# COVID Vaccine !



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

So differing reports - some saying there could still be one available in the UK in the next couple of months, whilst others are saying early next year or six months , and Boris Johnson even suggested recently we may never got one....

Whats everyones thoughts ?


----------



## Electric_Andy (18 Oct 2020)

The big commercial vaccine trials have only just started in the nhs populations. Most have treatment periods of between 1 and 3 months. If any of them work, even though they will probably be expedited , I'd be surprised if we get anything within the year. And that's if any of them work, which at this stage is unclear. And to be marketed they have to work and also have no significant side effects


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

Electric_Andy said:


> The big commercial vaccine trials have only just started in the nhs populations. Most have treatment periods of between 1 and 3 months. If any of them work, even though they will probably be expedited , I'd be surprised if we get anything within the year. And that's if any of them work, which at this stage is unclear. And to be marketed they have to work and also have no significant side effects



I thought the oxford trial entered phase 3 months ago.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-06-28-trial-oxford-covid-19-vaccine-starts-brazil


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

I think there will be partially effective vaccines at stopping people get infected. The WHO benchmark is 30%. There will be vaccines that exceed this but it is likely to end up trickier in some cases who to give it to and waiting for 'better' ones.

They will be "available" in 2021 for a "lucky" few million people. No vaccine for kingrollo, or the elite on here, or the peasants. A few of the very eldest of cyclechat may get the vaccine and people like midlife and MarkF may be bunged a vaccine.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> I think there will be partially effective vaccines at stopping people get infected. The WHO benchmark is 30%. There will be vaccines that exceed this but it is likely to end up trickier in some cases who to give it to and waiting for 'better' ones.
> 
> They will be "available" in 2021 for a "lucky" few million people. No vaccine for kingrollo, or the elite on here, or the peasants. A few of the very eldest of cyclechat may get the vaccine and people like midlife and MarkF may be bunged a vaccine.



As an over 50, asthmatic, with a leaky heart valve and an NHS employee - I reckon I will be in the first group.....or second.


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> I thought the oxford trial entered phase 3 months ago.
> 
> https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-06-28-trial-oxford-covid-19-vaccine-starts-brazil



Results expected end of November.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> Results expected end of November.



Source?


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> Results expected end of November.



Ah well - have to keep rubbing Marmite on my gonads for a few months longer.


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> As an over 50, asthmatic, with a leaky heart valve and an NHS employee - I reckon I will be in the first group.....or second.



You may be bunged a vaccine from being in the NHS. Citizen kingrollo doesn't come very high up the pecking order on the other three criteria which have already been leaked .

It will takes months and months to give the vaccines. Asthma and heart conditions are incredibly common. The 'first' standard citizens to be given it will be those in their 80s.


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Source?



DCMO.

You can look it up I'm sure.

Or perhaps I can say it's all over the news. Or all over the daily mail? Not so nice to get some of your own medicine is it.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> So differing reports - some saying there could still be one available in the UK in the next couple of months, whilst others are saying early next year or six months , and Boris Johnson even suggested recently we may never got one....
> 
> Whats everyones thoughts ?



Thoughts: "when will it be available" may not the best question to ask. 

1. "Will a vaccine be developed which is capable of making a significant impact on the disease and if so when";

2. "How soon (if ever) can such a vaccine be rolled out to sufficient people in the UK to ease restrictions"

and

3. "How soon (if ever) can such a vaccine be rolled out worldwide to remove COVID as a significant health and social impact"


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> Or perhaps I can say it's all over the news. Or all over the daily mail? Not so nice to get some of your own medicine is it.



No idea what you're on about.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> You may be bunged a vaccine from being in the NHS. Citizen kingrollo doesn't come very high up the pecking order on the other three criteria which have already been leaked .
> 
> It will takes months and months to give the vaccines. Asthma and heart conditions are incredibly common. The 'first' standard citizens to be given it will be those in their 80s.



Guess I will just have to pay.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (18 Oct 2020)

Until successful phase 3 results are in, and UK approval given for a vaccine, who knows? Anything else is speculation. Some of it will also be political. Give the impression a vaccine is around the corner and people will be more accepting of restrictions. If no end in sight then difficult decisions will need to be made.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

YukonBoy said:


> Until successful phase 3 results are in, and UK approval given for a vaccine, who knows? Anything else is speculation. Some of it will also be political. Give the impression a vaccine is around the corner and people will be more accepting of restrictions. If no end in sight then difficult decisions will need to be made.



I think the opposite. Obey the rules - theres no cure or vaccine


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

This thread should be interesting in a month's time. I hope I am wrong and they give it to those in cyclechat who go on about their age, health conditions and importance e.g. teachers.


kingrollo said:


> Guess I will just have to pay.



I want everyone to get one. It's just not going to happen.

It's the numbers. It was discussed in the early days that it'd be tens of thousands of vaccines per day. So you might have something like a million a month vaccinated IF it happens in January. After that it may step up. Two jabs so a million a month initially may be about right .

This would still be good news. If you give it to 2 or 3 million in their 80s and true key workers it should reduce viral load by fewer very very sick people. That's good for everyone.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (18 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> I think the opposite. Obey the rules - theres no cure or vaccine



Problem is rules are not sustainable long term unless everyone given a living wage regardless of work status.


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

YukonBoy said:


> Until successful phase 3 results are in, and UK approval given for a vaccine, who knows? Anything else is speculation. Some of it will also be political. Give the impression a vaccine is around the corner and people will be more accepting of restrictions. If no end in sight then difficult decisions will need to be made.



Well it's certainly what the governments in the UK and US are hoping.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> This thread should be interesting in a month's time. I hope I am wrong and they give it to those in cyclechat who go on about their age, health conditions and importance e.g. teachers.
> 
> 
> I want everyone to get one. It's just not going to happen.
> ...



I dunno why it has to be a logistical nightmare. Just a get about 100 medics to walk down the M6 everyday between 7am-11am - Injecting people stuck in the traffic jam - you would do loads.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

YukonBoy said:


> Problem is rules are not sustainable long term unless *everyone given a living wage regardless of work status.*



And we bloody well can't have that can we !


----------



## Ming the Merciless (18 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> And we bloody well can't have that can we !



Not with this government.


----------



## classic33 (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> This thread should be interesting in a month's time. I hope I am wrong and they give it to those in cyclechat who go on about their age, health conditions and importance e.g. teachers.


One health condition means it'll never be given to me. Just like every other "routine" jab out there.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

Surely not to give the vaccine would be a breach of my human rights .........................


----------



## classic33 (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> Results expected end of November.


Some results known already.
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ivir-has-little-effect-on-survival-finds-who/


----------



## Ming the Merciless (18 Oct 2020)

classic33 said:


> Some results known already.
> https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ivir-has-little-effect-on-survival-finds-who/



That is not a vaccine


----------



## dodgy (18 Oct 2020)

There's a good radio interview with Prof Sarah Gilbert on BBCR4 that you can listen to if you want to hear actual information from someone qualified. She seems rather more positive than the tone on here.


----------



## tom73 (18 Oct 2020)

We need a very open and up front public debate about who got's what and how we the mass numbers of professionals to give it. Long before we get a vaccine. Some possibly unpopular choices may be needed. Some vaccines may start off looking good for one group say the old but then prove to be not so. But effective on another group say the young then what ? Use them at the expense of having to stop using them on the old even if that's the only one we have plenty of ? Ethnic groups are more at risk than anyone from covid do we do them first ? Poverty is another risk.Do them before others too ? Who should decide government , parliament or clinicians ? 
This debate need's starting if we wont to avid a social and political bun fight later. 
Together with some honest admission that even with one or more vaccines it will not be back to normal for some time. 
We've already just had a law change with little general public knowledge to allow MHRA to short circuit current licence requirements and to open up the list of people who can do vaccinations. Inc student HCP's unsupervised. Which will not help with confidence in any vaccine that comes along. 
We also need a robust plan to tackle the anti vac lot and that need's starting sooner rather than later.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

tom73 said:


> We need a very open and up front public debate about who got's what and how we the mass numbers of professionals to give it. Long before we get a vaccine. Some possibly unpopular choices may be needed. Some vaccines may start off looking good for one group say the old but then prove to be not so. But effective on another group say the young then what ? Use them at the expense of having to stop using them on the old even if that's the only one we have plenty of ? Ethnic groups are more at risk than anyone from covid do we do them first ? Poverty is another risk.Do them before others too ? Who should decide government , parliament or clinicians ?
> This debate need's starting if we wont to avid a social and political bun fight later.
> Together with some honest admission that even with one or more vaccines it will not be back to normal for some time.
> We've already just had a law change with little general public knowledge to allow MHRA to short circuit current licence requirements and to open up the list of people who can do vaccinations. Inc student HCP's unsupervised. Which will not help with confidence in any vaccine that comes along.
> We also need a robust plan to tackle the anti vac lot and that need's starting sooner rather than later.



put six immigrants in a dinghy, say they are from France - that will distract the anti vaxers for 18 months.


----------



## winjim (18 Oct 2020)

tom73 said:


> We also need a robust plan to tackle the anti vac lot and that need's starting sooner rather than later.


I had a covid vaccine and now I'm autistic.






Seriously though, just tell them to fark off.


----------



## tom73 (18 Oct 2020)

That’s the simple solution sadly they have got a bit more advanced. So need a robust reply they are real threat and a growing one.


----------



## oldwheels (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> I think there will be partially effective vaccines at stopping people get infected. The WHO benchmark is 30%. There will be vaccines that exceed this but it is likely to end up trickier in some cases who to give it to and waiting for 'better' ones.
> 
> They will be "available" in 2021 for a "lucky" few million people. No vaccine for kingrollo, or the elite on here, or the peasants. A few of the very eldest of cyclechat may get the vaccine and people like midlife and MarkF may be bunged a vaccine.


I never quote my age but I have a fair guess I am the oldest cyclechatter so I should be alright then so long as I last long enough. I was described once as the grandfather of the cycle club although that was more as a founding member I think.


----------



## Unkraut (18 Oct 2020)

I heard a couple of days ago that the state government is starting to procure and stockpile the means of giving a vaccine in large quantities. This could either mean they take seriously the possibility of there being a vaccine in the reasonably near future, or it could be that they don't want to be caught unprepared as was the case at the beginning of the epidemic (wasn't just the UK) but actually nothing is just around the corner.

I get the feeling mass production is thought to be months away rather than weeks.

There are a couple of candidates for vaccines here that are at the same stage as the Oxford trials, but a reliable one in the near future (Christmas) is being played down to prevent false expectations.

I suspect the two Russian vaccines haven't been tested enough, and prestige has been put ahead of safety.


----------



## lane (18 Oct 2020)

"According to deputy chief medical officer Jonathan Van-Tam, the vaccine, created at Oxford University and manufactured by AstraZeneca, should be available just after Christmas, report the Sunday Times.
Mr Van-Tam told MPs last week stage three trials of the vaccine mean a mass rollout is on the horizon and thousands of NHS staff are to undergo training to administer the vaccine before the end of the year."

Mr Van-Tam said: “We aren't light years away from it. It isn't a totally unrealistic suggestion we could deploy a vaccine soon after Christmas. That would have a significant impact on hospital admissions and deaths.
“Vaccines are being developed at a speed that, if successful, will save lives.”
*The first vaccines will be given to the elderly and vulnerable and to vaccinate those most at risk will take several months. Most people will not be given the jab.*

So to vaccinate those most at risk will take several months. Who are the most at risk? It would appear the plan is to have roughly the same criteria as the flu jab (but not the young children) and probably stop there on the basis that deaths are low enough in other groups not be an issue. How many would that be - about 10 million maybe?

From what I gather there is also a moral question about giving the vaccine to low risk patients in this country when high risk elsewhere can't get it.


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

That's the plan Lane. It depends on if the first vaccine works well enough in those very high age groups.

There are different types of vaccine and little is known how some types will interact with the immune systems of older populations. That's why the government has dibs on about 12.

It will be the most precious commodity on earth, we should expect arguments.


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

lane said:


> Mr Van-Tam told MPs last week stage three trials of the vaccine mean a mass rollout is From what I gather there is also a moral question about giving the vaccine to low risk patients in this country when high risk elsewhere can't get it.



Practical as well as moral. Hoarding 66x2 million doses initially when you can't give them is moronic if people are still dropping dead in sickeningly high numbers in ROI, Spain, Netherlands, France, Germany and places we trade and have visitors from. Let alone the third world. It's not a provincial virus.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> Practical as well as moral. Hoarding 66x2 million doses initially when you can't give them is moronic if people are still dropping dead in sickeningly high numbers in ROI, Spain, Netherlands, France, Germany and places we trade and have visitors from. Let alone the third world. It's not a provincial virus.



youve missed me off again.


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

oldwheels said:


> I never quote my age but I have a fair guess I am the oldest cyclechatter so I should be alright then so long as I last long enough. I was described once as the grandfather of the cycle club although that was more as a founding member I think.



I hope so.

The point I am making is that a lot of people for example in their 70s are going to get a shock when they get told/find out they are getting the jab say 2 months after they start. To borrow a phrase the first wave of vacinations may include a very large number of people but will take months.

The numbers for over 85 risk is just so stark when you see it in the graphs from PHE . So it's right that that is the basic plan if there aren't hiccups or not that effective.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 Oct 2020)

Unkraut said:


> I get the feeling mass production is thought to be months away rather than weeks.



Some of these vaccines are being mass produced already. Both Pfizer and Astrazeneca have started manufacturing.


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> youve missed me off again.



Kingrollo me old mucker I think you will probably get a vaccine . It'll just be quite a while that's all.

The vaccine given to even higher risk groups than you before is very, very good for you. It just may not feel like it.

Even a few hundred thousand targetted double doses given before the middle of February would help things along. If they work. The plans are for vastly more over a longer period of time.

Jeremy Farrar was talking about monoclonal antibodies today and if that works and can be mass produced another promising treatment.


----------



## Julia9054 (18 Oct 2020)

I think there are lots of people in all age/risk groups who would rather not be in the first wave of those vaccinated but would prefer to see how others get on first


----------



## Chromatic (18 Oct 2020)

oldwheels said:


> I never quote my age but I have a fair guess I am the oldest cyclechatter so I should be alright then so long as I last long enough. I was described once as the grandfather of the cycle club although that was more as a founding member I think.



You are Methuselah AICMFP


----------



## marinyork (18 Oct 2020)

Julia9054 said:


> I think there are lots of people in all age/risk groups who would rather not be in the first wave of those vaccinated but would prefer to see how others get on first



There will always be not enough data. Luckily for you there are teachers who are selfless who reside in South Africa and Brazil who took the risk so that the Brits like you can get the jab if you were deemed high enough risk and wanted it. The world's a cool place. You don't live in Manaus. If you're lucky enough to get a jab I'm sure you'll be moaning about it whilst thousands die in the 3rd world. But that's what we love on these forums.


----------



## Julia9054 (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> There will always be not enough data. Luckily for you there are teachers who are selfless who reside in South Africa and Brazil who took the risk so that the Brits like you can get the jab if you were deemed high enough risk and wanted it. The world's a cool place. You don't live in Manaus. If you're lucky enough to get a jab I'm sure you'll be moaning about it whilst thousands die in the 3rd world. But that's what we love on these forums.


You do enjoy being snarky about others don't you.
I don't believe I gave my personal opinion about whether I would want to be vaccinated


----------



## tom73 (18 Oct 2020)

Training is all well and good but you’ve still got to get the stuff sent out. Then it needs storing some maybe fine at room temp. Some are likely to need refrigeration. We simply don’t have enough of them both for transport and local storage. The Stock control alone will be a big job both centrally and at local level. A mistake at any point and 1000’s will useless in one go. The other big logistic issue is PPE and the vast about of clinical waste and sharps. That any mass vaccination will bring that’s on top of the extra already in around. 

Then you‘ve got the clinics that need space finding church halls, parks , drive in centres. Not everyone will be able to reach them some may need the DN to call round they are thin on the ground so that will take some away from other work. Using health visitors much more is another blinding option. But too many governments have rip that part of the NHS to bits. 
Families with high risk children will need to be high up the line. School nurse service along with GP’s are well experienced in vaccinations. Locally they are the best option to work this stuff out. The only real way this will work is locally ran and planned. But if T&T is anything to go by it’s unlikely to happen.

Last I heard we did not even have enough glass Vials to put the stuff in either.


----------



## lane (18 Oct 2020)

It's hard to believe all the negative prophecies on here about logistics and distribution. Surely a government that has made such a mess of PPE and test and trace has to get something right one day.....or perhaps not.


----------



## lane (18 Oct 2020)

Maybe we will have a world beating mobilisation for the vaccination.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> Kingrollo me old mucker I think you will probably get a vaccine . It'll just be quite a while that's all.
> 
> The vaccine given to even higher risk groups than you before is very, very good for you. It just may not feel like it.
> 
> ...


Weird - in all seriousness. Despite my list of health conditions...I'm not I'll ! - I work, ride my bike, there's nothing I've been advised not to do.

That's what gets me about "pre existing conditions" - it can be minor as HBP - or someone who puffs an inhaler a couple of times when they have a cold.


----------



## steveindenmark (19 Oct 2020)

In Denmark it sounds like the military are being taught to give injections. I have been injecting myself for 3 weeks to prevent embolisms. It took 10 seconds to learn. Once the vaccine is available in Denmark they will get everyone vaccinated quickly because people will go and can be tracked to show they have been. There seems to be a big resistance in the UK to the fact that Covid exists. I have not seen that here🇩🇰


----------



## cisamcgu (19 Oct 2020)

steveindenmark said:


> In Denmark it sounds like the military are being taught to give injections. I have been injecting myself for 3 weeks to prevent embolisms. It took 10 seconds to learn. Once the vaccine is available in Denmark they will get everyone vaccinated quickly because people will go and can be tracked to show they have been. *There seems to be a big resistance in the UK to the fact that Covid exists*. I have not seen that here🇩🇰


I would say it is occasionally loud and raucous, but not big


----------



## C R (19 Oct 2020)

steveindenmark said:


> In Denmark it sounds like the military are being taught to give injections. I have been injecting myself for 3 weeks to prevent embolisms. It took 10 seconds to learn. Once the vaccine is available in Denmark they will get everyone vaccinated quickly because people will go and can be tracked to show they have been. There seems to be a big resistance in the UK to the fact that Covid exists. I have not seen that here🇩🇰


I don't think self injecting anticoagulants or insulin, both subcutaneous, is the same as an intramuscular injection. I've been injecting insulin for over 25 years, but the once I tried to self inject the flu vaccine it didn't quite go to plan.


----------



## tom73 (19 Oct 2020)

steveindenmark said:


> In Denmark it sounds like the military are being taught to give injections. I have been injecting myself for 3 weeks to prevent embolisms. It took 10 seconds to learn. Once the vaccine is available in Denmark they will get everyone vaccinated quickly because people will go and can be tracked to show they have been. There seems to be a big resistance in the UK to the fact that Covid exists. I have not seen that here🇩🇰



That's one drug that has been checked and dispensed to you. Unless the government is going to bypass even more clinical governance. 
The admin and medicine management alone is massive. Not impossible but we don't have great track recored on health IT or implementing it.
Never mind the public having confidence in this HCP's need it too. Without it many will be very careful around this process. 
As we may well end up with many different vaccines they may have multiple side effects so remembering which to look out for and when. 
will need to explained and form part of any training. Advice to patients will also differ again that's got to be explained in ways that they understand. Sound like Denmark may not have issues with any of this as will many other nations. 

Sadly the public here will it's likely not get clear information or guidance. We've not had much up to now. It will only take one or two "rare" side effects and people will panic, the daily hate will have a field day and GP's will get mass worried well beating down the door. 
So much hangs on this working it has to done right we will only have one shot at this. It will come down to the personal details and how each person see things.


----------



## lane (19 Oct 2020)

steveindenmark said:


> In Denmark it sounds like the military are being taught to give injections. I have been injecting myself for 3 weeks to prevent embolisms. It took 10 seconds to learn. Once the vaccine is available in Denmark they will get everyone vaccinated quickly because people will go and can be tracked to show they have been. There seems to be a big resistance in the UK to the fact that Covid exists. I have not seen that here🇩🇰



Not big just a few nutters. Had a protest outside our local village supermarket on Saturday against the tier 2 restrictions.

However I think there is probably more people concerned about the safety of the vaccine - especially the fact the process has been speed up. They may even be right - I believe there were some unpleasant side effects form the swine flu vaccine. Still I will be getting mine as soon as possible and had my flu one on Friday. Balance of risk.


----------



## oldwheels (19 Oct 2020)

marinyork said:


> I hope so.
> 
> The point I am making is that a lot of people for example in their 70s are going to get a shock when they get told/find out they are getting the jab say 2 months after they start. To borrow a phrase the first wave of vacinations may include a very large number of people but will take months.
> 
> The numbers for over 85 risk is just so stark when you see it in the graphs from PHE . So it's right that that is the basic plan if there aren't hiccups or not that effective.


While I do fall into a group that would get first go at a vaccine I am not too bothered really. Given my current lifestyle I am at low risk {I hope} of getting infected and in any case I would rather wait a bit in case of teething troubles. My life could of course change suddenly if I developed some other illness.


----------



## oldwheels (19 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> And we bloody well can't have that can we !


I think the Scottish Government are thinking of that but would not be allowed by Westminster.


----------



## steveindenmark (19 Oct 2020)

tom73 said:


> That's one drug that has been checked and dispensed to you. Unless the government is going to bypass even more clinical governance.
> The admin and medicine management alone is massive. Not impossible but we don't have great track recored on health IT or implementing it.
> Never mind the public having confidence in this HCP's need it too. Without it many will be very careful around this process.
> As we may well end up with many different vaccines they may have multiple side effects so remembering which to look out for and when.
> ...


Yes I appreciate that. We are quite fortunate to be run by a government who we have trust in. Hopefully we will get vaccinated when it proved to be safe.


----------



## lazybloke (19 Oct 2020)

I'm encouraged that there are numerous vaccines in Stage 2 and Stage 3 trials currently; surely there will quickly be a vaccination scheme aimed at key-workers and the most vulnerable (oh, and politicians).

But I do fear that the good news won't last.
Millions unemployed, Rishi re-imposing austerity, empty (closed) shops. A vaccine that isn't available to all, leaving millions terrified and potentially at risk from the slightest nearby cough or sneeze. A scramble for private jabs (at what cost?) which will highlight inequality in society. Riots.
Such scenes could spread across the world, along with international tensions and finger-pointing. 

Meanwhile the virus quietly mutates, potentially rendering the vaccines useless.


----------



## srw (19 Oct 2020)

lane said:


> Mr Van-Tam said: “We aren't light years away from it.


Grrr.

You'd have thought a professional scientist would correct the unit error before he let the PR people send it out with his name on.


----------



## tom73 (19 Oct 2020)

srw said:


> Grrr.
> 
> You'd have thought a professional scientist would correct the unit error before he let the PR people send it out with his name on.


As with much matters around covid many things that for most are not common conversations. But common professional talk is now main stream with little or no context. With the media happy to apply buckets of mediation to help it along.


----------



## Drago (19 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> So differing reports - some saying there could still be one available in the UK in the next couple of months, whilst others are saying early next year or six months , and Boris Johnson even suggested recently we may never got one....
> 
> Whats everyones thoughts ?


I still have contacts in the dibble, somemof them quite senior. They in turn get their info direct from the Home Office, without the distortion or pollution of press or pundits.

Word is 6 are under development, and 4 show promise. However, they say best case scenario would be February, an a lot of things have to go right, a lot of planets have to line up the make that happen, a lot of luck imvolved.

That leaves overseas sources, which may or may not manage it quicker. Always assuming it turns out to be possible at all. My guess is there's an evens chance it'll never be viable - if it were that easy to immunise against viral infections there would have been an aids vaccine decades ago.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (19 Oct 2020)

Drago said:


> - if it were that easy to immunise against viral infections there would have been an aids vaccine decades ago



Not all viruses are equal.

A smallpox vaccine was developed over two centuries ago!

The HIV virus mutates far faster than this virus.

Most experts are far more confident than you that a useful vaccine will be developed, however, many do not believe it will be 100% effective or lifelong.

It's very likely, perhaps near certain, that the first efficacy data on vaccines will emerge this year. That's not to say they will be rolled out on that timescale.


----------



## kingrollo (19 Oct 2020)

Drago said:


> I still have contacts in the dibble, somemof them quite senior. They in turn get their info direct from the Home Office, without the distortion or pollution of press or pundits.
> 
> Word is 6 are under development, and 4 show promise. However, they say best case scenario would be February, an a lot of things have to go right, a lot of planets have to line up the make that happen, a lot of luck imvolved.
> 
> That leaves overseas sources, which may or may not manage it quicker. Always assuming it turns out to be possible at all. My guess is there's an evens chance it'll never be viable - if it were that easy to immunise against viral infections there would have been an aids vaccine decades ago.



Key difference though is that AIDs is terminal - COVID isn't (mostly). I've heard that makes a vaccine much more feasible.


----------



## kingrollo (20 Oct 2020)

Challenge trial - whereby a small number of people are deliberately infected with the virus to start in Jan

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-to-infect-young-volunteers-to-hasten-vaccine

Would they do this if they knew a vaccine was close ?


----------



## srw (20 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Would they do this if they knew a vaccine was close


They're doing it because they believe a reliable vaccine is close. I think you've missed out some crucial words.


----------



## kingrollo (20 Oct 2020)

srw said:


> They're doing it because they believe a reliable vaccine is close. I think you've missed out some crucial words.


Obviously I have ...and they are still missing.....enlighten me ?

Why would you undertake high risk trials if a reliable vaccine is close ?


----------



## winjim (20 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Obviously I have ...and they are still missing.....enlighten me ?
> 
> Why would you undertake high risk trials if a reliable vaccine is close ?


$$$


----------



## Beebo (20 Oct 2020)

We have some clear evidence that natural immunity isn’t permanent. And it’s cycling related! Giro Rider tests positive for the second time. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/54612253
Does this mean we will need an annual vacation like the current flu.


----------



## srw (20 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Obviously I have ...and they are still missing.....enlighten me ?
> 
> Why would you undertake high risk trials if a reliable vaccine is close ?


I believed you meant "they" the researchers, who are undertaking the trial in order to test what they believe to be a reliable vaccine. It sounds as if you meant "they" the trial participants, who will have various motivations, from altruism to money to wanting to be first in line to get a plausible vaccine and get their lives back. 

It would be unethical to infect healthy volunteers without a very good prospect of the vaccine protecting them.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (20 Oct 2020)

srw said:


> would be unethical to infect healthy volunteers without a very good prospect of the vaccine protecting them



According to Nature, the first part of such trials would be to find what an infectious dose of virus would be in the absence of a vaccine. 

Ergo there would be zero prospect of protection for early cohorts. 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02821-4


----------



## bitsandbobs (20 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Obviously I have ...and they are still missing.....enlighten me ?
> 
> Why would you undertake high risk trials if a reliable vaccine is close ?



A few years ago, a first in human clinical trial was carried out in the UK. A number of subjects ended up in intensive care within a matter of hours with catastrophic organ failure. There was quite some publicity about it at the time and the amounts subjects were paid for enrollment in the trial got some attention. I was told that enrollments in clinical trials in the UK went up quite noticeably at the time! (I've never checked to see if it's true, btw)


----------



## matticus (20 Oct 2020)

Beebo said:


> We have some clear evidence that natural immunity isn’t permanent. And it’s cycling related! Giro Rider tests positive for the second time.
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/54612253
> Does this mean we will need an annual vacation like the current flu.


That is only clear evidence of two positive tests.

But I do agree that we need annual vacations!


----------



## Hover Fly (20 Oct 2020)

bitsandbobs said:


> A few years ago, a first in human clinical trial was carried out in the UK. A number of subjects ended up in intensive care within a matter of hours with catastrophic organ failure. There was quite some publicity about it at the time and the amounts subjects were paid for enrollment in the trial got some attention. I was told that enrollments in clinical trials in the UK went up quite noticeably at the time! (I've never checked to see if it's true, btw)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theralizumab


----------



## lazybloke (20 Oct 2020)

bitsandbobs said:


> A few years ago, a first in human clinical trial was carried out in the UK. A number of subjects ended up in intensive care within a matter of hours with catastrophic organ failure. There was quite some publicity about it at the time and the amounts subjects were paid for enrollment in the trial got some attention. I was told that enrollments in clinical trials in the UK went up quite noticeably at the time! (I've never checked to see if it's true, btw)


That trial is often mentioned in conversations of who will be first in the queue for vaccines. The conversation usually goes "who wants to be a guinea pig?" and "I'd rather not be an early adopter".

I usually point out the contradiction, if those same people are happy to have a new flu jab every year. Indeed the short period of time availalle for the development and testing of flu jabs suggests to me that novel vaccines are a safer branch of the pharmaceutical industry than novel medications. 

However I'm speaking from a position of ignorance!


----------



## roubaixtuesday (20 Oct 2020)

lazybloke said:


> That trial is often mentioned in conversations of who will be first in the queue for vaccines. The conversation usually goes "who wants to be a guinea pig?" and "I'd rather not be an early adopter".
> 
> I usually point out the contradiction, if those same people are happy to have a new flu jab every year. Indeed the short period of time availalle for the development and testing of flu jabs suggests to me that novel vaccines are a safer branch of the pharmaceutical industry than novel medications.
> 
> However I'm speaking from a position of ignorance!



All medical interventions, pharmaceutical or otherwise, carry risks as well as benefits. 

Note that the trial referenced above was part of the procedure for ensuring safety; these were the very first people ever dosed. 

Covid vaccine trials, on the other hand, will have dosed tens of thousands of subjects before anyone in the general public is dosed, and most are developed using "platform" technology, so many more again have been dosed with similar agents. 

The benefit is *very* high - ending a global pandemic. 

But there will always be a risk, it cannot be eliminated.


----------



## kingrollo (21 Oct 2020)

A Cheery article.  

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/21/covid-vaccine-immunisation-protection


----------



## winjim (21 Oct 2020)

lazybloke said:


> That trial is often mentioned in conversations of who will be first in the queue for vaccines. The conversation usually goes "who wants to be a guinea pig?" and "I'd rather not be an early adopter".


I appear to still be alive if that's any succour. But I'm part of the trial which is a different thing to being 'first in the queue' for routine vaccination which takes place after the trial has been concluded. Which is kind of the point of having a trial.


----------



## lazybloke (21 Oct 2020)

winjim said:


> I appear to still be alive if that's any succour. But I'm part of the trial which is a different thing to being 'first in the queue' for routine vaccination which takes place after the trial has been concluded. Which is kind of the point of having a trial.


Thanks, but I'm already happy with the clinical trials process for vaccines, and I won't hesitate to have the jab if it's offered to me. 

However I stil worry the vaccine won't be a silver bullet. We've barely dealt with the initial impact of this disease, let alone worked out long-term implications for the NHS or the economic shockwave. Arguably, the economic shockwave hasn't even arrived yet.
If we're incredibly lucky the virus will somehow quickly burn itself out, but I fear that long before that happens the global community will experience a massive destabilisation thanks to this virus. I'm really not sure what to expect.


----------



## kingrollo (21 Oct 2020)

lazybloke said:


> Thanks, but I'm already happy with the clinical trials process for vaccines, and I won't hesitate to have the jab if it's offered to me.
> 
> However I stil worry the vaccine won't be a silver bullet. We've barely dealt with the initial impact of this disease, let alone worked out long-term implications for the NHS or the economic shockwave. Arguably, the economic shockwave hasn't even arrived yet.
> If we're incredibly lucky the virus will somehow quickly burn itself out, but I fear that long before that happens the global community will experience a massive destabilisation thanks to this virus. I'm really not sure what to expect.



Yep it's going to cost billions to cut the backlog of elective surgery/treatments people are waiting for on the NHS ....

There is of course a way not to spend those billions - that will come to the fore in due course.


----------



## kingrollo (27 Oct 2020)

So if this is be believed the antibodies only last a few months.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54696873

Have read elsewhere that the Vaccine makers can up the dose to produce a greater immune response - I suppose right now 4 months protection would be an upgrade on the protection we have now.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Oct 2020)

winjim said:


> I appear to still be alive if that's any succour. But I'm part of the trial which is a different thing to being 'first in the queue' for routine vaccination which takes place after the trial has been concluded. Which is kind of the point of having a trial.



Indeed and being part of a trial means you may not have been injected with a vaccine at all.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Oct 2020)

kingrollo said:


> So if this is be believed the antibodies only last a few months.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54696873
> 
> Have read elsewhere that the Vaccine makers can up the dose to produce a greater immune response - I suppose right now 4 months protection would be an upgrade on the protection we have now.



The immune response is more multi faceted than just anti bodies. It has many components.


----------



## winjim (27 Oct 2020)

YukonBoy said:


> Indeed and being part of a trial means you may not have been injected with a vaccine at all.


Oh, I've definitely been injected with a vaccine, just maybe not against Covid-19.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Oct 2020)

winjim said:


> Oh, I've definitely been injected with a vaccine, just maybe not against Covid-19.



True could be the meningitis one.


----------



## Landsurfer (27 Oct 2020)

I assume that all MP'S will have the vaccine first, then after a 14 day wait, all members of the NCS. 
Then, we give it month or 2 for the side effects to show themselves before the vulnerable groups have it ..... 
Then, like the Moonshot Testing, the rest of the population will be quietly forgotten ... as they don't actually need it ...


----------



## kingrollo (9 Nov 2020)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54873105

90% effective !


----------



## Adam4868 (9 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54873105
> 
> 90% effective !


Just heard that on the radio...at last some good news !


----------



## DCLane (9 Nov 2020)

That's a start and I'm sure others will follow.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Nov 2020)

Exceptionally good news. Nobody expected 90% efficacy.

Some thoughts:

1. Measured 7 days or more from 2nd dose, no indication yet on how long lived immunity is.

2. A couple of weeks yet until the length of safety data required for registration.

3. No indication from the press release on the age profile of the cases. How effective vaccines are in elderly population is a key question. I don't know if this trial has a specific elderly cohort.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Nov 2020)

Just stick it in my arm baby !


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Just stick it in my arm baby !



With utter predictability, it looks like there may not be a plan to do so...

https://capx.co/a-vaccine-is-coming-but-the-uks-immunisation-plan-is-fatally-flawed/


----------



## Adam4868 (9 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> With utter predictability, it looks like there may not be a plan to do so...
> 
> https://capx.co/a-vaccine-is-coming-but-the-uks-immunisation-plan-is-fatally-flawed/


If any goverment can make a feck up of it...I'm confident ours will.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Nov 2020)

Well I'm in the top group - the downside is my GP is feckin useless - if they are involved in way , shape or form , I'm done for !


----------



## vickster (9 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Well I'm in the top group - the downside is my GP is feckin useless - if they are involved in way , shape or form , I'm done for !


News says it’s likely front line clinicians will be prioritised which obviously makes sense, then it’ll be the extremely clinically vulnerable presumably


----------



## kingrollo (9 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> News says it’s likely front line clinicians will be prioritised which obviously makes sense, then it’ll be the extremely clinically vulnerable presumably


ok then 2nd top group !


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> News says it’s likely front line clinicians will be prioritised which obviously makes sense, then it’ll be the extremely clinically vulnerable presumably



Published prioritisation:


older adults’ resident in a care home and care home workers1
all those 80 years of age and over and health and social care workers1
all those 75 years of age and over
all those 70 years of age and over
all those 65 years of age and over
high-risk adults under 65 years of age
moderate-risk adults under 65 years of age
all those 60 years of age and over
all those 55 years of age and over
all those 50 years of age and over
rest of the population (priority to be determined)2
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...e-on-priority-groups-for-covid-19-vaccination


----------



## vickster (9 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> ok then 2nd top group !


Didn’t know you’re over 80 based on the published list


----------



## vickster (9 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Published prioritisation:
> 
> 
> older adults’ resident in a care home and care home workers1
> ...


The suggestion about front line NHS staff was based on there being a limited number of doses available this year (assuming regulatory authority sign off obviously)


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> The suggestion about front line NHS staff was based on there being a limited number of doses available this year (assuming regulatory authority sign off obviously)



Yeah, I've heard that too and it makes sense to me. Not in the published prioritisation though


----------



## kingrollo (9 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> Didn’t know you’re over 80 based on the published list


----------



## newfhouse (9 Nov 2020)

How long before UKIP Brexit Party Reform and associated cling-ons jump on the anti vaxx bandwagon? I'll give it until this afternoon.


----------



## vickster (9 Nov 2020)

Are you patient-facing in your job?


----------



## vickster (9 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Yeah, I've heard that too and it makes sense to me. Not in the published prioritisation though


That’s dated 25 September though, still time for it to change based on the reality of what’s actually available.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> Are you patient-facing in your job?



No - but I know a lot of people !


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Nov 2020)

One thing reported today I didn't realise is that this vaccine has an ultra cold chain storage and distribution requirement - needs to be under dry ice, only 48 hours at fridge temperature(!)

https://www.fiercepharma.com/manufa...llouts-could-be-ice-as-analysts-question-cold

Bit of a logistical challenge, that...


----------



## vickster (9 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> No - but I know a lot of people !


I don't know if that'll matter. However, if it does, presumably you'd just get vaccinated at the hospital, no need to go to GP?
Are you back in the office now?


----------



## kingrollo (9 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> I don't know if that'll matter. However, if it does, presumably you'd just get vaccinated at the hospital, no need to go to GP?
> Are you back in the office now?



Nah still WFH - the office space has been given up.

Hoping to get the jab through hospital


----------



## DCLane (9 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> News says it’s likely front line clinicians will be prioritised which obviously makes sense, then it’ll be the extremely clinically vulnerable presumably



SWMBO's been told she'll be one of the first as she works on a Covid ward.

I'm likely to be mid-December as I'm in no. 7 on that list but have been ill this year.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Nov 2020)

DCLane said:


> I'm likely to be mid-December as I'm in no. 7



I think timelines are against anything but a tiny number of vaccinations this year. 

Pfizer will not file the data from this trial with regulatory agencies until the safety readout, which they've said will be late November (today's news is on efficacy). Then the relevant agency needs to review and approve. That normally takes 12-18 months(!) but in current circumstances they're talking about short numbers of weeks. Pfizer will most likely prioritise a US submission; EU will probably follow very shortly. 

Allow time for distribution, logistics and prioritising, and it seems very unlikely more than a handful of vaccinations this year. 

As we're leaving the EU on 1st Jan, it's possible approval could be delayed by that, if not approved before then.


----------



## slowmotion (9 Nov 2020)

Can somebody explain what "90% effective" means? 90% of the population probably don't get C-19 without taking anything.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Nov 2020)

slowmotion said:


> Can somebody explain what "90% effective" means? 90% of the population probably don't get C-19 without taking anything.



It means that it prevents 90% of cases.

Having the same exposure to the virus, you are 10x less likely to end up with Covid if you'd had this vaccine, compared to someone not vaccinated. 

Put it another way: if at a typical Trump rally 100 people get Covid, if they'd been vaccinated previously, only 10 of them would get it.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Nov 2020)

I'm not sure with this particular trial, but with the Oxford trial, the primary measure is symptomatic disease, not just testing for virus. Asymptomatic cases don't count.


----------



## slowmotion (9 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> It means that it prevents 90% of cases.
> 
> Having the same exposure to the virus, you are 10x less likely to end up with Covid if you'd had this vaccine, compared to someone not vaccinated.
> 
> Put it another way: if at a typical Trump rally 100 people get Covid, if they'd been vaccinated previously, only 10 of them would get it.


Ah. Thanks. That makes sense.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Nov 2020)

McDonalds are planning to give vaccinations away with Happy Meals.


----------



## Unkraut (9 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> It means that it prevents 90% of cases.


Something I didn't know about until a couple of days ago is that a vaccine will not prevent you getting infected but it will prevent you getting ill. At the end of the day though it comes out at the same place.


----------



## Seevio (9 Nov 2020)

Hopefully this vaccine will allow people to fight off the virus prior to becoming infectious. It's not enough just to stop people getting ill if the the virus still spreads.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> McDonalds are planning to give vaccinations away with Happy Meals.



For Cholera


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Nov 2020)

Unkraut said:


> Something I didn't know about until a couple of days ago is that a vaccine will not prevent you getting infected but it will prevent you getting ill. At the end of the day though it comes out at the same place.



Vaccine prevents the virus getting a strong foothold. It’s can’t sneak in and rapidly multiply before it gets recognised as an intruder. As soon as it’s through the door it gets hit over the head with a sledgehammer by the immune system.


----------



## Rusty Nails (9 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> It means that it prevents 90% of cases.
> 
> Having the same exposure to the virus, you are 10x less likely to end up with Covid if you'd had this vaccine, compared to someone not vaccinated.
> 
> Put it another way: * if at a typical Trump rally 100 people get Covid, if they'd been vaccinated previously, only 10 of them would get it.*



There's always a downside.


----------



## PaulB (9 Nov 2020)

slowmotion said:


> Can somebody explain what "90% effective" means? 90% of the population probably don't get C-19 without taking anything.


90% effective means Pfizer's PR department have found an open door people want them to push. 

90% effective! It's only been around ten minutes. How effective was Thalidomide before they released it?


----------



## vickster (9 Nov 2020)

PaulB said:


> 90% effective means Pfizer's PR department have found an open door people want them to push.
> 
> 90% effective! It's only been around ten minutes. *How effective was Thalidomide before they released it?*


Quite effective for its intended use (morning sickness)...just not very safe!
Clinical testing has moved on a bit since and as a result fortunately!
As well as pharmcovigilance and post launch surveillance (making my life fun from time to time)


----------



## newfhouse (9 Nov 2020)

Rusty Nails said:


> There's always a downside.


Half of them wouldn’t take it anyway, just in case it turned them into gay Muslims.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Nov 2020)

I think Boris was getting things under control anyway


----------



## slowmotion (9 Nov 2020)

Suppose I wanted to buy a batch of a million doses. Does anybody have a rough estimate of what Pfizer might sell the stuff for on a per dose basis?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Nov 2020)

slowmotion said:


> Suppose I wanted to buy a batch of a million doses. Does anybody have a rough estimate of what Pfizer might sell the stuff for on a per dose basis?



$20 a dose or so apparently

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.evaluate.com/node/16061/amp


----------



## slowmotion (9 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> $20 a dose or so apparently
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.evaluate.com/node/16061/amp


That article states that Pfizer got $2 billion from Project Warp Speed. A recent spokesman for the company said that they hadn't got a bean from them.


----------



## RoadRider400 (9 Nov 2020)

Can anybody suggest why this vaccine might need two doses per person within a short period of time? I know some vaccines have follow up jabs later on but I thought this was after at least a year.


----------



## slowmotion (9 Nov 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> Can anybody suggest why this vaccine might need two doses per person within a short period of time? I know some vaccines have follow up jabs later on but I thought this was after at least a year.


Hepatitis jabs used to be a few weeks apart. Lord knows why. I remember it well because they jabbed you in your buttocks and the syringe was huge. Hurt like hell after an hour or so.


----------



## lazybloke (9 Nov 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> Can anybody suggest why this vaccine might need two doses per person within a short period of time? I know some vaccines have follow up jabs later on but I thought this was after at least a year.


Not a clue, but i opted to have mmr recently - in my late 40s - and that was a month between two jabs.


----------



## lane (9 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> It means that it prevents 90% of cases.
> 
> Having the same exposure to the virus, you are 10x less likely to end up with Covid if you'd had this vaccine, compared to someone not vaccinated.
> 
> Put it another way: if at a typical Trump rally 100 people get Covid, if they'd been vaccinated previously, only 10 of them would get it.



They wouldn't be vaccinated though would thry


----------



## PK99 (9 Nov 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> Can anybody suggest why this vaccine might need two doses per person within a short period of time? I know some vaccines have follow up jabs later on but I thought this was after at least a year.



Rabies is two or 3 in a short period


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Nov 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> Can anybody suggest why this vaccine might need two doses per person within a short period of time? I know some vaccines have follow up jabs later on but I thought this was after at least a year.



Sometimes, if you take a large group of people, with one vaccination you might expect 70 percent to be protected. But if you give a second dose, you may get up to 90 percent. Rather than testing the population to find the 20 percent not protected by the first dose, what is probably a more straightforward strategy is just giving two doses to insure you have that high level of protection.

Some immune systems need a second dose to prime them whilst some are fine with just the first dose. But we don’t know who falls into which bracket for each vaccine. So just give them two doses to be sure.


----------



## Solocle (9 Nov 2020)




----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Nov 2020)

Solocle said:


> View attachment 557378



Nope he’s in the coronaverse


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I'm not sure with this particular trial, but with the Oxford trial, the primary measure is symptomatic disease, not just testing for virus. Asymptomatic cases don't count.



From what little information we've been given this one is the same symptomatic only. Pfizer look to have been very selective on the information given. Still a lot of unknowns. Of the ones who become covid positive no information on age , risk factor ect. It's unusually to go public with details this early. The trial is still on going until it's formally published, peer reviewed and independently safety tested a lot can still go wrong.


----------



## winjim (10 Nov 2020)

It's early days and with a few of the vaccine studies reportedly about to release data I think Pfizer just wanted to get a jump on their rivals. The early bird catches the worm, or in this case 7% on their share price. Interestingly, the Pfizer news immediately knocked $14bn off the value of Zoom.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

winjim said:


> It's early days and with a few of the vaccine studies reportedly about to release data I think Pfizer just wanted to get a jump on their rivals. The early bird catches the worm, or in this case 7% on their share price. Interestingly, the Pfizer news immediately knocked $14bn off the value of Zoom.


That's the top and bottom of it. Money to be had and lot's of it you can bet the others with an eye on this will be organized crime. They already make plenty from counterfeit drugs can't see this being any different.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

Papers full of vaccine news with little eye on the facts. Melt down of GP's phone lines will be well under way by now.


----------



## Poacher (10 Nov 2020)

tom73 said:


> Papers full of vaccine news with little eye on the facts. Melt down of GP's phone lines will be well under way by now.


Delight at the news may be slightly tempered by the photo on several front pages of a little bottle,with a label showing "For intramsucular use only."
Not much attention to detail there. Was it a rushed job with insufficient checks?


----------



## Archie_tect (10 Nov 2020)

Poacher said:


> Delight at the news may be slightly tempered by the photo on several front pages of a little bottle,with a label showing "For intramsucular use only."
> Not much attention to detail there. Was it a rushed job with insufficient checks?


Don't rely on the accuracy of PR photos!


----------



## kingrollo (10 Nov 2020)

tom73 said:


> Papers full of vaccine news with little eye on the facts. Melt down of GP's phone lines will be well under way by now.



What You mean your GP might not answer the phone as quickly ?


----------



## oldworld (10 Nov 2020)

Maybe I'm being unduly negative but does anyone else see problems in the supply chain and administering the injection? 
I heard this vaccine has a short life and needs storing at -80 c. What could possibly go wrong given this governments past failures.
I'm just hoping my fears are unfounded.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Nov 2020)

oldworld said:


> Maybe I'm being unduly negative but does anyone else see problems in the supply chain and administering the injection?
> I heard this vaccine has a short life and needs storing at -80 c. What could possibly go wrong given this governments past failures.
> I'm just hoping my fears are unfounded.



These are very real issues.


----------



## vickster (10 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> These are very real issues.


Presumably for every country in the world if it's different to the normal process for transporting and storing vaccines?


----------



## oldworld (10 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> Presumably for every country in the world if it's different to the normal process for transporting and storing vaccines?


I'm sure the challenges of implementing this are the same. The worry for me is the govt will again give it to a private contractor with no experience. They have rather a history of this.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> Presumably for every country in the world if it's different to the normal process for transporting and storing vaccines?



I'm not an expert in vaccine logistics, but every vaccine will have its own requirements depending on the specifics. Obviously ambient storage is best, then refrigerated, then frozen, and this ultra frozen is worst. I think most vaccines only require refrigeration, but I could be wrong. Obviously this will be a huge challenge for remote populations - and doubly so because two doses are required.

In short, I would guess this is only tenable for 1st world or urban populations.


----------



## ikdo01 (10 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Obviously this will be a huge challenge for remote populations - and doubly so because two doses are required.
> 
> In short, I would guess this is only tenable for 1st world or urban populations.



Wendover made a good video explaining the problems with the logistics and supply chain of the vaccine a few months ago


----------



## oldworld (10 Nov 2020)

ikdo01 said:


> Wendover made a good video explaining the problems with the logistics and supply chain of the vaccine a few months ago



I've just watched this and it's done nothing to give me hope with government handling this well. 
Thinking about the logistics being in place I don't think it very likely we'll have a 'World Beating' system.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> These are very real issues.



It's a total nightmare from end to end which is getting glossed over. Normally anything needing this sort of requirement the MHRA would normally only allow to be used in hospital settings. Now with law changes that will be push to one side. Your right vaccines are normally kept in a fridge and only last for a given time out of it. Normal medicine management of fridges is bad enough but trying to keep sub zero one clinical viable is way of the scale. No GP practice has medicine fridge that go's that low. So they better have plenty on order which I doubt. Given that the scale of this vaccine program add in covid safe element and you have a right old problem. Running mass vaccine centres on hours Handcock is going on about makes it even harder. You simply won't be able to get though each jab quick enough. The idea of mass numbers of untrained / inexperienced vaccine givers using this sort of vaccine is alarming. It's a clinical governance nightmare.
That's before you can guarantee the supply of dry ice you're going to need.

A poor country solution this one is not as is the idea that this will an "NHS" lead vaccine program. It will be jobs for the boys all round just look at the vaccine task force and not forgetting "NHS" T&T


----------



## midlife (10 Nov 2020)

I know nothing about vaccinating a population, no staff, no means of moving stuff at -70 degrees....... I'll put my tender in now. £2 billion should do it., Perfect retirement present to myself, beats working !


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

midlife said:


> I know nothing about vaccinating a population, no staff, no means of moving stuff at -70 degrees....... I'll put my tender in now. £2 billion should do it., Perfect retirement present to myself, beats working !


You sound just right Serco all be happy to sign you up for the subcontract.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Nov 2020)

midlife said:


> I know nothing about vaccinating a population, no staff, no means of moving stuff at -70 degrees....... I'll put my tender in now. £2 billion should do it., Perfect retirement present to myself, beats working !



Sorry, due diligence check required. 

1. Are you a Tory MP or Lord?
2. Are you married to a Tory MP or Lord? 
3. [Actually, there is no 3]


----------



## newfhouse (10 Nov 2020)

midlife said:


> I know nothing about vaccinating a population, no staff, no means of moving stuff at -70 degrees....... I'll put my tender in now. £2 billion should do it., Perfect retirement present to myself, beats working !


Which school did you attend?


----------



## C R (10 Nov 2020)

tom73 said:


> You sound just right Serco all be happy to sign you up for the subcontract.


I'll take the subsubcontract to supply the CO2 for the dry ice, I have already started filling up plastic bags with the air I exhale during my rides.


----------



## kingrollo (10 Nov 2020)

oldworld said:


> Maybe I'm being unduly negative but does anyone else see problems in the supply chain and administering the injection?
> I heard this vaccine has a short life and needs storing at -80 c. What could possibly go wrong given this governments past failures.
> I'm just hoping my fears are unfounded.



By the law of averages you must think Boris and his mates will get something right.

My heart did groan when I heard Boris say it will be an "NHS Led" (aka Serco) rollout. ! Why not just let the NHS do it ?


----------



## newfhouse (10 Nov 2020)

oldworld said:


> I've just watched this and it's done nothing to give me hope with government handling this well.
> Thinking about the logistics being in place I don't think it very likely we'll have a 'World Beating' system.


We spent months failing to deliver latex gloves so I think you’re right. I wonder if one of the big accountancy firms could provide consultants or thought partners to help out?


----------



## C R (10 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> By the law of averages you must think Boris and his mates will get something right.
> 
> My heart did groan when I heard Boris say it will be an "NHS Led" (aka Serco) rollout. ! Why not just let the NHS do it ?


And how are the boards of Sicko and Crapita going to pay their yatch installments?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Nov 2020)

C R said:


> I'll take the subsubcontract to supply the CO2 for the dry ice, I have already started filling up plastic bags with the air I exhale during my rides.



If you're supplying the market with bloated bags of fetid wind, there's a regular COVID press conference always on the lookout for new supplies.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

C R said:


> And how are the boards of Sicko and Crapita going to pay their yatch installments?


Yes given that each contact T&T are just about finding is costing around 10K each. Lord knows what price tag each jab will have.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

newfhouse said:


> We spent months failing to deliver latex gloves so I think you’re right. I wonder if one of the big accountancy firms could provide consultants or thought partners to help out?


They did supply the gloves but they only counted them as single ones not pairs.


----------



## CanucksTraveller (10 Nov 2020)

What, you're all wary that the pre-selected "Dido Distribution Ltd" (a Serco company) won't be able to do this in a world, beating, oven ready way? 
I wonder where all this cynicism comes from.


----------



## srw (10 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Why not just let the NHS do it ?


The NHS is geared up to provide urgent and long-term healthcare in response to need - and even that it does in partnership with private enterprises (GP and dental surgeries and private pharmacies as well as the obvious private hospital chains). It's not geared up to provide two doses of a universal vaccine to 60 million people - it's a project an order of magnitude bigger than any other vaccination programme, and needs to be delivered more rapidly, more reliably and without disrupting anything else the NHS has to deliver.

The best possible model would have local NHS management in the lead and would rely very heavily on GP surgery lists - but you would need someone else to actually do the work.


----------



## winjim (10 Nov 2020)

tom73 said:


> They did supply the gloves but they only counted them as single ones not pairs.


They don't come in pairs.


----------



## kingrollo (10 Nov 2020)

srw said:


> The NHS is geared up to provide urgent and long-term healthcare in response to need - and even that it does in partnership with private enterprises (GP and dental surgeries and private pharmacies as well as the obvious private hospital chains). It's not geared up to provide two doses of a universal vaccine to 60 million people - it's a project an order of magnitude bigger than any other vaccination programme, *and needs to be delivered more rapidly, more reliably and without disrupting anything else the NHS has to deliver.*
> 
> The best possible model would have local NHS management in the lead and would rely very heavily on GP surgery lists - but you would need someone else to actually do the work.



Maybe not in terms of resources - but in expertise then personally I don't think anyone is better placed to deliver the vaccine than the NHS. Given the on going debacles with private companies of late the likes of SERCO should be a million miles away from this. 

There is already massive disruption in the NHS - the hospital where I work has stripped back A+E and is cancelling most elective surgery. The idea that we can call in few private contractors whilst the NHS cracks on with everything else is a complete non starter IMO.


----------



## srw (10 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Maybe not in terms of resources - but in expertise then personally I don't think anyone is better placed to deliver the vaccine than the NHS.



*Ahem*



srw said:


> The best possible model would have local NHS management in the lead and would rely very heavily on GP surgery lists



I am actually agreeing with you. But pointing out that there might well be a role for various outsourcing companies, possibly including Serco. 

If we simply leave it entirely to the NHS you can kiss goodbye to any other treatments at all for months.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

winjim said:


> They don't come in pairs.


Sterile ones do. 
One box is one box. One glove as PPE won't be of much use government figures on items of PPE based numbers on single gloves not pairs. 
Which by magic turned one box into two that's a fiddle in anyone book.


----------



## winjim (10 Nov 2020)

tom73 said:


> Sterile ones do.
> One box is one box. One glove as PPE won't be of much use government figures on items of PPE based numbers on single gloves not pairs.
> Which by magic turned one box into two that's a fiddle in anyone book.


The ones mostly used as covid PPE aren't sterile. But one box is approximately 200 gloves. Not 100 pairs. And that's 200 by weight so there's a roughly 50% chance of it containing an odd number of gloves. And what if I put on my gloves but then one of them rips so I have to put on another one? That's 1.5 pairs.

I agree that individual gloves are the wrong metric to be assessing quantity of PPE, but the single / pairs thing is an absolute red herring.


----------



## newfhouse (10 Nov 2020)

I wish I’d cited aprons now.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

srw said:


> *Ahem*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Bring the Army in they move things in a timely and managed way all day long. They are also widely experienced in planning and 
co-ordinationg large scale operations. With the help and experience of NHS at both national and local level this is do able it's a massive undertaking for sure. It won't be easy and it will effect other services how that's managed is up to the NHS as they are currently going. 
As the law has been changed to open up to allow all professionals who work in occupational health. Anyone working in large companies it should be simple to roll it out in the work place even vet's have been giving the green light to help give them. 
Bring in 3rd sector organisations who have a track recored of proving support to the NHS. To help provide support with both logistics and clinical support, admin support. Private sector will be required but the T and C's need to solid with formal open and transparent tendering process. Not as we are doing handing over vast sums of money to who ever they feel like with no come back. Serco don't even let Serco run health care in Serco prisons. They simply can't do this they can't even fix what we've already given them to do.


----------



## vickster (10 Nov 2020)

Pfizer (and any subsequent companies that have a vaccine ready eg AZ, Sanofi) are going to be rather closely involved in the supply chain to get their vaccines to the end user in a safe, effective and timely manner in line with the regulatory approval and product label, eg the freezing, refrigeration, shelf life, packaging, dosing etc.
They're quite adept at distributing billions of doses of medicines and vaccines and so on in the correct manner every year around the world - they have enormous logistics and supply chain organisations. They will already be well into the planning for Covid vaccine (probably from the day they identified how it will need to be manufactured, distributed, stored and injected).
Any issues in manufacture, supply chain, product quality are already extremely closely monitored and reported, it's a legal obligation for every Pharma or Medical device company.

Getting the product to the end user isn't going to be left wholly to government (or the Healthcare system or the Army or any private business not specifically contracted by the manufacturer or whoever) in any country that's for certain 

It's a bit different to the distribution of gloves and pinnies


----------



## PK99 (10 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> Pfizer (and any subsequent companies that have a vaccine ready eg AZ, Sanofi) are going to be rather closely involved in the supply chain to get their vaccines to the end user in a safe, effective and timely manner in line with the regulatory approval and product label, eg the freezing, refrigeration, shelf life, packaging, dosing etc.
> They're quite adept at distributing billions of doses of medicines and vaccines and so on in the correct manner every year around the world - they have enormous logistics and supply chain organisations. They will already be well into the planning for Covid vaccine (probably from the day they identified how it will need to be manufactured, distributed, stored and injected).
> Any issues in manufacture, supply chain, product quality are already extremely closely monitored and reported, it's a legal obligation for every Pharma or Medical device company.
> 
> ...



Spoil sport!


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

In the House of Commons, Matt Hancock says he has written to GPs to announce £150m to support the vaccine rollout and to let them know what they would be expected to do.

Now we're getting some details of what that will mean in England: NHS England has told each of the 1,250 primary care areas to nominate a GP surgery that could hold clinics from 8am to 8pm seven days a week, including on bank holidays if needed.

Documents suggest that each of these dedicated clinics will be expected to deliver a minimum of 975 doses per week and need to have the fridge space by 1 December.

Patients will need to be supervised for 15 minutes after receiving the vaccine, and annual flu jabs and Covid-19 immunisations must be given at least a week apart.

Appointments for the vaccine - in two doses, given between 21 days and 28 days apart - will be managed through a national booking system, the documents say. Patients will be notified they are eligible and can then book with their nearby GP provider or choose another provider through the National Booking Service.

Hancock said earlier that pharmacies and dedicated clinics set up in public venues such as sports halls were also likely to be used.

What can possibly go wrong ? Just who is going to get access to all the GP's lists is not clear either. How big do they think a GP's surgery is just what are they supposes to do with all the ones who need care after having it. Better candidates for a vaccine better come along or this will be impossible to do any time soon.


----------



## vickster (10 Nov 2020)

PK99 said:


> Spoil sport!


Just trying to fill that CycleChat glass higher than a couple of dribbles


----------



## winjim (10 Nov 2020)

Chinese vaccine trial is on pause.

BBC News - Covid: China's Sinovac vaccine trial halted in Brazil
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-54883383


----------



## kingrollo (10 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> Pfizer (and any subsequent companies that have a vaccine ready eg AZ, Sanofi) are going to be rather closely involved in the supply chain to get their vaccines to the end user in a safe, effective and timely manner in line with the regulatory approval and product label, eg the freezing, refrigeration, shelf life, packaging, dosing etc.
> They're quite adept at distributing billions of doses of medicines and vaccines and so on in the correct manner every year around the world - they have enormous logistics and supply chain organisations. They will already be well into the planning for Covid vaccine (probably from the day they identified how it will need to be manufactured, distributed, stored and injected).
> Any issues in manufacture, supply chain, product quality are already extremely closely monitored and reported, it's a legal obligation for every Pharma or Medical device company.
> 
> ...


Someone has just been on sky news saying more or less the opposite of the above.


----------



## vickster (10 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Someone has just been on sky news saying more or less the opposite of the above.


Who was it?
(Sky=Fox=Murdoch)

Do you really think a Global business that turned over $51bn last year is going to leave the distribution of its latest and highest profile development to chance and itself open to potentially destructive lawsuits?


----------



## Ming the Merciless (10 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Someone has just been on sky news saying more or less the opposite of the above.



Yeah but that’s Sky news


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> Pfizer (and any subsequent companies that have a vaccine ready eg AZ, Sanofi) are going to be rather closely involved in the supply chain to get their vaccines to the end user in a safe, effective and timely manner in line with the regulatory approval and product label, eg the freezing, refrigeration, shelf life, packaging, dosing etc.
> They're quite adept at distributing billions of doses of medicines and vaccines and so on in the correct manner every year around the world - they have enormous logistics and supply chain organisations. They will already be well into the planning for Covid vaccine (probably from the day they identified how it will need to be manufactured, distributed, stored and injected).
> Any issues in manufacture, supply chain, product quality are already extremely closely monitored and reported, it's a legal obligation for every Pharma or Medical device company.
> 
> ...


They also have a track record of screwing all the money that can out of any health service inc ours. Poor countries tend to get even more special attention. They can be as organised as they like but without real work on the ground by professionals it will only ever stay in the box. That's the real critical part of this. We simply don't have enough people to do it in a safe timely manner. So unless they are feeling like bunging in a few quid to pay for it. Or even better handing over the rights to all for free for the good of humanity again don't think the share holders will like that.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

So GP's are expect to make this all work for £12.58 per dose given. That's £2.52 more than a flu jab the extra the government says is in recognition of the need for extra training, post-vaccine observation, and other associated costs. 
Practices will need to provide most of the required staff from their own workforce. How can they possibly do it all ?


----------



## kingrollo (10 Nov 2020)

vickster said:


> Who was it?
> (Sky=Fox=Murdoch)
> 
> Do you really think a Global business that turned over $51bn last year is going to leave the distribution of its latest and highest profile development to chance and itself open to potentially destructive lawsuits?



Not really sure I have the insight to give much of a valid opinion. My guess would be that Pfizer would issue a distribution protocol - the challenge would to tie that in with current NHS standards. I could be wrong but the delivery and implementation of the Jabs wouldn't couldn't come from Pfizer. Even Hancock was implying later tonight that much of this will come down NHS staff.


----------



## kingrollo (10 Nov 2020)

tom73 said:


> They also have a track record of screwing all the money that can out of any health service inc ours. Poor countries tend to get even more special attention. They can be as organised as they like but without real work on the ground by professionals it will only ever stay in the box. That's the real critical part of this. We simply don't have enough people to do it in a safe timely manner. So unless they are feeling like bunging in a few quid to pay for it. Or even better handing over the rights to all for free for the good of humanity again don't think the share holders will like that.



Thats a good point - its reminds me of all the well meaning famine relief efforts in 1980's - everything was in place except the boots on the ground. - lessons were learned............ eventually.


----------



## oldworld (10 Nov 2020)

tom73 said:


> So GP's are expect to make this all work for £12.58 per dose given. That's £2.52 more than a flu jab the extra the government says is in recognition of the need for extra training, post-vaccine observation, and other associated costs.
> Practices will need to provide most of the required staff from their own workforce. How can they possibly do it all ?


Hancock said today that the NHS will be ready.
Well that sorted then, Matt will be free of any blame should it go horrible wrong. 
After all he's tasked the them to be ready by the 1st Dec.
I had a boss like this, tell you to get something done and never considered the barriers that had to be crossed or did we have the resources.

Are there any Doctors on here? I'd like their view.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

oldworld said:


> Hancock said today that the NHS will be ready.
> Well that sorted then, Matt will be free of any blame should it go horrible wrong.
> After all he's tasked the them to be ready by the 1st Dec.
> I had a boss like this, tell you to get something done and never considered the barriers that had to be crossed or did we have the resources.
> ...


The real leg work will fall to practice nurses, district nurses and it’s going to need health visitors to boost the numbers (well what’s left of them after decades of running them down)


----------



## kingrollo (10 Nov 2020)

Still think my idea of jabbing people on the M6 during rushour is being overlooked !


----------



## newfhouse (10 Nov 2020)

tom73 said:


> The real leg work will fall to practice nurses, district nurses and it’s going to need health visitors to boost the numbers (well what’s left of them after decades of running them down)


Might they stiff the student nurses again?


----------



## midlife (10 Nov 2020)

There are 40,000 odd dentists in the UK who are adept at sticking needles in people and are past masters of taking the King's shilling.....


----------



## Ming the Merciless (10 Nov 2020)

There’s 2 million addicts adept at reusing needles ... oh hang on.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

midlife said:


> There are 40,000 odd dentists in the UK who are adept at sticking needles in people and are past masters of taking the King's shilling.....


Have the BDA been asked to look into giving it the ok to use it’s members?


----------



## midlife (10 Nov 2020)

tom73 said:


> Have the BDA been asked to look into giving it the ok to use it’s members?



I think the BDA, General Dental Council, indemnity insurers are still working under the assumption that dentists can still be redeployed. If there's a few Bob in it the BDA are at the front of the queue.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

newfhouse said:


> Might they stiff the student nurses again?


Possibly the Covid vac law change allows them give it and without supervision. If it’s along the same lines as last time. Students got asked to stay on in current placement or go back to the last one. So with this it would depend how many are on community placement at the time. Which given lack of placements access the NHS is not likely to many. That’s assuming they’d be happy to jab people on mass day in day out with little support.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

midlife said:


> I think the BDA, General Dental Council, indemnity insurers are still working under the assumption that dentists can still be redeployed. If there's a few Bob in it the BDA are at the front of the queue.


The law change covers them anyway and clears the way to do them. Guess it comes down to how much the CCG’s want to pay them. With little over 12 quid each jab to play with can’t see it being much. One for the high up commissioners to fight over I think.


----------



## tom73 (10 Nov 2020)

Pfizer say it’s needs to thawed out before you can give it and will last up to 5 days in a normal drug fridge. That makes it’s a little less complex but more room for waste.

To ones who know once we get to a full roll out. How long are we giving SystmOne before it go’s down ?


----------



## Unkraut (11 Nov 2020)

I just watched the latest current events discussion, including on the new vaccine. 

Prof Streeck of hotspot study fame was on, and previously having warned not to take the successful development of a vaccine for granted, said there were grounds to be optimistic on this one, but not to get too carried away.

It is though very early days. It's not known whether the vaccine prevents infections or prevents illness. No information on who the vaccine benefits most. There aren't enough numbers yet to be sure of any side-effects, this will take time. Hopefully this won't be the only vaccine that might be successful against the virus. The conditions for preserving this vaccine are going to be difficult for developing countries with poor infrastructure.

The politicians are already organising the necessary facilities to administer the vaccine - or a different one if it yet proves problematic. Realistically it is not likely to be available until early next year, and then the priority will be medical staff, carers in old people's homes, followed by older citizens and those with pre-existing medical conditions. 

Long-term planning to avoid lockdown after lockdown is needed, and we will have to live with the virus at least during next year and possibly the year after, but at least life should be somewhat more normal than it is now.

Prof Streeck is a great believer in vaccines and would be happy to have the jab. His overall position was optimism yes, but not euphoria.


----------



## lazybloke (11 Nov 2020)

I'm aware of 0 deaths in a trial of 40,000 volunteers.
However, 1 in 100 Covid 19 infections result in death, and some survivors will suffer from Long Covid.

With those numbers, I'm definitely taking the vaccine, assuming no contraindications.


----------



## PK99 (11 Nov 2020)

lazybloke said:


> I'm aware of 0 deaths in a trial of 40,000 volunteers.
> However, 1 in 100 Covid 19 infections result in death, and some survivors will suffer from Long Covid.
> 
> With those numbers, I'm definitely taking the vaccine, assuming no contraindications.



I volunteered to take part in one of the trials, but my medical history ruled me out. Not for the vaccine but for medical trial.


----------



## RoadRider400 (11 Nov 2020)

lazybloke said:


> I'm aware of 0 deaths in a trial of 40,000 volunteers.
> However, 1 in 100 Covid 19 infections result in death, and some survivors will suffer from Long Covid.
> 
> With those numbers, I'm definitely taking the vaccine, assuming no contraindications.


Im going to hazard a guess testing is carried out on the young and healthy. Whereas there is no restriction on who gets infected with the virus in general circulation. I wonder how the old and frail will get on with the vaccine.


----------



## winjim (11 Nov 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> Im going to hazard a guess testing is carried out on the young and healthy. Whereas there is no restriction on who gets infected with the virus in general circulation. I wonder how the old and frail will get on with the vaccine.


It's been tested on the healthy but not just the young.

https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04368728



But yeah, it's the same as masking, the people who can have it should, to protect the people who can't.


----------



## PK99 (11 Nov 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> *I'm going to hazard a guess testing is carried out on the young and healthy*. Whereas there is no restriction on who gets infected with the virus in general circulation. I wonder how the old and frail will get on with the vaccine.



In that guess you are wrong. The requests for volunteers makes clear that all age groups are needed and stable controlled, long term conditions are not a bar.

I'm 65 and take 6 meds daily, yet got through the first cut but was ruled out at the detailed history stage as one of my conditions is an autoimmune condition prone to random "Flares" - a Flare over the year-long duration of the trial would have been an issue. It would, apparently, rule me out of most drug trials.


----------



## RoadRider400 (11 Nov 2020)

PK99 said:


> In that guess you are wrong. The requests for volunteers makes clear that all age groups are needed and stable controlled, long term conditions are not a bar.
> 
> I'm 65 and take 6 meds daily, yet got through the first cut but was ruled out at the detailed history stage as one of my conditions is an autoimmune condition prone to random "Flares" - a Flare over the year-long duration of the trial would have been an issue. It would, apparently, rule me out of most drug trials.


So just the healthy then 
I wonder if they going to pre screen people who get the vaccine when its rolled out to the general public.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (11 Nov 2020)

.


RoadRider400 said:


> So just the healthy then
> I wonder if they going to pre screen people who get the vaccine when its rolled out to the general public.



If you're interested, exclusion criteria are here. There are very few conditions that exclude you.

Normally, the label awarded to a treatment will be in line with the exclusion criteria for the trial, so you would not be eligible for the vaccine if not eligible for the trial.




• Participation in COVID-19 prophylactic drug trials for the duration of the study.
Note: Participation in COVID-19 treatment trials is allowed in the event of hospitalisation due to COVID-19. The COV002 study team should be informed as soon as possible.
• Participation in SARS-CoV-2 serological surveys where participants are informed of their serostatus for the duration of the study.
Note: Disclosure of serostatus post enrolment may accidently unblind participants to group allocation. Participation in COV002 can only be allowed if volunteers are kept blinded to their serology results from local/national serological surveys
• Receipt of any vaccine (licensed or investigational) other than the study intervention within 30 days before and after each study vaccination, with the .exception of the licensed seasonal influenza vaccination and the licenced pneumococcal vaccination. Participants will be encouraged to receive these vaccination at least 7 days before or after their study vaccine.
• Prior or planned receipt of an investigational or licensed vaccine or product likely to impact on interpretation of the trial data (e.g. Adenovirus vectored vaccines, any coronavirus vaccines). ). This exclusion criteria will not apply to group 11, as recruitment will be targeted at those volunteers who previously received a ChAdOx1 vectored vaccine.
• Administration of immunoglobulins and/or any blood products within the three months preceding the planned administration of the vaccine candidate.
• Any confirmed or suspected immunosuppressive or immunodeficient state (except group 12, where HIV infected participants are allowed); asplenia; recurrent severe infections and use of immunosuppressant medication within the past 6 months, except topical steroids or short-term oral steroids (course lasting ≤14 days)
• History of allergic disease or reactions likely to be exacerbated by any component of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or MenACWY
• Any history of angioedema.
• Any history of anaphylaxis.
• Pregnancy, lactation or willingness/intention to become pregnant during the study.
• Current diagnosis of or treatment for cancer (except basal cell carcinoma of the skin and cervical carcinoma in situ).
• History of serious psychiatric condition likely to affect participation in the study.
• Bleeding disorder (e.g. factor deficiency, coagulopathy or platelet disorder), or prior history of significant bleeding or bruising following IM injections or venepuncture.
• Continuous use of anticoagulants, such as coumarins and related anticoagulants (i.e. warfarin) or novel oral anticoagulants (i.e. apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran and edoxaban)
• Suspected or known current alcohol or drug dependency.
• Any other significant disease, disorder or finding which may significantly increase the risk to the volunteer because of participation in the study, affect the ability of the volunteer to participate in the study or impair interpretation of the study data.
• Severe and/or uncontrolled cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, gastrointestinal disease, liver disease, renal disease, endocrine disorder and neurological illness (mild/moderate well controlled comorbidities are allowed)
• History of laboratory confirmed COVID-19 (except groups 5d, 9, 10 and 11).
- Seropositivity to SARS-CoV-2 before enrolment (except groups 5d, 9, 10 and 11)
- NB: volunteers with previous PCR positive results are also allowed in groups 9, 10 and 11

https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-001228-32/GB

[edit, this is actually for the AZ/Oxford trial. the Pfizer equivalent is here https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-002641-42/DE note that for the Pfizer trial most exclusions only apply to phase I, not to the larger phase III]


----------



## PK99 (11 Nov 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> So just the healthy then
> I wonder if they going to pre screen people who get the vaccine when its rolled out to the general public.



Please read my post properly, I was rejected for a specific form of condition that can produce random unpredictable flares of illness that could confound any drug trial.

MY CONDITION WOULD NOT BE A BAR TO HAVING THE VACCINE - as was confirmed by the senior doctor doing the screen interview.

I have the flu jab every year but would not be accepted for a flu jab trial.


----------



## lazybloke (11 Nov 2020)

PK99 said:


> MY CONDITION WOULD NOT BE A BAR TO HAVING THE VACCINE - as was confirmed by the senior doctor doing the screen interview.


That's good news for you.

Others won't be so lucky, so will be depending on the vaccination programme to deliver herd immunity.
Alas, J van-Tam has today confirmed today that children will NOT be vaccinated, and there still no plan to vaccinate adults under the age of 50 (unless they fall into the already defined categories).

Surely that means herd immunity is a pipe-dream; the disease will continue to circulate among half the population. 
Bad news for those with undiagnosed underlying health conditions.
Bad news for those that CANNOT be vaccinated (for medical reasons).

Two colleagues at work today were sent home with fevers and having lost their sense of taste. I shared a room with one of them twice, although not for the 15 minutes required for it to be classed as close contact. Still a little nervous.


----------



## PaulB (11 Nov 2020)

This vaccine should be tested on members of the government. If they survive, it's safe. If they don't survive, the country's safe. It's a win-win situation.


----------



## classic33 (11 Nov 2020)

lazybloke said:


> I'm aware of 0 deaths in a trial of 40,000 volunteers.
> However, 1 in 100 Covid 19 infections result in death, and some survivors will suffer from Long Covid.
> 
> With those numbers, I'm definitely taking the vaccine, assuming no contraindications.


Two, in Brazil, but it didn't warrant halting the trial of one. But halted the trial of the second involved.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...-death-of-volunteer-who-took-placebo-12110476

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...e-after-unrelated-death-of-volunteer-12128957


----------



## qigong chimp (11 Nov 2020)

Diverting though all this undoubtably is, the big question is will a role be found for Maxine Peake to front the vaccination programme?


----------



## lazybloke (11 Nov 2020)

classic33 said:


> Two, in Brazil, but it didn't warrant halting the trial of one. But halted the trial of the second involved.
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...-death-of-volunteer-who-took-placebo-12110476
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...e-after-unrelated-death-of-volunteer-12128957


Different vaccine?


----------



## PaulB (11 Nov 2020)

qigong chimp said:


> Diverting though all this undoubtably is, the big question is will a role be found for Maxine Peake to front the vaccination programme?


What, so we can say, "Pass the vaccine, Maxine?"


----------



## Mo1959 (11 Nov 2020)

qigong chimp said:


> Diverting though all this undoubtably is, the big question is will a role be found for Maxine Peake to front the vaccination programme?


She’s too busy trying to get us to install smart meters!


----------



## classic33 (11 Nov 2020)

lazybloke said:


> Different vaccine?


The Oxford one or the Chinese one?


----------



## PK99 (11 Nov 2020)

classic33 said:


> Two, in Brazil, but it didn't warrant halting the trial of one. But halted the trial of the second involved.
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...-death-of-volunteer-who-took-placebo-12110476
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...e-after-unrelated-death-of-volunteer-12128957




The first had had the placebo not the vaccine, ispo facto the vaccine was not the cause. No need to halt the trial.

The second was a political decision - the president does not like the testing program.

With 10's of thousands of people involved in a trail some are bound to die of causes not related to the vaccine


----------



## classic33 (12 Nov 2020)

PK99 said:


> The first had had the placebo not the vaccine*, ispo facto the vaccine was not the cause. No need to halt the trial.
> 
> The second was a political decision - the president does not like the testing program.
> 
> With 10's of thousands of people involved in a trail some are bound to die of causes not related to the vaccine


For the Oxford vaccine, from the piece linked.
*_"this hasn't been officially confirmed_

For the Chinese trial
_"Brazil's health regulator has halted clinical trials of a coronavirus vaccine being made by Chinese drug firm Sinovac after a "serious adverse effect"._

No mention of the president not liking the trial due to a polical decision.

Edited to add
Three deaths
https://wjla.com/news/health/astraz...ntinue-after-brazil-announces-volunteer-death


----------



## winjim (12 Nov 2020)

classic33 said:


> Two, in Brazil, but it didn't warrant halting the trial of one. But halted the trial of the second involved.
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...-death-of-volunteer-who-took-placebo-12110476





PK99 said:


> The first had had the placebo not the vaccine, ispo facto the vaccine was not the cause. No need to halt the trial.


Who said they had a placebo? Because firstly they're wrong, this is not a placebo controlled trial. Secondly, I don't know specifically what the case is for fatalities in Brazil, but for adverse events in this country, that is not information that would be available to the study participants or to the researchers because that would unblind them and potentially jeapordise the entire study. The trial is halted and unblinded data is provided to an independent panel who assess whether it is safe to continue the trial.

My guess is that the Oxford trial was not halted this time because all participants have already been given both injections and they're just in the observation phase so halting now would be meaningless. The trial was halted over the summer between initial and booster injections so the independent panel could assess reports of peripheral neuropathy in some participants but they gave the go-ahead to continue.

Halting trials in order to assess safety data is a perfectly normal part of the process. It's kind of the point.


----------



## kingrollo (16 Nov 2020)

So the Moderna Vaccine is 95% effective. Be spoilt for choice soon !!!


----------



## Rusty Nails (16 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> So the Moderna Vaccine is 95% effective. Be spoilt for choice soon !!!



I've ditched the masks and am off to a crowded pub for a pint to celebrate.

Or should I wait a while?


----------



## lane (16 Nov 2020)

Wait a while. The pubs are closed.


----------



## kingrollo (26 Nov 2020)

So controversy on the Oxford trial data. Differing reports - with some saying a higher does gives 90% protection - while some saying a lower dose. and some reports suggesting the higher number are only achieved in the under 55 years - its effectiveness for the rest of us could be as low as 62%


----------



## winjim (26 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> So controversy on the Oxford trial data. Differing reports - with some saying a higher does gives 90% protection - while some saying a lower dose. and some reports suggesting the higher number are only achieved in the under 55 years - its effectiveness for the rest of us could be as low as 62%


It's almost as if they've been in a bit of a rush. But the reports I've seen say it's the half-full dose which is most effective(in <55s). Interestingly the FT quotes a study participant who was informed of the half dose cockup in July. I received no such information so I assume that I'm in the full dose cohort.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Nov 2020)

I really wouldn't overthink the "controversy" over the Oxford trial. 

The results look good.

The endpoint will have been agreed in advance with the regulatory agency (always is for phase 3 trials, not just this one)

Their lawyers and regulatory experts would not have allowed them to make a misleading press release - its illegal under financial law.

There's lots of detail unclear from the press release. This isn't unusual for a phase 3 trial. The trial is complex because it covers multiple countries. Again, not at all unusual.

It's always possible that something surprising and negative will emerge, but I wouldn't lose sleep over it.

@winjim I think the dosing error was in the earlier phase I trial. When the data from that looked good, it was deliberately included in the phase 3. Could be wrong.


----------



## winjim (26 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> @winjim I think the dosing error was in the earlier phase I trial. When the data from that looked good, it was deliberately included in the phase 3. Could be wrong.


Can't find the actual statement but reports are that it was 'later phases' of the trial. AIUI they only switched to using two doses partway through phase 2/3. We were recalled and told they had done this, we originally only signed up for one dose. This may be because they were looking at data from phase 1/2 though.


----------



## lane (26 Nov 2020)

I would be very happy to have it now. It prevents serious covid big or small dose. Given my work environment people are going down with covid almost daily.


----------



## kingrollo (26 Nov 2020)

lane said:


> I would be very happy to have it now. It prevents serious covid big or small dose. Given my work environment people are going down with covid almost daily.



Me too - I've been WFH since march. But now pressure is mounting to get me back on site (hospital env) - my shielding letter protects me until next week - after that the prospect of mingling with patients doesn't thrill me - as an asthmatic !


----------



## lane (26 Nov 2020)

Yes I also have asthma but not serious enough to get a letter


----------



## Unkraut (27 Nov 2020)

Rusty Nails said:


> I've ditched the masks and am off to a crowded pub for a pint to celebrate.
> 
> Or should I wait a while?


Not if you don't want it to get warm and flat ...


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Nov 2020)

kingrollo said:


> So controversy on the Oxford trial data. Differing reports - with some saying a higher does gives 90% protection - while some saying a lower dose. and some reports suggesting the higher number are only achieved in the under 55 years - its effectiveness for the rest of us could be as low as 62%



There aren’t differing reports from the Oxford people. It’s just newspaper editors getting confused. But then we know they're not the brightest when it comes to getting the facts right.


----------



## Unkraut (27 Nov 2020)

Watched an interview with Dr. Ingmar Hoerr last night. He is the biologist who discovered, more by luck than design, the potential use of RNA for vaccines. He had an infectious (sorry!) enthusiasm talking about the discovery, which his professor initially didn't believe!

It was interesting how he financed Curevac, the company researching this - initially Dietmar Hopp very rich founder of SAP put up a couple of €million, and later also the Bill Gates Foundation. That should whet the conspiracy theorists appetite, but without this investment the technique could not have been developed.

The most interesting point to me as a complete layman (thicko!) in this kind of thing was the fact that the new vaccines being developed against corona using RNA ought to be safe from long-term effects. It (RNA) is so unstable that after injection within a very short period of time it just disappears. It survives only long enough to trigger the body's immune system and is then gone. The body, however, remembers it and reacts accordingly if it encounters the corona virus.


----------



## oldwheels (27 Nov 2020)

Perhaps it is fake news but the Oxford vaccine is doomed. Apparently in Scotland at least it must have a union jack printed on the capsules. Taxpayers money is to be spent on political posturing.


----------



## Moon bunny (27 Nov 2020)

Almost:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...union-flag-on-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-kits


----------



## roubaixtuesday (27 Nov 2020)

Unkraut said:


> the new vaccines being developed against corona using RNA ought to be safe from long-term effects. It (RNA) is so unstable that after injection within a very short period of time it just disappears. It survives only long enough to trigger the body's immune system and is then gone. The body, however, remembers it and reacts accordingly if it encounters the corona virus



This is in general true of vaccines - that the vaccine itself is not long lived in the body ( though even more so for mRNA perhaps)

It does not necessarily imply less long term effects.


----------



## lane (27 Nov 2020)

If probably still take it even if they put a picture of Trump on it.


----------



## Milzy (27 Nov 2020)

So many people believe that there’s a chip in the vaccine to track you. Haha how can a microchip float around in a liquid and stay in the body?


----------



## vickster (27 Nov 2020)

Milzy said:


> So many people believe that there’s a chip in the vaccine to track you. Haha how can a microchip float around in a liquid and stay in the body?


Clearly it can’t, it’s utter bollox


----------



## roubaixtuesday (27 Nov 2020)

Milzy said:


> how can a microchip float around in a liquid and stay in the body?



They use liquid crystal technology, obviously.


----------



## winjim (27 Nov 2020)

Milzy said:


> So many people believe that there’s a chip in the vaccine to track you. Haha how can a microchip float around in a liquid and stay in the body?


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Nov 2020)

lane said:


> If probably still take it even if they put a picture of Trump on it.



A side effect is that you develop orange skin and start telling whoppers


----------



## roubaixtuesday (27 Nov 2020)

YukonBoy said:


> A side effect is that you develop orange skin and start telling whoppers



Could be worse, you might develop an orange whopper!


----------



## Milzy (27 Nov 2020)

winjim said:


> View attachment 560490


Nuclear weapons, Jack. They mean nothing. Everybody's got 'em, nobody has the balls to use 'em. Am I right?

[Jack shrugs, then tries to say something] 

Space, you say? Space is a flop. Didn't you know that?

[Jack shakes his head] 

An endless junkyard of orbiting debris. Ah, but! - miniaturization, Jack. That's the ticket. That's the edge everybody's been looking for. Who will have that edge Jack? What country... will control miniaturization?

[takes a puff of his cigar] 

Frankly, I don't give a shoot. I'm only in this for the money. And that's why, Jack, we've got to get that little pod out

[prods Jack's side] 

from inside of you!


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Nov 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Could be worse, you might develop an orange whopper!



Does it come with fries?


----------



## MntnMan62 (27 Nov 2020)

YukonBoy said:


> Does it come with fries?



Yes. And a large soda.


----------



## Rusty Nails (27 Nov 2020)

Milzy said:


> So many people believe that there’s a chip in the vaccine to track you. Haha how can a microchip float around in a liquid and stay in the body?


It doesn't just float around. It waits until it gets to your brain, drills through your vein and attaches itself to your brain to control all your thoughts.

Simples!


----------



## kingrollo (1 Dec 2020)

Is the winter flu jab a pre requisite for the covid Jab ?


----------



## vickster (1 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Is the winter flu jab a pre requisite for the covid Jab ?


Why would it be?


----------



## kingrollo (1 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> Why would it be?



The hospital where I work say it is. That's probably internal policy though.


----------



## Unkraut (1 Dec 2020)

Curevac in Tübingen have just announced the are starting trials for a fourth anti-corona vaccine. Something to do with T cells, but no details were given and I probably wouldn't have understood them if they had!


----------



## DCLane (1 Dec 2020)

SWMBO's been told to be ready for her first vaccine injection. It _could_ be as soon as tomorrow, but it's in the next week. She's frontline with Covid patients and has tests twice-weekly.


----------



## vickster (1 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> The hospital where I work say it is. That's probably internal policy though.


Indeed, flu jabs aren't mandatory outside healthcare settings AFAIK 

Under 50s are more likely to get a free Covid jab than a free flu jab (it's hard enough to find one privately at the moment)


----------



## kingrollo (1 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> Indeed, flu jabs aren't mandatory outside healthcare settings AFAIK
> 
> Under 50s are more likely to get a free Covid jab than a free flu jab (it's hard enough to find one privately at the moment)



Flu jabs standalone aren't mandatory in the trust I work for. However they are stating that you must have had a flu jab before you get a COVID Jab.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (1 Dec 2020)

Unkraut said:


> Curevac in Tübingen have just announced the are starting trials for a fourth anti-corona vaccine. Something to do with T cells, but no details were given and I probably wouldn't have understood them if they had!



Same principle as Pfizer and Moderna, but claimed much better stability- refrigerated cold chain. 

https://www.curevac.com/en/covid-19/


----------



## winjim (1 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Flu jabs standalone aren't mandatory in the trust I work for. However they are stating that you must have had a flu jab before you get a COVID Jab.


They've been encouraging us to get the flu jab since September simply so that if and when the Covid vaccine arrives we'll have had the required 28 days between them.


----------



## vickster (1 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Flu jabs standalone aren't mandatory in the trust I work for. However they are stating that you must have had a flu jab before you get a COVID Jab.


Not even for clinicians? Or patient facing staff?


----------



## winjim (1 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> Not even for clinicians? Or patient facing staff?


Entirely voluntary at our trust although we are being incentivised.


----------



## tom73 (2 Dec 2020)

No flu jab has never been mandatory for health workers. Many do have it inc Mrs 73 who has always seen it as a way to help her protect patients. The other incentivise is you often got the chance to jab a few staff you don't like .


----------



## Mo1959 (2 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> Not even for clinicians? Or patient facing staff?


I was reading an article yesterday, can't remember where now, that said that there was actually a very high percentage of health care staff that didn't take the flu jab.


----------



## winjim (2 Dec 2020)

Mo1959 said:


> I was reading an article yesterday, can't remember where now, that said that there was actually a very high percentage of health care staff that didn't take the flu jab.


The interesting thing about our incentive (prize draw, win a Samsung tablet) is that you have to either have the jab, inform them you've had it elsewhere, or officially decline it. I guess that firstly they're hoping that by reminding and incentivising people, more will accept than decline, and secondly ensuring they don't fall foul of discrimination legislation by not offering the incentive to those who are unable to have the vaccine.

Trust management is being leaned on very heavily this year to ensure maximum takeup of the flu jab.


----------



## Julia9054 (2 Dec 2020)

Sometimes it's not about actively not wanting something but it being low down the list of priorities. Our HR offers free flu jabs to all staff. They used to have nurses come into school on a couple of days and staff would go and get their jab. Uptake was high. Then they changed over to a system where they issued a voucher for staff to take to a pharmacy and arrange their own jab. Lots of people didn't bother.


----------



## tom73 (2 Dec 2020)

How ever great the news is today for most of use it's going to be some time before we can let our guard down. From today the real work starts. We need to let the NHS get on with this and not end up in a massive bun fight. If the government really want this to work. They very quickly need to stop the mixed messages and start going what ones who really know how to do this tell them. If the total mess like over the weekend with vaccine passports continues much of this or other vaccines will not get past the factory gate. The 5 O'clock Boris show today is not a great start. A lot of people still need to be empowered with simple and clear information to move from I'm not sure to yes I'm up for this jab.


----------



## winjim (2 Dec 2020)

Julia9054 said:


> Sometimes it's not about actively not wanting something but it being low down the list of priorities. Our HR offers free flu jabs to all staff. They used to have nurses come into school on a couple of days and staff would go and get their jab. Uptake was high. Then they changed over to a system where they issued a voucher for staff to take to a pharmacy and arrange their own jab. Lots of people didn't bother.


They actually send the flu nurses round to our department now rather than having us go to them. And we get a little sweetie afterwards like we're five years old or something. And a sticker.


----------



## vickster (2 Dec 2020)

winjim said:


> They actually send the flu nurses round to our department now rather than having us go to them. And we get a little sweetie afterwards like we're five years old or something. And a sticker.


I asked the nurse for a sticker when I had my ‘pre-school’ MMR jab a couple of years ago before going Mexico (endemic measles)....she laughed...I mean jabs can be ouchy for 46 year olds too


----------



## bitsandbobs (2 Dec 2020)

Unkraut said:


> The most interesting point to me as a complete layman (thicko!) in this kind of thing was the fact that the new vaccines being developed against corona using RNA ought to be safe from long-term effects. It (RNA) is so unstable that after injection within a very short period of time it just disappears. It survives only long enough to trigger the body's immune system and is then gone. The body, however, remembers it and reacts accordingly if it encounters the corona virus.



One of the challenges in using RNA is actually to get it to persist long _enough_. RNA doesn't itself trigger the immune system btw - that was another hurdle to the use of RNA vaccines - how to render it less immunogenic.


----------



## oldwheels (2 Dec 2020)

Mo1959 said:


> I was reading an article yesterday, can't remember where now, that said that there was actually a very high percentage of health care staff that didn't take the flu jab.


Perhaps frightened of needles?


----------



## marinyork (2 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> The hospital where I work say it is. That's probably internal policy though.



JCVI says leave 7 days between flu jab and covid jab. So a general muttering about worried about getting flu and covid-19, is not really surprising there's promotion.

JCVI just published more or less the same list as September. The one people didn't necessarily want to read as it suggests a wait.


----------



## potsy (2 Dec 2020)

winjim said:


> They actually send the flu nurses round to our department now rather than having us go to them. And we get a little sweetie afterwards like we're five years old or something. And a sticker.


I got to cuddle a teddy bear when I had mine at work a few years ago, and there is photographic evidence to prove it! 

And no, you cannot see


----------



## newfhouse (2 Dec 2020)

winjim said:


> And we get a little sweetie afterwards like we're five years old or something.


I'm getting my jab on Friday evening. I'm hoping for chips.


----------



## tom73 (2 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> JCVI says leave 7 days between flu jab and covid jab. So a general muttering about worried about getting flu and covid-19, is not really surprising there's promotion.
> 
> JCVI just published more or less the same list as September. The one people didn't necessarily want to read as it suggests a wait.


Mrs 73 and co have been told in a flu jab reminder they needed it 28 before. Which maybe more to do pushing the flu jab than anything else.


----------



## DCLane (2 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> Mrs 73 and co have been told in a flu jab reminder they needed it 28 before. Which maybe more to do pushing the flu jab than anything else.



SWMBO's had the same from her NHS trust. Possibly the same as yours? (SW Mental Health & Nottingham as she works for both).


----------



## mjr (2 Dec 2020)

Priorities set in Belgium. Putting health/care staff first seems different to what's been discussed in the UK according to https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/the-covid-vaccine-thread.267960/post-6191014


----------



## bitsandbobs (2 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Priorities set in Belgium. Putting health/care staff first seems different to what's been discussed in the UK according to https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/the-covid-vaccine-thread.267960/post-6191014
> View attachment 561259



Is there a point to all this reportage from Belgium?


----------



## oldwheels (2 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Priorities set in Belgium. Putting health/care staff first seems different to what's been discussed in the UK according to https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/the-covid-vaccine-thread.267960/post-6191014
> View attachment 561259


It has been announced by Ms Sturgeon that it is hoped vaccination will start next Tuesday with those administering the jabs and healthcare staff first along with vulnerable groups and the ancients.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Dec 2020)

oldwheels said:


> It has been announced by Ms Sturgeon that it is hoped vaccination will start next Tuesday with those administering the jabs and healthcare staff first along with vulnerable groups and the ancients.



The ancients as in the 2,000 year olds?


----------



## winjim (2 Dec 2020)

oldwheels said:


> It has been announced by Ms Sturgeon that it is hoped vaccination will start next Tuesday with* those administering the jabs ... first* along with vulnerable groups and the ancients.


We're bloody well stuck then, who gives the first one?


----------



## oldwheels (2 Dec 2020)

winjim said:


> We're bloody well stuck then, who gives the first one?


Good question but presumably somebody who has been tested for antibodies already in their system.


----------



## tom73 (2 Dec 2020)

DCLane said:


> SWMBO's had the same from her NHS trust. Possibly the same as yours? (SW Mental Health & Nottingham as she works for both).


Maybe they are hoping for a more general cut off date easier to roll out than working on individual ones. Or Working to one date to get flu jabs all but done so focus can move to this one.


----------



## tom73 (2 Dec 2020)

winjim said:


> We're bloody well stuck then, who gives the first one?


Don't rule out Boris hosting a lottery style covid jab prime time TV live draw.


----------



## vickster (2 Dec 2020)

bitsandbobs said:


> Is there a point to all this reportage from Belgium?


Maybe he’s Belgian?


----------



## midlife (2 Dec 2020)

rumour is that our hospital will get enough to vaccinate 500 very soon. I guess that 500 NHS frontline staff and patients...


----------



## Archie_tect (2 Dec 2020)

winjim said:


> We're bloody well stuck then, who gives the first one?


Dart gun...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAqIMA_V6tI_start_24


----------



## marinyork (2 Dec 2020)

midlife said:


> rumour is that our hospital will get enough to vaccinate 500 very soon. I guess that 500 NHS frontline staff and patients...



Batches of 975. So that probably means that another local hospital will get 500 too.

I looked at the list of trusts/hospitals this morning and was surprised a neighbouring trust was also one of the 50.


----------



## tom73 (2 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> Batches of 975. So that probably means that another local hospital will get 500 too.
> 
> I looked at the list of trusts/hospitals this morning and was surprised a neighbouring trust was also one of the 50.


A number on the list are surprising some are going to have cover a wide area.
Van-tan today said regular has not yet approved slipping the batches up so who knows.
It was a great help when they also said some may get it at next week hospital outpatients appointments.
Bet outpatients staff are really looking forward to tomorrow morning.
Unless the Oxford and others that more more useable don't came quickly. A mass roll out just won’t happen anytime soon. If we are going to need this say every year they are the only workable option not to say the cheapest.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Dec 2020)

winjim said:


> We're bloody well stuck then, who gives the first one?



Eric Bristow. A three dart finish to score 975.


----------



## randynewmanscat (3 Dec 2020)

newfhouse said:


> How long before UKIP Brexit Party Reform and associated cling-ons jump on the anti vaxx bandwagon? I'll give it until this afternoon.


I will be putting in many boring hours over the next months reporting Youtube videos and bookface groups and posts. It is important that the conspiracy dolts are drowned out by the normal populace. Its hard work, I had to report a Youtube video several times before it was taken down.
It was a video taken from a small community radio station web feed and contained much FUD from a woman who is anti-vax and stupid with it. The account that put the vid up was less than a month old and has since been closed, not by Youtube.
Her name is mentioned somewhere else on the thread, she is a known loony but has a following. The radio station was censured by OFCOM for not countering her assertions but no sanction was imposed. The depressing thing is that she is one of many actual UK citizens peddling the same fictions rather than a Kremlin controlled bot or human troll.
The noise will get louder as the months pass and all normal people with a functioning brain need to step in to quell the FUD, do not ignore it, it will not go away if you do.


----------



## Unkraut (3 Dec 2020)

randynewmanscat said:


> I will be putting in many boring hours over the next months reporting Youtube videos and bookface groups and posts. It is important that the conspiracy dolts are drowned out by the normal populace.


Good for you. I thinks Burke's famous saying _The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing _very much applies here. I would also include countering nonsense spouted in YT comment sections and the right-wing tabloids, with the goal of getting people to think.


----------



## rockyroller (3 Dec 2020)

37,000 Americans died from covid in November alone, over 3,000 Americans died from covid yesterday alone, & our company's owner thinks everything will be back to normal in 3 weeks due to the vaccine ...


----------



## rockyroller (3 Dec 2020)

since chump & his supporters think covid is a hoax they should be banned from getting the vaccine


----------



## marinyork (3 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> A number on the list are surprising some are going to have cover a wide area.
> Van-tan today said regular has not yet approved slipping the batches up so who knows.
> It was a great help when they also said some may get it at next week hospital outpatients appointments.
> Bet outpatients staff are really looking forward to tomorrow morning.
> Unless the Oxford and others that more more useable don't came quickly. A mass roll out just won’t happen anytime soon. If we are going to need this say every year they are the only workable option not to say the cheapest.



Yes it was clarifiedby the MHRA. Apparently some batches are 4785 and not just 975.

The stuff said yesterday I took to mean the oxford vaccine may not get approved till early January.

Mass roll out is Jan to April by the sounds of what JVT, John Stevens, Raine and Lim said. It was interesting noises yesterday that there may be a phase 2 of vaccines after April running into the autumn or there abouts. The PR of managing expectations.

BioNTech said yesterday that the UK may get a bit more than 5 million doses in December, which includes the 800,000 which it sounds like is being kept for the second dose as there may be a gap to tranche 2.


----------



## Nigeyy (5 Dec 2020)

I've also been thinking that I should encourage anti-vaxxers to keep to their values. I'd hate for any vaccine to be more available for people who actually want it and appreciate and take note of science and data 



rockyroller said:


> since chump & his supporters think covid is a hoax they should be banned from getting the vaccine


----------



## MrGrumpy (5 Dec 2020)

A work colleague of mine is getting the vaccine next week, he does maintenance work in a care home on his days off. Both him and his wife caught the virus back in March .


----------



## tom73 (5 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> Yes it was clarifiedby the MHRA. Apparently some batches are 4785 and not just 975.
> 
> The stuff said yesterday I took to mean the oxford vaccine may not get approved till early January.
> 
> ...


That's how I see it many are going to be in for a long wait and the sooner that that cut's though the better. The list of who and when has already changed be it a small one. But that may need to happen again as we get to know more a the vaccines out in the real world. Managing expectations need's to get carefully worked on both in terms of this and the effect rolling this out will have on primary care services. The letters that are starting to go out re over 80's make's it clear that GP's that are taking the lead in this will only going emergency work. Which will have a knock on effect when the vaccine get's into the pharmacy service. Which is some time off but they already have enough to do without extra knock on effects. 

The bun fighting is already starting and simple clear information need's to come out quickly and in ways that cut though to different demographics. That press briefing the other day was an important one and it’s great to be given clinical facts on the vaccine. It’s not the experts fault but someone should have helped them prep for it. it was like some stuffy old school lecture crossed with a meeting you just want to end. It was public that needed to know not a room full of experts.

The conditions set out yesterday for splitting batches and sending them out don't allow for much breathing space. The original waste figures may need to be looked at again. The more that we learn about the logistics of this the more questions it brings and the higher the manpower needed gets. The idea that it's just an injection which the government are happy to push needs to change in the same way that they are happy to push the mass testing as some sort of quick fix way out.


----------



## mjr (5 Dec 2020)

Nigeyy said:


> I've also been thinking that I should encourage anti-vaxxers to keep to their values. I'd hate for any vaccine to be more available for people who actually want it and appreciate and take note of science and data


Four pages of government advert in the local free newspaper this week, set out as news articles on how the vaccine was developed and checked for safety before approval.


----------



## midlife (5 Dec 2020)

MrGrumpy said:


> A work colleague of mine is getting the vaccine next week, he does maintenance work in a care home on his days off. Both him and his wife caught the virus back in March .



Email to all patient facing staff here to register for vaccine, starting with staff in the West of the County so that's not me. No date set for when but I guess they are drawing up a list. 

No place given either, email does say you will have to be prepared to travel.......


----------



## Blue Hills (5 Dec 2020)

How will old folk who are effectively isolating and don't have their own transport get the vaccine?
Many of the vaccine centres will surely be beyond walking distance?


----------



## newfhouse (5 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> How will old folk who are effectively isolating and don't have their own transport get the vaccine?
> Many of the vaccine centres will surely be beyond walking distance?


I expect they will have to wait for a vaccine that has less onerous transport and storage requirements.


----------



## tom73 (5 Dec 2020)

newfhouse said:


> I expect they will have to wait for a vaccine that has less onerous transport and storage requirements.



You're right the current one has been ruled out for use in individual homes.


----------



## tom73 (5 Dec 2020)

midlife said:


> Email to all patient facing staff here to register for vaccine, starting with staff in the West of the County so that's not me. No date set for when but I guess they are drawing up a list.
> 
> No place given either, email does say you will have to be prepared to travel.......


The only one Mrs 73 has been sent is asking her to do the jabs when she's not going the rest that is.
Guess it will at one central location within the trust that big enough for the pre and post vaccine requirements. At some point the vaccine will need to move around trust sites and other near by ones if they can get hold of some that is. 
Wonder if the one set of national guidelines on drawing up lists will be used or left to each trust to get on up on the others?
The talk of starting with ICU staff which going on most of health care deaths looks to be starting at the wrong end.


----------



## Blue Hills (5 Dec 2020)

newfhouse said:


> I expect they will have to wait for a vaccine that has less onerous transport and storage requirements.


A quick google news search finds that the East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust (ELHT), which includes the Royal Blackburn and Burnley General hospitals isn't on the list of initial centres, which seems a bit odd in view of infection rates in those areas - long been amongst the highest in the country I think.


----------



## tom73 (5 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> A quick google news search finds that the East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust (ELHT), which includes the Royal Blackburn and Burnley General hospitals isn't on the list of initial centres, which seems a bit odd in view of infection rates in those areas - long been amongst the highest in the country I think.


Most likely a number of issues that limited which trusts got picked. Storage and availably of space for the processing of the vaccine being high on there list. Transport links and distance to other sites being another but we just don't know as they've not published the thinking behind it. 
Most likely the clowns will start demanding to know once they feel left out. Should have a better idea which area are covered by which hub once the primary care lists come out hopefully the GP lead vaccine centres will be shared out better.


----------



## midlife (5 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> The only one Mrs 73 has been sent is asking her to do the jabs when she's not going the rest that is.
> Guess it will at one central location within the trust that big enough for the pre and post vaccine requirements. At some point the vaccine will need to move around trust sites and other near by ones if they can get hold of some that is.
> Wonder if the one set of national guidelines on drawing up lists will be used or left to each trust to get on up on the others?
> The talk of starting with ICU staff which going on most of health care deaths looks to be starting at the wrong end.



Our Trust is not getting the vaccine directly but is being doled out by Newcastle so it's up to them how much we get.

I'm not sure what it's like elsewhere but our ICU staff did not pick up covid from being in ICU (so we were told). Would not like to work there but seems one of the safest places to work covid wise.


----------



## Julia9054 (5 Dec 2020)

Asked my son if he had heard anything about being vaccinated as he is a home care worker. His work haven't said anything. A few weeks ago they said they were going to start testing them weekly. He hasn't heard anything recently about that either.


----------



## qigong chimp (5 Dec 2020)

PaulB said:


> What, so we can say, "Pass the vaccine, Maxine?"


Gah! If only I'd thought of that serendipitous rhyme my attempted joke might've had a chance..


----------



## tom73 (5 Dec 2020)

midlife said:


> Our Trust is not getting the vaccine directly but is being doled out by Newcastle so it's up to them how much we get.
> 
> I'm not sure what it's like elsewhere but our ICU staff did not pick up covid from being in ICU (so we were told). Would not like to work there but seems one of the safest places to work covid wise.


Sounds about right the the friends we have lost worked in areas seen as "lower risk" most known deaths have come from them too. 
The 1st reported one being a mental health nurse working in a community setting.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (5 Dec 2020)

Mass vaccination centre will be about 3 miles from here.


----------



## marinyork (5 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> Sounds about right the the friends we have lost worked in areas seen as "lower risk" most known deaths have come from them too.
> The 1st reported one being a mental health nurse working in a community setting.



There has been at least one outbreak of covid recently in MH settings here. The JCVI has made allowances for it in their list. Given the settings outpatients might mix in it's a very important one to get right in the coming months.


----------



## mjr (5 Dec 2020)

Julia9054 said:


> Asked my son if he had heard anything about being vaccinated as he is a home care worker. His work haven't said anything. A few weeks ago they said they were going to start testing them weekly. He hasn't heard anything recently about that either.


Might be a reaction to that care home in Yorkshire (shown on BBC Look North) that started testing weekly, found loads of cases, ran out of staff because they had to quarantine, asked for help and was basically told to stop testing their staff so often! 

After all, it's not like the govt already promised regular testing in care homes, then dithered and delayed. Oh wait, yes it is! https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/care-home-coronavirus-testing-pledge-abandoned-tqxf6mm6j


----------



## mjr (5 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> How will old folk who are effectively isolating and don't have their own transport get the vaccine?
> Many of the vaccine centres will surely be beyond walking distance?


Only motorists qualify, maybe? Wouldn't be the first time NHS services were located in places that prioritise drivers.


----------



## Milzy (5 Dec 2020)

The vaccine is a weakened dead common cold virus that has been engineer to fight off Covid. When you inject it, the vaccine inserts itself into your MRC-5 cells where it gets to work. It doesn’t contain MRC-5 genetic material but it needs the MRC-5 cells in your body to work. This however something that a mother of 5 on benefits in south London who quit school at 14 wouldn’t understand unless they do their research before hand and only using reputable sources.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (5 Dec 2020)

Milzy said:


> The vaccine is a weakened dead common cold virus that has been engineer to fight off Covid. When you inject it, the vaccine inserts itself into your MRC-5 cells where it gets to work. It doesn’t contain MRC-5 genetic material but it needs the MRC-5 cells in your body to work. This however something that a mother of 5 on benefits in south London who quit school at 14 wouldn’t understand unless they do their research before hand and only using reputable sources.



The one that is approved is no such thing it is mRNA


----------



## oldwheels (5 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Only motorists qualify, maybe? Wouldn't be the first time NHS services were located in places that prioritise drivers.


My local small hospital is the most likely place for covid vaccine and is 21 miles away. It can be reached by bus but a short appointment could take all day and in summer the buses are full by the time they get there anyway so return journey is not guaranteed. Car is the only realistic option. A taxi would cost I think currently about £80.


----------



## Blue Hills (5 Dec 2020)

oldwheels said:


> My local small hospital is the most likely place for covid vaccine and is 21 miles away. It can be reached by bus but a short appointment could take all day and in summer the buses are full by the time they get there anyway so return journey is not guaranteed. Car is the only realistic option. A taxi would cost I think currently about £80.


And buses are of course a covid threat for the vulnerable.


----------



## Julia9054 (5 Dec 2020)

Milzy said:


> This however something that a mother of 5 on benefits in south London who quit school at 14 wouldn’t understand


Blimey! We are Judgy McJudgeface today!


----------



## roubaixtuesday (5 Dec 2020)

YukonBoy said:


> The one that is approved is no such thing it is mRNA



@Milzy neither did it use MRC5, rather HEK293.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjACegQIDRAB&usg=AOvVaw0xWVCVRGbA-MWQq1DMH4BD


----------



## kingrollo (6 Dec 2020)




----------



## tom73 (6 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> There has been at least one outbreak of covid recently in MH settings here. The JCVI has made allowances for it in their list. Given the settings outpatients might mix in it's a very important one to get right in the coming months.



I also hope allowances have been made for other areas that have been totally over looked since the start. No word on hospices , group homes or LD's the mencap report is shocking and government has some real questions. Given that the risk of death is 6x higher you'd think they should move up the list. But none of these groups are sadly seen as important by wider socially so no votes in it for any government to talk about them. Or have the ear of the press so never get a look in. Or as with MH everyone talks about them but age old attitudes hold firm.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (6 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> View attachment 561872



Those portaloos are only for slim folk.


----------



## mjr (8 Dec 2020)

So as expected, Marshland not even told to go fark itself. Care homes and other priority vaccinatees told nothing as it becomes clear that King's Lynn's Hospital is not a hub for the first vaccine. Presumably that means loads of 80+ frail residents will have to make two trips 40-55 miles each way across either frozen fens or foggy forest to one of the city hubs or wait for another vaccine, but reports say they've been told nothing. Feels like the usual thing of the metro elite government saving other urbanites first.


----------



## fossyant (8 Dec 2020)

Care Home residents (and those in other institutions) aren't likely to be treated soon due to transport difficulties with this particular vaccine.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Dec 2020)

Just wonderful to see public vaccination start today. Apparently, one William Shakespeare was second in line!

Generally, IMV, the govt covid response has been contemptible. 

But, credit where it's due, their vaccine strategy has been clear and well executed from the start AFAICT.

I don't think it's reasonable to criticise for limited geographical rollout of the very first doses of the very first vaccine. Better to ensure it's done in the easiest places first and learn from that, as logistics are very challenging and volumes are limited anyway. 

We'll see how the rollout goes, but so far, so good.


----------



## Blue Hills (8 Dec 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I don't think it's reasonable to criticise for limited geographical rollout of the very first doses of the very first vaccine. Better to ensure it's done in the easiest places first and learn from that, as logistics are very challenging and volumes are limited anyway.



To clarify - I wasn't complaining as such - just asking about plans for the roll-out for folk (many I am sure) who will not be able to travel safely to a distant centre.

Hence I have a strong interest (my mum) in plans to make the vaccine available through GPs/local health centre.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> To clarify - I wasn't complaining as such - just asking about plans for the roll-out for folk (many I am sure) who will not be able to travel safely to a distant centre.
> 
> Hence I have a strong interest (my mum) in plans to make the vaccine available through GPs/local health centre.



Sorry, didn't mean to be overly critical. I think the Oxford vaccine, if approved, will be more suited to logistically more difficult settings. Hopefully soon.


----------



## mjr (8 Dec 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I don't think it's reasonable to criticise for limited geographical rollout of the very first doses of the very first vaccine. Better to ensure it's done in the easiest places first and learn from that, as logistics are very challenging and volumes are limited anyway.
> 
> We'll see how the rollout goes, but so far, so good.


So good to fark my borough?!?!? Wow.

They've not done the easiest places AFAICT from the limited info dribbling out. They've not done the worst-affected places first either, for which an argument could be made. They've done the cities first, then a few multi-town clusters. Rural and semirural area hubs seem to be at the back of the queue. It's like most infrastructure grants. Kill the bumpkins


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> So good to fark my borough?!?!? Wow.
> 
> They've not done the easiest places AFAICT from the limited info dribbling out. They've not done the worst-affected places first either, for which an argument could be made. They've done the cities first, then a few multi-town clusters. Rural and semirural area hubs seem to be at the back of the queue. It's like most infrastructure grants. Kill the bumpkins



Can't agree. Doses to date are very limited, and logistics very difficult with this specific vaccine. Attempting a rural rollout would risk wasting doses. It seems very sensible to me.


----------



## mjr (8 Dec 2020)

fossyant said:


> Care Home residents (and those in other institutions) aren't likely to be treated soon due to transport difficulties with this particular vaccine.


No one official has told them that. They are being left guessing, rushing preparations that probably don't need rushing, wasting scarce resources.

Non institution priority vaccinees around here reportedly also told nothing yet. Not even the motorists among them.


----------



## mjr (8 Dec 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Can't agree. Doses to date are very limited, and logistics very difficult with this specific vaccine. Attempting a rural rollout would risk wasting doses. It seems very sensible to me.


I bet you the cities get the other vaccines first too. Our main hope is if Brexit farks the ports and the military starts flying it in because we have a big air base fairly close to the hospital.


----------



## tom73 (8 Dec 2020)

Clear clinical and supply issues will be what's driving the roll out what ever the government and co may say this will take as long as it takes. 
Staff are will be working hard to get this vaccine into arms as quick as they can. This is on top of all the other day to days services which are expected to run along side this. Many of the staff are going this out side of these services so the least we can do is give them some slick.
Until other easier vaccines come along the only way to go is steady and making every dose count. Which will mean coverage of supply will be limited to given areas.It's not just a jab like any medicine it needs and requires full medicine management from factory to clinician giving it. The requirements of this vaccine make that management all the harder. 
Country wide Primary care roll out will not be this year. The task of working though GP's list and deciding which people to call and when is massive task alone. The NHS can do this if it's left to get on with it yes problems will came you can't prevent that. Once other vaccines come on line things can go a little quicker. We all just have hold on in and wait hard to do I know but we don't have an option. I'm well down the list and know it will be some months yet but that's how it is.


----------



## screenman (8 Dec 2020)

Just been for an ECG and had a chat about the vaccine, seems that ours will be given at a hospital about 20 miles away, which by bus is a big problem and would take a couple of them at least and they do not connect well. Fine for the majority of us that drive. but not so for the elderly or others that may not drive.


----------



## tom73 (8 Dec 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Just wonderful to see public vaccination start today. Apparently, one William Shakespeare was second in line!
> 
> Generally, IMV, the govt covid response has been contemptible.
> 
> ...



Let's hope they just let them get on with it and we don't end up with T&T vaccine mess. 
Things are going well time will tell but get to this point is a credit to all the ones who on one will ever know. All the little cogs that just to the job day in day out. Just hope the public hold out and loose it as it downs how long this will take and many will have to wait some time.


----------



## Archie_tect (8 Dec 2020)

screenman said:


> Just been for an ECG and had a chat about the vaccine, seems that ours will be given at a hospital about 20 miles away, which by bus is a big problem and would take a couple of them at least and they do not connect well. Fine for the majority of us that drive. but not so for the elderly or others that may not drive.


Then it is time for neighbours with cars to take on the responsibility to take people to hospital;- it's for their benefit too... oops no, can't do that with social distancing can we?... as you were. Life's complicated.


----------



## screenman (8 Dec 2020)

Archie_tect said:


> Then it is time for neighbours with cars to take on the responsibility to take people to hospital;- it's for their benefit too... oops no, can't do that with social distancing can we?... as you were. Life's complicated.



I suggest volunteer drivers vaccinated before hand may help.


----------



## vickster (8 Dec 2020)

Haven’t nhs volunteers been taking people to appointments throughout the pandemic? How would this be different beyond sheer volume of people?


----------



## lazybloke (8 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> I bet you the cities get the other vaccines first too. Our main hope is if Brexit farks the ports and the military starts flying it in because we have a big air base fairly close to the hospital.


What seems unfair to individuals or small communities might be justified for the greater benefit to society as a whole; I can see reasons why vaccination should start in, and be co-ordinated from, cities. 

My vulnerable loved ones don't live in cities, so I'm not keen on them having to wait either - but I prefer them to wait until they have local vaccination facilities than for them to travel into some urban centre where they'd be at high risk of infection. 

There's more gen on current & proposed prioritisations in the NHS announcement that was published last weekend, including something on care homes. Also a list of the 50 hospitals that will home vaccination hubs, as well as the intended use of GP and community health workers, plus various venues such as sports halls. 

My greatest worry is how long this will all take?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Dec 2020)

lazybloke said:


> My greatest worry is how long this will all take?



Looks likely to be limited by supply of vaccines atm.

Maybe middle of next year best case? End of next year worst case??


----------



## Archie_tect (8 Dec 2020)

screenman said:


> I suggest volunteer drivers vaccinated before hand may help.


As long as they do volunteer for the benefit of their community and don't just it as an excuse to queue jump!
When did I become so cynical?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Dec 2020)

View: https://twitter.com/ConMend/status/1336249743182327808


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Dec 2020)

Gove concedes on EU position on NI protocol.


View: https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/1336298315487567873


I predict the same from Johnson tomorrow on the other issues, followed by claims of a British victory over perfidious continent.


----------



## Archie_tect (8 Dec 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Gove concedes on EU position on NI protocol.
> 
> 
> View: https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/1336298315487567873
> ...



Then the truth will slowly drip feed out after the final vote....


----------



## mjr (8 Dec 2020)

lazybloke said:


> What seems unfair to individuals or small communities might be justified for the greater benefit to society as a whole; I can see reasons why vaccination should start in, and be co-ordinated from, cities.


I can see reasons why they start with cities, but most of them are basically continuations of the neglect of rural/semi-rural boroughs over the last 10+ years.



> My vulnerable loved ones don't live in cities, so I'm not keen on them having to wait either - but I prefer them to wait until they have local vaccination facilities than for them to travel into some urban centre where they'd be at high risk of infection.


Some of mine do, some don't, so I'm fairly neutral in that regard, but on balance, I think it would make more sense to prioritise boroughs with high infection rates and their neighbours, rather than the current practice of sending this short-supply vaccine to outlying cities in low-infection areas.

The announcement on https://www.england.nhs.uk/2020/12/...est-ever-nhs-vaccination-programme-this-week/ seems a bit misleading because it listed trusts when it is often only the HQ hospital which is getting any. For example, Boston's hospital is run by the United Lincs Hospitals Trust which is on the list, but I heard that only Lincoln is getting the vaccine despite Boston's semi-rural borough having more cases per 100k per week than Lincoln as of yesterday (418 vs 412).



roubaixtuesday said:


> Gove concedes on EU position on NI protocol.


What's that got to do with the vaccine?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> What's that got to do with the vaccine?



Just my incompetence in posting on the right thread. 

But hey, since when has being offtopic ever stopped anyone on here ;-)


----------



## tom73 (8 Dec 2020)

screenman said:


> Just been for an ECG and had a chat about the vaccine, seems that ours will be given at a hospital about 20 miles away, which by bus is a big problem and would take a couple of them at least and they do not connect well. Fine for the majority of us that drive. but not so for the elderly or others that may not drive.



It's not an ideal situation to find yourselves and other will have the same issues. It's something that needs to be worked on the situation will improve once GP hubs are up and running. Which more news is on the way about shortly. Given that supply is limited and will be for a few months. Even if you could get to a hub you may not just have been asked given the supply issues.
Just hold on in and things will improve and ways will be found to get you the vaccine.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Dec 2020)

Oxford/AstraZeneca interim readout published in the Lancet.

https://marlin-prod.literatumonline.com/pb-assets/Lancet/pdfs/S0140673620326611.pdf

Short version: it works, but not enough data to confidently choose the optimal dose regime. 62% for standard first dose, 90% for low first dose, but overlapping confidence intervals.

First data from any vaccine vs asymptomatic infection: as well as 90% efficacy vs symptomatic, asymptomatic infections significantly lower in the lower first dose arm (60% efficacious against asymptomatic vs 4% for standard dose)

My guess: interim approval with the low dose regime, conditional on confirmation with larger cohort.

[postscript - excellent data vs severe disease - no severe cases at all on active arm beyond 21 days post first dose]


----------



## screenman (8 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> It's not an ideal situation to find yourselves and other will have the same issues. It's something that needs to be worked on the situation will improve once GP hubs are up and running. Which more news is on the way about shortly. Given that supply is limited and will be for a few months. Even if you could get to a hub you may not just have been asked given the supply issues.
> Just hold on in and things will improve and ways will be found to get you the vaccine.



The concern was not for myself.


----------



## marinyork (8 Dec 2020)

screenman said:


> The concern was not for myself.



The situation sucks, but it's about the best that can be got at this stage. Tranche 1 will vaccinate 400,000 people. Then there may be a wait and a splurge before/after Christmas for tranche 2. Boris is being cautious now and the 'some months' quote even for some of the high priority people (although that includes as discussed previously there's a month from first jab to the highest level of protection 7 days after the second jab).

Care home staff, workers, those over 80 and frontline NHS staff comes to a shade under 7 million people IIRC. That's not even getting onto the over 75s and over 70s and so on. The numbers are astronomically large. 

We knew it was coming like this for months and months and months and it doesn't make it any less frustrating. It was one of the reasons why people got so excited about the Oxford vaccine.


----------



## lazybloke (8 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> I can see reasons why they start with cities, but most of them are basically continuations of the neglect of rural/semi-rural boroughs over the last 10+ years.
> 
> 
> Some of mine do, some don't, so I'm fairly neutral in that regard, but on balance, I think it would make more sense to prioritise boroughs with high infection rates and their neighbours, rather than the current practice of sending this short-supply vaccine to outlying cities in low-infection areas.
> ...


You've looked in more detail than I have, so I don't think I can add anything of value; although a 412 vs 418 is a small difference, probably other factors are more important. Lack of transparency in decision-making is a regular issue, of course.


----------



## marinyork (8 Dec 2020)

lazybloke said:


> You've looked in more detail than I have, so I don't think I can add anything of value; although a 412 vs 418 is a small difference, probably other factors are more important. Lack of transparency in decision-making is a regular issue, of course.



That's just terrifying. 400+. The second wave rippling through particularly Eastern areas even as in some other areas it's on the way down or levelled off. 400,000 doses doesn't go very far.

The transparency just reflects the politics. You can't play up the vaccine too much or give too much information or they'll be uproar, people over 50 bombarding health services with requests for the vaccine. I've already had every tamara, deirdre and harriett telling me oh don't worry you can get a vaccine because you care for at risk groups. Erm no fecking chance. If that's what sensible people think, it shows you have to be careful.

If the vaccine is played up too much people will be playing the fiddle while rome burns. If they tell them the truth of how long it'll take, people will be sod it we've got to live our lives.


----------



## vickster (8 Dec 2020)

A friend of mine is getting it next week, she's clinically vulnerable and frontline NHS (MH Trust)


----------



## PK99 (8 Dec 2020)

lazybloke said:


> You've looked in more detail than I have, so I don't think I can add anything of value; although a 412 vs 418 is a small difference, probably other factors are more important. Lack of transparency in decision-making is a regular issue, of course.



418, 412 are essentially the same number and there is nearly a 3x difference in population Lincoln>Boston


----------



## srw (8 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> I can see reasons why they start with cities, but most of them are basically continuations of the neglect of rural/semi-rural boroughs over the last 10+ years.


They really aren't. There are very good epidemiological reasons why you might want to focus your efforts on the people who are more likely to have more contacts. It's a question of basic maths. 

Your objective is to minimise the risk of people dying. The vaccine does two things - it (a) very significantly reduces the risk that the person you give it to dies, and (b) it very significantly reduces the risk that they infect each person they meet, and therefore reduces the risk that they die.

Risk (a) is independent of the place they live, risk (b) isn't. People who live in cities are more likely to have larger networks than people in market towns, so a vaccination programme that focuses on them maximises risk reduction (b). And I say that as someone who lives in a market town.


----------



## marinyork (8 Dec 2020)

The news now saying only 4 million doses expected this year, another update from BioNTech ☹.


----------



## Blue Hills (8 Dec 2020)

Good news on the Oxford vaccine?
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coro...finds/ar-BB1bK0s4?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBoPWjQ


----------



## winjim (8 Dec 2020)

God, I'm going to have to read that paper, aren't I?


----------



## lazybloke (8 Dec 2020)

PK99 said:


> 418, 412 are essentially the same number and there is nearly a 3x difference in population Lincoln>Boston


Thank you, I was just looking that up. 

But important though it is to understand all the stats, @marinyork makes an important point that we should also acknowledge the magnitute of those infection rates, shockingly high as they are. 

Considering the recent short lockdown was supposed to bring things under control, give a bit of breathing space, and thus allow a relaxation at Christmas, there's a clear danger of bad things about to happen.

The vaccines are great news but this is Day 1. There are months still to. Billions to vaccinate.


----------



## tom73 (8 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> The news now saying only 4 million doses expected this year, another update from BioNTech ☹.


 
Guess that follows on from yesterday when they reported they are already having issues with getting hold of materials. 
Your right about attitudes changing on the vaccine news it’s just made matters worse I’ve heard and seen even more ”who cares about covid” From trolleys that I’ve seen more look set for Christmas than before this either that or couples are even more happy to give the bin a good feed come Boxing Day.
The timing of this though welcome has come just the wrong time given what’s coming in down the line.


----------



## lane (8 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> I can see reasons why they start with cities, but most of them are basically continuations of the neglect of rural/semi-rural boroughs over the last 10+ years.
> 
> 
> Some of mine do, some don't, so I'm fairly neutral in that regard, but on balance, I think it would make more sense to prioritise boroughs with high infection rates and their neighbours, rather than the current practice of sending this short-supply vaccine to outlying cities in low-infection areas.
> ...



Boston also has far and away highest rate in over 60s nationally


----------



## mjr (8 Dec 2020)

srw said:


> People who live in cities are more likely to have larger networks than people in market towns,


Is that true? I thought once there was a fairly low threshold level of built-up-ness, then network size remained pretty constant (because once you're seeing people all the time when moving around, it doesn't matter that there's - for example - another five suburbs beyond yours rather than only one) until you get to the biggest cities that have metros/undergrounds putting hundreds in contact, instead of bus-sized groups.


----------



## Randomnerd (9 Dec 2020)

You couldn’t make this shoot up. 

Hatt Mancock crying fake tears on telly. Daft royals chugging about on a train. A couple of million people in one of the richest nations on the planet heading for destitution. Sixty thousand dead in nine months. And Boris is busy getting his suitcase packed to go argue about haddock. 

im going for a bike ride.


----------



## srw (9 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Is that true? I thought once there was a fairly low threshold level of built-up-ness, then network size remained pretty constant


In terms of people you know, possibly. In terms of people you can infect, definitely not.


----------



## Adam4868 (9 Dec 2020)

Randomnerd said:


> You couldn’t make this shoot up.
> 
> Hatt Mancock crying fake tears on telly. Daft royals chugging about on a train. A couple of million people in one of the richest nations on the planet heading for destitution. Sixty thousand dead in nine months. And Boris is busy getting his suitcase packed to go argue about haddock.
> 
> im going for a bike ride.


V Day....🙄


----------



## tom73 (9 Dec 2020)

It turns out the biggest factor in which hospitals become one of 50 hubs came down to which hospitals already had the freezers. As this stuff is in such sort supply and the media are just waiting for things to go wrong. It a sensible way to start it means they can be up and running quickly. Given that it take a few weeks for the freezers to get to temperature and that pharmacy staff will have experience of correct medicines mangermaent and the skills to dispense the vaccine correctly. Using experienced clinicians allows for things to be quickly be learned and built into a wider roll out. 
My area is not part of the 50 either but I know in time it will come it's no point having a vaccine if it can't be given in a way that works and at a rate that is quick enough but still clinically safe. 
It's only day two and some of the clowns are already starting the "they have one I don't have one" game. This is not a political game but a public health matter and not a time for things to off the rails. It won't work if the ones who know how to do this are not allowed to do it. 
T&T mess up shows what happens when the clowns get to work.


----------



## mjr (9 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> It turns out the biggest factor in which hospitals become one of 50 hubs came down to which hospitals already had the freezers.


Have they come out and said that officially? Such an admission would go some way to soothing anger of those in "vaccine deserts" - it would then just seem like another consequence of past thoughtlessness rather than a new deliberate choice to prioritise (for example) Tier 1 Truro ahead of Tier 3 Boston.



> It's only day two and some of the clowns are already starting the "they have one I don't have one" game. This is not a political game but a public health matter and not a time for things to off the rails. It won't work if the ones who know how to do this are not allowed to do it.
> T&T mess up shows what happens when the clowns get to work.


Oh I quite expect that, as with T&T, this cannot be fixed now for this time. It was probably broken in 2012 during the last balkanising reform of NHS hospitals or the short-term year-to-year complete reboot of public health policy or something like that. I just hope the clowns aren't playing games and remember this injustice the next time they are invited to review the public health structures for England.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Dec 2020)

Look, there’s only limited doses till next year. Not everyone is getting vaccinated for Christma. Just be patient, we are all in a vaccine desert till invited.


----------



## Jenkins (9 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Have they come out and said that officially? Such an admission would go some way to soothing anger of those in "vaccine deserts" - it would then just seem like another consequence of past thoughtlessness rather than a new deliberate choice to prioritise (for example) Tier 1 Truro ahead of Tier 3 Boston.


The lack of freezers is why Ipswich (Suffolk) isn't getting any vaccines yet, but the sister hospital in Colchester (Essex) is. Plenty of coverage from The James Paget (Gorelston, Norfolk) of vaccinations in Look East this evening.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Dec 2020)

Jenkins said:


> Plenty of coverage... ...of vaccinations in Look E



Isn't it just wonderful to be able to read news like this. Just imagine back in April. Who would have believed it possible. 

Fantastic.


----------



## lazybloke (9 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> ....Such an admission would go some way to soothing anger of those in "vaccine deserts" - it would then just seem like another consequence of past thoughtlessness rather than a new deliberate choice to prioritise (for example) Tier 1 Truro ahead of Tier 3 Boston....


Tiers are almost certainly irrelevant to the hub locations.
The decision of location would have been decided long ago, possibly in hot weather when infections rates were low and the idea of tiers was still way down in a back pocket. Factors in deciding locations may have included the existence and capacity of storage facilities, electrical supplies for all those freezers, hospital staffing levels, space/capability/skills to start immediate vaccination campaigns on the premises, the likely impact on other services at that site, the availability of staff with skills to run the wider vaccination programmes within the wider commuity, local transport links, and no doubt many other factors.

The important thing to remember is that vaccination is a long-term solution; a strategic response that will take a long time to be delivered.

In that time infection rates in different areas will rise and fall. A high rate in Linconshire now does deserve a rapid tactical response, of course it does, but that exactly what the Tiers are for.

Edited for typos


----------



## mjr (10 Dec 2020)

Jenkins said:


> Plenty of coverage from The James Paget (Gorelston, Norfolk) of vaccinations in Look East this evening.


BBC as state propaganda machine reacting to the rural outrage being expressed to several of their local radio phone ins yesterday by emphasising probably the smallest settlement to get the vaccine yet.

But even then, everyone should be aware that Gorleston runs into Yarmouth, Caister, Hopton, Corton, Lowestoft, Oulton and Carlton with only golf courses and holiday parks between some of them as artificial green divides, so really it's the hospital of a cross-border urban area of 125'000+ people. It's almost as populous as the Cambridge area excluding students.


----------



## lazybloke (10 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> BBC as state propaganda machine reacting to the rural outrage being expressed to several of their local radio phone ins yesterday by emphasising probably the smallest settlement to get the vaccine yet.
> 
> But even then, everyone should be aware that Gorleston runs into Yarmouth, Caister, Hopton, Corton, Lowestoft, Oulton and Carlton with only golf courses and holiday parks between some of them as artificial green divides, so really it's the hospital of a cross-border urban area of 125'000+ people. It's almost as populous as the Cambridge area excluding students.


Yesterday you implied that Truro didn't deserve a vaccination hub - your preference was Boston.

The Boston hospitals are already in a trust that runs a vaccination hub, just 36 miles up the road at Lincoln.
Meanwhile, if you "moved" the Truro hub to Boston, that would leave the entire country of Cornwall without any hub.

The nearest hub to Cornwall would probably then be Plymouth , so if a care worker lived near Lands End, they could face a round trip of well over 150 miles and a Tamar bridge toll to receive their first vaccination. And the same for the booster in 3 weeks.

I'm not trying to criticise; more a case of recognising that each hub location will have different pros & cons, so some areas will not be served as well as others.
As others have said, patience is needed by all. Local vaccination will come.


----------



## tom73 (10 Dec 2020)

Many have tried to explain that sound clinical and logistics issues are driving this. Most focus has been no the latter but the clinical part is massive and complex it can't/won't be rushed. If that fails the trust and confidence in the vaccine will go and it's game over. It's not about one area getting one one up on another the tiers and case rates have nothing to do with this. Vaccine programs don't work like that and public health doesn't fit into nice little boxers. 
Not having a hub may well turn out to be an advantage as the need for more GP's hubs will be bigger. Which GP's become hubs will be down to CCG's. This vaccine program is not time limited everyone who want's this can have one. We just have calm down and sit tight and wait for the vaccination program to get rolled out. The vaccine is the way to future not a way out current mess the more people start to push the more the clowns get twitchy and start to poke around. We really can't afford that to happen. Mass vaccination programs has been bread and butter for the NHS for years they really know how to do this. It's a simple choice let them do it at a speed that's safe ,Clinical sound and do able or let Serco et al let rip and watch the wheels come.


----------



## winjim (10 Dec 2020)

Sit tight is right. It's frustrating but until you're offered it, the thing to do is just forget the vaccine for now, keep doing what we've all been doing. Stay at home, keep your distance, wear a mask, wash your hands. And FFS whatever you do, don't have a massive five day Christmas party. Just because you (legally) can, doesn't mean you should.

The vaccine is coming and we're in a tremendous position compared to where we were in March, let's just hang on a bit longer.


----------



## dodgy (10 Dec 2020)

My Dad got vaccinated yesterday, a complete surprise but happy to hear it! Mum still waiting as she's <80.


----------



## mjr (10 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> Many have tried to explain that sound clinical and logistics issues are driving this.


Those clinical and logistical issues are far from sound. They look an awful lot like consequences of having spent primarily in cities for 10+ years.



> Vaccine programs don't work like that and public health doesn't fit into nice little boxers.


Public health has been gutted, centralised and fed to the cronies.



> Not having a hub may well turn out to be an advantage as the need for more GP's hubs will be bigger. Which GP's become hubs will be down to CCG's.


I don't know if this is national, but CCGs around here have been merged into county ones run from - you guessed it - the cities. Norfolk, Cambs and Lincs all like that. We will wait and see where GP hubs are put.

It could also turn out to be an advantage if one of the later vaccines is deployed GP-first and turns out to be better, for some definition of better.



> This vaccine program is not time limited everyone who want's this can have one.


Sure but there are time pressures and this uneven deployment means that probably some of my neighbours will die unnecessarily. Wouldn't that make you angry too?

I know I'm almost back of the list and will have to wait and probably by then there will be a wide rollout and no rural divide. I do wonder if I will be expected to drive, though.

Also I know we can't fix years of starving bits of the NHS in time for these vaccines. But that does not mean anyone has to pretend that the allocations of the first vaccine has been solely for "sound clinical reasons" and nothing to do with the legacy of city-first funding.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Sure but there are time pressures and this uneven deployment means that probably some of my neighbours will die unnecessarily. Wouldn't that make you angry too?



Sorry, but thus is just ridiculous. Vaccine rollout is limited by supply. There is an entirely reasonable prioritisation by clinical need in place. To expect absolutely perfect geographically agnostic, clinically prioritised rollout for a medicine in short supply, difficult logistics and only approved last week is wholly unrealistic. I'm suburban, but if I found out the local GPs/hospitals weren't part of the immediate rollout wouldn't make me even mildly irritated, let alone angry. 

The key to avoiding our neighbours dieing unnecessarily is probably more improving and maintaining social distancing over the coming months rather than optimising vaccine rollout.


----------



## mjr (10 Dec 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Sorry, but thus is just ridiculous.


No, what's ridiculous is posting that vaccine is prioritised by clinical need:



> Vaccine rollout is limited by supply. There is an entirely reasonable prioritisation by clinical need in place.



And then immediately implying it's also effectively prioritised by geography:


> To expect absolutely perfect geographically agnostic, clinically prioritised rollout for a medicine in short supply, difficult logistics and only approved last week is wholly unrealistic.





> I'm suburban,


Urbansplaining.



> but if I found out the local GPs/hospitals weren't part of the immediate rollout wouldn't make me even mildly irritated, let alone angry.


It's not that the local venues aren't part of the rollout as much as the local supposedly-prioritised people aren't being called forwards, according to reports. Basically, if you're not near a hub, you're not as high a priority and that effectively means on average if you're not near a city, you're down the list, regardless of clinical need.



> The key to avoiding our neighbours dieing unnecessarily is probably more improving and maintaining social distancing over the coming months rather than optimising vaccine rollout.


In the coming months, sure. I've posted several times that I realise this can't be fixed for this vaccine. But we should also push for a more just plan for the next health crisis response because this one stinks, not dismiss the concerns, decry pointing it out as "ridiculous" or insult our representatives as "clowns" for making this valid point (warning: they may be clowns for other reasons...)


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (10 Dec 2020)

We are getting the vaccine as soon as we can
My wife was in the shielding group so she can;t really afford to take risks

Hopefully she will get an invite as part of the first group other than care home and NHS staff (and similar)

I will probably not get one for a while because I am less vulnerable - probably

People who are going on about how it isn't important annoy me - maybe they are right - but if the scientists and government are right but other's are wrong the my wife might die

so basically we will go with the wife not dying option as the odds are that it may be critical - and the risks are pretty low and the risks are only of minor problems (as reported so far)
not getting the vaccine includes risk of DEATH for my wife - and at better odds


----------



## lane (10 Dec 2020)

lazybloke said:


> Yesterday you implied that Truro didn't deserve a vaccination hub - your preference was Boston.
> 
> The Boston hospitals are already in a trust that runs a vaccination hub, just 36 miles up the road at Lincoln.
> Meanwhile, if you "moved" the Truro hub to Boston, that would leave the entire country of Cornwall without any hub.
> ...



As I said up thread Boston had way way more over 60s with Covid than anywhere else in the country. Probably should be a priority if some sort at some time but probably not a massive issue right now.


----------



## kingrollo (10 Dec 2020)

I think there should be a special group for baldies ! We don't get anything !


----------



## vickster (10 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> I think there should be a special group for baldies ! We don't get anything !


Yes you do...cheap hairdressing


----------



## mjr (10 Dec 2020)

lazybloke said:


> Yesterday you implied that Truro didn't deserve a vaccination hub - your preference was Boston.


Not "didn't deserve" so much as "shouldn't be a higher priority than".



> The Boston hospitals are already in a trust that runs a vaccination hub, just 36 miles up the road at Lincoln.


Yes, because rural/semirural hospitals have been encouraged to link up with "better" (better-funded!) city hospitals to get by... and then resources needed for things like this went to the city hospitals. Some others tried to get by without doing that, but then they've been overlooked for this, possibly because they've not had the past investment to be able to handle the logistics. Non-city-size hospitals basically can't qualify either way.



> I'm not trying to criticise; more a case of recognising that each hub location will have different pros & cons, so some areas will not be served as well as others.


Yes, pros and cons, but one of those factors seems to be whether it is in a city or rural borough (because a city location means they can better handle the logistics like freezers and transport because they've had more investment over recent years).



> As others have said, patience is needed by all. Local vaccination will come.


I understand corpses are very good at waiting patiently in this cold weather.


----------



## mjr (10 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> As I said up thread Boston had way way more over 60s with Covid than anywhere else in the country. Probably should be a priority if some sort at some time but probably not a massive issue right now.


Not a massive issue if some bumpkins die avoidably. Not enough to be worth moving a vaccination hub 35 miles east in future. Can you hear how this sounds?


----------



## lane (10 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Not a massive issue if some bumpkins die avoidably. Not enough to be worth moving a vaccination hub 35 miles east in future. Can you hear how this sounds?



You have misunderstood my point. Vaccine is so limited at the moment that it won't make much practical difference if we vacanate the over 80s in Lincoln or Boston. When there is more available it would make sense to target hotspot s like Boston. Think that's a reasoned argument personally how do you think it sounds?


----------



## tom73 (10 Dec 2020)

Just because a full blow by blow account for every tiny bit of the roll out is not around for the media and unqualified masses to pick to bits. 
It must some how be a pilot well it's not stop reading into things and see things from the other side. They know who need's this and when using the guidelines already agreed. Health Care Professional do this every day of week they know how to do it. They can't magic supply out of thin air you can't share round what you don't have. We have what we have and we don't have room for error or waste. They have to work with what they have and the what services they have left to use what ever state they have been allowed to get in. You can't share round what you don't have So like I said keep pushing and wait to see what mess you will end up with. Or support the service and staff who are going flat out to get this thing done as clinically safe as possible and continue with the current measures to keep everyone safe.


----------



## Rocky (10 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> Just because a full blow by blow account for every tiny bit of the roll out is not around for the media and unqualified masses to pick to bits.
> It must some how be a pilot well it's not stop reading into things and see things from the other side. They know who need's this and when using the guidelines already agreed. Health Care Professional do this every day of week they know how to do it. They can't magic supply out of thin air you can't share round what you don't have. We have what we have and we don't have room for error or waste. They have to work with what they have and the what services they have left to use what ever state they have been allowed to get in. You can't share round what you don't have So like I said keep pushing and wait to see what mess you will end up with. Or support the service and staff who are going flat out to get this thing done as clinically safe as possible and continue with the current measures to keep everyone safe.


Spot on!!

We have a good GP system in our town. I know that I'll get a text when its my turn to get the vaccine. I've just had my 'flu jab this morning - very impressed with the organisation. They must have vaccinated nearly 200 people in an hour.

I think we need to (i) trust the research and regulatory processes (ii) the infrastructure and planning for the delivery. As you say, it won't all happen at once but it will be rolled out in an orderly/systematic way. I hope that Government and the DoH are kept as far away from the planning as possible. This is something that should be implemented locally.

Meanwhile, let's be sensible and keep socially distancing & wearing masks in enclosed/poorly ventilated places.


----------



## mjr (10 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> Health Care Professional [...] have to work with what they have and the what services they have left to use what ever state they have been allowed to get in. You can't share round what you don't have


I absolutely agree with that. I do not criticise the health care professionals. By and large, they're not the ones who were choosing to fund the cities to higher levels.



> So like I said keep pushing and wait to see what mess you will end up with. Or support the service and staff who are going flat out to get this thing done as clinically safe as possible and continue with the current measures to keep everyone safe.


No. We can support the efforts of HCPs while opposing the unjust distribution. If people keep on supporting and defending this shoot, the politicians won't improve it in future.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Dec 2020)

Excellent article on vaccine safety

https://coronavirus.medium.com/are-the-covid-19-vaccines-safe-3a399a9bd8a0

Short version: Clearly safer than COVID, even for young people


----------



## lazybloke (11 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Not "didn't deserve" so much as "shouldn't be a higher priority than".


I agree NHS funding is insufficient and uneven; it could be a discussion in its own thread
But funding shortages usually relate to services other than vaccination, particularly Covid19 vaccination which has had seen plenty of cash spaffed at it.

In the context of this thread, I think funding is not very relevant, and I stiill think it it wrong to infer prioritisation from the list of hub locations.
Tiers are transient measurements hence frequent reviews, and therefore should not be a factor in choice of long-term decisions such as location of vaccination hubs.

If Boston is spiking again, then the urgent response is a high tier; and that's working - the infection rate has been falling for several days. Hopefully it will continue.
Vaccination couldn't possibly work that quickly, but given enough time it should have a bigger effect.

My keywork puts me at high risk of contracting Covid . I worry less about my health than that of my parents - they are both pushing 80 and one of them has a centenarian parent still going. Everyone knows vulnerable friends & family like the above. I'm keeping clear of my family, if I see them at Christmas it'll be a socially-distanced outdoor walk, not indoor gatherings or parties. 


My sugestion to all vulnerable people is the same. Do everything you can to minimise or avoid going outside. It's only one Christmas. Use the phone to keep in touch. Socially distanced visits if essential, but take responsibility for your own health and don't listen to Boris.


----------



## lane (11 Dec 2020)

Parents contacted yesterday lunchtime to get vaccinated next week. They live in Sleaford and will travel to Grantham. Dad told them mum has allergies so now waiting for an answer on that - think he shouldn't have said anything and he now regrets doing so.


----------



## mjr (11 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Parents contacted yesterday lunchtime to get vaccinated next week. They live in Sleaford and will travel to Grantham. Dad told them mum has allergies so now waiting for an answer on that - think he shouldn't have said anything and he now regrets doing so.


Better to tell them than risk the medics being surprised IMO.

It's good Grantham is now up and running to cut that from a 50-mile round trip to Lincoln to a 30-mile one for them.


----------



## lane (11 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Better to tell them than risk the medics being surprised IMO.
> 
> It's good Grantham is now up and running to cut that from a 50-mile round trip to Lincoln to a 30-mile one for them.



Yes maybe you are right.


----------



## mjr (11 Dec 2020)

Sanofi GSK vaccine delayed. https://www.reuters.com/article/hea...etback-to-global-fight-idUSKBN28L0II?rpc=401&


----------



## Bazzer (11 Dec 2020)

Some shenanigans with my Mum who is 89 and lives with my sister who is her carer. Mum was offered the vaccine, but my sister was not allowed to accompany her for it. Apparently Mum also had to sign a disclaimer, but my sister was not allowed to read it to Mum, who is registered blind. And my sister couldn't have the vaccine despite being Mum's almost full time carer.
As my sister was not allowed to accompany Mum, nor was anyone in the vaccination centre willing to accompany Mum, or willing to read the disclaimer, she couldn't have the vaccination!
I am gradually coming to the conclusion that there must be another virus which has not been identified because the level of stupidity in the last few months seems have grown exponentially.


----------



## mjr (11 Dec 2020)

Bazzer said:


> Some shenanigans with my Mum who is 89 and lives with my sister who is her carer. Mum was offered the vaccine, but my sister was not allowed to accompany her for it. Apparently Mum also had to sign a disclaimer, but my sister was not allowed to read it to Mum, who is registered blind. And my sister couldn't have the vaccine despite being Mum's almost full time carer.
> As my sister was not allowed to accompany Mum, nor was anyone in the vaccination centre willing to accompany Mum, or willing to read the disclaimer, she couldn't have the vaccination!


Refusing to read a disclaimer to a blind person and denying them service as a result sounds illegally ableist. Please urge them to contact PALS at the hosting hospital trust because that should not be.


----------



## lane (11 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Better to tell them than risk the medics being surprised IMO.
> 
> It's good Grantham is now up and running to cut that from a 50-mile round trip to Lincoln to a 30-mile one for them.



They visit hospital regularly - sometimes Grantham and sometimes Lincoln it makes no difference to them


----------



## rogerzilla (11 Dec 2020)

They could talk to the dealers and mix the vaccine with the heroin supply. That would get parts of Swindon done with no effort at all.


----------



## midlife (11 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Parents contacted yesterday lunchtime to get vaccinated next week. They live in Sleaford and will travel to Grantham. Dad told them mum has allergies so now waiting for an answer on that - think he shouldn't have said anything and he now regrets doing so.



This is from our website about allergies and the vaccine.


Please do not book an appointment if you have a history of any type of anaphylactic reaction.

It's severe allergies that they are worried about, the type that people carry epipens for.


----------



## lane (11 Dec 2020)

midlife said:


> This is from our website about allergies and the vaccine.
> 
> 
> Please do not book an appointment if you have a history of any type of anaphylactic reaction.
> ...



She does not carry an epipen but has had a severe reaction to I think peanuts. However, if she can't get vaccinated at 80+ where does that leave her?


----------



## lazybloke (11 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> She does not carry an epipen but has had a severe reaction to I think peanuts. However, if she can't get vaccinated at 80+ where does that leave her?


Possibly it leavea her waiting for a different vaccine. 
Medical advice needed.


----------



## srw (11 Dec 2020)

Results of the vaccine trials are beginning to be published properly.

Oxford/AstraZeneca (23,848 people)





and even more remarkable, the Pfizer vaccine (over 43,000 participants)





Via https://www.covid-arg.com/bulletins, a rich mine of summary information on the emerging picture of the pandemic.


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2020)

midlife said:


> This is from our website about allergies and the vaccine.
> 
> 
> Please do not book an appointment if you have a history of any type of anaphylactic reaction.
> ...


If the reaction is so fast you don't have time to react, would you count that?


----------



## midlife (12 Dec 2020)

classic33 said:


> If the reaction is so fast you don't have time to react, would you count that?



Not sure what you mean? The instructions on our website about booking a covid vaccine say do not book an appointment if you have had an episode of anaphylaxis


----------



## marinyork (12 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> She does not carry an epipen but has had a severe reaction to I think peanuts. However, if she can't get vaccinated at 80+ where does that leave her?



Disclose, see what the people administering think.

It's difficult, but epipens are stored at sites giving vaccines despite the shortage and cost. The vaccine isn't a normal one with temp and shortage but this is normal for vaccines in general.

There will be other vaccines in time whatever happens. In time more will be known about risks.


----------



## lane (12 Dec 2020)

Thanks for the advice. If it was me I would have kept quiet and gone along for the vaccination without doubt but since my dad has already told them we will wait and see.


----------



## marinyork (12 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Thanks for the advice. If it was me I would have kept quiet and gone along for the vaccination without doubt but since my dad has already told them we will wait and see.



It's difficult. It's difficult even waiting. 

A nice graphic from the BBC demonstrating the enormity of the task







Sky News to an unattributed source reckoned on Tuesday there had been around 5000 vaccines done and on Wednesday 10,000. Tranche 1 is around 400,000 people and it's early days, but it really is the case that hardly anyone is getting it. Absolutely awesome for anyone who is getting it and a big deal, but it's January this thing is going to ramp up.


----------



## lane (12 Dec 2020)

I'm in group 6 not expecting it imminently


----------



## LarryDuff (12 Dec 2020)

I'm in group. 8 but by the time I get it I might be in group 7.


----------



## fossyant (12 Dec 2020)

SIL had her's today, works in a care home. Had to go to the local hospital for it, so who knows when it will come out to residents.


----------



## mjr (13 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> It's difficult. It's difficult even waiting.
> 
> A nice graphic from the BBC demonstrating the enormity of the task
> 
> ...


There is more about how the first few vaccinated gives you a huge reduction in deaths in More or Less: Behind the Stats: Vaccines: how safe and who gets it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p090hlp7

It's expired from my player now but it was something like the first million would have prevented almost a third of deaths, the next five million takes you beyond half, then it's diminishing returns but reduces transmission, which would become very important if immunity doesn't last long.


----------



## marinyork (13 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> There is more about how the first few vaccinated gives you a huge reduction in deaths in More or Less: Behind the Stats: Vaccines: how safe and who gets it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p090hlp7
> 
> It's expired from my player now but it was something like the first million would have prevented almost a third of deaths, the next five million takes you beyond half, then it's diminishing returns but reduces transmission, which would become very important if immunity doesn't last long.



The vaccines are amazing and numbers even smaller than a million can make a very efficient difference (to deaths and hospitalisations) and this has been posted months ago. We aren't anywhere near 1 million people being 28 days later. Otherwise I'd be the first to say this is awesome, don't worry quite so much. If you believe news sources then it's something like 50-100,000 people have been vaccinated with 1 dose and after 12 days it'll start revving the immune system to a fair old whack. Tranche 1 is 400,000 people.

But semantically we're not really talking about deaths. Semantically people are talking about a variety of other things like 'getting back to normal' or 'fewer restrictions' or being like 'last summer' etc. People are talking about the state of things. By about February/March the vaccine should have a noticeable effect on deaths and hospitalisations, but to pluck out made up numbers will say 150 people still be dying a day of covid in February and March? I expect so. So what happens then? Do we have the tiers running till early April as bojo has hinted? Yep. 

I post the numbers and the graphic mostly because I don't think people appreciate the numbers as it's not communicated clearly by the media until relatively recently. Something I've heard loads of loads of times the last nine months is about asthma. Another one on the tv people have got awfully upset about is family carers. That's sadly not likely to happen either .

I am of the JVT and John Edmunds view that it will become endemic, it will be seasonal and the virus will be here 'forever more'.


----------



## marinyork (13 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> I'm in group 6 not expecting it imminently



I meant for your parents in group 1 or 2, not you. 

My father is in group 4 via conditions and I've told him I don't think he'll get the first dose till February. That might be wrong and if the shipments come in in January and things ramped up consistently he gets it at the end of January, or if things go badly it could be March.


----------



## lane (13 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> The vaccines are amazing and numbers even smaller than a million can make a very efficient difference (to deaths and hospitalisations) and this has been posted months ago. We aren't anywhere near 1 million people being 28 days later. Otherwise I'd be the first to say this is awesome, don't worry quite so much. If you believe news sources then it's something like 50-100,000 people have been vaccinated with 1 dose and after 12 days it'll start revving the immune system to a fair old whack. Tranche 1 is 400,000 people.
> 
> But semantically we're not really talking about deaths. Semantically people are talking about a variety of other things like 'getting back to normal' or 'fewer restrictions' or being like 'last summer' etc. People are talking about the state of things. By about February/March the vaccine should have a noticeable effect on deaths and hospitalisations, but to pluck out made up numbers will say 150 people still be dying a day of covid in February and March? I expect so. So what happens then? Do we have the tiers running till early April as bojo has hinted? Yep.
> 
> ...


 With regard to asthma severe is included in criteria for group 6 but also you in extremely vulnerable group (shielding) so makes no sense. If there are 8+ million in group 6 must include quite a spectrum.


----------



## lane (13 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> The vaccines are amazing and numbers even smaller than a million can make a very efficient difference (to deaths and hospitalisations) and this has been posted months ago. We aren't anywhere near 1 million people being 28 days later. Otherwise I'd be the first to say this is awesome, don't worry quite so much. If you believe news sources then it's something like 50-100,000 people have been vaccinated with 1 dose and after 12 days it'll start revving the immune system to a fair old whack. Tranche 1 is 400,000 people.
> 
> But semantically we're not really talking about deaths. Semantically people are talking about a variety of other things like 'getting back to normal' or 'fewer restrictions' or being like 'last summer' etc. People are talking about the state of things. By about February/March the vaccine should have a noticeable effect on deaths and hospitalisations, but to pluck out made up numbers will say 150 people still be dying a day of covid in February and March? I expect so. So what happens then? Do we have the tiers running till early April as bojo has hinted? Yep.
> 
> ...



Once we have done the groups identified down to over 50s which could be Feb could be April life will go back to normal no reason it shouldn't no doubt covid will still be around and some deaths but will be manageable


----------



## marinyork (13 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> With regard to asthma severe is included in criteria for group 6 but also you in extremely vulnerable group (shielding) so makes no sense. If there are 8+ million in group 6 must include quite a spectrum.



At the risk of kicking off some of the grumpier and tetchier members of this forum, who've had enough of stuff, severe asthma should absolutely be included. Severe asthma is pretty rare as a percentage of all asthmatics though (because asthma itself is a vastly large group of people). I do worry very much about how many of the non-severe asthmatics will be feeling in terms of interacting with health services though. Asthma is not something that primary care deals with awfully well in my opinion. Had an awfully large number of conversations about that.

Group six is extremely diverse. If you look at group 4, if you know what the list actually means there's a lot of variation even within that. My father has several conditions, each which put him in category 4. JCVI guidance was that people below that age would be the same risk as 70-74 year olds and should so be lumped in in that age group and why it was done. Parents don't look after themselves and it's a theme of many people I know that their parents are dead (despite their parents being younger than many on here) or not good health.


----------



## lane (13 Dec 2020)

My point is that severe asthma is included in group 6 and group 4 which doesn't make sense or appear very clear.


----------



## marinyork (13 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Once we have done the groups identified down to over 50s which could be Feb could be April life will go back to normal no reason it shouldn't no doubt covid will still be around and some deaths but will be manageable



The over 50s are not going to be done by Feb. That's just not going to happen. Even if we had 10 million doses sat in the 50 hubs, the nine groups of people are not going to be vaccinated by Feb. My father, group 4 in february is what I said and I meant it.

Back to normal is perception as much as what's happening. Things will be back to normal in late spring and early summer, but that's because people will have had enough, as opposed to virus transmission or even deaths and hospitalisations. So it's quite possible that you might have what many on here regard as scarily high deaths going on in the background, but life is more like say tier 1 is now, but for most of the country.


----------



## lane (13 Dec 2020)

You are probably right but that is not the message the Government are sending. Once all the 25 million are vacinated surely deaths will be at a much lower level rather than still scarily high - but not sure what you count as scarily high

"The “majority” of vulnerable people in the UK will be vaccinated throughout January and February, the government has said, as authorities prepare to rollout the first available doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech jab.
Around 25 million people are covered by the 10 priority categories set out by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI)."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-vaccine-uk-doses-latest-b1767500.html


----------



## marinyork (13 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> My point is that severe asthma is included in group 6 and group 4 which doesn't make sense or appear very clear.



There is overlap. Severe asthma in group 6 is pretty small percentage as group 6 is so large though.

The graphic is just meant to show the task. A million jabs a week, where each person needs a 2nd jab after 21 days and only a good level of protection 28 days after the first, would suggest people in their 70s and category 4 may be getting the jab sometime in February and have a good level of protection end of February/March . We're not doing anything like a million jabs a week .

Another not incidental point on the severe asthma is that quite a numerically large number is children, who won't be given the vaccine, not yet at least.


----------



## lane (13 Dec 2020)

I don't understand why there is overlap. When all this kicked off I looked into it because I have asthma. People with severe asthma are a defined group with specific definition (does not include me btw). These people were on the shielding list and classed as extremely vulnerable. Therefore they will be classed as group 4. I don't understand how they can also be in group 6. Never mind it doesn't effect me anyway.

I thought people with asthma would be in group 6 because they were originally (and and still are I believe) classed as vulnerable as it included all eligible for the flu job. No based on what you have said this is incorrect and I can't see them in the list for group 6.

The British Lung Foundation says

"We are asking whether people who are considered ‘clinically vulnerable’ – for example, people with asthma or COPD that is not severe – will be prioritised too"

.


----------



## marinyork (13 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> You are probably right but that is not the message the Government are sending. Once all the 25 million are vacinated surely deaths will be at a much lower level rather than still scarily high - but not sure what you count as scarily high
> 
> "The “majority” of vulnerable people in the UK will be vaccinated throughout January and February, the government has said, as authorities prepare to rollout the first available doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech jab.
> Around 25 million people are covered by the 10 priority categories set out by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI)."
> ...



There's an element of unclearness though. And that's because Bojo wants to keep tory MPs and the public on board over Christmas and January for the tiers. 

It depends what they mean by vulnerable. When I saw this last week in various other sources I assumed they meant that by the end of february 50.1% of people down to category 4 will have had their first jab. I agree that may happen and is in fact pretty likely to happen. But it's making something sound better than it really is.

Which is a completely different thing to saying 50.1% of those in categories 1-9 will have had both doses of a vaccine by the end of February . That's doable, we'd really be in a decent place sooner if it happen. Just given the more recent updates on supply from BioNTech, I'm sceptical. Some of the later noises from the NHS were longer timelines.

I'm aware of the 99% deaths figure. What I'd say on that is that say we agreed all 9 categories have their 2nd doses by 23rd April, then from May they have a good level of protection. Hospitalisations lag around 2 weeks after infection and deaths about a month later. So to me that says a huge number of deaths by around end of May would cease. By May transmission should be coming down anyway. Again that's very different from expecting the deaths down in February. The Whitty said he was quite sceptical about deaths coming down fast in february.


----------



## Julia9054 (13 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> My point is that severe asthma is included in group 6 and group 4 which doesn't make sense or appear very clear.


The clinical definition of severe asthma is fairly useless as it relies on noting frequency and severity of symptoms when not on medication. Most people who have asthma won’t really know if they have been on preventive medication for years. I would certainly not risk stopping my medication to see what my symptoms might be like these days.
A more useful distinguisher would be how well controlled the asthma is with medication. A very small percentage of patients have poorly controlled asthma no matter what combination of medication is tried.
In terms of whether people with asthma were advised to shield (group 4), the distinguishing factors appear to have been, number of recent courses of oral steroids, number of recent hospitalisations and maximum dose of inhaled steroids.
i agree it’s not clear


----------



## lane (13 Dec 2020)

I don't think that is correct @Julia9054 . This the definition I have read:

"Someone with ‘severe asthma’ has a specific type of asthma which doesn’t get *better with the usual medicines*. (my bold)

Even if someone takes those medicines exactly as prescribed, a different approach is needed to control symptoms and reduce frequent asthma attacks.

Other causes and triggers for the symptoms have also been ruled out as much as possible.file:///C:/Users/Deborah/Documents/...s Severe Asthma ENDNOTED JK for AW.docx#_edn1

Around 4 out of 100 people with asthma have severe asthma, which is about 200,000 people in the UK. "


----------



## lane (13 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> There's an element of unclearness though. And that's because Bojo wants to keep tory MPs and the public on board over Christmas and January for the tiers.
> 
> It depends what they mean by vulnerable. When I saw this last week in various other sources I assumed they meant that by the end of february 50.1% of people down to category 4 will have had their first jab. I agree that may happen and is in fact pretty likely to happen. But it's making something sound better than it really is.
> 
> ...



Yes that makes a lot of sense


----------



## Julia9054 (13 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> I don't think that is correct @Julia9054 . This the definition I have read:
> 
> "Someone with ‘severe asthma’ has a specific type of asthma which doesn’t get *better with the usual medicines*. (my bold)
> 
> ...


Which makes more sense, thanks.


----------



## marinyork (13 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Around 4 out of 100 people with asthma have severe asthma, which is about 200,000 people in the UK. "



The reason for the around, is it's debated, there are numbers that are lower and higher than that. As said a non-coincidental point on this, a fairly sizeable number of people with severe asthma are under 16. The usual quoted figure for severe asthma is usually slightly higher than that, but it's a not a large proportion of group 4.

One of the issues here is making a comparison with the flu jab. It's a very bad idea for politicians to make a link between flu vaccine eligibility and covid-19. There is a lot of overlap, but it's going to cause the government way more issues than it's worth doing. Vulnerable is also a parlance and political word, so mix up clinically vurnerable, clinically extremely vulnerable, vulnerable and so on in political and medical landscapes and you're in big trouble.


----------



## kingrollo (13 Dec 2020)

I'm in group 4 and bald -I expect mine within the next 7 days


----------



## midlife (13 Dec 2020)

At work our vaccine booking has gone from email occupational health to download the app to don't contact us we will contact you you sometime.......


----------



## Adam4868 (13 Dec 2020)

My dad who's had Covid and is in his 80s hasn't had anything to say when yet Sorry I'm out the loop on when or how you hear ? Would it make a difference that he's had Covid ?


----------



## lane (13 Dec 2020)

How you hear - my dad got a phone call.


----------



## lane (13 Dec 2020)

My dad is over 90 got a call last week


----------



## tom73 (14 Dec 2020)

Adam4868 said:


> My dad who's had Covid and is in his 80s hasn't had anything to say when yet Sorry I'm out the loop on when or how you hear ? Would it make a difference that he's had Covid ?



Your Dad need's not to anything they will contact him when they are able to offer him one locally. Either via his GP or Hospital if he's due an outpatients appointment. As for having had covid they don't know enough yet about the vaccine. It will become a lot more clearer with more real life vaccine data.


----------



## Adam4868 (14 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> Your Dad need's not to anything they will contact him when they are able to offer him one locally. Either via his GP or Hospital if he's due an outpatients appointment. As for having had covid they don't know enough yet about the vaccine. It will become a lot more clearer with more real life vaccine data.


To be honest he's made a great recovery as wasn't in the best of health.Very tired and impatient but grumpy with me so doing well.Aftercare from the hospital is almost non existant unfortunately.Im pretty sure my mum had it aswell but wouldn't go and get a test !


----------



## Blue Hills (14 Dec 2020)

Good news - starting to roll out via GPs from this week apparently.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55295702

Since this is the currently approved vaccine I assume that these will be GPs with the low temperature storage facilities which are apparently required. Hoping that one of the GPs will be in my mum's town.

If anyone sees a detailed list please post.

Would also be interested in posts from anyone who gets the vaccine through a GP or has a relative etc who managed to get one.


----------



## tom73 (14 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> The reason for the around, is it's debated, there are numbers that are lower and higher than that. As said a non-coincidental point on this, a fairly sizeable number of people with severe asthma are under 16. The usual quoted figure for severe asthma is usually slightly higher than that, but it's a not a large proportion of group 4.
> 
> One of the issues here is making a comparison with the flu jab. It's a very bad idea for politicians to make a link between flu vaccine eligibility and covid-19. There is a lot of overlap, but it's going to cause the government way more issues than it's worth doing. Vulnerable is also a parlance and political word, so mix up clinically vurnerable, clinically extremely vulnerable, vulnerable and so on in political and medical landscapes and you're in big trouble.



This and other post's are spot on the numbers are massive and the time frame is not as neat and tidy as politicians are keen to push.
To back up the severe asthma points yes they need to be part of this to give an example Mrs 73 is caring for someone covid + aged 55 using covid risk score they have a covid age of 88.


----------



## lazybloke (14 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Good news - starting to roll out via GPs from this week apparently.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55295702
> 
> ...


IIRC - At point of use it can be stored at more conventional temps - for a few days only.


----------



## midlife (14 Dec 2020)

GP’s get the thawed vaccine as far as I know and have 3.5 days to get it into arms. It’s GP surgeries with space staff and capacity that get it first as far as I know. Any vaccine left over on day 3 can be used for nhs staff.


----------



## kingrollo (14 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Good news - starting to roll out via GPs from this week apparently.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55295702
> 
> ...


Well it's feckin cold in Dudley this morning - they might not need the fridges !!!


----------



## tom73 (14 Dec 2020)

The GP roll out will be small and limited which practice get's it will be down to a local level. As with Hospitals GP hubs are being set up giving GP's two days notice of changes has not helped leading to some having to pull out at the last minute. 
Namely being confirming that the 15 minutes after a vaccination now has to observed so even more staff have to found. 
The system which is used for all vaccinations that everyone know how to use and they started using for covid. 
Some clown now thinks it a good idea to now start using a totally different one for covid. Expecting GP's to get trained in two days.
The big issue is the Hospital IT can't talk to GP's IT so they have no idea who's had the 1st one so don't know who to call up and when. 
So it's going to some time to get things going as quick as they'd like. Staff are working hard to sort things out and will find a way like they always do 

So it's going to be some time to get things going as quick as they'd like. Staff are working hard to sort things out and will find a way like they always do. All we can do is wait and carry on with things as they are so scrub up, mask up , ventilate. Keep your distance ,keep other's safe and stay safe. When it's time get the vaccine you will soon know and please don't phone your GP or Hospital they really have a lot going on right now. A real big please don't take it out on the first staff member you see it's not down to them. They already get a hell of a lot verbal and physical abuse as it is.


----------



## kingrollo (14 Dec 2020)

Just eat pot noodles and monster munch - the chemicals in that will kill covid !


----------



## tom73 (14 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Just eat pot noodles and monster munch - the chemicals in that will kill covid !


Nice to see government guidelines finally improving.


----------



## Chromatic (14 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Good news - starting to roll out via GPs from this week apparently.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55295702
> 
> ...



My dad got a call from his GP last week offering the vaccine, he's booked in for the first jab Thursday this week and the confirmation letter arrived today. Has to go to a different practice for it though, which was explained during the call last week.


----------



## Adam4868 (14 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> Just eat pot noodles and monster munch - the chemicals in that will kill covid !


You could ward off vampires with a bombay bad boy and pickled onions monster munch! 
I'm hoping they'll have a anti gove vaccine by the time they get to me.


----------



## Bazzer (14 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Refusing to read a disclaimer to a blind person and denying them service as a result sounds illegally ableist. Please urge them to contact PALS at the hosting hospital trust because that should not be.


My sister sought clarification today before I fired off an email. Apparently outside care homes, over 80s must be able to be self mobile. Carers would mean more people in the building than are allowed (6!). Sound bollox to me, but my sister says to let it be for a few days.


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2020)

Bazzer said:


> My sister sought clarification today before I fired off an email. Apparently outside care homes, over 80s must be able to be self mobile. Carers would mean more people in the building than are allowed (6!). Sound bollox to me, but my sister says to let it be for a few days.


I thought this hinged on someone refusing to read something out to a blind person. I didn't realise your mum was not mobile. Still seems a bit borderline IMO but maybe closer to it than it sounded.


----------



## Jimidh (14 Dec 2020)

I got my first dose last week - no I’ll effects apart from a sore arm. Most of my team have now been vaccinated and their experience is similar.

Got my appointment for my 2nd jab in January.


----------



## Bazzer (15 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> I thought this hinged on someone refusing to read something out to a blind person. I didn't realise your mum was not mobile. Still seems a bit borderline IMO but maybe closer to it than it sounded.


She is self mobile, but only for short distances. A wheelchair is better from the carer's point of view, a) because the vaccination centre is not the GP surgery but a much larger building and b) because she is blind she will not know where to go as she cannot be accompanied by my sister.
Also the issue of reading the disclaimer has still not gone away. The person my sister spoke to was non committal about whether a member of staff would read it to our Mum. My sister is of the view we have to get her in the door first. When arrangements are made for her injection this will be clarified.


----------



## tom73 (15 Dec 2020)

Bazzer said:


> She is self mobile, but only for short distances. A wheelchair is better from the carer's point of view, a) because the vaccination centre is not the GP surgery but a much larger building and b) because she is blind she will not know where to go as she cannot be accompanied by my sister.
> Also the issue of reading the disclaimer has still not gone away. The person my sister spoke to was non committal about whether a member of staff would read it to our Mum. My sister is of the view we have to get her in the door first. When arrangements are made for her injection this will be clarified.



Not being fully mobile is bit of a problem but not impossible to find a way round. The main issue is around consent if no-one is willing to explain ie read though the form with her. Before asking her to freely sign it then the giver has a problem any giver of any treatment has to ensure that it's done with informed consent. A HCP in this case has a problem as it's not clear if she has given it. So even if she can get though the door she my not get the vaccination anyway. I've check with Mrs 73 no legal issues or professional ones are stopping them reading it to her. Mrs 73 often reads things to patients that can't read. As long as they freely sign the form without any prompting or encouragement or force than it not an issue.


----------



## Bazzer (15 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> Not being fully mobile is bit of a problem but not impossible to find a way round. The main issue is around consent if no-one is willing to explain ie read though the form with her. Before asking her to freely sign it then the giver has a problem any giver of any treatment has to ensure that it's done with informed consent. A HCP in this case has a problem as it's not clear if she has given it. So even if she can get though the door she my not get the vaccination anyway. I've check with Mrs 73 no legal issues or professional ones are stopping them reading it to her. Mrs 73 often reads things to patients that can't read. As long as they freely sign the form without any prompting or encouragement or force than it not an issue.


Although normally if Mum signs anything, either my sister or I will be present and will ok it for her, neither of us saw the signing as a problem. Neither did we see it is a problem for one of the staff to take Mum from my sister. Arguably, in her wheelchair, certainly if my sister had been given admission at the same time, she could be processed as quickly, or more quickly than some late 80 year olds who were more generally mobile. - Although I get possible cross infection, but that didn't seem to be too high up the list, when Mum was recently admitted to and a week or so later discharged from Salford Royal.
If a criteria has been decided upon by someone higher up the food chain, by which some of those most vulnerable can be processed quickly, to the exclusion of certain ones, then at least the vaccination staff or Government should be open about it. Despite the irresponsible behaviour seen in some sections of the population, most of us are grown ups and should be treated as such. Someone seemed to manage it with the flu jab.


----------



## tom73 (15 Dec 2020)

Bazzer said:


> Although normally if Mum signs anything, either my sister or I will be present and will ok it for her, neither of us saw the signing as a problem. Neither did we see it is a problem for one of the staff to take Mum from my sister. Arguably, in her wheelchair, certainly if my sister had been given admission at the same time, she could be processed as quickly, or more quickly than some late 80 year olds who were more generally mobile. - Although I get possible cross infection, but that didn't seem to be too high up the list, when Mum was recently admitted to and a week or so later discharged from Salford Royal.
> If a criteria has been decided upon by someone higher up the food chain, by which some of those most vulnerable can be processed quickly, to the exclusion of certain ones, then at least the vaccination staff or Government should be open about it. Despite the irresponsible behaviour seen in some sections of the population, most of us are grown ups and should be treated as such. Someone seemed to manage it with the flu jab.


I suspect that it's coming from higher up the food chain as you say. Who are looking at the how many did we do target. 
The hand over of your mum is not normally a problem at the moment it's all to do with limiting interactions and cross overs.
The infection control of the hospital as a whole is over riding ever thing else. Staff are likely to have come form other work in other areas and are expected to return to that work at some point. They are also likely to be running vaccinations with limited number of staff and once ready go the vaccine is time critical. I can see why they are wanting to limit other people going distancing is greatly reducing capacity. 
The GP hubs are likely to be more flexible and open to working something out. Have any opened in your area ? That maybe a the best route to find out about and push for your mum to get one that way. 
It's difficult and not ideal I wish you well in finding a solution


----------



## tom73 (15 Dec 2020)

@Bazzer don’t know if it helps much but you can download the vaccine consent form.
So at least you have some idea on what’s on it and what your mum needs to know. 
https://assets.publishing.service.g...id-19_Consent_form_adults_able_to_consent.pdf


----------



## Bazzer (15 Dec 2020)

tom73 said:


> @Bazzer don’t know if it helps much but you can download the vaccine consent form.
> So at least you have some idea on what’s on it and what your mum needs to know.
> https://assets.publishing.service.g...id-19_Consent_form_adults_able_to_consent.pdf


@tom73 many thanks. I'll forward it to my sister, with whom our Mum lives.


----------



## dodgy (15 Dec 2020)

Dad (Ormskirk) already vaccinated, Father in Law being done tomorrow (Wirral). They seem to be making progress.


----------



## classic33 (15 Dec 2020)

First vaccinations for the Calderdale & Huddersfield Foundation Trust, done this morning.

They don't say where though.


----------



## Adam4868 (15 Dec 2020)

My dad got a phone call this afternoon and went for the injection.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (15 Dec 2020)

classic33 said:


> First vaccinations for the Calderdale & Huddersfield Foundation Trust, done this morning.
> 
> They don't say where though.



In the upper arm I think


----------



## Ming the Merciless (17 Dec 2020)

https://www.omnicalculator.com/health/vaccine-queue-uk


----------



## srw (17 Dec 2020)

A million a week feels optimistic. I dug around and discovered that typically around 7 million people in England (say 8 million in the UK) get a flu vaccine over the 2 - 3 months that it's given. The flu vaccine is easier to store, and you don't need to be monitored once it's given.

And if they're still vaccinating those over 50 in June even on what feels like an optimistic estimate of the rate of vaccination it seems unlikely that we'll be back to anything like normal by Easter in April.


----------



## IaninSheffield (19 Dec 2020)

Nuff said


----------



## marinyork (19 Dec 2020)

As it happens there was a vaccine update today, despite the gloomy rumours from BioNTech about shortages from Jan-March.

350,000 people have now been vaccinated, so the last few days it looks to have stepped up to 30,000-60,000 a day, from the much lower rates the first 2-3 days.

This doesn't stop Biden in America making outrageously ambitious claims about 100 million jabs in 100 days, or UK sources going way above even what that one ^^ up there posted of up to 2 million doses a week.

However, apart from supply, last few days some slight good news.


----------



## MntnMan62 (19 Dec 2020)

I just read an article that said that a Colorado GOP Congressman is not going to take the vaccine because he's worried more about the safety of the vaccine than he is about the side effects of contracting the virus. I find this interesting. The US is seeing deaths currently at a rate of 3,600 per day. There have been no confirmed deaths related to people receiving the Covid vaccine. So, this guy won't take the vaccine because he's worried about it being safe, yet it's proven that it is safe and more importantly much safer than not taking it and getting Covid. I'd say this guy should be thrown out of office, not for refusing to take the vaccine, but because he's shown a complete lack of critical reasoning skills, making him nothing short of an imbecile.


----------



## marinyork (20 Dec 2020)

Matt Hancock confirms 350 000 had the first jab, on tv, indirectly confirms 60,000-75,000 a day getting the jab from 400 sites. Always take with a pinch of salt as he has form for quoting best figures but that suggests tranche 2 of the vaccine has arrived in the UK.

Supply allowing it'd suggest an ability to do roughly 2 million vaccines a month.


----------



## classic33 (20 Dec 2020)

YukonBoy said:


> https://www.omnicalculator.com/health/vaccine-queue-uk
> 
> View attachment 563812


Using that, I'm going backwards(later dates given) since Thursday. No change to the numbers in front of me though.


classic33 said:


> Based on your profile, there are between 6,029,525 and 9,926,645 people in front of you in the queue for a COVID vaccine across the UK.
> 
> 📅 Given a vaccination rate of 1,000,000 a week and an uptake of 70.6%, you should expect to receive your vaccine between 28/01/2021 and 24/02/2021.


Based on your profile, there are between 6,029,525 and 9,926,645 people in front of you in the queue for a COVID vaccine across the UK.
📅 Given a vaccination rate of 1,000,000 a week and an uptake of 70.6%, you should expect to receive your vaccine between 31/01/2021 and 27/02/2021.


----------



## marinyork (20 Dec 2020)

We aren't up to a million a week yet!


----------



## Unkraut (21 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> We aren't up to a million a week yet!


We haven't even started yet! Anticipated date is next Sunday.


----------



## classic33 (21 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> We aren't up to a million a week yet!


I know, the only thing to change on the result was the likely date period. 
Answers remained the same.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (21 Dec 2020)

classic33 said:


> I know, the only thing to change on the result was the likely date period.
> Answers remained the same.



The numbers already done will have changed in their equations.


----------



## mjr (21 Dec 2020)

MntnMan62 said:


> I'd say this guy should be thrown out of office, not for refusing to take the vaccine, but because he's shown a complete lack of critical reasoning skills, making him nothing short of an imbecile.


I think if that were an accepted reason to recall a politician, we'd have a different UK PM and POTUS by now!

But then, would anyone who can reason want either job just now?


----------



## Archie_tect (21 Dec 2020)

I wonder where they've parked up the refrigerated vaccine carrying HGVs in the freight lorry queue in Calais. [or is it all being handled by the military via an air bridge...]


----------



## Ming the Merciless (21 Dec 2020)

Archie_tect said:


> I wonder where they've parked up the refrigerated vaccine carrying HGVs in the freight lorry queue in Calais. [or is it all being handled by the military via an air bridge...]



It’s coming in by air


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Dec 2020)

Unkraut said:


> We haven't even started yet! Anticipated date is next Sunday.


Am slightly puzzled by the later start of many European countries.
Any theories?


----------



## Ming the Merciless (21 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Am slightly puzzled by the later start of many European countries.
> Any theories?



Not approved at same time as UK


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Am slightly puzzled by the later start of many European countries.
> Any theories?



Emergency licencing here and in America. Different regulators.

EU has a combined approach that may well pay off when things get going.

Not underplaying anything to do with vaccines, but the 450,000 people vaccinated is small change to this virus even before B.1.1.7. It's a massive psychological boost and offers hope to the population.

EU countries can catch us up quickly with a properly run program.


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Dec 2020)

YukonBoy said:


> Not approved at same time as UK


yes I know - but why so much slower on that?
(I stress that I'm not a "we're the best country in the world" merchant)


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> EU has a combined approach that may well pay off when things get going.


Surely individual EU countries don't have to wait for a nod from above?


----------



## Pale Rider (21 Dec 2020)

Hancock reckoned being out of the EU enabled us to move faster.

Greeted by howls of derision by the usual remain zealots.

The proof may lie in the pudding.


----------



## newfhouse (21 Dec 2020)

Pale Rider said:


> Hancock reckoned being out of the EU enabled us to move faster.
> 
> Greeted by howls of derision by the usual remain zealots.


The actual head of the actual MHRA confirmed that the approval was granted under the existing EU regulations.


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Surely individual EU countries don't have to wait for a nod from above?



My understanding is some EU countries can go ahead before under emergency powers.

EMA meeting today. They want a coordinated effort though.

A well run vaccine program matters far, far, more than when you start. Psychologically, politically, it's the early stuff that matters.

What'll probably happen is that comparing 28 different countries' vaccination programs in January there will be Daily Mail articles eventually asking why does Slovakia seem to be vaccinating at 2.7 times the rate per head of the population as Luxembourg, why is Germany vaccinating at 1.4x the rate we are and now overtaken us etc. These are madeup examples but will likely happen to some unluckier residents of some very rich western country, just hopefully it's not the UK.


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

Haha @Blue Hills , as we type the French have stuck up two fingers at the EU and announced they'll start vaccinating on Sunday.


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> Haha @Blue Hills , as we type the French have stuck up two fingers at the EU and announced they'll start vaccinating on Sunday.


thanks for the info, though would have assumed that this was an area where countries didn't have to stick two fingers to anyone. Not sure that I'm aware of much euro co-ordination in all of this. Italy locked down earlier than many european countries and bits of it at least (sardinia) have had their own rules on entry etc.


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> thanks for the info, though would have assumed that this was an area where countries didn't have to stick two fingers to anyone. Not sure that I'm aware of much euro co-ordination in all of this. Italy locked down earlier than many european countries and bits of it at least (sardinia) have had their own rules on entry etc.



It's heavily rumoured EMA will grant EU emergency authorisation today. So it's very much sticking up two fingers announcing it before. But then Macron does seem to be doing quite a string of rash decisions in close succession.

I'm thrilled for the french public though, a bit of hope.


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Italy locked down earlier than many european countries and bits of it at least (sardinia) have had their own rules on entry etc.



You mean now or in March?


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> You mean now or in March?


at the beginning.
(not that it saved them in the broader picture, such is the virus)


----------



## srw (21 Dec 2020)

Archie_tect said:


> I wonder where they've parked up the refrigerated vaccine carrying HGVs in the freight lorry queue in Calais. [or is it all being handled by the military via an air bridge...]





YukonBoy said:


> It’s coming in by air


This is what Grant Shapps said this morning:


> Asked if he could guarantee* UK *vaccine supplies would not be affected by the travel bans, UK transport secretary Grant Shapps told BBC Breakfast:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How reassuring. There are absolutely no possible problems with any of the container ports in the UK. Are there?


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> at the beginning.
> (not that it saved them in the broader picture, such is the virus)



Yes, they did 'lockdown' earlier than other countries, but then it appears that Italy got it first, got it worse in terms of it taking a hold early . There may have been a very large element of chance there. I'm sure some epidemiologists in private in Italy must have told the government when patient uno was picked up, look this thing may have been circulating for 2-3 months. We now know that was the case without getting into much flimsier speculations about it being around far in advance of that. Italy was also doing a fairly modest amount of testing initially, which was forgotten and fortunately the very paltry and stingy lab capacity they did have was right next to the outbreak, otherwise they'd have been even more screwed.


----------



## Unkraut (21 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Am slightly puzzled by the later start of many European countries.
> Any theories?
> 
> Surely individual EU countries don't have to wait for a nod from above?


The idea is for European-wide approval rather than separate approvals for each individual country. The EMA report will be presented today, and formal approval is taken as a given. As I said before it does seem a bit strange that they aren't going to start in anticipation of approval, but with such a serious medical procedure I assume they feel they have to wait for everything to have been done properly, especially with political pressure to cut corners.


marinyork said:


> Haha Blue Hills , as we type the French have stuck up two fingers at the EU and announced they'll start vaccinating on Sunday.


The federal health minister here anticipates beginning the vaccination programme next Sunday. It's not really going to get going until beginning of January, and there are still logistical and staffing problems to be overcome. Still some discussion of who has priority.

At least in one centre in Bavaria they have solved the logistics. A company that will prepare the vaccine has offered its car park and grounds for the construction of a vaccination centre. This conjures up pictures of bods in white coats making the stuff in one building, and then wheeling it on trolleys across the car part to another building, where another group of bods in white coats will start injecting into people's arms!


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

Unkraut said:


> The federal health minister here anticipates beginning the vaccination programme next Sunday. It's not really going to get going until beginning of January, and there are still logistical and staffing problems to be overcome. Still some discussion of who has priority.
> 
> At least in one centre in Bavaria they have solved the logistics. A company that will prepare the vaccine has offered its car park and grounds for the construction of a vaccination centre. This conjures up pictures of bods in white coats making the stuff in one building, and then wheeling it on trolleys across the car part to another building, where another group of bods in white coats will start injecting into people's arms!



That's good. The logistics matter. 

The UK might have got there early, but without an approved Oxford vaccine it's going to be mindbendingly challenging to deliver this and the public may become very weary in January/February when they realise what the score is on the vaccines and how long this'll go on for.

The good news we may get is if any of the vaccines stop transmission and that will offer a ray of hope when people realise how long this'll take.


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

As an addition, the NERVTAG guys are starting to break ranks with Boris. Calum Semple has been the third guy to attend NERVTAG meetings in some capacity and just been on tv and basically hinted that the x million people who are getting the vaccination this spring/winter may have to go through it all over again next winter/some indeterminate future date if vaccination confers immunity/cross-immunity for some longer time period.


----------



## bitsandbobs (21 Dec 2020)

one reason the EU has taken longer to approve is that the Germans in particular were looking for a regular approval, not an emergency approval. 

Germany has a large anti-vax cohort and it was felt that relying on emergency procedure would give that group an excuse to refuse vaccination. It was hoped that regular approval would lead to higher uptake.


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

bitsandbobs said:


> Germany has a large anti-vax cohort and it was felt that relying on emergency procedure would give that group an excuse to refuse vaccination. It was hoped that regular approval would lead to higher uptake.



If we're getting into that, it's only fair to say that the EU is made up of many countries and quite a few Eastern European countries, quite a few who are not in the EU but some of which are, have substantial cultural issues around vaccines.


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

EU approve the Pfizer vaccine.


----------



## Julia9054 (21 Dec 2020)

My parents are getting dose 1 tomorrow and dose 2 on 12th January. 
Given that I work in a school, I am thinking that it is still not wise to meet up until after I have had the vaccine (whenever that will be) What do others think?


----------



## LarryDuff (21 Dec 2020)

Mrs Duff works in intensive care but hasn't got a date for her vaccination, however her senior management who never see patients have had theirs already.


----------



## Cathryn (21 Dec 2020)

Julia9054 said:


> My parents are getting dose 1 tomorrow and dose 2 on 12th January.
> Given that I work in a school, I am thinking that it is still not wise to meet up until after I have had the vaccine (whenever that will be) What do others think?


I work in a school too. My 'theory' is that Primary Schools (where I work) are less risky than secondary and that I'll have been home and not mixing for a week before Christmas so meeting up with my parents should be do-able. But who knows.


----------



## marinyork (21 Dec 2020)

Julia9054 said:


> My parents are getting dose 1 tomorrow and dose 2 on 12th January.
> Given that I work in a school, I am thinking that it is still not wise to meet up until after I have had the vaccine (whenever that will be) What do others think?



I'd worry you might be waiting a very long time .

Assuming your parents live in an area of lower virus incidence recorded around 84 cases per 100,000, I think a lack of any other information it's reasonable to plan careful visits to your parents from 19th January (7 days after the second vaccine). Get some tests nearer the time from kirkless or york or somewhere, assuming they haven't been reassigned to areas that need them by then, which I do honestly wonder may happen. You know all the information anyway, it's how much you'll worry about it.

Of course if you were making a visit around the 19th January and the cases were jumping around like mexican beans and say happened to be around 250 per 100,000 like another poster on here I'd be the first to say don't do it. Actually I didn't say that to another poster because it'd have pissed them off, but what can you do.


----------



## Julia9054 (21 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> I'd worry you might be waiting a very long time .
> 
> Assuming your parents live in an area of lower virus incidence recorded around 84 cases per 100,000, I think a lack of any other information it's reasonable to plan careful visits to your parents from 19th January (7 days after the second vaccine). Get some tests nearer the time from kirkless or york or somewhere, assuming they haven't been reassigned to areas that need them by then, which I do honestly wonder may happen. You know all the information anyway, it's how much you'll worry about it.
> 
> Of course if you were making a visit around the 19th January and the cases were jumping around like mexican beans and say happened to be around 250 per 100,000 like another poster on here I'd be the first to say don't do it. Actually I didn't say that to another poster because it'd have pissed them off, but what can you do.


Yes, things can change very quickly. Where I live, cases are low and decreasing currently although the secondary schools in central Harrogate (including mine) have been hit badly. 
My parents live in Preston - currently 252/100,000 and on the rise whilst the surrounding areas are decreasing. I’m very glad they have a date for their vaccinations - thought it might be a bit longer for my mum as she is only 79.


----------



## winjim (21 Dec 2020)

The vaccines all work against the same target, the spike protein. The spike protein is what has mutated and made the virus more virulent. The more virulent strain will naturally become the more prevalent.

We may be about to find out just how quickly the vaccine program can move.


----------



## mjr (21 Dec 2020)

winjim said:


> The vaccines all work against the same target, the spike protein. The spike protein is what has mutated and made the virus more virulent. The more virulent strain will naturally become the more prevalent.
> 
> We may be about to find out just how quickly the vaccine program can move.


I think it was "How To Vaccinate The World" that this morning described the variant as a "tweak" rather than the scale of change which might stop the vaccine working.

With the spike mutating, we might need new vaccines each year like for flu, if spike-dependent vaccines turn out to be the only sort.


----------



## Unkraut (21 Dec 2020)

bitsandbobs said:


> Germany has a large anti-vax cohort and it was felt that relying on emergency procedure would give that group an excuse to refuse vaccination.


The figures I saw a couple of days ago on this were 50% of the population were quite happy to be vaccinated, 30% had reservations about it and 20% didn't want anything to do with it. Personally I'm in the 30% but I doubt if in the end this will stop me having the jab. I do wonder about longer-term side-effects, but those in the know all seem to agree that whilst not impossible, this is highly unlikely.

@marinyork the regulations for who is vaccinated first have just been published - they haven't had time to translate them into English yet - and there are no surprises as to the order. Over 80's first, those in homes and the nursing staff to care for them have highest priority. Then over 70's are high, third tranche over 60's raised priority, both according to pre-existing medical conditions and how serious they are. Public sector workers will be vaccinated according to their exposure to the virus from intensive care at the top and gradually working down to police, fire brigade and teachers.

According to supply those with a lower priority will not necessarily have to wait for the highest priority to have all been vaccinated first before they get their shot.


----------



## marinyork (22 Dec 2020)

NHS gets pissed off at the government, in part for them repeatedly declining to answer how much vaccine is here (good article though).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/22/nhs-leaders-raise-concerns-pace-covid-vaccine-rollout


----------



## srw (22 Dec 2020)

LarryDuff said:


> Mrs Duff works in intensive care but hasn't got a date for her vaccination, however her senior management who never see patients have had theirs already.


I was told today, somewhat to my surprise, that some companies have already paid to have senior staff vaccinated.


----------



## srw (22 Dec 2020)

bitsandbobs said:


> one reason the EU has taken longer to approve is that the Germans in particular were looking for a regular approval, not an emergency approval.


In reality, the difference of a couple of weeks in the first vaccination is completely irrelevant. What counts is how quickly the thing is stuffed into the arms of very large numbers of people. I'd put decent money on that happening more quickly in Germany than in the UK.


----------



## mjr (23 Dec 2020)

Vaccine shoved in arms of Biden and Faucci very publicly to reassure hesitant public. No sign of Trump being vaccinated but maybe he's immune.

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5C76XMCJCVs


----------



## mjr (23 Dec 2020)

Apparently, there is a minor problem with the Russian vaccine:

Don't mix Sputnik vaccine with alcohol, says Russian official. Some recoil | Reuters – https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-russia-vaccine-alcoho-idUSKBN28J239


----------



## Unkraut (23 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> Vaccine shoved in arms of Biden and Faucci very publicly to reassure hesitant public. No sign of Trump being vaccinated but maybe he's immune.


Trump is immune to a lot of things!

Anyway, regarding the hesitant public, I wonder if we are about to see another case of irrationality emerge. The anti-lockdown hygiene crowd base their argument on corona 'only' being fatal to about 1% of the population, many of whom are elderly and already ill. 

From what I have seen from the vaccine/epidemiology community, including the person who discovered of the mRNA technique the new vaccine being developed has very little chance of producing side effects. It has been widely tested for this prior to approval, enough to discover potential or actual problems, though they cannot absolutely rule them out.

If the chances of a problem with the vaccine are vastly less than the chances of serious illness from corona, it is illogical to argue against widespread use of the vaccine on the basis it might be harmful. The disease is a greater threat than the cure.


----------



## marinyork (23 Dec 2020)

Singapore to vaccinate the entire population that want/can have it.


----------



## BoldonLad (23 Dec 2020)

LarryDuff said:


> Mrs Duff *works in intensive care but hasn't got a date for her vaccination*, however her *senior management who never see patients have had theirs already.*



Why does this not surprise me?


----------



## midlife (23 Dec 2020)

Had email today to book a slot for covid vaccine. Was directed to a Web page that asked me to confirm a few details and an "I am not a robot" thing.

Didn't recognise me as a member of staff and bombed me out of the Web page.... Computer says no!


----------



## mjr (24 Dec 2020)

midlife said:


> Had email today to book a slot for covid vaccine. Was directed to a Web page that asked me to confirm a few details and an "I am not a robot" thing.
> 
> Didn't recognise me as a member of staff and bombed me out of the Web page.... Computer says no!


That Google "I am not a robot" box is offensive to people with audio and visual impairment, calling them robots. It stinks to high heaven for such ableism to be in the vaccination system.


----------



## screenman (24 Dec 2020)

How do the NHS know what people are priority? My wife is a Foot Health Practitioner and deals with mainly older people many with health problems, so would she be a priority person or not? The government says she should still be working.


----------



## vickster (24 Dec 2020)

screenman said:


> How do the NHS know what people are priority? My wife is a Foot Health Practitioner and deals with mainly older people many with health problems, so would she be a priority person or not? The government says she should still be working.


Not unless she’s in a high risk group herself, one of the page groups being prioritised (still 80+) or working for the frontline NHS? 

Presumably she’s minimising risk to herself and her patients by use of the correct PPE (as advised by her professional body?), eg mask, gloves, apron, eyewear and her patients are wearing a mask too and sanitising?


----------



## Julia9054 (24 Dec 2020)

screenman said:


> How do the NHS know what people are priority? My wife is a Foot Health Practitioner and deals with mainly older people many with health problems, so would she be a priority person or not? The government says she should still be working.


My son too. 1 day a week teaching brass in schools, 4 days a week providing close personal care in their own homes for the elderly and disabled many over 90.


----------



## screenman (24 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> Not unless she’s in a high risk group herself, one of the page groups being prioritised (still 80+) or working for the frontline NHS?
> 
> Presumably she’s minimising risk to herself and her patients by use of the correct PPE (as advised by her professional body?), eg mask, gloves, apron, eyewear and her patients are wearing a mask too and sanitising?



Yes, doing everything as best she can.


----------



## vickster (24 Dec 2020)

screenman said:


> Yes, doing everything as best she can.


Sure all ok if she’s minimising her risk to contract and transmit to her vulnerable patients.
Assuming she’s a private practitioner and not NHS, She could contact her professional body to ask about vaccination?


----------



## vickster (24 Dec 2020)

Guidance ref Covid here @screenman (she’s a podiatrist?)
Overriding seems to be if there’s a potential risk to a patient, non urgent appointments should be postponed
https://bcha-uk.org/news-&-events


----------



## screenman (24 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> Guidance ref Covid here @screenman (she’s a podiatrist?)
> Overriding seems to be if there’s a potential risk to a patient, non urgent appointments should be postponed
> https://bcha-uk.org/news-&-events



Non urgent is a hard one as the oldies, up to 103 years old, need regular servicing as many call it. We know she is doing as much as possible and will carry on doing so, we have always been sticklers for the safety side of things in the business.

It was just me thinking out aloud, I suppose dentist, private physio's etc all fall into the same thing, certainly not trying to queue jump.


----------



## MrGrumpy (24 Dec 2020)

screenman said:


> Non urgent is a hard one as the oldies, up to 103 years old, need regular servicing as many call it. We know she is doing as much as possible and will carry on doing so, we have always been sticklers for the safety side of things in the business.
> 
> It was just me thinking out aloud, I suppose dentist, private physio's etc all fall into the same thing, certainly not trying to queue jump.



My wifes a Pod, her governing body the HCPC says she needs the vaccine, been trying to organise that but is not straight forward. As for practising in lockdown. Pods can work through it however its only for emergency treatments only, NOTHING routine ! That is of course here in the UK.

I should add shes private only, and they appear to have missed these ones out, if she was NHS, she`d be in the queue now.


----------



## vickster (24 Dec 2020)

MrGrumpy said:


> My wifes a Pod, her governing body the HCPC says she needs the vaccine, been trying to organise that but is not straight forward. As for practising in lockdown. Pods can work through it however its only for emergency treatments only, NOTHING routine ! That is of course here in the UK.


Screenman is in the UK


----------



## lane (27 Dec 2020)

In the papers today it is reported the Government will lift restrictions after 15 million have been vaccinated. I think this is likely because the hospital admissions and deaths from the remaining 10 million will be tolerable they will be collateral damage. Those 10 million are people who are more likely to need to go to work.


----------



## marinyork (27 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> In the papers today it is reported the Government will lift restrictions after 15 million have been vaccinated. I think this is likely because the hospital admissions and deaths from the remaining 10 million will be tolerable they will be collateral damage. Those 10 million are people who are more likely to need to go to work.



Tabloid newspapers for you.

The Sun and The Daily Mail said February. Because the Oxford vaccine is speculated to be about to get approval and would speed up shots massively. 2 shots for 15 million people by the end of February is quite a challenge. Words like 'normal' were used. I don't think the tier system's going to get abolished in February, that's tabloid newspapers and politicians being mischievous to big people up.


----------



## PK99 (27 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> In the papers today it is reported the Government will lift restrictions after 15 million have been vaccinated. I think this is likely because the hospital admissions and deaths from the remaining 10 million will be tolerable they will be collateral damage. Those 10 million are people who are more likely to need to go to work.



not disputing that, but could you link to your source report(s)


----------



## marinyork (27 Dec 2020)

PK99 said:


> not disputing that, but could you link to your source report(s)



https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13580892/uk-could-be-free-of-covid-restrictions-by-february/


----------



## PK99 (27 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13580892/uk-could-be-free-of-covid-restrictions-by-february/




Ah, not a source I would normally go for sound information...

But I strongly suspect that even without a policy to that effect it will just happen once the top few at-risk groups are vaccinated.


----------



## lane (27 Dec 2020)

Thanks @marinyork also reported in the Mail.


----------



## marinyork (27 Dec 2020)

PK99 said:


> Ah, not a source I would normally go for sound information...
> 
> But I strongly suspect that even without a policy to that effect it will just happen once the top few at-risk groups are vaccinated.



I think the papers got a bit excited because it was Zahawi (vaccines minister) that said some of the bits.

This is just a rerun of the government's plans from about a month to two months ago, which if they did get vaccines done that quickly and there was no B117 strain, it might be looking just a tad optimistic on that timescale.

I think restrictions will be lifted, but the normal of which the papers speak of means tiers 1/2. And February looks very optimistic to me. The old vaccine dashboard hasn't been updated since 20th December figures.

The story that I'd go chest thumping on to cheer people up if I was a tabloid editor would have been project storm chaser which if the antibody trial works could transform some settings on covid in the second half of 2021.

I think the papers are getting ahead of themselves as the scientists will be re-evaluating everything for the B117 strain, which I think a change of tack and some difficult decisions will have to be made on vaccinating specific groups below 50 and more upheaval in workplaces and other settings.

From a political point of view, the restrictions expire in early February...


----------



## Unkraut (27 Dec 2020)

Officially the vaccination starts today, but was anticipated yesterday - _101-year-old Edith Kwoizalla was the first resident to be vaccinated in the Krüger senior citizen care home_. She was joined by another 40 residents and 10 staff.

The cameras were there of course. A long time to wait for your moment of fame!


----------



## lane (27 Dec 2020)

Tory backbenchers hate the restrictions so as soon as the most vulnerable are vaccinated it seems likely that they will be removed If NHS can cope with hospitalisations


----------



## marinyork (27 Dec 2020)

Unfortunately we haven't vaccinated 5 or 10 million people yet and adding another 5 to 10 million in the next couple of months.

The virus disagrees.

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-up-all-possible-beds-for-surging-covid-cases


----------



## mjr (27 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Tory backbenchers hate the restrictions so as soon as the most vulnerable are vaccinated it seems likely that they will be removed If NHS can cope with hospitalisations


And all the loonies will be back to licking each other and then trying to stand on your heels in shop checkout queues. There will be some tricky months for the unvaccinated who want to avoid this virus.


----------



## marinyork (27 Dec 2020)

Yep, the path blockers are already hard at it every day.


----------



## marinyork (28 Dec 2020)

The papers this morning unsurprisingly are more down to earth. Most claim a million vaccines a week which would be very far short of 15 million double jabs by an indetermimate date in February.


----------



## kingrollo (30 Dec 2020)

Oxford Vaccine approved. It would seem the approach now is to get as many people as possible the first Jab - which would give a degree of protection to all those receiving it.

Good news.
The only possible downside is that come the 2nd Jab - if the numbers are well down - will a lot of people not bother with Jab 2 ? - could this be like not completing a course of antibiotics ....there is a chance of developing a resistant strain ?


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

2m a week 1 jab and will do the 25 million vulnerable within 12 weeks, or more quickly if uptake is less than 100%. Presumably why the second dose not until after 12 weeks. All good news.


----------



## C R (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> 2m a week 1 jab and will do the 25 million vulnerable within 12 weeks, or more quickly if uptake is less than 100%. Presumably why the second dose not until after 12 weeks. All good news.


Where's that info? Who are in the 25 million group?


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

C R said:


> Where's that info? Who are in the 25 million group?



Is that a serious question?


----------



## C R (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Is that a serious question?


Yes, why not? You gave some figures and I would like to look at where they came from. I am type 1 diabetic and wondered if I would be part of the 25 million, that's all, I had no ulterior motives when asking.


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

Ok sorry @C R I wasn't sure if it was a joke. The figures were quoted and discussed earlier in the thread. I would imagine type 1 would be in the 25 million but am not 100% sure. I will try to find the earlier post and post below.


----------



## dodgy (30 Dec 2020)

As we all know, there's no list as such. It's a priority order. HEalth workers ->> care homes -> underlying health conditions -> age groups over 75, then 70, then 60 etc etc etc


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

marinyork said:


> It's difficult. It's difficult even waiting.
> 
> A nice graphic from the BBC demonstrating the enormity of the task
> 
> ...


Click on the attachment link to see how the 25 million are made up


----------



## C R (30 Dec 2020)

I had seen that, but it is previous to the astra zeneca vaccine approval. I can't find much specific about the new vaccine deployment other than the 1 million doses a week aim.

ETA, thanks @lane, I imagine that I am in group 6, under 50 with underlying condition. Will have to wait for my surgery to call me, I guess.


----------



## mjr (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> 2m a week 1 jab and will do the 25 million vulnerable within 12 weeks, or more quickly if uptake is less than 100%. Presumably why the second dose not until after 12 weeks. All good news.


That would be good news but I think even the aim is 1m a week and currently it's 480ish k a week, so expect six months.


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

25 million in priority groups including 8.5 million with underlying health conditions - not a list of individuals as such. Most is straightforward based on age but we don't know exactly who is included in the 8.5 million


----------



## Ming the Merciless (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Tory backbenchers hate the restrictions so as soon as the most vulnerable are vaccinated it seems likely that they will be removed If NHS can cope with hospitalisations



Because they see restrictions as limiting their chance of re election. It’s pure selfishness on their part.


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

C R said:


> I had seen that, but it is previous to the astra zeneca vaccine approval. I can't find much specific about the new vaccine deployment other than the 1 million doses a week aim.
> 
> ETA, thanks @lane, I imagine that I am in group 6, under 50 with underlying condition. Will have to wait for my surgery to call me, I guess.



I have seen 2 million a week but who knows? The news today is 1 dose initially and the second one after 12 weeks to speed up deployment.


----------



## C R (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> 25 million in priority groups including 8.5 million with underlying health conditions - not a list of individuals as such. Most is straightforward based on age but we don't know exactly who is included in the 8.5 million


I get called by my surgery for the flu vaccine every year, something similar for this I expect.

Agree with @mjr that 1 million a week seems optimistic at the moment.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> I have seen 2 million a week but who knows? The news today is 1 dose initially and the second one after 12 weeks to speed up deployment.



At the press conference the medical people said second dose between 4 and 12 weeks. There’s evidence leaving the second dose later improves efficacy and that may be behind the half dose results, not the dosage. But 12 weeks is the recommendation for the maximum period before a second dose.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (30 Dec 2020)

My mother’s health centre has managed to destroy a batch of Pfizer vaccine due to storage problems. The sooner the Oxford one can be used the better.


----------



## Blue Hills (30 Dec 2020)

Ming the Merciless said:


> My mother’s health centre has managed to destroy a batch of Pfizer vaccine due to storage problems. The sooner the Oxford one can be used the better.


am I right in thinking that the second one is less effective though?


----------



## vickster (30 Dec 2020)

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the at risk groups would be broadly aligned with those who get a free flu jab (other than pregnant women and children for whom the vaccines aren’t (currently) indicated)?


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> I seem to recall reading somewhere that the at risk groups would be broadly aligned with those who get a free flu jab (other than pregnant women and children for whom the vaccines aren’t (currently) indicated)?



Yes I read that. But then if you look at criteria it says, for example, severe asthma, which covers less than get the flu vaccine. So it's not very clear.

Also extremely vulnerable, which are higher priority than the 8.5 million with underlying conditions also includes People with severe asthma so they are included in two groups which makes no sense.


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

C R said:


> I get called by my surgery for the flu vaccine every year, something similar for this I expect.
> 
> Agree with @mjr that 1 million a week seems optimistic at the moment.



Astra Zenica say they can provide 2 million a week would have thought getting into people's arms is the easy bit.


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> I seem to recall reading somewhere that the at risk groups would be broadly aligned with those who get a free flu jab (other than pregnant women and children for whom the vaccines aren’t (currently) indicated)?



Also pregnant women can now have the vaccine


----------



## vickster (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Astra Zenica say they can provide 2 million a week would have thought getting into people's arms is the easy bit.


Well you do need someone trained to do it, but they are recruiting volunteers from the NHS volunteer pool to be trained up and support the admin side (I've had several messages asking me to sign up but I can't walk at the moment  )


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Well you do need someone trained to do it, but they are recruiting volunteers from the NHS volunteer pool to be trained up and support the admin side (I've had several messages asking me to sign up but I can't walk at the moment  )



They have enough people already to give the flu vaccine and think that's similar numbers. Our Doctors have stopped doing lots of things so must have some spare capacity as well. Plus there are lower levels of flu and colds so they can't be as busy as usual.


----------



## vickster (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> They have enough people already to give the flu vaccine and think that's similar numbers. Our Doctors have stopped doing lots of things so must have some spare capacity as well. Plus there are lower levels of flu and colds so they can't be as busy as usual.


I don't think that's necessarily the case given the numbers involved and how busy hospitals are and also the fact that more care will need to be taken between patients than in normal times. I believe St John's ambulance will be involved too.

I expect GP surgeries just have a doable rather than excessive workload! Not sure what they've stopped doing (still routine screening etc)


----------



## kingrollo (30 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> I don't think that's necessarily the case given the numbers involved and how busy hospitals are and also the fact that more care will need to be taken between patients than in normal times. I believe St John's ambulance will be involved too.
> 
> I expect GP surgeries just have a doable rather than excessive workload! Not sure what they've stopped doing (still routine screening etc)


If there's a way to feck this all up - it's to rely on GP surgies. Just hire some space and blast through the numbers.


----------



## srw (30 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> I seem to recall reading somewhere that the at risk groups would be broadly aligned with those who get a free flu jab (other than pregnant women and children for whom the vaccines aren’t (currently) indicated)?


Here's the official recommendation:












https://assets.publishing.service.g...oups-for-covid-19-vaccination-30-dec-2020.pdf



lane said:


> would have thought getting into people's arms is the easy bit.


Extremely difficult, though a bit easier with the version that doesn't need to be refrigerated. Somewhere in the thread I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation which suggested that even at the peak of flu vaccinations they weren't doing 2 million per week. Unless I've missed a change, the advice for this one is that once you've been vaccinated you need to be kept under observation for 15 minutes. If you're vaccinating 1 person per minute (which is the rate they managed for flu at our local surgery - in six vaccination stations around the surgery ) that means that for each vaccination station you need a very large holding pen for 15 grumpy adults kept 6 foot apart from each other, and in most places also somewhere to hold and move a hundred or so cars.

My local surgery essentially did most of the flu vaccine process outdoors - the only bit that was actually under cover was the jab. Fortunately on the day I went it was dry.


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

Well for example the asthma clinics gave been cancelled at my GPs since March so what has that nurse been doing ?


----------



## vickster (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> Well for example the asthma clinics gave been cancelled at my GPs since March so what has that nurse been doing ?


Smear tests for example  Patching up damaged cyclists with a gungy elbow 

Managing the potentially nasty symptoms of long Covid  ?

If you need an asthma review, request one


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

I don't need one waste of time - GP made me have it although now it's not required so it must have freed up time

Don't think out GP would patch up anyone send you to A and E


----------



## vickster (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> I don't need one waste of time - GP made me have it although now it's not required so it must have freed up time
> 
> Don't think out GP would patch up anyone send you to A and E


I’d been to A&E, I needed a wound check and a fresh dressing to replace the gungy one applied by paramedics. Certainly the role of a GP practice nurse  not A&E in the middle of a pandemic!


----------



## BoldonLad (30 Dec 2020)

srw said:


> ..................
> Unless I've missed a change, the advice for this one is that* once you've been vaccinated you need to be kept under observation for 15 minutes.* If you're vaccinating 1 person per minute (which is the rate they managed for flu at our local surgery - in six vaccination stations around the surgery ) that means that for each vaccination station you need a very large holding pen for 15 grumpy adults kept 6 foot apart from each other, and in most places also* somewhere to hold and move a hundred or so cars.*
> 
> My local surgery essentially did most of the flu vaccine process outdoors - the only bit that was actually under cover was the jab. Fortunately on the day I went it was dry.



My eldest daughter (NHS Nurse Practitioner), has been doing Covid Vaccinations for a few weeks now (ie, since Pfizer vaccine approval). They are doing them in former walk-in centres (now defunct), in the area where she is working. She is doing 1 day per week vaccinations and 4 days per week her "normal" job.

I spoke to her over the Christmas break, and, asked about the "observation period", as you say, 15 minutes "observation".

Until now, they have been doing those 80 and over, plus Health Workers etc.


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

They used to make me wait at the surgery after the flu vaccination - then one year it was no longer necessary. I guess with the covid vacination.being new they need to be more careful.


----------



## kingrollo (30 Dec 2020)

vickster said:


> I’d been to A&E, I needed a wound check and a fresh dressing to replace the gungy one applied by paramedics. Certainly the role of a GP practice nurse  not A&E in the middle of a pandemic!


But that's why people go straight to A+E....they do stuff !!!!

I would direct resources away from GP surgeries to hospital walk in centres.


----------



## vickster (30 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> But that's why people go straight to A+E....they do stuff !!!!
> 
> I would direct resources away from GP surgeries to hospital walk in centres.


Huh? The nurse at the GP practice did everything perfectly well at the time booked within 10 minutes.
I had spent about 5 hours at A&E a few days before, most of which was spent sitting around in pain waiting to see someone or have something done which took 10 minutes ... even though I arrived by ambulance.

GP surgeries deal with straightforward or chronic issues. Those are not appropriate for A & E or a walk in centre


----------



## Ming the Merciless (30 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> am I right in thinking that the second one is less effective though?



Lower efficacy, so in some individuals the vaccine won’t be as effective. Like all vaccines.


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> am I right in thinking that the second one is less effective though?



According to JVT this evening the answer is "not necessarily"


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

Also according to JVT the Oxford vaccine even if you get Covid will not go in hospital or die - good enough for me


----------



## Blue Hills (30 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> According to JVT this evening the answer is "not necessarily"


can you say more/give me a link?


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> can you say more/give me a link?



It was on the PM briefing you can view on iPlayer. Basically he said although the Oxford vaccine had lower quoted headline efficacy the starting point was not the same so you are comparing apples with pears.


----------



## mjr (30 Dec 2020)

kingrollo said:


> I would direct resources away from GP surgeries to hospital walk in centres.


Again favouring the cities over towns and villages! Our nearest "walk in" is about 30 miles away in a small city, which is not really walking distance!


----------



## dodgy (30 Dec 2020)

Risks are lower in the villages, higher in the cities. Where would you put your resources?


----------



## mjr (30 Dec 2020)

dodgy said:


> Risks are lower in the villages, higher in the cities. Where would you put your resources?


Lower, not zero, and I still doubt there are huge differences between medium towns and small cities. I would put resources in the Primary care and pharmacies, same as who handles the flu vaccines, not waste effort setting up a new vaccination network.


----------



## dodgy (30 Dec 2020)

Perhaps apply for a job in vaccine logistics, you sound experienced.


----------



## mjr (30 Dec 2020)

dodgy said:


> Perhaps apply for a job in vaccine logistics, you sound experienced.


About as qualified as @lane I suspect, if lane has some Operations Research training.

I may do better if I befriend an MP and bid for setting up a new vaccination network but how farking sick do you have to be to profiteer off this crisis?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (30 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> can you say more/give me a link?



You can never be absolutely definitive about the *relative* efficacy of two treatments unless they are directly compared had to head in the same trial.

The endpoints (definition of what constitutes a positive) were I think different.

You can read the Oxford trial paper here

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32661-1/fulltext

And the Pfizer one here.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjACegQICxAB&usg=AOvVaw1F_b9rk3lgpqOKNSqtA_Q_


----------



## lane (30 Dec 2020)

mjr said:


> About as qualified as @lane I suspect, if lane has some Operations Research training.
> 
> I may do better if I befriend an MP and bid for setting up a new vaccination network but how farking sick do you have to be to profiteer off this crisis?



I am not qualified, nor do I have any interest in setting up a new vaccination network. Nor do I think it is necessary.


----------



## Blue Hills (31 Dec 2020)

lane said:


> It was on the PM briefing you can view on iPlayer. Basically he said although the Oxford vaccine had lower quoted headline efficacy the starting point was not the same so you are comparing apples with pears.


Thanks for the reply lane, but, sorry, don't understand.will try to search out.


----------



## Blue Hills (31 Dec 2020)

roubaixtuesday said:


> You can never be absolutely definitive about the *relative* efficacy of two treatments unless they are directly compared had to head in the same trial.
> 
> The endpoints (definition of what constitutes a positive) were I think different.
> 
> ...


Thanks but fear they will be beyond me. O level sciences only.
Thanks again for the reply though.


----------



## lane (31 Dec 2020)

As far as I understand when they decide if the vaccine works or not with an individual they need some objective criteria to make the judgement. I think Oxford and Pfizer had different criteria so there results are not comparable with each other.

Just come across a clip online an interview with the Oxford professor and he said that it might not work well against the South African mutation "that has left us a bit exposed" which sounds a bit worrying.


----------



## lane (31 Dec 2020)

https://www.channel4.com/news/many-...nated-by-end-of-january-says-oxford-professor

Link before anyone asks


----------



## SpokeyDokey (31 Dec 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Thanks for the reply lane, but, sorry, don't understand.will try to search out.



Basically, JVT was being rather pointed towards the Media who have an obsession with comparatives: witness the tables published by eg BBC re relative effectiveness of the various vaccines authorised by either the UK or other countries.

He said that they were of little value (paraphrasing) due to the different start and endpoints of the trials relating to each different vaccine. That was my take FWIW.

Apologies if I have not understood your 'don't understand' in that it may not have been regarding this point.


----------



## IaninSheffield (31 Dec 2020)

GPs just interviewed on BBC expressing concern at latest govt pivot (acting on the advice of the JCVI):
"_Therefore, given data indicating high efficacy from the first dose of both Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca vaccines, the committee advises that delivery of the first dose to as many eligible individuals as possible should be initially prioritised over delivery of a second vaccine dose. This should maximise the short-term impact of the programme._"
With only a week until first recipients of the vaccine were due to receive their 2nd dose, I can understand GPs' concerns, not only having to deal with practicalities involved in cancelling appts., but also in the potential (likely?) diminution of trust in the programme.
FWIW, I share the GPs' concerns. Some CC members have received their 1st dose; I'd be interested to hear how they feel about this.


----------



## Chromatic (31 Dec 2020)

IaninSheffield said:


> GPs just interviewed on BBC expressing concern at latest govt pivot (acting on the advice of the JCVI):
> "_Therefore, given data indicating high efficacy from the first dose of both Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca vaccines, the committee advises that delivery of the first dose to as many eligible individuals as possible should be initially prioritised over delivery of a second vaccine dose. This should maximise the short-term impact of the programme._"
> With only a week until first recipients of the vaccine were due to receive their 2nd dose, I can understand GPs' concerns, not only having to deal with practicalities involved in cancelling appts., but also in the potential (likely?) diminution of trust in the programme.
> FWIW, I share the GPs' concerns. Some CC members have received their 1st dose; I'd be interested to hear how they feel about this.



My dad had his first dose two weeks ago today and this afternoon received a phone call telling him the second dose, due next Thursday, will be rearranged for a different date, no indication as to when he will receive it, he must wait for a letter telling him when. 

Pissed off is how he feels.


----------



## Mo1959 (31 Dec 2020)

Sounds a bit concerning given the way it was initially stressed how important it was that you went for your second dose within the time frame. Doesn’t fill me with confidence.


----------



## Edwardoka (31 Dec 2020)

Apologies for the link to twitter, but if I'm understanding this correctly, there is NO scientific basis for the change to vaccination schedule, such a change is completely untested and Pfizer are coming out against it?


View: https://twitter.com/TheDA_UK/status/1344641247806435330


Someone please correct me. I'm really terribly keen on this not being the case.


----------



## midlife (31 Dec 2020)

No evidence, but loads of my NHS colleagues have had the first dose and have been given dates for the second dose..


----------



## guitarpete247 (1 Jan 2021)

When I looked on the Omni site last week I could expect the jab April or May. Today, after the Astra Zeneka news, its September or October. What has happened?


----------



## Blue Hills (1 Jan 2021)

Mum, mum's sister and her husband had the jab yesterday (semi rural lancs) to then be told the new 12 week plan.
Can't read the doc's letter above.
Was hoping to visit mum soon - may need to delay.
Off to see how effective a single jab is.
Yes I think this last minute announcement undermines trust.


----------



## Julia9054 (1 Jan 2021)

guitarpete247 said:


> When I looked on the Omni site last week I could expect the jab April or May. Today, after the Astra Zeneka news, its September or October. What has happened?


It would be good if the calculator could show when people will get their first jab.
That should now be earlier if the vaccination regime has changed


----------



## potsy (1 Jan 2021)

According to omni I will be fully vaccinated sometime between January and June 2022


----------



## vickster (1 Jan 2021)

potsy said:


> According to omni I will be fully vaccinated sometime between January and June 2022


Ditto but I’m not surprised being under 50 and meeting none of the occupation/health criteria


----------



## rualexander (1 Jan 2021)

That omni calculator is clearly nonsense.
It tells me there are up to 24 million people in front of me in the queue.
Assumes a vaccine uptake of 70%.
Therefore 17 million in front of me.
It assumes a rate of vaccination of 1 million per week.
So I should get first dose after 17 weeks which is around end of april, and second dose 12 weeks later around end of july.
And yet it says I can expect to receive two doses and be fully protected by between mid october and early december.
🤔


----------



## srw (1 Jan 2021)

rualexander said:


> So I should get first dose after 17 weeks which is around end of april, and second dose 12 weeks later around end of july.


Each person in front of you in the queue needs two doses. That doubles your wait.


----------



## Milzy (1 Jan 2021)

It’s going to take a year to roll out. We will have a good few big spikes before then. Also many vaccines won’t work. People think it’s going to be a better year but it will be just more of the same. Roll on 2022.


----------



## nickyboy (1 Jan 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> Apologies for the link to twitter, but if I'm understanding this correctly, there is NO scientific basis for the change to vaccination schedule, such a change is completely untested and Pfizer are coming out against it?
> 
> 
> View: https://twitter.com/TheDA_UK/status/1344641247806435330
> ...



Firstly, I'm not a specialist in this area so I am not able to independently corroborate the following:

1. Pfizer cannot support increasif the time from 1st to 2nd jab as their trial was only done on 21 days. They are heavily regulated in what they can and cannot say
2. Apparently it is about 80% effective after 1st jab, increases to 95% after second
3. We don't know if that 80% figure reduces in the extended period up to the 2nd jab. However other vaccines (such as Astra Zeneca) don't show fall off

The relatively slow vaccine roll out, coupled with the new variant which has higher transmissibility has left a choice; vaccinate say 5m to 95% or 10m to 80%. Not great if you were due the booster but now aren't. But if the immunity works like this it is a better solution for all.


----------



## Rocky (1 Jan 2021)

potsy said:


> According to omni I will be fully vaccinated sometime between January and June 2022


Is that because you are 14?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (1 Jan 2021)

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm sure that JVT said the other day that with the Oxford vaccine, during trials, that no one has had to be hospitalised after the first jab apart from two persons who already had the virus prior to inoculation.

If that's the case then the delay re second jab seems relatively low risk.


----------



## Rocky (1 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Please correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> I'm sure that JVT said the other day that with the Oxford vaccine, during trials, that no one has had to be hospitalised after the first jab apart from two persons who already had the virus prior to inoculation.
> 
> If that's the case then the delay re second jab seems relatively low risk.


I think you are right - I think the main issue is how long was the period between the two jabs in the clinical trials, whose data was submitted to the MHRA when they sought approval for the vaccine. In fact the Prof (my wife) tells me that a gap of 12 weeks gives the maximum immune response. I'm not sure if all the trials (for the different vaccines) show this.

So the main argument now against the change of plan, is that there are 900,000 people vaccinated with one jab who are expecting to get a second jab in the next 10 days.....and they'll no longer get one. Contacting them is going to make a lot of extra work for someone. Clinically, however, the delay seems to be a positive move and it will mean an extra 900,000 will get their first dose sooner.


----------



## C R (1 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> I think you are right - I think the main issue is how long was the period between the two jabs in the clinical trials, whose data was submitted to the MHRA when they sought approval for the vaccine. In fact the Prof (my wife) tells me that a gap of 12 weeks gives the maximum immune response. I'm not sure if all the trials (for the different vaccines) show this.
> 
> So the main argument now against the change of plan, is that there are 900,000 people vaccinated with one jab who are expecting to get a second jab in the next 10 days.....and they'll no longer get one. Contacting them is going to make a lot of extra work for someone. Clinically, however, the delay seems to be a positive move and it will mean an extra 900,000 will get their first dose sooner.


How was that optimal 12 week period determined, was that done separately from the phase 3 study used for the vaccine authorisation?


----------



## Rocky (1 Jan 2021)

C R said:


> How was that optimal 12 week period determined, was that done separately from the phase 3 study used for the vaccine authorisation?


I don’t know that I’m sorry. I’ve seen references to it in the FT and Times. I’m not on Twitter but the Prof tells me that a number of medical tweeters also have made the claim. If I find any stronger evidence then I’ll post a link.

I’m guessing in amongst the trial data, there is a subset of patients who were dosed with a 12 week gap although the majority had a shorter gap. It’s fascinating this stuff - isn’t it? Unless you are a confused 88 year old trying to work out when you next have an injection


----------



## brodiej (1 Jan 2021)

IaninSheffield said:


> GPs Some CC members have received their 1st dose; I'd be interested to hear how they feel about this.



I had my 1st dose on December 22nd and was due my 2nd on January 13th

I’m in the clinically extremely vulnerable group put in a Tier 4 area on Boxing Day so am having to shield.

I’m a doctor on the front line who was looking after COVID patients even up to Christmas Eve.

I don’t think people realise how bad the situation is in hospitals right now - it’s terrifying. With the new variant I don’t think even a full lockdown including schools would be enough to hold it. The vaccine needs to be given out as quickly as possible just to try to control the R number.

I don’t think they have a lot of choice other than to go with getting as many people their 1st dose ASAP. The new variant has changed everything and it’s out of control.

On a personal level I’ve got no idea what to do or what I’ll be advised. I’ve been told I have to work from home until 1 week after my 2nd dose. If that still stands I could be working from home for 12 weeks which would seem a bit ridiculous given the shortage of front line medics.

I wouldn’t be surprised if they find a way to give 2nd doses to shielding front line staff


----------



## Fab Foodie (1 Jan 2021)

I remember when ‘getting a dose’ was a bad thing....


----------



## IaninSheffield (1 Jan 2021)

brodiej said:


> I had my 1st dose on December 22nd and was due my 2nd on January 13th
> 
> I’m in the clinically extremely vulnerable group put in a Tier 4 area on Boxing Day so am having to shield.
> 
> ...


Thank you for your reply and setting out the situation so plainly. More importantly, thank you for what you have done, are doing and will do in the coming weeks and months. Please can I wish you well, both in your profession and personally in the year ahead.


----------



## srw (1 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> Is that because you are 14?


I'm 36 years older than 14, so I'm actually on the list, and it's telling me I'll be somewhere between December 2021 and January 2022. I'd guess that everyone not on the list will be told January to June 2022.


----------



## Rocky (1 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> I'm 36 years older than 14, so I'm actually on the list, and it's telling me I'll be somewhere between December 2021 and January 2022. I'd guess that everyone not on the list will be told January to June 2022.


I’m 64, the Prof is 61. Originally we’d thought we might get something in Feb but our gestimate now is April-May at the earliest. I thought we might get mates rates, as the Prof was at medical school with the head of the vaccines unit.....but apparently that doesn’t count.


----------



## screenman (1 Jan 2021)

Mr Witty has said there is a shortage that will last months.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (2 Jan 2021)

screenman said:


> Mr Witty has said there is a shortage that will last months.



Where did you read/hear that please? 

Missed that piece of news - I'm 64 and have been wondering when I'll be 'done'.


----------



## Mo1959 (2 Jan 2021)

They are now saying they think it will be ok to mix the vaccines so you could get one of each. Sorry, but this is really not filling me with confidence. I won’t be taking it this year when I’m not happy they really know what they are doing!


----------



## roubaixtuesday (2 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> They are now saying they think it will be ok to mix the vaccines so you could get one of each. Sorry, but this is really not filling me with confidence. I won’t be taking it this year when I’m not happy they really know what they are doing!



Fine by me. I'll have yours.


----------



## vickster (2 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Where did you read/hear that please?
> 
> Missed that piece of news - I'm 64 and have been wondering when I'll be 'done'.


It was a BBC online headline yesterday, seems to have gone now


----------



## Mo1959 (2 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Fine by me. I'll have yours.


Fill yer boots......or your arm.


----------



## vickster (2 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> They are now saying they think it will be ok to mix the vaccines so you could get one of each. Sorry, but this is really not filling me with confidence. I won’t be taking it this year when I’m not happy they really know what they are doing!


Who is saying?


----------



## Mo1959 (2 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Who is saying?


https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-mix-and-match-covid-19-vaccine-strategy-2021-1?r=US&IR=T


----------



## vickster (2 Jan 2021)

Sounds like a bunch of ifs and buts from a US website?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (2 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> They are now saying they think it will be ok to mix the vaccines so you could get one of each. Sorry, but this is really not filling me with confidence. I won’t be taking it this year when I’m not happy they really know what they are doing!



On a less flippant note, this policy is a response to what is now a catastrophic situation for UK public health. 

We're faced with an absolute emergency, and I don't think it's realised just how bad things are. 

The rate of increase of the new strain is now ahead of any feasible vaccination programme. Thus, any vaccinations, even if slightly less effective, will directly save lives. At a very rough guess, the proposed change in approach might save 100,000 souls. Perhaps many more if our health service is completely overwhelmed. It's that bad. 

Scientifically, all these vaccines work in a very similar way, by tricking the body into making the surface spike protein. So you can reasonably expect a second dose from any of the vaccines to boost immunity in a similar way. Of course that's not absolutely certain until tested. 

The protection in the short term from a single dose looks very good. The second dose is required more for long term immune memory. 

Alongside the vaccination, the govt needs to get out of denial and impose a strict national lockdown. The emergency measures on vaccination need an emergency response across the board to go with them. 

Finally, sorry that my first response was rather grumpy. My middle son has tested positive and the whole household is now apprehensively in isolation.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (2 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> On a less flippant note, this policy is a response to what is now a catastrophic situation for UK public health.
> 
> We're faced with an absolute emergency, and I don't think it's realised just how bad things are.
> 
> ...



Sorry to hear about your son.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (2 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Sorry to hear about your son.



He's asymptomatic, so all's well for now


----------



## SpokeyDokey (2 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> He's asymptomatic, so all's well for now



Good (relatively speaking) News.


----------



## MrGrumpy (2 Jan 2021)

I need to stay of Twitter , too many nut jobs. Who are convinced this virus is the great reset. Governments out to reduce the population of the world and that it’s all to do with Bill Gates  .


----------



## roubaixtuesday (2 Jan 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> I need to stay of Twitter , too many nut jobs. Who are convinced this virus is the great reset. Governments out to reduce the population of the world and that it’s all to do with Bill Gates  .



I know, idiots, right?

It's Bezos who's running the show. Gates is so last millennium.


----------



## Edwardoka (2 Jan 2021)

I'll be the first to admit that I have certain intellectual shortfalls, and I'm certainly neither an immunologist nor a virologist.

Hopefully someone on here knows better than I do, so I'm going to phrase it as a question rather than a hypothesis.

- Does messing with vaccination schedules and possibly mixing different ones risk a weakened - but stronger than if unvaccinated - immune response that doesn't quite eliminate the virus in hosts, and that those virus cells that survive the initial immune response would be more likely to be selected under Darwinian selection?

By doing this, are we this risking the rise of a new, more resistant strain?

I know that unlike antibiotics and bacteria, the vaccine doesn't directly attack the virus cells, it trains the immune response to do so, so I am happy to accept that the antibiotic resistance model doesn't apply and that I am probably wrong here.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (2 Jan 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> I'll be the first to admit that I have certain intellectual shortfalls, and I'm certainly neither an immunologist nor a virologist.
> 
> Hopefully someone on here knows better than I do, so I'm going to phrase it as a question rather than a hypothesis.
> 
> ...



You're right in principle, though nobody knows how likely this is in reality. 


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/kearnsneuro/status/1345150320205324288


Incidentally, viruses come as virions rather than cells. 

https://www.britannica.com/science/virion


----------



## SpokeyDokey (2 Jan 2021)

Distribution update of the Oxford variant from the Beeb, ready to go from Monday:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-55515831

Presumably we should start seeing a significant dent in the number of deaths each day quite quickly as the initial vaccination targets are groups that have suffered disproportionately more than others.


----------



## Rocky (2 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Distribution update of the Oxford variant from the Beeb, ready to go from Monday:
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-55515831
> 
> Presumably we should start seeing a significant dent in the number of deaths each day quite quickly as the initial vaccination targets are groups that have suffered disproportionately more than others.


That is very good news - nice to have some hope going into 2021.


----------



## kingrollo (2 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Distribution update of the Oxford variant from the Beeb, ready to go from Monday:
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-55515831
> 
> Presumably we should start seeing a significant dent in the number of deaths each day quite quickly as the initial vaccination targets are groups that have suffered disproportionately more than others.



Does your hope factor in the new variant (covid 20 !) - which has been reported to spread even under T4 restrictions.


----------



## Blue Hills (3 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-mix-and-match-covid-19-vaccine-strategy-2021-1?r=US&IR=T


there's a story currently on bbc text news that the British Medical Journal has asked the New York Times to correct a story claiming that the UK intends to mix and match.


----------



## C R (3 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> there's a story currently on bbc text news that the British Medical Journal has asked the New York Times to correct a story claiming that the UK intends to mix and match.


According to the graun, PHE defend the idea in exceptional circumstances, and say that studies are in progress:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...defend-contingency-plan-to-mix-covid-vaccines


----------



## Rocky (3 Jan 2021)

C R said:


> According to the graun, PHE defend the idea in exceptional circumstances, and say that studies are in progress:
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...defend-contingency-plan-to-mix-covid-vaccines


It's an interesting concept mixing two vaccines with different approaches to stimulating an immune response. One from mRNA to generate the Covid virus spike protein and one to insert the same protein into the body via a viral vector. I'm not an immunologist and last studied it 45 years ago as a biochemistry student, however it seems to me that both vaccines are aiming at the same effect - producing an immune response to the spike protein. I'm not sure if mixing them would really be effective but logic tells me that it just might.

I'm rather hoping we've got some immunologists on CC who could help us out.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (3 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Does your hope factor in the new variant (covid 20 !) - which has been reported to spread even under T4 restrictions.



Firstly the answer is no. 

Secondly; where is that being reported?


----------



## midlife (3 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Firstly the answer is no.
> 
> Secondly; where is that being reported?



Only anecdotal but here in Carlisle under tier 4 our cases are rising and the hospital has nearly the same beds occupied with Covid as April.


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Jan 2021)

Wonder if the elephant in the room is that we can't stop it, whatever we do ... 10 months of lockdown, masks, economy trashed, restrictions, destruction of liberty, schools and collages closed .. travel restrictions .... and not a blind bit of difference .... here we are ... highest daily infection rates ever .... Just a thought .... again.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (3 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Only anecdotal but here in Carlisle under tier 4 our cases are rising and the hospital has nearly the same beds occupied with Covid as April.



Sorry to hear that @midlife

Whilst I don't want to add to anecdotal info' as it really doesn't help the situation but I honestly believe that the T4 case rising scenario is probably more about people breaching the T4 rules as opposed to new variant Covid sidestepping them. Not sure that I have explained the last bit very well - sorry.

Following our Happy New Year phone calls to friends and family we are now up to 8 households who flagrantly put two fingers up to T4.  

Six of these are households, with very well educated occupants, who absolutely understand the risk modelling involved (as far as that has been revealed to the GBP) have just been utterly selfish and irresponsible.

The other two households, well I'm not sure that they even understand why the moon shines. Given up explaining the rationale to them - they either can't understand or just don't want their cosy (highly integrated, all need to talk to each other several times a day can't live without seeing each other most days) lifestyles disrupted.

Sorry if this sounds grumpy but I've 'had it' with a good number of people by now.


----------



## Rocky (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Wonder if the elephant in the room is that we can't stop it, whatever we do ... 10 months of lockdown, masks, economy trashed, restrictions, destruction of liberty, schools and collages closed .. travel restrictions .... and not a blind bit of difference .... here we are ... highest daily infection rates ever .... Just a thought .... again.


I'm not sure many people are taking the social distancing seriously enough. IMO mixed messages from politicians and some scientists are not helping. Just to back up my point, have a look at this graph....mostly populated by Oxford scientists' pronouncements......






Some countries have pretty much eradicated Covid (see NZ or Aus for example) but it takes leadership, clear messages and fast action. That way people don't die and the economy doesn't get trashed.


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> I'm not sure many people are taking the social distancing seriously enough. IMO mixed messages from politicians and some scientists are not helping. Just to back up my point, have a look at this graph....mostly populated by Oxford scientists' pronouncements......
> 
> View attachment 567069
> 
> Some countries have pretty much eradicated Covid (see NZ or Aus for example) but it takes leadership, clear messages and fast action. That way people don't die and the economy doesn't get trashed.



Well that was then and this is now, people have died and the economy is trashed ... so what next .... more and more of the same ? 
Continue with blaming the populace at every opportunity, railing on about people flouting rules .... 
Bottom line. The Rules don't work.


----------



## kingrollo (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Wonder if the elephant in the room is that we can't stop it, whatever we do ... 10 months of lockdown, masks, economy trashed, restrictions, destruction of liberty, schools and collages closed .. travel restrictions .... and not a blind bit of difference .... here we are ... highest daily infection rates ever .... Just a thought .... again.



I would disagree. Whilst they are in place lockdowns thus far have worked at slowing the spread. Not saying they aren't a massive pain in the ass , and as soon they are lifted the whole thing starts moving again.

The big unknown is the new variant and if T4 restrictions are enough to stop it.


----------



## Rocky (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Well that was then and this is now people have died and the economy is trashed ... so what next .... more and more of the same ?


We could maintain social distancing, wear masks, get vaccinated (when it's available), and cut all unnecessary travel. Some of us are doing that but many are ignoring it and making things worse for everyone, including themselves.


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> I would disagree. Whilst they are in place lockdowns thus far have worked at slowing the spread. Not saying they aren't a massive pain in the ass , and as soon they are lifted the whole thing starts moving again.
> 
> The big unknown is the new variant and if T4 restrictions are enough to stop it.


Massive pain in the ass ... fancy telling that to a room full of people who have lost their incomes, work , homes .... hope your a quick runner.


----------



## Pale Rider (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> The Rules don't work.



No rule works on its own.

What works is abiding by the rule.


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> We could maintain social distancing, wear masks, get vaccinated (when it's available), and cut all unnecessary travel. Some of us are doing that but many are ignoring it and making things worse for everyone, including themselves.


We're not ignoring it ... we go to work daily, we travel to support standby generation for hospitals, we work in the supermarkets you insist on staying open ..... we have followed the rules for nearly a year and it's getting worse.

Another thing to consider, vaccinating the vulnerable. 9 months ago their where X vulnerable, lots died.  A whole new wave of vulnerable have appeared as a result of NHS neglect. A second wave. We will be vaccinating the vulnerable until the sun goes out at this rate.


----------



## Pale Rider (3 Jan 2021)

In common with most reasonable people, I am dismayed that so many appear so welded to their precious Christmas and New Year parties, and general socialising, so as to put their lives and the lives of others at risk.

Which is a very long sentence for me, but not half as long as the sentence I would give the knackers who do it.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Well that was then and this is now, people have died and the economy is trashed ... so what next .... more and more of the same ?
> Continue with blaming the populace at every opportunity, railing on about people flouting rules ....
> Bottom line. *The Rules don't work.*



Seriously? Pretty much the entire global community of field related experts has got it wrong?

They (rules) work, it's the people that ignore them that impinge on their effectiveness.

Without responding with a 'look at all the deaths and the caseload numbers' reply can you explain why the rules don't work as you claim?

FWIW I'm as shocked and concerned at the economic damage thus far caused as you are but without any rules I'm pretty sure we'd have been sunk by now.


----------



## Rocky (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> We're not ignoring it ... we go to work daily, we travel to support standby generation for hospitals, we work in the supermarkets you insist on staying open ..... we have followed the rules for nearly a year and it's getting worse.
> 
> Another thing to consider, vaccinating the vulnerable. 9 months ago their where X vulnerable, lots died.  A whole new wave of vulnerable have appeared as a result of NHS neglect. A second wave. We will be vaccinating the vulnerable until the sun goes out at this rate.


I'm pleased you are following the rules. I am as well. However, a quick read of some of the posts on CC and today's newspapers will tell you many aren't. I have relatives who are front line doctors in the NHS - the service is overwhelmed with Covid patients (who are really sick). The William Harvey, Ashford, for example is operating at 120%. 1 in 2 of every patient has Covid and is very sick (and this has an effect on staff, many of whom are off sick themselves). It is not possible for the NHS to carry on as normal and treat other illnesses, however much we would like this to happen. The efforts going into vaccination are huge and will make a real difference but we still need to follow the rules.


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Seriously? Pretty much the entire global community of field related experts has got it wrong?
> 
> They (rules) work, it's the people that ignore them that impinge on their effectiveness.
> 
> ...


Of course we need rules ..... rules are important .... but rules that work, not slavishly following rules that patently don't ! Let one of these super paid experts come up with rules that work .... The Barrington lot maybe ?


----------



## Rocky (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Of course we need rules ..... rules are important .... but rules that work, not slavishly following rules that patently don't ! Let one of these super paid experts come up with rules that work .... The Barrington lot maybe ?


Barrington has been hugely discredited.....have a look at my graph for example.


----------



## Pale Rider (3 Jan 2021)

Warming to my theme, as a Spurs fan, the pic of the Tottenham players really annoyed me.

It might not have been so bad if, as three single lads in a foreign country at Christmas, they had met at one of their houses.

But oh no, they went to a party attended by at least 15 others - there was 18 on the pic - which should be 19 because someone held the camera.

Goodness how many others were there, we can't see the kitchen, and as we all know, there's always someone in the kitchen at parties.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Of course we need rules ..... rules are important .... but rules that work, not slavishly following rules that patently don't ! Let one of these super paid experts come up with rules that work .... The Barrington lot maybe ?



With all due respect you've not really answered my question.

Why don't the rules work? 

For example - why does a reduction in population mingling not help slowing down the spread of the virus?


----------



## kingrollo (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Massive pain in the ass ... fancy telling that to a room full of people who have lost their incomes, work , homes .... hope your a quick runner.



Ok - my point was that lockdowns work in slowing the spread. I'm not glossing over the economic pain caused to individuals that lose incomes, jobs, houses etc. I don't believe there are any good or easy options right now.


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> With all due respect you've not really answered my question.
> 
> Why don't the rules work?
> 
> For example - why does a reduction in population mingling not help slowing down the spread of the virus?


No idea ... but we've seen it dosn't .... whats your theory ?


----------



## kingrollo (3 Jan 2021)

If there were rules that "worked" we would have implemented then months ago along with the rest of the world.

We have rules that give us a flavour of a least bad scenario (depending on how quickly and hard you lockdown) .

We don't know of any rules that 100% stop people getting infected and dying. 

The blunt lockdowns we have are to ensure that anyone who needs treatment gets it - from what I read even that is looking fragile at the moment.

The alternative is not to lockdown and hope for the best. I don't think any govt could get away with that.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> No idea ... but we've seen it dosn't .... whats your theory ?



Again - you've avoided the question. Plus you've added in an unqualified statement.

I'll leave it there as, being modestly astute, I'm pretty sure that I'm not going to get a straight answer from you.

Off to watch the footy now and I'm hoping for at least one positive response today from beleaguered Chelsea.


----------



## srw (3 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> We don't know of any rules that 100% stop people getting infected and dying.


Yes we do. 

Make sure that you have identified 100% of infective people, keep them isolated from everyone else until they're no longer infective, and make sure that nobody else infective enters the population. 

It's basically what New Zealand and Australia did.


----------



## kingrollo (3 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Yes we do.
> 
> Make sure that you have identified 100% of infective people, keep them isolated from everyone else until they're no longer infective, and make sure that nobody else infective enters the population.
> 
> It's basically what New Zealand and Australia did.



Touche 

However with 50k infections per day - I think that ship has sadly sailed.


----------



## rualexander (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Wonder if the elephant in the room is that we can't stop it, whatever we do ... 10 months of lockdown, masks, economy trashed, restrictions, destruction of liberty, schools and collages closed .. travel restrictions .... and not a blind bit of difference .... here we are ... highest daily infection rates ever .... Just a thought .... again.


We didn't have 10 months of lockdown though did we?
We had barely 3 months of lockdown then started opening everything up again, encouraging everyone to go to restaurants, letting people fly all over to go on holidays, etc, etc.
A bit more lockdown back then and some strict travel restrictions/controls and everthing could have been quite different, have a look at the countries which dealt with it successfully so far.


----------



## Edwardoka (3 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Again - you've avoided the question. Plus you've added in an unqualified statement.
> 
> I'll leave it there as, being modestly astute, I'm pretty sure that I'm not going to get a straight answer from you.
> 
> Off to watch the footy now and I'm hoping for at least one positive response today from beleaguered Chelsea.


This is why you're a moderator. I would have been hurling insults like the Simpsons old lady hurling cats by now


----------



## PK99 (3 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Off to watch the footy now and I'm hoping for at least one positive response today from beleaguered Chelsea.



A forlorn hope, it would seem. 

34mins and 0:3...oh dear!


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Jan 2021)

Thats the great thing about free speech .... you don't have to like it or agree with it ... you just have to defend it ....


----------



## BoldonLad (3 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> It's an interesting concept mixing two vaccines with different approaches to stimulating an immune response. One from mRNA to generate the Covid virus spike protein and one to insert the same protein into the body via a viral vector. I'm not an immunologist and last studied it 45 years ago as a biochemistry student, however it seems to me that both vaccines are aiming at the same effect - producing an immune response to the spike protein. I'm not sure if mixing them would really be effective but logic tells me that it just might.
> 
> I'm rather hoping we've got some immunologists on CC who could help us out.



i thought Pfizer disagreed (that it was a good idea, indeed, that any change was a good idea, including the change to dosage interval).


----------



## MrGrumpy (3 Jan 2021)

rualexander said:


> We didn't have 10 months of lockdown though did we?
> We had barely 3 months of lockdown then started opening everything up again, encouraging everyone to go to restaurants, letting people fly all over to go on holidays, etc, etc.
> A bit more lockdown back then and some strict travel restrictions/controls and everthing could have been quite different, have a look at the countries which dealt with it successfully so far.


This is exactly why it’s a basket case now, NZ, AUS etc all managed to nip this quick by hitting hard. I’m sure the residents of these countries were pissed about that as well. However it’s worked out ok looking in . UK Gov along with some of EU brethren have f.... this up big time.


----------



## classic33 (3 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Wonder if the elephant in the room is that we can't stop it, whatever we do ... 10 months of lockdown, masks, economy trashed, restrictions, destruction of liberty, schools and collages closed .. travel restrictions .... and not a blind bit of difference .... here we are ... highest daily infection rates ever .... Just a thought .... again.


Simple. 
You'll just have to get used to it and embrace the new "normal".


----------



## mjr (4 Jan 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> UK Gov along with some of EU brethren have f.... this up big time.


And yet, the UK looks to have lost its grip on the second wave unlike most large EU countries:






Johnson has bet everything on the emergency authorisations of vaccines. Pray he wins this one.


----------



## Unkraut (4 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Wonder if the elephant in the room is that we can't stop it, whatever we do ... 10 months of lockdown, masks, economy trashed, restrictions, destruction of liberty, schools and collages closed .. travel restrictions .... and not a blind bit of difference


I've not heard anybody claim you can stop it. You can slow the spread thereby saving the healthcare system from being overwhelmed. 

If the efforts so far have not had the desired effect, then going by what I have heard and read about what is going on in England I would have to put it down to far to large a minority of the population simply ignoring the rules and encouraging the virus to spread. It's a very sociable virus, when people get together for what normally would be a nice convivial time, party, meal, pub, it takes advantage of this to spread.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> A forlorn hope, it would seem.
> 
> 34mins and 0:3...oh dear!



It was - a shocker for Frank & Co.


----------



## slowmotion (4 Jan 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> This is exactly why it’s a basket case now, NZ, AUS etc all managed to nip this quick by hitting hard. I’m sure the residents of these countries were pissed about that as well. However it’s worked out ok looking in . UK Gov along with some of EU brethren have f.... this up big time.


Perhaps a few thousand miles of Pacific Ocean might have had a teenie weenie bit to do with that? Hawaii's doing well too. Go figure.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Jan 2021)

slowmotion said:


> Perhaps a few thousand miles of Pacific Ocean might have had a teenie weenie bit to do with that? Hawaii's doing well too. Go figure.



And population density (approx' figures):

UK 68m people in 94 000 sq miles

NZ 5m people in 104 000 sq miles

Australia 26m people in 2 900 000 sq miles


----------



## winjim (4 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Yes we do.
> 
> Make sure that you have identified 100% of infective people, keep them isolated from everyone else until they're no longer infective, and make sure that nobody else infective enters the population.
> 
> It's basically what New Zealand and Australia did.


Yes but it was easy for them, being island nations and all.


----------



## screenman (4 Jan 2021)

Our local vaccination centre which is 20 miles away is getting 975 doses every week or two according to a letter written by somebody who works there, each person needs two doses and they have 90,000 people to cover.
Bit early in the morning for my brain but that reads like 4 years, hopefully things will speed up.


----------



## IaninSheffield (4 Jan 2021)

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/...atest&country=AUS~DEU~JPN~NZL~SGP~THA~GBR~VNM


slowmotion said:


> Perhaps a few thousand miles of Pacific Ocean might have had a teenie weenie bit to do with that? Hawaii's doing well too. Go figure.


True, but there are other less isolated countries which had better success rates. See above.


SpokeyDokey said:


> And population density (approx' figures):
> 
> UK 68m people in 94 000 sq miles
> 
> ...


And there are countries with similar population densities which outperformed us too. Notwithstanding the fact that population density is a blunt metric, given its unequal distribution. Wellington, Auckland, Melbourne and Sydney probably have not too dissimilar pop densities to Manchester, Leeds and Leicester.

Perhaps it is important to acknowledge the multifactorial nature of a country's success or otherwise in dealing with the pandemic?


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Jan 2021)

slowmotion said:


> Perhaps a few thousand miles of Pacific Ocean might have had a teenie weenie bit to do with that? Hawaii's doing well too. Go figure.


See Iain in Sheffields post above, they stopped travel in and out !! Effectively starved the virus !! We could have, should have but well the rest is history now..... Incompetent and indefensible.


----------



## screenman (4 Jan 2021)

Maybe this country is not full of people that will listen to advise, I am not a Boris fan but if he tells people to do something and they do not do it is it his fault.


----------



## srw (4 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Yes but it was easy for them, being island nations and all.


I wonder what this slate grey wet stuff is all around the borders of Great Britain?


----------



## winjim (4 Jan 2021)

screenman said:


> Maybe this country is not full of people that will listen to advise, I am not a Boris fan but if he tells people to do something and they do not do it is it his fault.


It is if he has set a bad example by not admonishing his own advisors when they do the same.


----------



## IaninSheffield (4 Jan 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> See Iain in Sheffields post above, they stopped travel in and out !! Effectively starved the virus !! We could have, should have but well the rest is history now..... Incompetent and indefensible.


I agree, although also concede that closing our borders would perhaps have been more challenging than it proved for our Oceanic Commonwealth cousins. However, there is surely no doubt that we did too little, too late, then later compounded that by easing travel restrictions prematurely?


----------



## winjim (4 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> I wonder what this slate grey wet stuff is all around the borders of Great Britain?


Is it significant? I hadn't realised.


----------



## PK99 (4 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Yes but it was easy for them, being island nations and all.



Absent an effective vaccine all such isolation achieves is delaying the inevitable or committing to a permanent total isolation from the rest if the world.


----------



## nickyboy (4 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> I wonder what this slate grey wet stuff is all around the borders of Great Britain?


Australia and New Zealand has zero road freight access. Closing borders for them means closing ports and airports. 
Closing borders for countries with road freight access (and economies fundamentally dependent on it) is impossible. 
So you could allow access to lorries...but there are loads of commercial vans etc delivering product from mainland Europe to UK too. So you have to stop those too.
Comparing countries to Australia and NZ is a false equivalence due to the isolated nature of their geography


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Australia and New Zealand has zero road freight access. Closing borders for them means closing ports and airports.
> Closing borders for countries with road freight access (and economies fundamentally dependent on it) is impossible.
> So you could allow access to lorries...but there are loads of commercial vans etc delivering product from mainland Europe to UK too. So you have to stop those too.
> Comparing countries to Australia and NZ is a false equivalence due to the isolated nature of their geography


but going to the Med for your summer holidays was ok, or going skiing was ok as well ??? Encouraging people to mix, lets all relax everything for Christmas etc . That`s what boils my piss . So yep we could have should have but once again incompetence in Government.


----------



## mjr (4 Jan 2021)

screenman said:


> Maybe this country is not full of people that will listen to advise, I am not a Boris fan but if he tells people to do something and they do not do it is it his fault.


If Boris hires someone to lead his team who says Whitehall departments are "useless as communication devices" and then leaves covid messaging to those departments, is people not listening Boris's fault? If he does not use any of the social media methods that won him a referendum, party leadership and a general election, is people not listening Boris's fault? Where the fark are the UK cat and dog memes or tiktok dances supporting the rules? Look at what government is putting out online - it's so dry, you wish you could stuff your rain-soaked shoes with it!

If Boris's failure to communicate effectively (and refusal to see this as important enough to use the sharp tools) isn't Boris's fault, then whose do you think it is?

Boris made his choice months ago. Bet everything on vaccines and try to hold his party together long enough to deploy them. Suppressing peaks was just a way to stop MPs taking so much heat over NHS collapses that too many would rebel.


----------



## PK99 (4 Jan 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> but going to the Med for your summer holidays was ok, or going skiing was ok as well ??? Encouraging people to mix, lets all relax everything for Christmas etc . That`s what boils my piss . So yep we could have should have but once again incompetence in Government.



You are indulging in frustrated whataboutery.

Closing UK borders is both orders of magnitude a more complex problem and a world disrupting event. 

Plus don't forget we had recently been given a choice of PM: Boris, Corbyn or Swinson. The public chose Boris big margin.

Plus another piece of data:

New Zealand has a food self-sufficiency rate of 185%, 
Australia 207%.
UK 64%
Germany 80%


----------



## pawl (4 Jan 2021)

IaninSheffield said:


> I agree, although also concede that closing our borders would perhaps have been more challenging than it proved for our Oceanic Commonwealth cousins. However, there is surely no doubt that we did too little, too late, then later compounded that by easing travel restrictions prematurely?




Horse and stab door springs to mind Heard Boris saying schools are safe He certainly looks after London Then he says he may after review the situation in a few weeks He’s going to wait to see what happens to the disease in schools As I said as he always waits Shuts the stable door after the horse has bolted


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> You are indulging in frustrated whataboutery.
> 
> Closing UK borders is both orders of magnitude a more complex problem and a world disrupting event.
> 
> ...



Goods importing/exporting I can understand , fair enough. However they did restrict travel within, is my understanding ? Its complex , but the stats for us look awful and that sits at Westminster. There should have been clear concise decisions made, but its a bloody mess


----------



## screenman (4 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> If Boris hires someone to lead his team who says Whitehall departments are "useless as communication devices" and then leaves covid messaging to those departments, is people not listening Boris's fault? If he does not use any of the social media methods that won him a referendum, party leadership and a general election, is people not listening Boris's fault? Where the fark are the UK cat and dog memes or tiktok dances supporting the rules? Look at what government is putting out online - it's so dry, you wish you could stuff your rain-soaked shoes with it!
> 
> If Boris's failure to communicate effectively (and refusal to see this as important enough to use the sharp tools) isn't Boris's fault, then whose do you think it is?
> 
> Boris made his choice months ago. Bet everything on vaccines and try to hold his party together long enough to deploy them. Suppressing peaks was just a way to stop MPs taking so much heat over NHS collapses that too many would rebel.



I think I need to re-write my post, I admit I had other things on my mind at the time. You are bang on correct in all you say, but I still feel there is a percentage of the population who would ignore the rules.


----------



## srw (4 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Closing borders for countries with road freight access (and economies fundamentally dependent on it) is impossible.


Anything is possible - see the Isle of Man. It might be incredibly difficult, but it's not impossible.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Jan 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Goods importing/exporting I can understand , fair enough. However they did restrict travel within, is my understanding ? Its complex , but the stats for us look awful and that sits at Westminster. There should have been clear concise decisions made, but its a bloody mess



Although filtering this on deaths/million of population in descending order, puts a number of European countries ahead of us, and a few behind us that are pretty much in the same ball park:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

Maybe wait until the dust settles before we hand out the plaudits & brickbats?


----------



## nickyboy (4 Jan 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Goods importing/exporting I can understand , fair enough. However they did restrict travel within, is my understanding ? Its complex , but the stats for us look awful and that sits at Westminster. There should have been clear concise decisions made, but its a bloody mess


The restriction of travel within Australia is much more straightforward due to two things:

1) State governance system means that, for example, WA can legally close its borders with other states
2) Enormous distances mean that the routes from one state to another are very limited (except perhaps Victoria to NSW) so are easily controlled

I'm not saying that the UK isn't a shitshow, but to try to compare it with Australia or NZ isn't realistic. In reality the UK has as permeable border as all the other W European countries, all of whom are struggling to a degree


----------



## mjr (4 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> In reality the UK has as permeable border as all the other W European countries, all of whom are struggling to a degree


"all of whom are struggling to a degree" but the UK has lost control in a way apparently unlike any of them:






BBC Radio 4 "How to Vaccinate the World" is on now and being quite pessimistic about mass vaccination as a strategy, pointing out that the Smallpox vaccine existed for 200 years before bringing it under control, Polio 70 years. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000qz3p


----------



## nickyboy (4 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> "all of whom are struggling to a degree" but the UK has lost control in a way apparently unlike any of them:
> View attachment 567197
> 
> 
> BBC Radio 4 "How to Vaccinate the World" is on now and being quite pessimistic about mass vaccination as a strategy, pointing out that the Smallpox vaccine existed for 200 years before bringing it under control, Polio 70 years. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000qz3p


Had the new variant (which I understand has a level of transmissibility somewhere between 52% and 70% more than the more widely distributed strain) originated in, say, France, rather than UK what do you think the graphs would look like?

My take on this is that the measures and adherence to the measures in UK and most other W European countries are broadly the same with some finessing around the edges. You can see that at the beginning of December most were on a broadly similar trajectory. It's only in the past 4 weeks that things have changed. Small differences in restrictive measures don't explain this. New variant does. In that respect, UK has just been unlucky. I'm expecting most other countries to follow suit over the next couple of months as vaccination levels will be nowhere near enough to prevent its spread


----------



## mjr (4 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Had the new variant (which I understand has a level of transmissibility somewhere between 52% and 70% more than the more widely distributed strain) originated in, say, France, rather than UK what do you think the graphs would look like?


Oh, slightly different, but the variant has been found in samples from Germany taken in November so it's not like it's not in the other countries too; and the more cases a country has, the more chance of a new variant originating there, so it's not like the UK's failure to get on top of cases after the first wave is unconnected to where the new variant started.



> My take on this is that the measures and adherence to the measures in UK and most other W European countries are broadly the same with some finessing around the edges.


That is not borne out by the FT lockdown monitor or international behaviour surveys which suggest that the UK measures have been weaker and also adhered to less, with a notable exception of working from home.



> You can see that at the beginning of December most were on a broadly similar trajectory. It's only in the past 4 weeks that things have changed. Small differences in restrictive measures don't explain this. New variant does. In that respect, UK has just been unlucky. I'm expecting most other countries to follow suit over the next couple of months as vaccination levels will be nowhere near enough to prevent its spread


I disagree with your interpretation because the "weaker lockdown" countries of the UK, Netherlands, Austria and Sweden have all fared worse than those imposing stricter measures earlier (Norway is a notable exception to this) but only time will tell - and maybe not even then, as vaccination strategies become another factor.


----------



## mjr (4 Jan 2021)

Graph of the weaker-measures European countries:






Austria finally brought its second wave under control with a lockdown (as did France after a big spike followed their long period of weaker measures than the UK). Norway is curious.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (4 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Had the new variant (which I understand has a level of transmissibility somewhere between 52% and 70% more than the more widely distributed strain) originated in, say, France, rather than UK what do you think the graphs would look like?
> 
> My take on this is that the measures and adherence to the measures in UK and most other W European countries are broadly the same with some finessing around the edges. You can see that at the beginning of December most were on a broadly similar trajectory. It's only in the past 4 weeks that things have changed. Small differences in restrictive measures don't explain this. New variant does. In that respect, UK has just been unlucky. I'm expecting most other countries to follow suit over the next couple of months as vaccination levels will be nowhere near enough to prevent its spread



Germany still has tighter restrictions than we do despite not yet suffering from the new variant. 

Germany has a third of the number of deaths we do.

The scientific community has been consistently calling for a stricter approach throughout the 2nd wave. 

All of this should have happened before the new variant became apparent, is incredibly urgent now it is and still we wait.


----------



## Pale Rider (4 Jan 2021)

Not much social distancing among Julian Assange's supporters outside tier four Old Bailey.

Perhaps they've all already had their first jab.


----------



## Rocky (4 Jan 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Not much social distancing among Julian Assange's supporters outside tier four Old Bailey.
> 
> Perhaps they've all already had their first jab.


It makes me weep when I see that.


----------



## Pale Rider (4 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> It makes me weep when I see that.



It's always a scrum outside a high profile hearing, but apart from anything else it's a poor public relations effort on behalf of the supporters.

The group pictures will obscure their message which, by the way, was let him out of Belmarsh.

If that's how his chums go on, he might be better off staying where he is.


----------



## PaulB (4 Jan 2021)

Some clear advice at last.


----------



## nickyboy (4 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Oh, slightly different, but the variant has been found in samples from Germany taken in November so it's not like it's not in the other countries too; and the more cases a country has, the more chance of a new variant originating there, so it's not like the UK's failure to get on top of cases after the first wave is unconnected to where the new variant started.


How do you come to the conclusion "slightly different"? Based on the graph you supplied, UK didn't have the highest cases/100,000 of any of the countries in the graph at any time in the September-November period. The mutation was identified in September and not before.

As nobody posting here is any more than an interested amateur with zero qualifications or experience in the subject here is my take; 

The mutation that created the new strain was a random event that occurred at a time when UK case rates were similar to other countries. It could just have easily occurred somewhere else, UK was unlucky. The graph you so handily provided shows that UK was doing similarly to other counties in the graph. So I suspect UK, without the mutation, would have continued to do similarly and some other poor unfortunate country would have a line on the graph like ours. It's easy to point to the December numbers which are terrible and use them to further whatever agenda people have. But it was a random event that caused it and it could just as easily be another country. All that matters is how we respond to this random event (and how other countries respond to it when their numbers start to go up as I suspect they will)


----------



## mjr (4 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> How do you come to the conclusion "slightly different"? Based on the graph you supplied, UK didn't have the highest cases/100,000 of any of the countries in the graph at any time in the September-November period. The mutation was identified in September and not before.


I reach that conclusion because there is no discernable significant change when the variant is thought to have first occurred here and there have been much bigger changes around the time of each control policy change; the same appears to be true in the other countries that I've examined fairly closely; so I do not think presence of the variant is the dominant difference between the UK and other nearby countries.

We might not have had the highest cases/100,000 of any of the countries in the "big countries" graph at any time in the September-November period, but we never had the lowest either and once the shoot sandwich of "unlocking for Christmas shopping" and vacci-mania hit, that high base level provided a springboard.



> As nobody posting here is any more than an interested amateur with zero qualifications or experience in the subject here is my take;


Yes, everyone here has zero qualifications or experience, except for those of us who are qualified in statistics and have worked with health data (although I didn't do it for long before detouring into IT and it was many years ago now). I sometimes make mistakes but often someone will point it out and I'll say I was wrong, narrow my conclusion, or say that we can't know which interpretation is correct and mine obviously isn't the only one.


----------



## nickyboy (4 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> I reach that conclusion because there is no discernable significant change when the variant is thought to have first occurred here and there have been much bigger changes around the time of each control policy change; the same appears to be true in the other countries that I've examined fairly closely; so I do not think presence of the variant is the dominant difference between the UK and other nearby countries.
> 
> We might not have had the highest cases/100,000 of any of the countries in the "big countries" graph at any time in the September-November period, but we never had the lowest either and once the shoot sandwich of "unlocking for Christmas shopping" and vacci-mania hit, that high base level provided a springboard.
> 
> ...


Well there's the thing. You're just an interested amateur, as am I

You think the new variant wasn't the driver behind the increase in cases, I think it was

You've presented no reviewed statistical analysis to back up your claim, neither have I

Perhaps this shows what a waste of time talking about this really is. I don't find it cathartic, some clearly do.


----------



## mjr (4 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Well there's the thing. You're just an interested amateur, as am I


So now you drop the false accusation that I have "zero qualifications or experience". Thank you at least for that!



nickyboy said:


> You've presented no reviewed statistical analysis to back up your claim, neither have I


If I run the UK daily cases series through a time series analysis and show how well bigger step changes correlate to policy change dates plus lag rather than the emergence of the new variant, then secured one or more reviews of that, why would that convince you?


----------



## midlife (4 Jan 2021)

Still not able to book a COVID vaccine, the database for phone numbers to send codes is out of date... most of my workmates have been vaccinated or being done this week. I’m the oldest in the building and looking like the last to be done.


----------



## nickyboy (4 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> So now you drop the false accusation that I have "zero qualifications or experience". Thank you at least for that!
> 
> 
> If I run the UK daily cases series through a time series analysis and show how well bigger step changes correlate to policy change dates plus lag rather than the emergence of the new variant, then secured one or more reviews of that, why would that convince you?


If you have qualifications and experience I apologise


----------



## Edwardoka (4 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Is it significant? I hadn't realised.


You are Dominic Raab AICMFP


----------



## winjim (4 Jan 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> You are Dominic Raab AICMFP


Raaaaaaaaaaab


----------



## winjim (4 Jan 2021)

I now have the code to unblind myself should I so wish, although the study group would rather I waited until I am offered a vaccine through a different channel, so I'll probably hold on for now. My hunch is that the first dose was the real deal, not sure about the second. My colleague has unblinded himself and had the control which makes sense as he did test positive albeit asymptomatically, shortly after we got the booster.

The suspense though...


----------



## Adam4868 (5 Jan 2021)

Took my dad for his second injection this afternoon.Glad that's done,I was maybe thinking they weren't doing the second one.


----------



## mjr (6 Jan 2021)

EU approves Moderna vaccine (not yet approved in the UK) while Germany's health minister says all Germans will be offered a vaccine by summer. https://apnews.com/article/eu-authorizes-moderna-vaccine-925e91f8de26c517d18fd6b99458a132


----------



## midlife (6 Jan 2021)

Having tried for 3 weeks to book a covid vaccine via work the system has crashed......


----------



## accountantpete (7 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> EU approves Moderna vaccine (not yet approved in the UK) while Germany's health minister says all Germans will be offered a vaccine by summer. https://apnews.com/article/eu-authorizes-moderna-vaccine-925e91f8de26c517d18fd6b99458a132



The UK hasn't approved the Moderna vaccine because the first batch bought won't be available until the Spring. The thinking was that it was similar to the Pfizer and they were spreading out the risk/delivery times when ordering.

The USA funded most of the research on the Moderna vaccine and has first dibs. I'm not sure what agreement the EU has on the supply.


----------



## midlife (7 Jan 2021)

Well, that's the first Pfizer jab in the arm for me, I will be contacted for the second jab in 12 weeks. I used to think the only thing you got when born in the 50's was cheap car insurance....


----------



## classic33 (7 Jan 2021)

They seem to be cancelling the second injection round these parts. People that should have been getting the second injection are being told it's cancelled, and wait until they hear from their doctors(6 - 8 weeks from now).


----------



## mjr (8 Jan 2021)

I've heard from one friend they had their second dose this week.

On the news today, it said the number of vaccine centres is being doubled next week, with some on the north Norfolk coast at last, in an area with a worrying mix of retirees and London second-homers.


----------



## MrGrumpy (8 Jan 2021)

Mate at work who works in a care home on his days off got his second jab in Tues but was told that was changing from Wednesday abs moving to 12 weeks.


----------



## IaninSheffield (8 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> They seem to be cancelling the second injection round these parts. People that should have been getting the second injection are being told it's cancelled, and wait until they hear from their doctors(6 - 8 weeks from now).


Postponing rather than 'cancelling'?


----------



## mikeIow (8 Jan 2021)

Good to hear people here getting their jab, & sometimes their second.
We are awaiting the MIL to get hers: 88, clinically vulnerable, but Nottinghamshire appear to be very slow with getting the vaccine out: nothing yet 

I really wish that SAGE and the Government did *not* postpone the second dose beyond the 3 weeks Pfizer say it needs.
I couldn’t believe the SAGE scientist on the BBCQT show defending the decision.
From the link above: “Pfizer said their vaccine was not designed to be used in two doses 12 weeks apart, adding that there was no data to suggest the first shot continued to be effective after 21 days.”
WHO agree.

MAYBE it will all be fine.....
....or MAYBE it will dramatically reduce the impact of the vaccine, & in 6-12 weeks we could find cases of people who had the first shot getting COVID. 
I hope I’m wrong, but it does royally p*ss me off when our Great Leaders talk about “following the science”, yet they *and SAGE* are clearly explicitly ignoring the science on this very important point, just in order to be able to say “we jabbed more people”
Good luck all.


----------



## Julia9054 (8 Jan 2021)

Father in law aged 89 has had no word yet about his vaccine - we think.
He lives in retirement flats and several other residents have had theirs. He said he had a phone call from someone asking if he was ok but didn't know what it was about. We can't get through to his GP surgery to find out if it was them. He was told to isolate by test and trace. Does anyone know if it might have been them that rung him?


----------



## midlife (8 Jan 2021)

Not sure what happened there...


----------



## midlife (8 Jan 2021)

Aside from all our routine outpatient clinics canceled from this morning, our orthodontic department is being repurposed as a vaccination hub. I guess there is not enough capacity at GP surgeries.


----------



## IaninSheffield (8 Jan 2021)

mikeIow said:


> *...and SAGE* are clearly explicitly ignoring the science on this very important point, just in order to be able to say “we jabbed more people”


Based on the thinking of the JCVI, I suspect they would argue otherwise:
"...the JCVI highlighted that the Moderna vaccine, which like the Pfizer jab is based on mRNA technology, does have data to support high efficacy up to '108 days after the first dose'.

The JCVI said: 'There is currently no strong evidence to expect that the immune response from the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine would differ substantially from the AstraZeneca and Moderna vaccines.'"

An understandably cynical view of politicians' intentions might indeed be that they want to say “we jabbed more people”, but the scientific argument is more along the lines of 
"a classic public health approach centred on doing as much good for as many people in the shortest possible timeframe, within the available vaccine supplies, against a background of immediate disease activity"

As the article also says, some doctors have expressed concerns with this change, as outlined in this oped piece at the BMJ.

When I wondered about these matters on another thread, @brodiej provided some helpful perspective.


----------



## Joey Shabadoo (8 Jan 2021)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-55577426


> *A fraudster claiming to work for the NHS injected a 92-year-old woman with a fake Covid-19 vaccine, City of London Police has said.*
> Detectives are hunting the man who charged the victim in Surbiton, south-west London, £160.



Words ... I have none.


----------



## classic33 (8 Jan 2021)

IaninSheffield said:


> Postponing rather than 'cancelling'?


Well they're telling people who should have been getting the second jab "You'll be contacted when we're ready for you". After telling them to make sure they keep the date given, for the second jab, clear.


----------



## lane (8 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Well they're telling people who should have been getting the second jab "You'll be contacted when we're ready for you". After telling them to make sure they keep the date given, for the second jab, clear.



My Dad got his jab on Wednesday this week. They booked his second jab at the same time exactly 12 weeks later.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (8 Jan 2021)

mikeIow said:


> Good to hear people here getting their jab, & sometimes their second.
> We are awaiting the MIL to get hers: 88, clinically vulnerable, but Nottinghamshire appear to be very slow with getting the vaccine out: nothing yet
> 
> I really wish that SAGE and the Government did *not* postpone the second dose beyond the 3 weeks Pfizer say it needs.
> ...



I don't think they are ignoring the science, they are just adapting the approach to ensure that as many people as possible get at least the first jab in as quickly as possible. JVT explained the simple maths a couple of press conferences back.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (8 Jan 2021)

Excellent and reassuring explanation of the logistics process from Brigadier Prosser last night.

And good to see the entire country getting mobilised behind the effort.

Lots of positivity from people I have spoken to over the last week or so re the vaccination effort.


----------



## classic33 (8 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> My Dad got his jab on Wednesday this week. They booked his second jab at the same time exactly 12 weeks later.


The one's I know were all told 21 days. Since the start of this week/year they've been informed that their appointement has been cancelled and that they'll be contacted within 6 - 8 weeks. No date given, just that they'll be contacted.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (8 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> The one's I know were all told 21 days. Since the start of this week/year they've been informed that their appointement has been cancelled and that they'll be contacted within 6 - 8 weeks. No date given, just that they'll be contacted.



Same with an over 80's couple that we know here - they are both happy with the process change and are onboard with the delay decision.


----------



## lane (8 Jan 2021)

I think the difference is between those that were vaccinated before the change and those like my dad who have been vaccinated after the change.


----------



## BoldonLad (8 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I don't think they are ignoring the science, they are just adapting the approach to ensure that as many people as possible get at least the first jab in as quickly as possible. JVT explained the simple maths a couple of press conferences back.



On reading this, I thought, "such a reasonable spot needs to be reported", then, I noticed, you ARE a moderator 

I did watch (and listen to) the JVT explanation, seemed reasonable to me.


----------



## classic33 (8 Jan 2021)

All that I know who've had their appointment for the second cancelled, should have received their second jab this week.

Some had heard of the 12 week wait, but they've been given 6 - 8 weeks before they'll be contacted. No new appointments having been made as yet.


----------



## vickster (8 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> All that I know who've had their appointment for the second cancelled, should have received their second jab this week.
> 
> Some had heard of the 12 week wait, but they've been given 6 - 8 weeks before they'll be contacted. No new appointments having been made as yet.


What’s the issue? The change to 12 weeks has been well publicised? They’ll get their second appointment confirmed 4-6 weeks before the jab at 12 weeks. There are many more vaccination centres coming on stream. It’s possible the second jab may be elsewhere and that’s simply yet to be confirmed and there’s no need to confirm more than 4-6 weeks in advance. Not like anyone should be going anywhere which may render them unavailable in a given week


----------



## winjim (8 Jan 2021)

AIUI they're not making second appointments due to the admin workload involved in unbooking and rebooking all the first appointments.


----------



## classic33 (8 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> What’s the issue? The change to 12 weeks has been well publicised? They’ll get their second appointment confirmed 4-6 weeks before the jab at 12 weeks. There are many more vaccination centres coming on stream. It’s possible the second jab may be elsewhere and that’s simply yet to be confirmed and there’s no need to confirm more than 4-6 weeks in advance. Not like anyone should be going anywhere which may render them unavailable in a given week


I think the issue is, they were given a date on which the second "had" to be done. Then when that time arrived/got close, they were told it's not going to happen.


----------



## lane (8 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> I think the issue is, they were given a date on which the second "had" to be done. Then when that time arrived/got close, they were told it's not going to happen.



The policy has changed. I think this will inevitably cause some people anxiety and not everyone agrees with the change but it is what it is.


----------



## winjim (8 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> I think the issue is, they were given a date on which the second "had" to be done. Then when that time arrived/got close, they were told it's not going to happen.


The concern with this is that it potentially violates informed consent as well as undermining patient confidence and therefore possibly compliance.


----------



## rualexander (8 Jan 2021)

mikeIow said:


> .....
> From the link above: “Pfizer said their vaccine was not designed to be used in two doses 12 weeks apart, adding that there was no data to suggest the first shot continued to be effective after 21 days.”
> WHO agree.
> 
> ...



True, Pfizer have to say that though because that's the data they have and that's their schedule.
But in reality, efficacy will not suddenly stop after 21 days.
The immune system has been exposed to the spike protein and has learnt to recognise and react to it.
It may mean that further boosters beyond the 12 week one will also be required though, but that can be dealt with further down the track. 
Further doses may be necessary anyway to deal with future variants.
It does seem sensible in the face of the current emergency situation to get the first dose to as many as possible as quickly as possible.


----------



## nickyboy (8 Jan 2021)

MiL had first Pfizer vaccination and had a date later in Jan for booster. She was expecting to be told it would be delayed 

Surprised to be told her booster is still going ahead on original schedule. She was told that they had decided that it was "administratively too complex" to postpone boosters and replace these slots with people further down the priority list. Apparently they said they were concerned that people may not come forward and they would be left with empty slots. Sounds far fetched to me.

I'm really surprised at this apparent level of autonomy that the vaccination centre has. Doing what they are doing does make me question their motivation in not following the policy of expanding the first vaccination cohort


----------



## Pale Rider (8 Jan 2021)

I've received my latest long email about Covid from that well known double act, Hancock and Jenrick.

Lots about general precautions, but they also confirm I should receive a jab by February 18.

Which is what I had gathered as someone who is clinically extremely vulnerable, but not in coffin dodger territory.

I shall have to continue to be a patient patient.


----------



## accountantpete (8 Jan 2021)

Moderna vaccine now approved in UK - although production is in USA and European production won't start until the Spring

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55586410


----------



## SpokeyDokey (8 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Moderna vaccine now approved in UK - although production is in USA and European production won't start until the Spring
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55586410



Good news there. 

Also the note that we have now cleared 1.5 million (mainly) first jabs.

Good effort thus far by everyone involved.


----------



## C R (8 Jan 2021)

More good news on the vaccine front, as it appears that the Pfizer vaccine works against the variants of the virus.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...cts-against-new-covid-variants-study-suggests


----------



## BoldonLad (8 Jan 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I've received my latest long email about Covid from that well known double act, Hancock and Jenrick.
> 
> Lots about general precautions, but they also confirm I should receive a jab by February 18.
> 
> ...



My Brother-in-Law had his first jab today (age 77), not sure which vaccine. His wife (also 77) is scheduled for tomorrow (interestingly, this means they must be operating on Saturdays).

I assume they have been selected by age, rather than clinical vulnerability. They do both have health issues, but, nothing spectacular, given their age.

We are 73, and, I doubt any additional vulnerability, factors apply to us, so, as you say, waiting patiently (that is a slight exaggeration in the case of Mrs @BoldonLad, she doesn't like waiting  ).


----------



## IanSmithCSE (8 Jan 2021)

Good afternoon,



winjim said:


> ....... potentially violates informed consent......



Do you think that informed consent has truly been given by a large percentage of those receiving the vaccination?

As I understand it informed consent requires an absence of coercion and as far as I can see there is a great deal of coercion going on at the moment. 

Although the public statements from the Government have never stated or implied that having the vaccine is compulsory it would be easy to argue that the way that it is being presented and reported makes it seem that way.

If you look are the templates for the consent form and covering letter at
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-consent-form-and-letter-for-adults

They have paragraphs such as

*Once we have your consent, we will schedule the vaccination appointments. Please note two doses of the vaccine are be required.

Please confirm your consent by returning the attached form to a member of staff.

By consenting you will be playing your part in reducing your risk of catching and spreading COVID-19.*

The consent form has two distinct areas to sign, one confirming and one withholding consent. Even the fact that you are being requested to respond to an unsolicited letter from the Government declining the vaccine and giving your reason could easily be argued as coercion.

I am not trying to be funny and I can see why many people will regard this as absurd today, but if the vaccines work as well as hoped I can seriously see a rash of claims companies offering, "Did you consent to the COVID vaccination or was it forced on you? Call 0800 -------- to see if you are eligible for compensation.

With the above slogan I am trying to be diplomatic and have toned down the sales pitch, if you think about it for a while you may be able to see how far the idea could be taken.

This suggests that consent collection either needs to be considered in this context or legislation passed stating that informed consent is defined as -----.

The example consent form even has the statement *I want to receive the full course of COVID-19 vaccination *just above the name, date and signature box. Ouch, that's nasty if you plan to change to a partial course.

I suspect that most remember the PPI claims and once the legit claims had been made the claims companies went trawling for anybody would claim. More recently a company called Amigo Loans has gotten into trouble, they offered loans to individuals as long as that individual could come up with a guarantor[1], someone who could make the payments if the borrower couldn't.

There is a possible goldmine for the compensation industry and now would seem to be a good time to consider it, before it is too late.

Bye

Ian

[1] Two adults, generally one with a terrible credit history and one with a good history agreed to take out a loan, then quite a few months ago the FCA started a process that has pretty close to bankrupted Amigo on the grounds that the people taking out the loans shouldn't have been given them. 

Amigo did have a different approach to many lenders in that the guarantor was required to step in as soon as one payment was missed rather than allowing an unmanageable backlog to build up.

But the basic principle was that two individuals who generally didn't even live together weren't competent to ask for the loan and accept it.


----------



## the snail (8 Jan 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> *Once we have your consent, we will schedule the vaccination appointments. Please note two doses of the vaccine are be required.
> 
> Please confirm your consent by returning the attached form to a member of staff.
> 
> By consenting you will be playing your part in reducing your risk of catching and spreading COVID-19.*


I don't see any element of coersion, you're asked for consent in writing, you don't have to agree, you can change your mind at any point. There won't be any sanction if you refuse, or simply don't turn upfor your appointment - same as for pretty much any treatment. There will be plenty of takers for your dose if you don't want it.


----------



## IanSmithCSE (8 Jan 2021)

Good evening,



the snail said:


> I don't see any element of coersion, you're asked for consent in writing, you don't have to agree, you can change your mind at any point. There won't be any sanction if you refuse, or simply don't turn upfor your appointment - same as for pretty much any treatment. There will be plenty of takers for your dose if you don't want it.



The problem with the _You don't have to agree _argument is that coercion is recognised in so many areas of life that it is not seen as overriding the coercion.

I have posted the full covering letter below, I appreciate that this is a template and the actual ones used may be different but why I think that the risk is much much higher that with normal consent forms is that for many recipients this is an unsolicited request.

The recipient won't have been to the doctor with a complaint related to COVID or possibly related to COVID or even to the doctor at all in recent past, although it does seem reasonable to assume that anyone capable of giving consent would be expecting a letter on this subject around this time.

I have included the whole example letter below and added bold stressing the phrases that I see as at risk of being deemed coercive as extracting specific sentences as I did earlier may have lose overall impact.

I understand that it is implicit that asking for consent means that recipient doesn't have to give it, but notice the paragraph that starts with *Once we have your consent.*

If you are arguing coercion then that the fact that that paragraph is one sentence long suggests that your consent is expected especially as it could easily have said *If we have your consent. *

This one sentence paragraph is followed by another one sentence paragraph, starting with *Please confirm your consent*, again suggesting that consent is expected.

To repeat the point, this is an unsolicited letter sent to healthy people who are not undergoing treatment.

Comparing the letter below with https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...emplate-for-at-risk-patients-and-their-carers which is the annual flu reminder I see a very different tone.

So if your business is a "compensation culture one" then the argument that n hundred thousand people have had a COVID vaccine without their consent becomes a legal argument worth considering.

There may be no need to show injury, which would likely be a dead end as there is no reason to expect there to be any, the principle that consent is required is already established.

As mentioned in another post I am not registered with a GP and haven't been since I was at school and apart from one recent hospitalization based on assumed consent; I was unconscious, bleeding from the head and lying in the middle of a road so I don't resent the assumption, I have never been into hospital as a patient.

This is important as it is very easy to assume that everyone automatically trusts the medical system, visits the doctor frequently and that consent is almost automatically given, this is not the case.

You only need 50,000 people saying they were coerced into taking a treatment and £1,000 compensation per person to make this a nice 6 months works for a legal team. As the defendants would be governments it is easy to see that a settlement with tax payer's money would be a quick and easy solution.

I am not arguing that this is a good or bad thing only that it is predictable that it might happen.

edit: _be plenty of takers for your dose if you don't want it.
I am not sure if this was a generic or specific comment, but I did try recently to register with a GP as I didn't want to infect others who couldn't be vaccinated but the system is far too difficult to bother with. 
Me: Hello I haven't been registered with a GP since around 1977,
Surgery: Okay, no problem, who was your last GP?
Me: XYZ In Town
Surgery: We can't find any records.
Me: Okay no problem, there is nothing to find.
Surgery: We can't register you as we can't find any records. 
Me: That's not surprising there is nothing to find.
Surgery: We can't register you as we can't find any records. 
Me: _Lost Interest and went for a pint_._

Bye

Ian


Dear <Name>

COVID-19 Vaccination for Eligible Adults

I would like to inform you that we will soon be making COVID-19 vaccinations available to adults identified as being at *highest risk *of catching the disease and of *suffering serious complication or dying* from COVID-19. I would like to ask if you wish to give your consent to be vaccinated.

This vaccination will be free of charge and our highest priority is delivering the vaccines to eligible people as soon as the vaccine is available.

Through vaccination of those at *highest risk *we aim to help protect individuals from becoming *unwell with or dying* from COVID-19 disease.

Information about COVID-19 vaccines is available at: www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-vaccine

For women of childbearing age, please read the detailed guidance at: www.nhs.uk/covidvaccination

Indications are that some vaccine recipients may experience a painful heavy arm where they had the injection and may feel tired or have a mild fever for a couple of days. These are common side effects following vaccination. If required paracetamol may help to reduce these effects and keep you as comfortable as possible following vaccination. Please read the product information for more details on the vaccine and possible side effects by searching Coronavirus Yellow Card. You can also report suspected side effects on the same website or by downloading the Yellow Card app.

During the vaccination delivery we will maintain the range of measures we have in place to keep you safe from COVID-19. Staff giving the vaccine will be wearing personal protective equipment and will abide by all our cleaning and disinfection requirements.

*Once we have your consent,* we will schedule the vaccination appointments. Please note two doses of the vaccine are be required.

*Please confirm your consent* by returning the attached form to a member of staff.

By consenting you will be playing your part in reducing your risk of catching and* spreading* COVID-19.

Best wishes,


*<Name>*
<Job title>
<Organisation>


----------



## kingrollo (8 Jan 2021)

Would the result of a covid test be skewed if you had the vaccine ?


----------



## mjr (8 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Excellent and reassuring explanation of the logistics process from Brigadier Prosser last night.


He's changed from when he was knocking houses down, hasn't he?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvtPglw5ftk




> Lots of positivity from people I have spoken to over the last week or so re the vaccination effort.


Of course there is! They think it's all going to be back to normal by mid-February and we don't need to keep our distance any more!


----------



## SpokeyDokey (8 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> He's changed from when he was knocking houses down, hasn't he?
> 
> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvtPglw5ftk
> 
> ...





Who are 'they' ? I haven't spoken to anyone who thinks that tbh.

The positiveness of the people I have spoken to is more deeply rooted in their faith that the vaccination program will ultimately lead to better future somewhat further down the track than mid-February. Optimistic realists I guess you could call them.

The only downer appears to be the fear that the rule-breakers are not helping to solve the situation quickly - but that's another matter.


----------



## srw (8 Jan 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> for many recipients this is an unsolicited request.


Only for those who have been living under a stone for the last nine months. 

I can't quite work out your complaint here.


----------



## mjr (8 Jan 2021)

UK approves the "other" mRNA vaccine from Moderna: Vaccines: EU could approve Oxford/AstraZeneca by end of January, UK gives green light to Moderna – https://www.thejournal.ie/eu-potential-astrazeneca-vaccine-approval-5319782-Jan2021/


----------



## accountantpete (8 Jan 2021)

The next UK vaccine is likely to be the Novavax candidate. Again late spring - but it's interesting in that their 3rd stage trial is ongoing and includes main exposure to the New Variant so they should have a good handle on how well that is going.


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

Considering the level of justifiable criticism of the UK government on CC in terms of its overall response to the pandemic it's interesting that there is little recognition of how well it is doing regarding vaccinations

No major hiccups in a complex rollout and vaccination levels are fourth highest in the world. Currently 3x-4x that of our European neighbours

It's also interesting that UK has one of the highest public acceptance rates for vaccination. China is highest at 80% but UK is v close behind. Bizzarely France is at 40% suggesting extreme scepticism of the vaccine. Wonder why a country not so disimmilar from other developed western economies can have such a low potential take up


----------



## Landsurfer (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Considering the level of justifiable criticism of the UK government on CC in terms of its overall response to the pandemic it's interesting that there is little recognition of how well it is doing regarding vaccinations
> 
> No major hiccups in a complex rollout and vaccination levels are fourth highest in the world. Currently 3x-4x that of our European neighbours
> 
> It's also interesting that UK has one of the highest public acceptance rates for vaccination. China is highest at 80% but UK is v close behind. Bizzarely France is at 40% suggesting extreme scepticism of the vaccine. Wonder why a country not so disimmilar from other developed western economies can have such a low potential take up


Report in the press this morning that 1 in 5 people contacted to have their c-19 jab refuse it .....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9127859/One-medic-reveals-reality-rhetoric.html


----------



## vickster (9 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Report in the press this morning that 1 in 5 people contacted to have their c-19 jab refuse it .....
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9127859/One-medic-reveals-reality-rhetoric.html


That’ll be 80% acceptance then as stated above  Which is very high


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> That’ll be 80% acceptance then as stated above  Which is very high


Yup, according to the IPSOS survey, 80% is highest acceptance in all countries surveyed. UK was 77%. France is a real outlier which I don't understand


----------



## Landsurfer (9 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> That’ll be 80% acceptance then as stated above  Which is very high


Do the maths Vickster ... thats 1 in 5 of the over 80's not the population ....


----------



## vickster (9 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Do the maths Vickster ... thats 1 in 5 of the over 80's not the population ....


You didn’t say over 80s and I don’t read Daily Mail links I’m afraid on principle


----------



## Landsurfer (9 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> You didn’t say over 80s and I don’t read Daily Mail links I’m afraid on principle


Your missing out on some top class drivel ... The article is a 3 week diary of a Vaccination centre nurse .. I'm sure your aware there is a priority list for Vaccine, the over 80's being one of the current target groups ... worth a read, even if, like me, you regard the DM as a bit of a comic ...


----------



## C R (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Yup, according to the IPSOS survey, 80% is highest acceptance in all countries surveyed. UK was 77%. France is a real outlier which I don't understand


Homeopathy and other alternative woo are very popular in France and also Germany, often offered alongside proper medicine. I could never understand why, but might explain the low vaccine acceptance.


----------



## vickster (9 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Your missing out on some top class drivel ... The article is a 3 week diary of a Vaccination centre nurse .. I'm sure your aware there is a priority list for Vaccine, the over 80's being one of the current target groups ... worth a read, even if, like me, you regard the DM as a bit of a comic ...


There’s enough drivel on CycleChat without having to resort to the Daily Mail


----------



## vickster (9 Jan 2021)

C R said:


> Homeopathy and other alternative woo are very popular in France and also Germany, often offered alongside proper medicine. I could never understand why, but might explain the low vaccine acceptance.


Chinese Medicine is also very popular in China, so presumably something else drives those high rates (a sense at least of compulsion?)


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

Perhaps with such wild variations in both speed of vaccination rollout and public take up it is possible to make some wild guesstimates as to how the tail end of the pandemic may play out?

For example, France appears to be slower rolling out than most and has lowest take up of those surveyed. Countries like UK are the opposite. Perhaps this will impact on how the pandemic ends in those countries


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> No major hiccups in a complex rollout and vaccination levels are fourth highest in the world. Currently 3x-4x that of our European neighbours



That is a generous view of the statistics.

Based on an 80% take-up rate, in order to meet the government's targets we have to inject 9.4 million doses within the next five weeks. Up to a week ago we had injected 1.1 million. Over the last week of that period we managed fewer than a third of a million. Over the following six weeks, including the one just gone, we need to inject 1.4 million per week, over four times as many as the latest stats available. That's an operationally very difficult problem to solve using the central dictat tools we're trying to impose on a health system that is run very locally.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> For example, France appears to be slower rolling out than most and has lowest take up of those surveyed. Countries like UK are the opposite. Perhaps this will impact on


It's far too early to tell. 

Let's talk again in a couple of months when there is some robust data rather than political spin.


----------



## Unkraut (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Considering the level of justifiable criticism of the UK government on CC in terms of its overall response to the pandemic it's interesting that there is little recognition of how well it is doing regarding vaccinations
> 
> No major hiccups in a complex rollout and vaccination levels are fourth highest in the world. Currently 3x-4x that of our European neighbours


I noticed this too. It's easy to assume that Britain gets everything wrong because of its inept government.

The UK vaccination programme has been commented on here, partly in the context of the perceived slowness of getting it started on the continent. There is current capacity built for 400 000 vaccinations per day, but the vaccine is lacking. This is a worldwide phenomenon but insufficient supplies were ordered originally. This is being corrected now but it will take time.

The phone lines for booking an appointment are overloaded and not working properly. I think here too Britain might have got this sorted better and earlier. Booking online is better, but for over 80's?! Germany has been more sluggish in getting the tracking IT going as well.

It also has to be said that Britain has got its back to the wall due to earlier mismanagement of the pandemic and a high rate of infection. The British government took a calculated risk with pre-ordering the vaccine when it wasn't yet absolutely clear how effective it would be (the US as well). The EU hedged its bets somewhat, and its easy to be critical with hindsight. The EU has also had a policy to ensure the richer countries don't buy up all available supplies leaving the rest without.

The federal health minister is probably the most popular in the country at present, having put in stirling work from the beginning, and yet being willing to admit making mistakes. The main criticism of him is coming from politicians who think he could have started vaccination a bit earlier.





I saw my first one of these recently - _Vaccination Centre_ - and I suppose despite apparent initial delays we should all be grateful such signs exist and we are not going to have to wait until perhaps the end of this year for an effective vaccination.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Considering the level of justifiable criticism of the UK government on CC in terms of its overall response to the pandemic it's interesting that there is little recognition of how well it is doing regarding vaccinations
> 
> No major hiccups in a complex rollout and vaccination levels are fourth highest in the world. Currently 3x-4x that of our European neighbours
> 
> It's also interesting that UK has one of the highest public acceptance rates for vaccination. China is highest at 80% but UK is v close behind. Bizzarely France is at 40% suggesting extreme scepticism of the vaccine. Wonder why a country not so disimmilar from other developed western economies can have such a low potential take up



I agree the govt vaccine programme to date has been excellent

The problem is that they've disdained scientific advice to the extent that the virus is now quite likely to rip through much of the population ahead of vaccination. 

You can't outrun exponential virus growth with a linear vaccine programme. 

We are now in an absolutely dire position. The delay in response to post - November lock down growth may cost as many as 100,000 lives, and certainly half that. 

It's been criminally negligent. 

I only hope the rest of the world learns our lessons, as we failed to from Italy first time around.


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> It's far too early to tell.
> 
> Let's talk again in a couple of months when there is some robust data rather than political spin.


I don't see why. Uninformed, uneducated conjecture and speculation is the cornerstone of this subforum. A little more won't hurt


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

Ramp up in vaccine rates from a few dejected [edit: "selected!] countries.

Note log scale to allow trends in massively different rates understates the differences.







.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I agree the govt vaccine programme to date has been excellent


Really?

Here's what my GP surgery had to say last weekend. They haven't updated this message. 

"COVID-19 Vaccinations
We will be administering the first COVID-19 vaccinations (Pfizer BioNTech) to 975 of our most vulnerable patients from Weds 6th January, at [nextdoor town] Town Hall.

NHS England has advised that our initial priority is to vaccinate those who are aged 80 years old and older. However, the vaccination supply for next week is limited stock (975 doses) and this will not be enough to vaccinate all our patients aged over 80 in the first instance."

My rough calculation is that those 975 doses have to go around about 4,000 people over 80. We are in an affluent Tory-voting commuter town.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I agree the govt vaccine programme to date has been excellent


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...-vaccine-london-surgery-yet-receive-any-doses

So good they can't even sort out the PR.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> I don't see why. Uninformed, uneducated conjecture and speculation is the cornerstone of this subforum. A little more won't hurt


See above for some maths.....


----------



## vickster (9 Jan 2021)

How many over 80s live in Bloomsbury? The link is behind a Guardian paywall


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Really?



Yes, really. See chart posted above. 

Whether this continues, we'll see. But thus far, very good.

I don't think it's at all realistic to expect zero problems, and fear not, I'll be sure to pile on if they can't ramp it up.


----------



## Pale Rider (9 Jan 2021)

Europe, with the exception of Germany, not doing very well, according to this BBC story.

Russia, as ever, is something of a closed book, and all the figures need to be taken with bullshite vaccine, given how hard it is to gather accurate information.

But it still looks like the UK is close to the top of this particular tree.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55575756


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> How many over 80s live in Bloomsbury? The link is behind a Guardian paywall


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-vaccine-london-surgery-yet-receive-any-doses

Non-AMP link. The Guardian doesn't have a paywall. 

Bloomsbury is the sort of place where people live for a long time. I'd expect there to be a lot of people who moved there when it was a bit Boho in the 60s and who have never moved away.


----------



## Pale Rider (9 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Would the result of a covid test be skewed if you had the vaccine ?



Good question, the answer to which I believe is still, er, open to question.

The vaccine doesn't stop you catching the virus, it prevents severe symptoms, so one might think it wouldn't affect a test result.

Linked to this is another unknown: Does the vaccine prevent you infecting others?

Van Tam was asked about that a few days ago.

He said it was still being researched.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> See chart posted above.


The chart - with a log scale - shows that every other country on it have ramped up distribution very rapidly. We haven't. We've been more or less flatlining. And we're only publishing figures weekly, which makes me suspicious that they aren't all that good if you look at them daily.


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> See above for some maths.....


You're comparing actual performance and seeking to extrapolate these (so to some extent, conjecture)
I'm comparing actual performance against actual performance of other developed countries. Based on actual comparative performance the UK appears to be doing rather well viz our international cohort

Can't understand what's going on in France though.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> We've been more or less flatlining.



No, that comment just shows how easily misinterpreted a log plot is.

Here's the linear data (less Israel)


----------



## vickster (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> You're comparing actual performance and seeking to extrapolate these (so to some extent, conjecture)
> I'm comparing actual performance against actual performance of other developed countries. Based on actual comparative performance the UK appears to be doing rather well viz our international cohort
> 
> Can't understand what's going on in France though.


Bureaucracy?
Europe's slow start: How many people have had the Covid vaccine? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55575756

Covid: The challenge in speeding up France's vaccination drive https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55547518


----------



## Oldhippy (9 Jan 2021)

I appreciate this is very naive but with the vaccines should it not be free to all countries and not made for profit and prestige? It affects everyone worldwide.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> No, that comment just shows how easily misinterpreted a log plot is.
> 
> Here's the linear data (less Israel)
> 
> View attachment 568037


Far enough. But the point remains that the UK gradient is among the flattest on the chart, and injection will have to rocket to get close to Johnson's overpromising


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Far enough. But the point remains that the UK gradient is among the flattest on the chart, and injection will have to rocket to get close to Johnson's overpromising


I've been one of the biggest critics of nitpicking so I'm in danger of being hoisted by my own petard here.

However what you said just isn't correct. The UK gradient is shallower on the graph than USA and Denmark but steeper than Germany, China, France, RoW etc....everyone other than USA and Denmark

My interpretation is that the UK vaccination roll out has been, in these early stages, much more effective than most other countries. I hope that this effectiveness continues throughout the program for all our sakes


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

Oldhippy said:


> I appreciate this is very naive but with the vaccines should it not be free to all countries and not made for profit and prestige? It affects everyone worldwide.



That's exactly what Oxford/Astra have done. 

I do think it's pretty shocking what's going on elsewhere TBH, surprised there's not been more reaction to it.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Far enough. But the point remains that the _UK gradient is among the flattest_ on the chart, and *injection will have to rocket to get close to Johnson's overpromising*



_disagree_

*agree*


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> That is a generous view of the statistics.
> 
> Based on an 80% take-up rate, in order to meet the government's targets we have to inject 9.4 million doses within the next five weeks. Up to a week ago we had injected 1.1 million. Over the last week of that period we managed fewer than a third of a million. Over the following six weeks, including the one just gone, we need to inject 1.4 million per week, over four times as many as the latest stats available. That's an operationally very difficult problem to solve using the central dictat tools we're trying to impose on a health system that is run very locally.


I'd forgotten they'd also promised to vaccinate all NHS staff in the same timescale. That's another half a million per week.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Considering the level of justifiable criticism of the UK government on CC in terms of its overall response to the pandemic it's interesting that there is little recognition of how well it is doing regarding vaccinations
> 
> No major hiccups in a complex rollout and vaccination levels are fourth highest in the world. Currently 3x-4x that of our European neighbours
> 
> It's also interesting that UK has one of the highest public acceptance rates for vaccination. China is highest at 80% but UK is v close behind. Bizzarely France is at 40% suggesting extreme scepticism of the vaccine. Wonder why a country not so disimmilar from other developed western economies can have such a low potential take up



'Tis the nature of politics and what I feel is the generally negative attitude of the UK populace to just about everything to not laud our successes. We are a long way from being a remotely glass half full nation. And I think that this has been going on for a long time now - not just since the pandemic started. I'm no psychologist but it appears to me that bad news takes root faster than good news and spreads quicker and I have no idea why this is.

Personally I feel that the vaccine rollout is happening really fast, whether Johnson's targets will be hit is a matter for conjecture and on a personal note I'm just ignoring anyone who is overtly sunny side down on this, whether politically motivated or because they are just negative people, and will wait and see. Yes, the targets are tough but ime targets need to be stretching to achieve the best results.

Whilst I'm not saying that we should be singing and dancing in the street about other countries misfortunes I do think we should be proud that we are really getting behind the program and are well ahead of the curve compared to other European nations:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55575756


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> I'd forgotten they'd also promised to vaccinate all NHS staff in the same timescale. That's another half a million per week



Yes, that will delay the vulnerable for sure. 

That it's necessary shows just how dire things are. 

Stay home. If you must go out, stay distant. There is potential for an absolute catastrophe right now.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> However what you said just isn't correct. The UK gradient is shallower on the graph than USA and Denmark but steeper than Germany, China, France, RoW etc....everyone other than USA and Denmark


I reckon, by eye only, it's on a par with Germany and France and only steeper than China. The "world" line is a whole-world line. 

And I'll say it again - all of this is pissing around the edges of a long-term challenge. The real measure of success will come in a few weeks time when we can assess some large-scale data.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> ime targets need to be stretching to achieve the best results


They need to be stretching but achievable. 

We've had nine months of Johnson over-promising and under-delivering. Why should we believe him now?

Sturgeon has actually not performed much better, but crucially she's been honest that things will be difficult.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> I'm not sure what agreement the EU has on the supply.


They're getting their first batches next week. The UK declined the option to join in. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ne-approved-for-use-by-uk-medicines-regulator


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> We've had nine months of Johnson over-promising and under-delivering. Why should we believe him now?



I don't think you should believe him. 

I'm so aghast with his repeated lies, prevarications and obfuscations I literally cannot watch the man any more. 

I think you should believe the data, which shows to date we started earlier than anyone else in Europe, have more vaccines approved, have vaccinated more and to date continue to do so.


----------



## Pale Rider (9 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Tis the nature of politics



True, the incumbent government is set up to have its actions criticised, just as the opposition is largely reduced to sniping from the sidelines.

Which also gives the lie to the oft-repeated claim the media is 'right wing'.

Were that so, we wouldn't read any mainstream criticism of the Conservatives, but there's plenty.

As there should be, it being the media's role to hold the government to task, no matter who is currently forming it.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

Johnson's target is to offer the top 4 cohorts a vaccination slot by Feb 15th - you can debate all you like but there's only one way to find out and that is to wait and see. 

My money's on Boris.


----------



## C R (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Johnson's target is to offer the top 4 cohorts a vaccination slot by Feb 15th - you can debate all you like but there's only one way to find out and that is to wait and see.
> 
> My money's on Boris.


I hope you are right, but the numbers so far leave room for doubt. I think it was a mistake to say on Monday evening that vaccination would allow for things to start relaxing from mid February. People will have latched to that, and if by then relaxation is not actually possible we will have another wave of restrictions being ignored.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> They need to be stretching but achievable.
> 
> We've had nine months of Johnson over-promising and under-delivering. Why should we believe him now?
> 
> Sturgeon has actually not performed much better, but crucially she's been honest that things will be difficult.



_"They need to be stretching but achievable." _ 

We'll have to agree to differ on that - ime while the 'stretch' should not be ludicrous, and hence demotivational, it really doesn't matter if the 'stretch' is not achieved. It merely serves as a 'pull' to get to the position that you wanted to achieve in the first instance.

_"We've had nine months of Johnson over-promising and under-delivering. Why should we believe him now?"_

My understanding from the announcements/news briefs is that the rollout plan and targeting was put together and agreed by all the principal agencies involved in the undertaking. Whilst that doesn't bolster an anti-Tory/Johnson rhetoric it does give me considerable confidence that this element of the UK's Covid response is off to a great start.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (9 Jan 2021)

C R said:


> I hope you are right, but the numbers so far leave room for doubt. I think it was a mistake to say on Monday evening that vaccination would allow for things to start relaxing from mid February. People will have latched to that, and if by then relaxation is not actually possible we will have another wave of restrictions being ignored.



Maybe JB was trying to inject some hope into a difficult situation which does have some validity and, to be fair, he did say it was subject to the data available at the time


----------



## Pale Rider (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Johnson's target is to offer the top 4 cohorts a vaccination slot by Feb 15th - you can debate all you like but there's only one way to find out and that is to wait and see.
> 
> My money's on Boris.



I will volunteer to be the bellwether, being at what could be called the 'lower end' of cohort four.

No sign of a jab yet, but my expectation is I will be among the last of that group.


----------



## PK99 (9 Jan 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> As there should be,* it being the media's role to hold the government to task*, no matter who is currently forming it.




That is *PART *of the media's role.

Another part is to analyse and explain issues to the general public.

There is a balance to be found between those roles.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> My money's on Boris.



A gambling strategy which would have bankrupted you already had you asked it to previous COVID announcements. 

FWIW I don't think there's any public domain info which allows a rational judgment either way. Believing Johnson certainly isn't rational. Watch, wait and hope.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> the 'stretch' should not be ludicrous, and hence demotivational


This stretch is utterly ludicrous. It is ridiculous. It is a figment of the imagination of a few advisors in Whitehall who have never had to deal with the messy reality of actually getting drugs into people's arms. 


SpokeyDokey said:


> did say it was subject to the data available at the time


The data available at the time - i.e. now - tells us that things will be considerably worse by mid February. That's true even if the absurd vaccination targets are met because of the rate of infection, the spreadability of the disease, the fact that the NHS is overwhelmed, and the delays from infection to symptoms to death or recovery and from vaccination to protection. 

And this is only dose one. There's a second dose required before anyone is even remotely permanently protected.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Maybe JB was trying to inject some hope into a difficult situation which does have some validity and, to be fair, he did say it was subject to the data available at the time



There's little or no chance of a relaxation that soon. Even if vaccination targets are met.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> This stretch is utterly ludicrous. It is ridiculous. It is a figment of the imagination of a few advisors in Whitehall who have never had to deal with the messy reality of actually getting drugs into people's arms.
> 
> The data available at the time - i.e. now - tells us that things will be considerably worse by mid February. That's true even if the absurd vaccination targets are met because of the rate of infection, the spreadability of the disease, the fact that the NHS is overwhelmed, and the delays from infection to symptoms to death or recovery and from vaccination to protection.
> 
> And this is only dose one. There's a second dose required before anyone is even remotely permanently protected.



We'll agree to differ then.

You have clearly made up your mind that the initiative is going to fail and I see no further point in responding to you.


----------



## winjim (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Johnson's target is to offer the top 4 cohorts a vaccination slot by Feb 15th - you can debate all you like but there's only one way to find out and that is to wait and see.
> 
> My money's on Boris.


Our trust has said they're due to begin vaccinating staff beginning mid Jan, following JCVI priority. 15 Feb seems optimistic for me to get mine, trial participation notwithstanding, but we'll see.


----------



## mjr (9 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> We'll agree to differ then.
> 
> You have clearly made up your mind that the initiative is going to fail and I see no further point in responding to you.


To be fair, @srw does seem to be drawing reasonable extrapolations from the available information. If Team Boris do manage to pull a rabbit out of their bums (rather than a scapegoat), then I expect @srw will change assessment.


----------



## Pale Rider (9 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> That is *PART *of the media's role.
> 
> Another part is to analyse and explain issues to the general public.
> 
> There is a balance to be found between those roles.



That's true, but it ought to go without saying the basic story is fairly told first.

Call me old-fashioned, but too much of the broadcast media's time is now spent interviewing their own reporters.

It never used to happen, it being the reporter's role to do the leg work to find and interview people appropriate to the story.

Not sit on their arse in the studio and make pronouncements in response to leading questions from a colleague.


----------



## winjim (9 Jan 2021)

While we're on the subject, has anyone yet defined what a 'frontline' healthcare worker is?


----------



## Julia9054 (9 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> While we're on the subject, has anyone yet defined what a 'frontline' healthcare worker is?


A press officer for a London based NHS trust almost certainly working mostly from home has had his vaccination ahead of my son providing close personal care to the elderly, frail and disabled in their own homes.


----------



## mjr (9 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> While we're on the subject, has anyone yet defined what a 'frontline' healthcare worker is?


No idea who else has, but I'll try: it is those who treated patients before there was enough PPE.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Our trust has said they're due to begin vaccinating staff beginning mid Jan, following JCVI priority. 15 Feb seems optimistic for me to get mine, trial participation notwithstanding, but we'll see.



There are a number of housebound over 80's in our area who couldn't make it for the central centre for the Pfizer jab and they have been advised of a similar date (mid Jan) for the Oxford jab. Presumably the District Nurse will be involved - it really is an all round effort.


----------



## midlife (9 Jan 2021)

My vaccinator training starts Monday morning. As nurses are pulled back onto the wards the number of people to stick the vaccine into arms have dropped......


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> My vaccinator training starts Monday morning. As nurses are pulled back onto the wards the number of people to stick the vaccine into arms have dropped......



Hopefully they have now stopped the PC interrogation of former GP's and Hospital Staff that could help in this area.


----------



## FishFright (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Hopefully they have now stopped the PC interrogation of former GP's and Hospital Staff that could help in this area.
> 
> View attachment 568054



Which are the ones that trouble you from that list ?


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

FishFright said:


> Which are the ones that trouble you from that list ?



The following don't appear to be vital in *administering* a Vaccine:

Legal Aspects Of Vaccination
Preventing Radicalisation (level 1)
Moving and Handling(Level 1)
Data security Awareness
Fire Safety (Level 1
Health Safety and Welfare (Level 1)
Equality Diversity and Human Rights


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

FishFright said:


> Which are the ones that trouble you from that list ?


I'm not sure I'm likely to be recruited as in ISIS volunteer while I'm in the queue for my jab (15)


----------



## midlife (9 Jan 2021)

All staff should be up to date with their mandatory training which is most of that list. Training is 3 online modules.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> All staff should be up to date with their mandatory training which is most of that list. Training is 3 online modules.



This is retired GP's and Nurses we are talking about and making it easier for them to volunteer their valuable services


----------



## mjr (9 Jan 2021)

FishFright said:


> Which are the ones that trouble you from that list ?


"Passort" troubles me. "anaphylaxi" too.


----------



## Pale Rider (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> This is retired GP's and Nurses we are talking about and making it easier for them to volunteer their valuable services



The list does look very demanding.

I doubt every GP and nurse currently working would tick every box, let alone those who are retired.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> 'Tis the nature of politics and what I feel is the generally negative attitude of the UK populace to just about everything to not laud our successes. We are a long way from being a remotely glass half full nation. And I think that this has been going on for a long time now - not just since the pandemic started. I'm no psychologist but it appears to me that bad news takes root faster than good news and spreads quicker and I have no idea why this is.
> 
> Personally I feel that the vaccine rollout is happening really fast, whether Johnson's targets will be hit is a matter for conjecture and on a personal note I'm just ignoring anyone who is overtly sunny side down on this, whether politically motivated or because they are just negative people, and will wait and see. Yes, the targets are tough but ime targets need to be stretching to achieve the best results.
> 
> ...


Because bad news is generally something you don't see coming - and so is more newsworthy.

Good news is when something planned works - so we have an inkling it's coming


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Hopefully they have now stopped the PC interrogation of former GP's and Hospital Staff that could help in this area.
> 
> View attachment 568054


I'm betting that fake news.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> I'm betting that fake news.



No - raised in House Of Commons on Wednesday - that is what was being asked. Shocking isn't it?


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> No - raised in House Of Commons on Wednesday - that is what was being asked. Shocking isn't it?


Well it depends 

Each of those topics in the extreme - could be covered in a PowerPoint slide in e-learning.

I work in training and that could be ..."the topics we are going to cover today" 

I think that graphic is misleading.


----------



## FishFright (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> The following don't appear to be vital in *administering* a Vaccine:
> 
> Legal Aspects Of Vaccination
> Preventing Radicalisation (level 1)
> ...



So you don't care about

Ignorance of the legal aspect of your actions
Ignoring signs of Radicalisation that may present a danger to the public
No training in moving people without injury or risk to health
Ignoring data security, including yours.
Anyone who isn't you burning to death
Not caring about what may cause an unneeded injury
Abuses of human rights.


No one will ever smoke you a kipper but I think you may be one.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Well it depends
> 
> Each of those topics in the extreme - could be covered in a PowerPoint slide in e-learning.
> 
> ...




here it is - Liam Fox (retired GP)


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEuRVqQjxzs


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

FishFright said:


> So you don't care about
> 
> Ignorance of the legal aspect of your actions
> Ignoring signs of Radicalisation that may present a danger to the public
> ...



No - I just want someone to stick a needle in my arm and say "Next Please!"


----------



## FishFright (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> here it is - Liam Fox (retired GP)
> 
> 
> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEuRVqQjxzs




Because as a retired GP he needs to update his training.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

FishFright said:


> Because as a retired GP he needs to update his training.



So he has to go on a Heavy Lifting and Fire Awareness course to give a vaccine does he?


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> The following don't appear to be vital in *administering* a Vaccine:
> 
> Legal Aspects Of Vaccination
> Preventing Radicalisation (level 1)
> ...



Working in the NHs I disagree.

Just an example of what you are up against I worked for a local council where it was discovered that sex offenders had taken low level jobs in social services with the intent of getting at the children at risk register.

You can not just have anyone sticking a chemical in millions of people's arms.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> No - I just want someone to stick a needle in my arm and say "Next Please!"



Go round any city centre in the early hours of tommorow morning with £20 then.


----------



## FishFright (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> So he has to go on a Heavy Lifting and Fire Awareness course to give a vaccine does he?



Yes because it is important.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> The following don't appear to be vital in *administering* a Vaccine:
> 
> Legal Aspects Of Vaccination
> Preventing Radicalisation (level 1)
> ...


If I were doing the jabbing myself or responsible for the people doing the jabbing the only two I'd be willing to let the jabbers do without would be preventing radicalisation and equality, diversity and human rights. Both very important topics, but can be suspended temporarily. It's the nature of a large organisation in a fast-moving situation that sometimes things fall through the cracks.

On the other hand:

Legal aspects - I'd want to know that I'd not be sued for doing my job
Moving and handling - I'd expect that among the jabbees would be quite a lot who can't move for themselves
Data security - names, addresses, medical details!
Fire safety - how the hell do I respond if a fire breaks out in the rickety town hall we've taken over for the day?
Health, safety and welfare - you really think it's acceptable for someone playing with needles _not_ to have basic health, safety and welfare training?!

This is all basic level-1 mandatory training stuff. It'll take a retired GP or nurse a couple of hours to read the relevant material and answer a few questions to confirm they understand.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Working in the NHs I disagree.
> 
> Just an example of what you are up against I worked for a local council where it was discovered that sex offenders had taken low level jobs in social services with the intent of getting at the children at risk register.
> 
> You can not just have anyone sticking a chemical in millions of people's arms.



The initial section (not shown ) was about Qualifications and references - so you couldn't get just anyone volunteering.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> So he has to go on a Heavy Lifting and Fire Awareness course to give a vaccine does he?



Fire awareness definitely - fires at hospitals aren't unknown. The fire training in our hospital takes 45 minutes tops.
That 45 minutes might prevent a 1,000 bed hospital becoming redundant.

The other is more protect - the authority from being sued "I wasn't trained to lift a 16 stone bloke .....now I need surgery on my back and have lost my job - I demand £400k in compensation"


----------



## Rocky (9 Jan 2021)

I’m with @accountantpete here, my wife the Prof volunteered to join the vaccinating task force, since recovering from cancer five years ago, she hasn’t seen patients and works as a full time medical academic. However, the key thing is that she can give injections having spent a lifetime doing it. She too couldn’t supply 75% of those certificates and so wasn’t eligible. At a time when there’s a shortage of jabbers it all seems crazy.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> I’m with @accountantpete here, my wife the Prof volunteered to join the vaccinating task force, since recovering from cancer five years ago, she hasn’t seen patients and works as a full time medical academic. However, the key thing is that she can give injections having spent a lifetime doing it. She too couldn’t supply 75% of those certificates and so wasn’t eligible. At a time when there’s a shortage of jabbers it all seems crazy.



I understand that a revised form is now available to download at gov.uk that makes it easier.


----------



## winjim (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> So he has to go on a Heavy Lifting and Fire Awareness course to give a vaccine does he?


Staff may potentially be evacuating patients in the event of a fire. You need to know the system, it's not as simple as just leaving the building and nursing staff don't need a load of volunteers who don't know what they're doing, getting in the way.

The moving and handling training covers not only heavy lifting, which could be required for moving patients, but also positioning your workstation and sitting correctly which could be important for someone doing a repetitive task like repeated injections.

All this training could be done on a single day's induction course.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> I’m with @accountantpete here, my wife the Prof volunteered to join the vaccinating task force, since recovering from cancer five years ago, she hasn’t seen patients and works as a full time medical academic. However, the key thing is that she can give injections having spent a lifetime doing it. She too couldn’t supply 75% of those certificates and so wasn’t eligible. At a time when there’s a shortage of jabbers it all seems crazy.



My understanding was that the checklist was mostly for completed training - which I would have thought the vast majority would be web based e-learning.


----------



## winjim (9 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> I’m with @accountantpete here, my wife the Prof volunteered to join the vaccinating task force, since recovering from cancer five years ago, she hasn’t seen patients and works as a full time medical academic. However, the key thing is that she can give injections having spent a lifetime doing it. She too couldn’t supply 75% of those certificates and so wasn’t eligible. At a time when there’s a shortage of jabbers it all seems crazy.


It looks like a lot of them, resus etc could be covered by having a competent supervisor rather than having to train each individual.

My resus training is 'dial 2222'.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> having a competent supervisor


As someone whose job is basically telling other people what to do and thinking about risk - I want them to know what to do themselves. Even if what you want them to do is "call the supervisor, or failing that ask someone else". You cannot rely on a supervisor to be available whenever something goes wrong, and it's dangerous in a situation where there are vulnerable people who might die to rely on individuals making their own decisions on the spur of the moment in a crisis. Everyone needs to have the same response to the crisis - and when you're through-processing thousands of elderly people, some of whom will be sick and highly infectious, and jabbing them with a vaccine where there will be very occasional adverse reactions, there will definitely be crises.

I'm afraid that goes as much for respected professors of public health with a lifetime of GPing behind them as much as it does for someone straight out of college.


----------



## Rocky (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> As someone whose job is basically telling other people what to do and thinking about risk - I want them to know what to do themselves. Even if what you want them to do is "call the supervisor, or failing that ask someone else". You cannot rely on a supervisor to be available whenever something goes wrong, and it's dangerous in a situation where there are vulnerable people who might die to rely on individuals making their own decisions on the spur of the moment in a crisis. Everyone needs to have the same response to the crisis - and when you're through-processing thousands of elderly people, some of whom will be sick and highly infectious, and jabbing them with a vaccine where there will be very occasional adverse reactions, there will definitely be crises.
> 
> I'm afraid that goes as much for respected professors of public health with a lifetime of GPing behind them as much as it does for someone straight out of college.


I don't disagree with any of that but the issue is providing bits of evidence that supposedly demonstrate that you understand about radicalisation etc etc. If you are a clinician, that evidence is ready at hand and will be part of your CPD portfolio. Retired clinicians and those not seeing patients will not have them.

The reality of these vaccination clinics is there's a row of vaccinators whose job is to get the individual to roll up their sleeve, ask them about allergies and then stick a needle in their arm. Someone else then monitors the patient for signs of anaphylactic reaction. The whole clinic is supervised by someone taking names at the door and directing patients to each station.

Yes, all those issues are important but the key thing is to be able to give a jab competently. The other tasks can be done by someone else...and in reality are.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Staff may potentially be evacuating patients in the event of a fire. You need to know the system, it's not as simple as just leaving the building and nursing staff don't need a load of volunteers who don't know what they're doing, getting in the way.
> 
> The moving and handling training covers not only heavy lifting, which could be required for moving patients, but also positioning your workstation and sitting correctly which could be important for someone doing a repetitive task like repeated injections.
> 
> All this training could be done on a single day's induction course.



Compare and contrast:

As I mentioned in another thread, the Wasbies were women volunteers who made their own arduous way to the Far East to help the troops in any way they could. No training for lifting heavy objects, no training for fire drills and equal opportunities - they just went out there to help in any way they could.


----------



## Rocky (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Compare and contrast:
> 
> As I mentioned in another thread, the Wasbies were women volunteers who made their own arduous way to the Far East to help the troops in any way they could. No training for lifting heavy objects, no training for fire drills and equal opportunities - they just went out there to help in any way they could.
> 
> View attachment 568068


My dad tells the story of being inoculated with some unknown jab before boarding the troop ship to Burma in 1943. He lined up with a couple of hundred other squaddies to receive a jab in his bum.......everyone was injected with the same needle and syringe; apparently there was a shortage at the time.


----------



## midlife (9 Jan 2021)

I was taught to inject in the bum, (upper and outer quadrant). Might get some funny looks if I ever get deployed to vaccinate....


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> I don't disagree with any of that but the issue is providing bits of evidence that supposedly demonstrate that you understand about radicalisation etc etc. If you are a clinician, that evidence is ready at hand and will be part of your CPD portfolio. Retired clinicians and those not seeing patients will not have them.


In which case the problem is with the process of evidencing or training, not (as @accountantpete and ex-doctor Liam Fox were implying) with the requirements themselves.

If only the government had had nine months notice that one day they'd need to undertake a massive vaccination programme very quickly. They might have had a chance to develop robust plans to ensure that respected professors of public health could roll up their sleeves - and ask others to do the same so that jabs could be given quickly _and_ safely.


----------



## winjim (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Compare and contrast:
> 
> As I mentioned in another thread, the Wasbies were women volunteers who made their own arduous way to the Far East to help the troops in any way they could. No training for lifting heavy objects, no training for fire drills and equal opportunities - they just went out there to help in any way they could.
> 
> View attachment 568068


We're bringing the farking war into this discussion as well are we?


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Compare and contrast:
> 
> As I mentioned in another thread, the Wasbies were women volunteers who made their own arduous way to the Far East to help the troops in any way they could. No training for lifting heavy objects, no training for fire drills and equal opportunities - they just went out there to help in any way they could.


I don't know if you've noticed - but we're not actually at war abroad. Oddly enough civilians in their own country are a bit fussier than troops fighting a vicious enemy about standards and safety.


----------



## Rocky (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> In which case the problem is with the process of evidencing or training, not (as @accountantpete and ex-doctor Liam Fox were implying) with the requirements themselves.
> 
> If only the government had had nine months notice that one day they'd need to undertake a massive vaccination programme very quickly. They might have had a chance to develop robust plans to ensure that respected professors of public health could roll up their sleeves - and ask others to do the same so that jabs could be given quickly _and_ safely.


I can't speak for Dr Fox or others from the retired medical community, but in the Prof's case, competence, training and experience is not an issue but evidencing it in the required format is. In this case, she won't be vaccinating the good people of Oxford but carrying on her research into long Covid et al.........after 40 years working in the health service she knows there are always plenty of other opportunities to contribute.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> We're bringing the farking war into this discussion as well are we?




Why not? they were/are National Emergencies.


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> evidencing it in the required format is


Yup. That's what I said.

I then used the opportunity to have a dig at government preparedness. Not like you to let that one slide...


----------



## Drago (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Why not? they were/are National Emergencies.


Imdeed. In terms of mobilising a resource response they make an excellent parallel. In fact, they are so alike that combat trained personnel are often used in times such as this.

I'm trained and authorised - first responder- to administer intra muscluar injections, and I won't even bother trying to jump through the hoops the government have set. If its anything like the recent flu jab it will be a production line, where each subject is in the company of the person administering for 2 or 3 minutes.

This is a national emergency, and the response to the now biggest single cause of death among adults in the UK does not require that I am trained to recognise radicalism or domestic abuse. The _emergency_ nature of the situation would require that I jab 40 people an hour, and then go home when the emergency has passed. 

And nothing more.

The wellbeing of individuals is important, but the wellbeing of the nation takes priority in an emergency sotuation such as this. In normal times we can afford considerations secondary to clinical need to be of such import - during a national emergency with a massive, overriding priority, we cannot allow it. Anything that distracts from addressing immedetiate clinical lead should be dispensed with, solely for Covid, and solely for the duration of the emergency.

As things stand covid is killing far more people in the UK than radicalism, domestic abuse, suicided related to mental health, so it is utter insanity that these temporaility less dangerous causes of death are being given training and awareness priority over the administering of life saving covid vaccines.


----------



## Rocky (9 Jan 2021)

@srw - your point about having 9 months to plan......I'm told Matt Hancock turned up at an Oxford surgery last week to witness a vaccination clinic.....unfortunately the vaccine delivery was cancelled at short notice, so he stood around watching numerous medical staff phoning their elderly vulnerable confused patients to tell them not to pitch up......oh, the irony.


(Sorry I'm being slow today)


----------



## BoldonLad (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Really?
> 
> Here's what my GP surgery had to say last weekend. They haven't updated this message.
> 
> ...



Our area started the vaccination program just a few days after the approval of the Pfizer Vaccine.

Grand-daughter (GP Surgey Receptionist) has had vaccination, Eldest daughter (her mother, a Senior Nurse Practiopner) is scheduled to receive AstraZenaca jab today, (she has allergy problems), 

They have started doing the over 75 age group, at least two days ago. At least two of my relatives, in that group, have already been "done". 

The centre at which my eldest daughter is working (administering vaccine) in now operating 7 days a week, not sure how many hours per day.


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

And despite all these hoops, UK is still the fourth most vaccinated country in the world and its rate of increase in vaccinations is as quick if not quicker than all but USA and Denmark (of the countries someone provided the graph for upthread). The temptation is to view the vaccination rollout through the myopic lens of political persuasion and that would be a mistake. 

Just to provide a bit of context


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> We're bringing the farking war into this discussion as well are we?



Beat me to it...


----------



## fossyant (9 Jan 2021)

My local GP's is busy with drive in/walk up for the over 80's from the car park - just driven past twice and cars are going in, either with elderly drivers, or elderly passengers. BIL's grand parents have been done, but MIL in a Nursing home not yet done - rubbish.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

"The Firm" have been done.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55602007


----------



## Unkraut (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> "The Firm" have been done.


We have been vaccinated!


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> We have been vaccinated!



View from Kenya of the Saxe-Coburg Gotha's vaccination


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/gathara/status/1347926591389786113


----------



## BoldonLad (9 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> View from Kenya of the Saxe-Coburg Gotha's vaccination
> 
> 
> View: https://mobile.twitter.com/gathara/status/1347926591389786113




Not a Royalist, but, from Kenya... "clung to power", "opulent", Kettle and frying pan spring to mind


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Not a Royalist, but, from Kenya... "clung to power", "opulent", Kettle and frying pan spring to mind



..........<<<WHOOSH>>>.......


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

Drago said:


> Imdeed. In terms of mobilising a resource response they make an excellent parallel. In fact, they are so alike that combat trained personnel are often used in times such as this.
> 
> I'm trained and authorised - first responder- to administer intra muscluar injections, and I won't even bother trying to jump through the hoops the government have set. If its anything like the recent flu jab it will be a production line, where each subject is in the company of the person administering for 2 or 3 minutes.
> 
> ...




What's changed is were are now in a very litigation savvy world. A few people start croaking it because of dirty needles, or slipping on the church hall floor , virusjablawers4u will be all over it.


----------



## BoldonLad (9 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> What's changed is were are now in a very litigation savvy world. A few people start croaking it because of dirty needles, or slipping on the church hall floor , virusjablawers4u will be all over it.


From the Employers (and, possibly, the managers) point of view, there is also the “duty of care” legislation to think about.


----------



## Landsurfer (9 Jan 2021)

Julie and I had our flu jabs last week .... from entering the surgery front door to leaving by the side door was less that 5 minutes ..a lot less .. really ... Why does it take so long so long to give the covid jab .... age of the recipients ?
Watched footage of the Israeli program in action .... thats fast .... at one location people where just putting their arms out of the window of the car .. jabbed and gone ... but younger demographic in the report i watched on i24 News.


----------



## Rocky (9 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Julie and I had our flu jabs last week .... from entering the surgery front door to leaving by the side door was less that 5 minutes ..a lot less .. really ... Why does it take so long so long to give the covid jab .... age of the recipients ?
> Watched footage of the Israeli program in action .... thats fast .... at one location people where just putting their arms out of the window of the car .. jabbed and gone ... but younger demographic in the report i watched.


Two reasons why the vaccination programme appears to be taking longer - patients have to wait 30 mins after the jab to make sure no anaphylactic reaction (and space is limited, limiting the nos of patients in each cohort) and there is a shortage of vaccine available at the mo.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

Let's also not forget - we are 9 years in credit in developing the vaccine - it usually takes 10 years. I haven't had my Jab and as a member of the vunerable group - I am very keen to get it ! 

It's signed off by the relevant authorities - but we shouldn't undo that by letting untrained people do the jab.
The parts people would cut out - probably only save a couple of hours anyway. Sure every hour counts with 60m to get through ...but I'm happy with the standards proposed. 
Plus it might not be the jabbers that are the bottleneck - as anyone who has managed projects will know - throwing more resource in - doesn't always increase speed - at least in the short term.


----------



## FishFright (9 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> I’m with @accountantpete here, my wife the Prof volunteered to join the vaccinating task force, since recovering from cancer five years ago, she hasn’t seen patients and works as a full time medical academic. However, the key thing is that she can give injections having spent a lifetime doing it. She too couldn’t supply 75% of those certificates and so wasn’t eligible. At a time when there’s a shortage of jabbers it all seems crazy.



Is doing a handful of hours getting up to speed the main thing preventing her doing so ?


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

If you could get every member of the UK population to give you 20p - you would get yourself a tidy sum ....if it's that easy do it


----------



## Rocky (9 Jan 2021)

FishFright said:


> Its doing a handful of hours getting up to speed the main thing preventing her doing so ?


If there was no one else to vaccinate, she'd jump through all the hoops but sees very little point in completing (sometimes irrelevant to her) training modules. She is making contributions to the fight against Covid in other ways.

She's perfectly able to jab people - I've seen give herself intramuscular injections of herceptin (a chemo drug) or sew her own finger up (after lacerating it decorating) having injected anaesthetic beforehand.


----------



## kingrollo (9 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> If there was no one else to vaccinate, she'd jump through all the hoops but sees very little point in completing (sometimes irrelevant to her) training modules. She is making contributions to the fight against Covid in other ways.
> 
> She's perfectly able to jab people - I've seen give herself intramuscular injections of herceptin (a chemo drug) or sew her own finger up (after lacerating it decorating) having injected anaesthetic beforehand.



So she is contributing to overall crisis in other very important ways.

Behind every person sticking needles in arms, there a whole team of enablers.


----------



## Landsurfer (9 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> Two reasons why the vaccination programme appears to be taking longer - patients have to wait 30 mins after the jab to make sure no anaphylactic reaction (and space is limited, limiting the nos of patients in each cohort) and there is a shortage of vaccine available at the mo.


I take it the vaccine used in Israel doesn't require the 30 minutes sitting about or they have done the maths arena adverse effects


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> All staff should be up to date with their mandatory training which is most of that list. Training is 3 online modules.



Should be? Says who?


----------



## Rocky (9 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I take it the vaccine used in Israel doesn't require the 30 minutes sitting about or they have done the maths arena adverse effects


I'm not sure about the Israeli arrangements, so can't really comment but I know about the UK issues through GP friends who are currently vaccinating people. It'll be interesting (from a scientific point of view) to see how many people actually have an adverse reaction. It's taken seriously at the moment and there needs to be someone with a syringe of adrenalin waiting just in case.


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

They wouldn't vaccinate my mum even though it is quite common peanut allergy, so certainly seem very risk adverse.


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

Entire population can be vaccinated in 5 days 

This is behind a paywall but I would be interested in how he says it could be done

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ve-days-if-it-were-better-motivated-lmd093l6d


----------



## midlife (9 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Should be? Says who?



My employer. Non compliance is a breach of contract, they can stop things like pay increases, access to study leave etc. but usually just a bollocking....


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> My employer. Non compliance is a breach of contract, they can stop things like pay increases, access to study leave etc. but usually just a bollocking....



That could be changed and should be due to being bloody stupid. Still if we are happy for people to die while people complete pointless irrelevant online modules......


----------



## midlife (9 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> That could be changed and should be due to being bloody stupid. Still if we are happy for people to die while people complete pointless irrelevant online modules......



My mandatory training is designed to keep me current in procedures and practices that keep me, the staff, patients, visitors and the community safe. 

For example, if you have a heart attack in my surgery you would expect me to be able to look after you until the paramedics arrive.


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> My mandatory training is designed to keep me current in procedures and practices that keep me, the staff, patients, visitors and the community safe.
> 
> For example, if you have a heart attack in my surgery you would expect me to be able to look after you until the paramedics arrive.



I wouldn't however give a toss if you had been trained on radicalisation.


----------



## midlife (9 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I wouldn't however give a toss if you had been trained on radicalisation.



Yep, trained on radicalisation too. I see and speak to thousands of people a year. Maybe I spot and report the person planning to plant a pipe bomb. Maybe save more lives than I have picking up cancers.


----------



## Gunk (9 Jan 2021)

Quite relieved that my 85 year old Father had the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine today.


----------



## Landsurfer (9 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> My employer. Non compliance is a breach of contract, they can stop things like pay increases, access to study leave etc. but usually just a bollocking....


Employment Law .... Your employer is dead in the water ...... Contact Mentor Services ... a division of Nat West .... free advice and representation ....


----------



## winjim (9 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Employment Law .... Your employer is dead in the water ...... Contact Mentor Services ... a division of Nat West .... free advice and representation ....


It's part of the shonky pay contract that the NHS unions screwed their membership over a couple of years ago. Unlikely it would be overturned.


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Yep, trained on radicalisation too. I see and speak to thousands of people a year. Maybe I spot and report the person planning to plant a pipe bomb. Maybe save more lives than I have picking up cancers.



Think very carefully before you answer this; how likely is it that someone administering a vaccine to someone which takes all of a couple of minutes is going to spot a pipe bomber?

I'm sure you do a great job at cancer and stopping pipe bombers - but you probably should try and move into NHS admin you would be a natural.


----------



## accountantpete (9 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Julie and I had our flu jabs last week .... from entering the surgery front door to leaving by the side door was less that 5 minutes ..a lot less .. really ... Why does it take so long so long to give the covid jab .... age of the recipients ?
> Watched footage of the Israeli program in action .... thats fast .... at one location people where just putting their arms out of the window of the car .. jabbed and gone ... but younger demographic in the report i watched on i24 News.



The situation here is a bit more complex.

It is the middle of winter with snow possible on the ground.

The over 80's have to arrive, park their car in the nearby car park, walk to the Centre and book in. They are then queued up and jabbed and then sent to a recovery are where looked after for 15 minutes(no tea and biscuits). They then have to walk back to the car and vacate the area.

All this has to be done at a rate that does not saturate the parking, queuing or recovery areas, allows covid safe passage in and out and gives the 80 year olds sufficient time to do all this.


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

My Dad went last week. The jab took very little time. He was then given a document with a time on it, and had to sit in the waiting room until it was that time at which point he got up and left. Although he was there for while he wasn't taking up staff time except for a short while.

In the lockdown number 1 my daughter had to go for a vaccination. It was car park, arm out the window, jab, go. Make sense to do that with Covid.


----------



## Landsurfer (9 Jan 2021)

According to the press reports the elderly arrive .. stand in a queue in the rain until soaked then get marched into a room to be jabbed ... but that was the DM ....
I doubt thats reality ...


----------



## srw (9 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Entire population can be vaccinated in 5 days
> 
> This is behind a paywall but I would be interested in how he says it could be done
> 
> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ve-days-if-it-were-better-motivated-lmd093l6d


Non paywall version.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/09/nhs-vaccinate-uk-covid-five-days-oxford-professor
By slashing red tape.

He reckons we can get about 30,000,000 jabs done per day. I reckons he hasn't the foggiest idea. At 1 minute per jab and 12 hours per jabber per day that's over 40,000 jabbers. Nuts. 

Here's what the NHS is saying, rather more politely than perhaps he deserves:
“Prof Bell’s reported comments suggest he may not know that at the current time there are not actually that number of vaccines available to the NHS to deploy. It’s best to stick to the facts, and they are that vaccine supply will be progressively increasing over the coming weeks, allowing rapidly expanding vaccinations.”


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> According to the press reports the elderly arrive .. stand in a queue in the rain until soaked then get marched into a room to be jabbed ... but that was the DM ....
> I doubt thats reality ...



Certainly not for my dad


----------



## DCLane (9 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> The situation here is a bit more complex.
> 
> It is the middle of winter with snow possible on the ground.
> 
> ...



The hospital where SWMBO works is setting up rooms for this: she's been moved out of her workspace so there's a series of rooms they can use; welcome / wait / injection / recovery / follow-up paperwork. This is being set up this weekend to operate from Monday, although she's got a message asking whether people are able to help from tomorrow. It's all hands on deck with any non-urgent things cancelled until this is done.

The idea is they can filter people in with parking, entry, injection, recovery and exit efficiently.


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Non paywall version.
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/09/nhs-vaccinate-uk-covid-five-days-oxford-professor
> By slashing red tape.
> 
> ...



Thanks for that @srw it was really intreaging me but I won't pay anything to the Times or even sign up for a free trial. I think he makes some fair points but overall I am unconvinced he has a detailed or realistic plan to vaccinate everyone in 5 days.


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

Mind you it would really slow things down if everyone was visited at home like for the royal family.


----------



## Unkraut (9 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> She's perfectly able to jab people - I've seen give herself intramuscular injections of herceptin (a chemo drug) or sew her own finger up (after lacerating it decorating) having injected anaesthetic beforehand.


Now that is what I call DIY!


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

What happens to the doses allocated to people who are no shows? Can they be recycled into subsequent days?

Reason for the question is because I read the story of some company offering substantial payments to vaccinate their staff using no shows' doses on the day. If they're binned otherwise I've no particular issue with this but presumably they aren't?


----------



## lane (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> What happens to the doses allocated to people who are no shows? Can they be recycled into subsequent days?
> 
> Reason for the question is because I read the story of some company offering substantial payments to vaccinate their staff using no shows' doses on the day. If they're binned otherwise I've no particular issue with this but presumably they aren't?



Well I do have a bit of an issue they were offering £5k to the individual staff giving the vaccinations which would clearly be open to abuse.


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Well I do have a bit of an issue they were offering £5k to the individual staff giving the vaccinations which would clearly be open to abuse.


Agree on that but they contacted the GP surgeries and offered charitable donation instead. Anyway, ain't happening. I'm just interested to know what happens to the inevitable no show doses. I read that in one area some were given to local police. But this sounds very inefficient


----------



## Julia9054 (9 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Agree on that but they contacted the GP surgeries and offered charitable donation instead. Anyway, ain't happening. I'm just interested to know what happens to the inevitable no show doses. I read that in one area some were given to local police. But this sounds very inefficient


Spare doses are given to anyone around to stop them going off. An auction house - not operating at the moment - is acting as a vaccination centre. Spare doses are given to the volunteers helping to run the makeshift vaccination hub and to employees of the auction house whose premises are being used


----------



## Blue Hills (10 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Well I do have a bit of an issue they were offering £5k to the individual staff giving the vaccinations which would clearly be open to abuse.


exactly. noxious shysters . there was understandable outrage, including many comments on their google maps marker. They now seem to have disappeared from google maps along with all the comments. They have issued some bullshit statement about their initiative being misinterpreted.


----------



## Rocky (10 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Agree on that but they contacted the GP surgeries and offered charitable donation instead. Anyway, ain't happening. I'm just interested to know what happens to the inevitable no show doses. I read that in one area some were given to local police. But this sounds very inefficient


In Oxford, the left over doses are being given to frontline staff from the John Radcliffe Hospital who have had their second dose delayed. Incidentally each Pfizer vial of vaccine is designed for five shots, but the vaccinators are finding that it contains sufficient for six - so extra recipients are being contacted to come in at short notice but again this will be frontline staff.


----------



## kingrollo (10 Jan 2021)

It would appear that a lack of jabbers isn't currently the bottleneck....more the supply of the vaccine itself.

Again this might be something other than production of the vaccine - I have heard there is a shortage of vials to transport and store the vaccine for one


----------



## nickyboy (10 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> In Oxford, the left over doses are being given to frontline staff from the John Radcliffe Hospital who have had their second dose delayed. Incidentally each Pfizer vial of vaccine is designed for five shots, but the vaccinators are finding that it contains sufficient for six - so extra recipients are being contacted to come in at short notice but again this will be frontline staff.


That sounds eminently sensible. However, I presume eventually they will run out of "handy" people who need a dose (first or second). Then they either have to throw away or come up with some complicated "subs bench" type system whereby people register as a short notice alternate in the even that they have doses they are going to throw away. I'm well down the list but I'd be happy to register and get a call saying "can you get here this afternoon?"


----------



## Rocky (10 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> That sounds eminently sensible. However, I presume eventually they will run out of "handy" people who need a dose (first or second). Then they either have to throw away or come up with some complicated "subs bench" type system whereby people register as a short notice alternate in the even that they have doses they are going to throw away. I'm well down the list but I'd be happy to register and get a call saying "can you get here this afternoon?"


I think it’s the latter. Our practice has a subs bench.


----------



## Pale Rider (10 Jan 2021)

Here's the first few lines of an NHS England press release which they embargoed until 00.01 this morning.

*Hundreds Of Thousands Invited To New NHS Vaccination Centres*

Hundreds of thousands of people aged 80 and over are being invited to book a coronavirus vaccination at the new NHS vaccination centres that open this week.

The first 130,000 letters began arriving on doormats this weekend with more than 500,000 following this week, with the national vaccination programme “rapidly accelerating”.

The letters have been sent to people aged 80 or over who live 30 to 45 minutes drive from one of the seven new sites and explain how they can book a slot – over the phone or online through the national booking service.

The centres, which include one at the site of the London Nightingale Hospital and Manchester’s Etihad Stadium, offer a convenient alternative to GP and hospital services and can each deliver thousands of vaccinations every week.

Nurses, doctors, physios and other NHS staff working nearby are also being jabbed at the centres, along with social care and care home workers.


----------



## Chromatic (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> According to the press reports the elderly arrive .. stand in a queue in the rain until soaked then get marched into a room to be jabbed ... but that was the DM ....
> I doubt thats reality ...



It was exactly like that, without the rain, granted, when my dad had his first jab.


----------



## accountantpete (10 Jan 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Here's the first few lines of an NHS England press release which they embargoed until 00.01 this morning.
> 
> *Hundreds Of Thousands Invited To New NHS Vaccination Centres*
> 
> ...



They have opened up Epsom Racecourse - presumably you can have a flutter whilst getting the jab


----------



## rockyroller (10 Jan 2021)

heard yesterday that "everyone" in the US should be vaccnated by July* JULY?!*


----------



## Pale Rider (10 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> They have opened up Epsom Racecourse - presumably you can have a flutter whilst getting the jab



The figures, as ever, are hard to interpret fairly.

I was mildly surprised to see there are still at least 630,000 over 80s to be vaccinated.

Leaving aside ages, this does appear to be an example of the 'ramping up' of which we've heard so much.


----------



## BoldonLad (10 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Agree on that but they contacted the GP surgeries and offered charitable donation instead. Anyway, ain't happening. *I'm just interested to know what happens to the inevitable no show doses.* I read that in one area some were given to local police. But this sounds very inefficient



As I said above, at the Vaccination Centre where my eldest daughter has been working for past 2 or 3 weeks, "left overs" if they cannot be used next day, are allocated to NHS Staff. Presumably, this can only go on for so long, before all NHS staff, in the area, have been "done". Maybe, "deserving relatives" will then be in the frame


----------



## kingrollo (10 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> They have opened up Epsom Racecourse - presumably you can have a flutter whilst getting the jab


Hancock said the its "going good to firm at Epson"


----------



## accountantpete (10 Jan 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I was mildly surprised to see there are still at least 630,000 over 80s to be vaccinated.



I'm mildly surprised to see how many over 80's there are - 3.3million with 16,000 Centenarians.


----------



## Pale Rider (10 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> I'm mildly surprised to see how many over 80's there are - 3.3million with 16,000 Centenarians.



Blimey, but that does go some way to explain why so many over 80s are yet to be vaccinated.

Life expectancy has edged up in recent decades, so the old 'three score years and 10' is now at the lower end of the spread.

Having said that, I noticed two professional footballers who died recently did so at 71.

I think the current average is 82 for men, and 86 for women, who have always lasted longer.


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Blimey, but that does go some way to explain why so many over 80s are yet to be vaccinated.
> 
> Life expectancy has edged up in recent decades, so the old 'three score years and 10' is now at the lower end of the spread.
> 
> ...


I believe the average age for men dying of Covid is 84.2 years .... ONS figures ... But i can't find the figures for women ....


----------



## BoldonLad (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I believe the average age for men dying of Covid is 84.2 years .... ONS figures ... But i can't find the figures for women ....


 I read (don’t remember where, but, not the DM), that average age of those who have died of Covid is 82 (that is both men and women).


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> I read (don’t remember where, but, not the DM), that average age of those who have died of Covid is 82 (that is both men and women).


Thank you ....


----------



## SpokeyDokey (10 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> I'm mildly surprised to see how many over 80's there are - 3.3million with 16,000 Centenarians.



@deptfordmarmoset posted this info re population numbers by vaccination priority groupings a few days ago:


View: https://twitter.com/john_actuary/status/1338422079096500226?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1338422079096500226%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2Flive%2F2021%2Fjan%2F05%2Fcovid-uk-coronavirus-live-news-updates-lockdown-boris-johnson


----------



## SpokeyDokey (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I believe the average age for men dying of Covid is 84.2 years .... ONS figures ... But i can't find the figures for women ....



Scroll down this link to this horizontal bar chart:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55586994


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)




----------



## SpokeyDokey (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


>



Upside of the dreadful impact to date in the over 70's age groups is that once the vaccinations rollout works its way through these groups then a real impact on overall deaths and hospital admission numbers will be felt.

Can't come quick enough.


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)

I've posted this already but i genuinely don't understand why it takes so long to do the jabs .... julie and I had our flu jab ... both of us, in and out of the surgery in less than 5 mins, both ... we could have sat in the car for 15 minutes if they had asked ...
I really hope that when they get to the under 70's its just a drive through with your arm out of the window and off ...

But i doubt it .. Buffoon and Handsoncock and the NCS will work out someway to make it difficult ... So hope i'm wrong ....


----------



## Rocky (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I've posted this already but i genuinely don't understand why it takes so long to do the jabs .... julie and I had our flu jab ... both of us, in and out of the surgery in less than 5 mins, both ... we could have sat in the car for 15 minutes if they had asked ...
> I really hope that when they get to the under 70's its just a drive through with your arm out of the window and off ...


There is a shortage of supplies


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> There is a shortage of supplies


I hear you .. but the suppliers of the vaccine say there is no shortage .... someone is lying .. sorry "misspoken" again .. and so far it's been the UK government


----------



## Rocky (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I hear you .. but the suppliers of the vaccine say there is no shortage .... someone is lying .. again .. and so far it's been the UK government


I’m sure plenty is being made but the world needs vaccinating and the logistics to get doses to uk vaccination centres are complex and this takes time.


----------



## nickyboy (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I've posted this already but i genuinely don't understand why it takes so long to do the jabs .... julie and I had our flu jab ... both of us, in and out of the surgery in less than 5 mins, both ... we could have sat in the car for 15 minutes if they had asked ...
> I really hope that when they get to the under 70's its just a drive through with your arm out of the window and off ...
> 
> But i doubt it .. Buffoon and Handsoncock and the NCS will work out someway to make it difficult ... So hope i'm wrong ....


Never had a flu jab before so I was surprised how quick it was. 2 minutes into and out of the GP surgery reception area. 

By the way, there has been significant criticism of posters making up insulting names for people like Sturgeon. What you're doing is no better. Sauce for the goose and all that


----------



## accountantpete (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I've posted this already but i genuinely don't understand why it takes so long to do the jabs .... julie and I had our flu jab ... both of us, in and out of the surgery in less than 5 mins, both ... we could have sat in the car for 15 minutes if they had asked ...
> I really hope that when they get to the under 70's its just a drive through with your arm out of the window and off ...
> 
> But i doubt it .. Buffoon and Handsoncock and the NCS will work out someway to make it difficult ... So hope i'm wrong ....



You can't have people driving a ton of heavy metal if there's a chance of going into shock just after the jab.


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> By the way, there has been significant criticism of posters making up insulting names for people like Sturgeon. What you're doing is no better. Sauce for the goose and all that



Off topic .. but your call ...
No harm to you, but ... Don't care ... He is a disgrace, to all of us ... I have no respect for him, his boss and his hauscarls ... and I'm a 40 year Tory supporter ... no longer .... Criticism is the corner stone of free speech .... Make up all the insulting names you want folks ... it's one of our diminishing freedoms to insult ...


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> You can't have people driving a ton of heavy metal if there's a chance of going into shock just after the jab.


But i thought it was safe ... you can drive away after the Flu jab ... are you saying the covid jab is not as safe as the Flu jab ... ?


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> But i thought it was safe ... you can drive away after the Flu jab ... are you saying the covid jab is not as safe as the Flu jab ... ?


There’s a risk of anaphylactic shock with any vaccination. The Covid jab is new, post marketing authorisation surveillance and reporting is standard with each and every new medicinal product in case there are adverse events not observed in trials. This continues for as long as any medicinal product is on the market (even if it’s a generic and has been around for years).

You can also have an allergic reaction to the flu jab, hence you should be asked if you’ve ever had one before receiving it, I certainly was.


----------



## Adam4868 (10 Jan 2021)

I couldn't make doctors for flu jab due to work.So went to local chemist who insisted I sat down and waited five ish mins after having it.


----------



## PK99 (10 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> I'm mildly surprised to see how many over 80's there are - 3.3million with 16,000 Centenarians.



Some of the numbers are indeed surprising:

The 3.3M number comes from here:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/281174/uk-population-by-age/

Risk of death per year by age is given here:





At age 80, it is about 1 in 10

ie expected deaths in the UK of people over 80 is ~300,000 pa


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> There’s a risk of anaphylactic shock with any vaccination. The Covid jab is new, post marketing authorisation surveillance and reporting is standard with each and every new medicinal product in case there are adverse events not observed in trials. This continues for as long as any medicinal product is on the market (even if it’s a generic and has been around for years).
> 
> You can also have an allergic reaction to the flu jab, hence you should be asked if you’ve ever had one before receiving it, I certainly was.


I had my first flu jab ever just before xmas .... as i said, in and out in minutes .... nobody even spoke to me ... the clinician who gave it was on her phone when i walked into the room, put her phone down, jabbed me, and picked her phone up as i left .....


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I had my first flu jab ever just before xmas .... as i said in, and out in minutes .... nobody even spoke to me ... the clinician who gave it was on her phone when i walked into the room, put her phone down, jabbed me, and picked her phone up as i left .....


GP surgery where they have your records?


----------



## accountantpete (10 Jan 2021)

Many years after The Stud, Joan Collins still likes a prick


----------



## PK99 (10 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> GP surgery where they have your records?



WRT records, for the flu jab there seems to me minimal record-keeping and no link to GP held medical records. I, my wife and a number of friends have had the jab at Pharmacies, we each have continued to receive reminders from the GP that we are eligible. From what we could see, there was no link from the jab provider to NHS personal medical records. That does not matter, as the flu jab is a personal protective measure.

WRT the covid jab. This is a personal protective measure AND a herd immunity/population protective measure and I would expect all covid jabs to be on individuals' medical records to allow tracking across the population.

.


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> WRT records, for the flu jab there seems to me minimal record-keeping and no link to GP held medical records. I, my wife and a number of friends have had the jab at Pharmacies, we each have continued to receive reminders from the GP that we are eligible. From what we could see, there was no link from the jab provider to NHS personal medical records. That does not matter, as the flu jab is a personal protective measure.
> 
> WRT the covid jab. This is a personal protective measure AND a herd immunity/population protective measure and I would expect all covid jabs to be on individuals' medical records to allow tracking across the population.
> 
> .


Hence asking if the jab was done at the GP surgery. They presumably have the poster’s records?
My flu jabs have been done privately at pharmacies and they have always asked me about potential allergy and prior issues (can’t get private jab from GP anymore)


----------



## C R (10 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Hence asking if the jab was done at the GP surgery. They presumably have the poster’s records?
> My flu jabs have been done privately at pharmacies and they have always asked me about potential allergy and prior issues (can’t get private jab from GP anymore)


I always have the flu vaccine at my GP, and still they ask every time if I have an allergy to eggs or if I have ever had a reaction to the vaccine, this year was no different.


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> GP surgery where they have your records?


Yes .. but no records for jabs .... And apart from "David Whiteside go in now" no verbal or other contact ..
Since its the only vaccine jab i've had outside the RAF i thought nothing of it ...


----------



## BoldonLad (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I had my first flu jab ever just before xmas .... as i said, in and out in minutes .... nobody even spoke to me ... the clinician who gave it was on her phone when i walked into the room, put her phone down, jabbed me, and picked her phone up as i left .....


Change of GP may be wise


----------



## Landsurfer (10 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Change of GP may be wise


Been with them for 20 years ... even though this crap they have supported Julie even when she was abandoned by the NHS ... I'll put it down as a bad hair day ...


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Jan 2021)

C R said:


> I always have the flu vaccine at my GP, and still they ask every time if I have an allergy to eggs or if I have ever had a reaction to the vaccine, this year was no different.



The flu vaccine is incubated in eggs.


----------



## midlife (10 Jan 2021)

AFAIK there is no central record of covid vaccination. I asked if that in the future I could check if someone has had a vaccine and I was told probably not. Will have to self declare on their medical history.


----------



## BoldonLad (10 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> AFAIK there is no central record of covid vaccination. I asked if that in the future I could check if someone has had a vaccine and I was told probably not. Will have to self declare on their medical history.



Interesting. That will really help with tracking effectiveness, problems (hopefully none), etc.

Make the possible future claims industry a real gold mine.


----------



## midlife (10 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Interesting. That will really help with tracking effectiveness, problems (hopefully none), etc.
> 
> Make the possible future claims industry a real gold mine.



Ultimately it might all get collated but not sure how. I have a little card with my name, date and Pfizer batch number on it plus it is on my occupational health data. I think it's a numbers game at the moment. 

We have been told there will be no "vaccine passport" and people who are not vaccinated will not be discriminated against. Not seen it written down though....


----------



## BoldonLad (10 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Ultimately it might all get collated but not sure how. I have a little card with my name, date and Pfizer batch number on it plus it is on my occupational health data. I think it's a numbers game at the moment.
> 
> We have been told there will be no "vaccine passport" and people who are not vaccinated will not be discriminated against. Not seen it written down though....


Yes, hopefully it will not be another EXcel fiasco


----------



## C R (10 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The flu vaccine is incubated in eggs.


I know, that's why they ask. What I was highlighting was that I get the vaccine in the same place every year, but they still confirm the allergy questions.


----------



## IanSmithCSE (10 Jan 2021)

Good evening

https://www.nhs.uk/using-the-nhs/about-the-nhs/sharing-your-health-records/
From 25 May 2018 you can choose to stop your confidential patient information being used for purposes other than your own care and treatment.

https://www.nhs.uk/your-nhs-data-matters/
You can choose to stop your confidential patient information being used for research and planning.
.......
To help the NHS respond to coronavirus, your information may be used for coronavirus research purposes even if you have chosen not to share it. Any information used will be shared appropriately and lawfully.

So a central COVID database won't be stopped by the agreement you may have thought you had governing the privacy of your medical records.

Whether you think that this is a good or bad thing could easily be another 100 page debate. :-)

Bye

Ian


----------



## rualexander (10 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Many years after The Stud, Joan Collins still likes a prick
> 
> View attachment 568285


Looks to be aiming a bit low there, not sure he's hitting much of the deltoid muscle.
Best to wear a loose fitting t shirt so the muscle can be easily accessed.


----------



## classic33 (10 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Ultimately it might all get collated but not sure how. I have a little card with my name, date and Pfizer batch number on it plus it is on my occupational health data. I think it's a numbers game at the moment.
> 
> We have been told there will be no "vaccine passport" and people who are not vaccinated will not be discriminated against. Not seen it written down though....


Check Germany's new rule for people travelling from Ireland. Certificate of vaccination required for entry into Germany.


----------



## classic33 (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Yes .. but no records for jabs .... And apart from "David Whiteside go in now" no verbal or other contact ..
> Since its the only vaccine jab i've had outside the RAF i thought nothing of it ...


Every medication ever given, under the NHS, will be on your records. This should also include any adverse reactions to any of those.


----------



## nickyboy (10 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Off topic .. but your call ...
> No harm to you, but ... Don't care ... He is a disgrace, to all of us ... I have no respect for him, his boss and his hauscarls ... and I'm a 40 year Tory supporter ... no longer .... Criticism is the corner stone of free speech .... Make up all the insulting names you want folks ... it's one of our diminishing freedoms to insult ...


I'm not having a go at you. I don't care.

However, I don't like double standards. Plenty of posters here have complained when someone has used an insulting name for a non Conservative politician. But strangely quiet about insulting names for Conservative politicians.


----------



## midlife (10 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Check Germany's new rule for people travelling from Ireland. Certificate of vaccination required for entry into Germany.



Sorry, should have meant within the NHS, for example I cannot refuse a referral on the grounds they are not vaccinated if that makes sense.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (11 Jan 2021)

We've now cleared 2.4 million vaccinations (inc' many with 2 jabs) - breaking on Sky:

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...navirus-jab-in-uk-says-boris-johnson-12185070

Good news and a fantastic effort by all involved.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (11 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> We've now cleared 2.4 million vaccinations (inc' many with 2 jabs) - breaking on Sky:
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...navirus-jab-in-uk-says-boris-johnson-12185070
> 
> Good news and a fantastic effort by all involved.



Should shoot up now the Oxford/AZ vaccine is into the swing, if supply can keep up.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (11 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Should shoot up now the Oxford/AZ vaccine is into the swing, if supply can keep up.



The batch approval process seems to be a bit of a choke point although obviously not one that can be short-cut.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (11 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> The batch approval process seems to be a bit of a choke point although obviously not one that can be short-cut.



It's a weird one that; doesn't apply to small molecules at all but seems to for vaccines generally and I'm not sure if the temporary authorisation has made the requirement more stringent. Would be interested to know more.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (11 Jan 2021)

Best up to date source for England vaccination stat's that I can find:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/


Reporting PeriodCumulative Total Vaccinations to Date8th December 2020 to 10th January 20212,333,764​Of which, 1st dose1,959,151​Of which, 2nd dose374,613​


----------



## mjr (11 Jan 2021)

At 2m/month, the mid-Feb 13.2m "jabs" target will be reached in June? It'll get faster but it needs to go a lot faster.


----------



## accountantpete (11 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> At 2m/month, the mid-Feb 13.2m "jabs" target will be reached in June? It'll get faster but it needs to go a lot faster.



The new "Super Hubs" have only just come 'online' - have faith we'll get there.


----------



## Rocky (11 Jan 2021)

My 88 year old mum had her second Pfizer jab on Saturday. The vaccination clinic was at a local GP surgery and staffed by local hospital consultants on their day off. All pro bono to ensure this horrible disease is conquered.

We should remember this next time someone knocks the NHS.


----------



## Blue Hills (11 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> My 88 year old mum had her second Pfizer jab on Saturday. The vaccination clinic was at a local GP surgery and staffed by local hospital consultants on their day off. All pro bono to ensure this horrible disease is conquered.
> 
> We should remember this next time someone knocks the NHS.


That"s good going, i thought second jabs had been seriously put back. When did she get the first? 3 elderly relatives of mine got their first jab on 31 dec, no news on second yet.


----------



## Rocky (11 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> That"s good going, i thought second jabs had been seriously put back. When did she get the first? 3 elderly relatives of mine got their first jab on 31 dec, no news on second yet.


She had her first on 19th Dec. The vaccination centre decided to go ahead with giving second jabs because they struggled to contact people over Christmas to reschedule.

I do hope your elderly relatives get a slot soon.


----------



## lazybloke (11 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> We've now cleared 2.4 million vaccinations (inc' many with 2 jabs) - breaking on Sky:
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...navirus-jab-in-uk-says-boris-johnson-12185070
> 
> Good news and a fantastic effort by all involved.


A long way to go, but that is really encouraging news. Fingers crossed that the target vaccination rate can be achieved & sustained, and that manfacturers can keep pace - both in the UK and overseas.


It is a little disconcerting however to hear stories like the shortage of vials, almost like no-one has known in the last year that a huge vaccination effort would be needed!!!! The US were warning of this back in June.


And what about the Vaccines Delivery Plan, released by the DHSC today which included the words "_The scale of this challenge is enormous, equivalent to establishing a national supermarket business in less than a month_". LESS THAN A MONTH? You've had most of a year to prepare!!!!


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Jan 2021)

My 92 year young mother had her second dose last Wednesday (17 Dec - 7 Jan = 21 days) at her local cottage hospital/MIU.
I really doubt there'll be much take-up from over 70s to travel long distances to these mass vaccination hubs so I wouldn't be surprised if there's a scramble to extend the offer at those locations to lower groups otherwise their delivery capacity will be wasted.
The government have set a target of vaccinating tranches UK 1-4 by "mid" Feb: in 40 days. England total of those 4 is 11.7M to which add roughly 2.5M for NISW. This assumes that 100% of those eligible choose to take the vaccination. I wonder what refusnik planning figure the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) is using.
The numbers getting a second dose of the vaccine before mid-March will be negligible (less than 0.2% of future vaccinations before April).
Ramping up in the next 10 days to 1/3M per day (by 21 Jan) will allow us to hit that target.
@SpokeyDokey 's useful link (for England) offers transparency of the delivery rate/totals. I hope that similar authoritative trackers for the other home nations of UK can be added when available (to make that pinned post 'UK-wide' - bit parochial at present).


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Jan 2021)

lazybloke said:


> stories like the shortage of vials, almost like no-one has known in the last year that a huge vaccination effort would be needed!!!! The US were warning of this back in June.
> And what about the Vaccines Delivery Plan, released by the DHSC today which included the words "_The scale of this challenge is enormous, equivalent to establishing a national supermarket business in less than a month_". LESS THAN A MONTH? You've had most of a year to prepare!!!!


Perhaps you could share an authoritative basis for "stories of shortage of vials" (11 Jan)? Media like to pick old stuff and resurrect it.
Just because they've had a long time to plan, it doesn't make the scale of the challenge any less enormous, does it? The NIMS has to roll this out: do you think this is easy?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (11 Jan 2021)

lazybloke said:


> A long way to go, but that is really encouraging news. Fingers crossed that the target vaccination rate can be achieved & sustained, and that manfacturers can keep pace - both in the UK and overseas.
> 
> 
> It is a little disconcerting however to hear stories like the shortage of vials, almost like no-one has known in the last year that a huge vaccination effort would be needed!!!! The US were warning of this back in June.
> ...



Re glass vials - not a problem here in the UK according to this link:

_One challenge facing pharmaceutical companies globally has been a shortage of glass vials for the "fill and finish" stage of manufacture - when a vaccine is packaged for despatch. Although, unlike elsewhere, the UK is thought currently to have enough of this glassware in storage. _

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55274833

Re vaccine rollout:

Following General Prosser's briefing and a few other pieces of information: it is my understanding that a rollout plan was formulated a while back (obviously it could never be in fine detail as that only becomes apparent as the situation morphs closer to rollout) and the quote you have shown relates to the final upscale of the plan rather than the time in which the plan it total was formulated.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (11 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> My 92 year young mother had her second dose last Wednesday (17 Dec - 7 Jan = 21 days) at her local cottage hospital/MIU.
> I really doubt there'll be much take-up from over 70s to travel long distances to these mass vaccination hubs so I wouldn't be surprised if there's a scramble to extend the offer at those locations to lower groups otherwise their delivery capacity will be wasted.
> The government have set a target of vaccinating tranches UK 1-4 by end Feb: in 48 days. England total of those 4 is 11.7M to which add roughly 2.5M for NISW. This assumes that 100% of those eligible choose to take the vaccination. I wonder what refusnik planning figure the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) is using.
> The numbers getting a second dose of the vaccine before mid-March will be negligible (less than 0.2% of future vaccinations before April).
> ...



If you find any appropriate links please let the Mods know and we'll happily sticky them.


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> any appropriate links


Before posting I had already looked but unable to find. Scotland's leader said in the parliament (? a week + ago) that she would make the progress data visible. Will keep looking.
Wales promised 'from today': https://media.service.gov.wales/news/new-covid-vaccination-plan-published
"the latest figures show more than 86,000 people have received the vaccine. Wales will publish daily vaccine figures from today."
UK and by nation best, at this stage: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/det...ople_who_have_received_vaccinations_by_nation (I suspect this will be maintained on a weekly basis, but we can hope more frequently).
And this, albeit out-of-date, gives an insight to proportions:
Cumulative totals of first doses, as at each week-ending, by home nation[1]

Week-endingEnglandNorthern IrelandScotlandWalesTOTALSun 13/12/2020Not available[ii]3,62319,1328,143*30,898*Sun 20/12/2020542,96116,06858,80723,280*641,116*Sun 27/12/2020786,00031,01692,18835,335*944,539*Sun 03/01/20211,092,88540,685113,45949,403*1,296,432*


----------



## SpokeyDokey (11 Jan 2021)

Full rollout plan here (47 pages):

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...gest-vaccination-programme-in-british-history


----------



## SpokeyDokey (11 Jan 2021)

Now at 2.6 million to 2.3 million people.


----------



## lazybloke (11 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Perhaps you could share an authoritative basis for "stories of shortage of vials" (11 Jan)? Media like to pick old stuff and resurrect it.
> Just because they've had a long time to plan, it doesn't make the scale of the challenge any less enormous, does it? The NIMS has to roll this out: do you think this is easy?


Business Insider story of a global shortage of vials, May 2020

"i" article from Dec 31st, with quote from Jonathan van-Tam about critical shortages in "fill and finish", and details about how the promised 2 million doses pre week will outstrip availability for vials between Jan-March.

Shortage of vials reported by the BBC 6 days ago, affecting fill and finish (Prof Jonathan Van-Tam says fill and finish was a "critically short resource across the globe)

Of course I don't think this is easy, I certainly wouldn't want to be in the shoes of Boris, Gavin or Matt as they stand in front of the cameras facing questions every day, but it's so clear that they've been making a number of bad decisions for the last 4 months or so; further education students should have resumed courses online last September to minimise travel/mixing throughout the UK. The SAGE recommendation of a circuit break was ignored for over 4 weeks. It was clear by October that infections in schools were increasing rapidly. Christmas relaxations were never a good idea. Schools were forced to stay open until end of term in December, increasing the spread of infections at Christmas. Schools were again forced to reopen in January, allowing more mixing of households. I've had a grandmother and two nieces who caught the virus but were fine, and a pal at work (we're classed critical workers) who was sent by his local CMS to hospital by ambulance.

So with that context in mind, excuse me if I'm disappointed by what I see as avoidable issues reported in the press. 




@SpokeyDokey - thanks for that BBC link. I'll be delighted if there are enough vials, but a I'm hoping for a more emphatic confirmation than (paraphrasing): "we think we have enough". 
I understand the vials are discarded in the sharps bin after use, so are presumably incinerated.
Never mind the possibility of a UK shortage, if there's a confirmed global shortage of vials, then maybe re-use or recycling would be viable.

I'll have to read the DHSC document in detail before I comment further on the "less than a month" planning time. Admittedly I only heard it on the news and didn't look further than to google the original source.


----------



## accountantpete (11 Jan 2021)

Interesting article on vials - they have to be chemically inert and resist shards of glass inside.

They have enough raw materials so it's a matter of ramping up production

https://cen.acs.org/materials/Vials-vital-COVID-19-vaccine/98/i37


----------



## srw (11 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> We've now cleared 2.4 million vaccinations (inc' many with 2 jabs) - breaking on Sky:
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...navirus-jab-in-uk-says-boris-johnson-12185070
> 
> ...


It is the best. But as presentations of statistics go it's terrible.

You have a time series of data. You have been preparing to release this time series for the last nine months. It's the most important data you will release all year so that the country has confidence in your ability to protect them. It's really important to know trends in the data. Do you:
(a) Release the data each day as a list, showing daily incremental and cumulative data points, by date of dose and date of reporting so that it's absolutely clear how many doses have been given when to whom? or
(b) Release the data ad-hoc, showing only data to date, with no breakdown of reporting date or vaccination date, with inconsistencies between different data dumps?



SpokeyDokey said:


> Full rollout plan here (47 pages):
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...gest-vaccination-programme-in-british-history


Direct link to the actual document rather than the government PR machine's spin on the document: https://assets.publishing.service.g...951284/UK_COVID-19_vaccines_delivery_plan.pdf

Likewise the rollout of this vaccine is the most important and development in public health in a decade. Getting it right is essential, and gaining public confidence that you know what you're doing is even more important. Your efforts to date have not met the targets you have set and have been met by the public with some scepticism. Do you:
(a) Release the rollout plan in advance of starting the vaccination programme, making it short, accessible, factual and with clear measurable targets that are convincing and clearly stated? or
(b) Release the rollout plan a month after the rollout started, making it long, wordy, full of jargon, stuffed full of irrelevant callout sections on how wonderful and - yes "world-leading" (twice) your country's response has been, including quotes from "Major Button" and someone unidentified saying "So well organised"?

Buried somewhere within that 47-page report there is the 10-page plan it was before the ministers got at it.


----------



## PK99 (11 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Now at 2.6 million to 2.3 million people.



Is there a graph/plot/table anywhere showing how many vaccinated each week since the program started?


----------



## srw (11 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> Is there a graph/plot/table anywhere showing how many vaccinated each week since the program started?


I have one - in an internal report that one of my team prepared for the organisation I work for. There's something purporting to be it on the government's dashboard: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare but it's rubbish because it lumps all the pre-Christmas doses in one "week" and hasn't been updated for today's stats.


----------



## PK99 (11 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> I have one - in an internal report that one of my team prepared for the organisation I work for. There's something purporting to be it on the government's dashboard: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare but it's rubbish because it lumps all the pre-Christmas doses in one "week" and hasn't been updated for today's stats.



Thanks, that helps. I've got a rellie with her knickers in a twist that only 300,000 have had two doses.


----------



## BoldonLad (11 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Before posting I had already looked but unable to find. Scotland's leader said in the parliament (? a week + ago) that she would make the progress data visible. Will keep looking.
> Wales promised 'from today': https://media.service.gov.wales/news/new-covid-vaccination-plan-published
> "the latest figures show more than 86,000 people have received the vaccine. Wales will publish daily vaccine figures from today."
> UK and by nation best, at this stage: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/det...ople_who_have_received_vaccinations_by_nation (I suspect this will be maintained on a weekly basis, but we can hope more frequently).
> ...



There is a graph here: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare which shows England, Scotland, Wales, NI figures, the bad news is, it is not very up to date, and it is only in chunks of one week.


----------



## lazybloke (11 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Interesting article on vials - they have to be chemically inert and resist shards of glass inside.
> 
> They have enough raw materials so it's a matter of ramping up production
> 
> https://cen.acs.org/materials/Vials-vital-COVID-19-vaccine/98/i37


Interested to see they are borosilicate glass. Last time I looked, my local refuse centre wouldn't take the stuff except for landfill so that might answer my question about recycling. Reuse sounds like a qa nightmare.


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Jan 2021)

lazybloke said:


> Shortage of vials reported by the BBC 6 days ago, affecting fill and finish (Prof Jonathan Van-Tam says fill and finish was a "critically short resource across the globe)
> Of course I don't think this is easy, <<snip>>
> So with that context in mind, excuse me if I'm disappointed by what I see as avoidable issues reported in the press.


May 2020 - shortage of vials: bang up to date and relevant (and worth pointing up) then.
The next 31 Dec link is just the 'i' puffing up one of its September stories so they can say 'told you so' but with no current 'evidence'.
From the BBC report (5 Jan 21) to which you shared the link:
" process called fill and finish whereby the vaccine is put into vials and packaged up for use . . . there is already a concern . . . with the availability of key ingredients and equipment including glass vials a key issue.
England's deputy chief medical officer Prof Jonathan Van-Tam says fill and finish was a "critically short resource across the globe".
Process - tick
Availability of vials: It is of course a key issue - tick. A concern? Was a concern (early December), not a concern now (for UK anyway), had been addressed by inter alia, the UK Vaccines procurement task force led by Kate Bingham - who said on the radio last week (roughly) - "not a problem, do you think we are stupid not to address the whole chain of procurement to delivery?" Maybe you are concerned about vial availability in the rest of the world - no doubt there will be a variety of issues, fo which 'fill and finish' is but one. You can't reuse vials, btw. And JvT said nothing about a shortage of vials per se.
I don't doubt that vial supply is a critical element. But can find no current expression of concern.
As for the rant on the mistakes government have made, I wish your grandmother well - but it's got f all to do with rolling out a huge nation-wide, then world wide (UK well to the fore on that too, especially at Oxford-AZ 'at cost' prices) vaccination programme which you implied was being ballsed-up (I paraphrase) even though they'd had "almost a year to plan it". Let's look forward to a cunning plan (which is now transparently shared), delivered effectively across our United Kingdom, at amazing pace: no doubt with bumps on the road to lift one's fork over to smooth out the ride.


----------



## lazybloke (11 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> <snip>


Thanks. I'guess I'm happy to take it on trust that the shortage of vials has been addressed, but if you want to reassure folk then a link would have been nice.


----------



## fossyant (11 Jan 2021)

MIL had her first vacation today. Phew.


----------



## potsy (11 Jan 2021)

fossyant said:


> MIL had her first vacation today. Phew.


Where did she go?


----------



## mikeIow (11 Jan 2021)

potsy said:


> Where did she go?


We booked to go to Iceland next week.
Fingers crossed: if it goes well, we will try Asda the week after, then Tesco....

Back on topic: MIL in Nottingham, 88, COPD, ‘at risk’, still waiting to hear: feels like Nottingham has been a bit rubbish 

& I do wish they insisted on completing the 2 doses for all: Pfizer stated they could not guarantee the efficacy without the second dose within 3 weeks, & WHO backed that up: SAGE and Boris very specifically going *against* the science in deciding to just roll out 1 dose as widely as possible first 
Time will tell, but that has scientific potential to be a proper big mistake.....


----------



## mjr (11 Jan 2021)

Most people not keeping 2m distance in the queue for Stevenage mass vaccination centre. Also complaining it is cold in January.





Big praise to the man in the green jacket.


----------



## Unkraut (11 Jan 2021)

mikeIow said:


> I do wish they insisted on completing the 2 doses for all: Pfizer stated they could not guarantee the efficacy without the second dose within 3 weeks, & WHO backed that up: SAGE and Boris very specifically going *against* the science in deciding to just roll out 1 dose as widely as possible first ...


Postponing the second dose has been considered here, but at present rejected for the reason you give - it is not certain just how effective the vaccine with be before the second installment.

With the current high infection rate in the UK I suspect Boris is not so much going against the science as taking a calculated risk that more people with a less effective vaccine immunity is better than fewer people with the full effect.


----------



## rualexander (12 Jan 2021)

A question posed by Dr John Campbell in his video series on youtube today was why they don't use bigger vials with more doses in them if they are short of the vials they are using currently.


----------



## Blue Hills (12 Jan 2021)

fossyant said:


> MIL had her first vacation today. Phew.


Congrats. Good news despite the delay is that the clock is at least now ticking for the second jab. Would be interested in when folks get second jabs, how long after first.


----------



## Blue Hills (12 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Most people not keeping 2m distance in the queue for Stevenage mass vaccination centre. Also complaining it is cold in January.
> View attachment 568504
> 
> Big praise to the man in the green jacket.


From a quick look that looks ok, the couples may live together.


----------



## winjim (12 Jan 2021)

If this pandemic has taught me anything it's that people are really crap at estimating short distances.


----------



## nickyboy (12 Jan 2021)

Good news this morning. Got text from our GP advising that son#2 could book a vaccination appointment for today or tomorrow. Presumably these short notice appointments are due to postponing 2nd doses or something similar

Went online and system wouldn't allow as he "isn't over 80". Quick call to GP and they sorted it. Tomorrow morning at the local cricket club. He's delighted.

All very efficient. Hopefully same tomorrow

Edit to add: I've been notified this is my 10,000th post so it's nice that it's a good news one. I can't believe I've wasted so much time on CC over the years


----------



## SpokeyDokey (12 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> It is the best. But as presentations of statistics go it's terrible.
> 
> You have a time series of data. You have been preparing to release this time series for the last nine months. It's the most important data you will release all year so that the country has confidence in your ability to protect them. It's really important to know trends in the data. Do you:
> (a) Release the data each day as a list, showing daily incremental and cumulative data points, by date of dose and date of reporting so that it's absolutely clear how many doses have been given when to whom? or
> ...



Thanks very much. Have added the direct link to the sticky.


----------



## MrGrumpy (12 Jan 2021)

Mother is now booked for Saturday, seems to be rolling out with speed now. Still not sure about the gap in between jabs ?! No choice now as government have decided for us . I`m way down the pecking order just !! Shall see though the big 50 awaits this summer.


----------



## mjr (12 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> From a quick look that looks ok, the couples may live together.


Ignoring the couples, it is only over 2m spacing if some people are 4m plus tall!


----------



## fossyant (12 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Good news this morning. Got text from our GP advising that son#2 could book a vaccination appointment for today or tomorrow. Presumably these short notice appointments are due to postponing 2nd doses or something similar
> 
> Went online and system wouldn't allow as he "isn't over 80". Quick call to GP and they sorted it. Tomorrow morning at the local cricket club. He's delighted.
> 
> ...



Fantastic news for you ! Must take a little worry off !


----------



## Bazzer (12 Jan 2021)

My 89 y/o Mum is booked for her injection in a few days at the GP surgery.


----------



## fossyant (12 Jan 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Mother is now booked for Saturday, seems to be rolling out with speed now. Still not sure about the gap in between jabs ?! No choice now as government have decided for us . I`m way down the pecking order just !! Shall see though the big 50 awaits this summer.



I'm only just over 50, but not holding hopes up as no health conditions to be concerned about, so I might be a day before the under 50's !

Glad your mum is being done, 1 injection is better than non- it reduces the severity of any infection.


----------



## fossyant (12 Jan 2021)

MIL thinks we can come and visit her at the home now she's vaccinated - it's not going to happen until Autumn I recon. Very sad, but needs must.


----------



## tom73 (12 Jan 2021)

Still no word on when Mrs 73 can receive her's over 12 hours a day with wall to wall covid they better get a move on. Or no staff will be left as for her patients no-one knows. The "oh look how good we are" vaccine plan out yesterday says mobile units will be used it's not practical. Why is the question every other vaccine is just sent and health care do them. So in her day job she's not good enough but yet she about to start doing yet more extra work being in charge of a mass vaccination centre.


----------



## Blue Hills (12 Jan 2021)

fossyant said:


> MIL thinks we can come and visit her at the home now she's vaccinated - it's not going to happen until Autumn I recon. Very sad, but needs must.


Do folks have views/info on safety of visits after one jab rather than two?


----------



## tom73 (12 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Do folks have views/info on safety of visits after one jab rather than two?



You can't is the simple reply even after both measures will still be in place for a good time to come. The same go's for going to see grand children the vaccine is not a freedom ticket. It's likely to be a some time before the real world data shows how much protection it gives to others.


----------



## Blue Hills (12 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> You can't is the simple reply even after both measures will still be in place for a good time to come. The same go's for going to see grand children the vaccine is not a freedom ticket. It's likely to be a some time before the real world data shows how much protection it gives to others.


to clarify - I meant safety for the elderly person who had had the single/double jab. not the person visiting them.


----------



## vickster (12 Jan 2021)

The injection doesn’t stop you getting Covid but it lowers the likelihood of moderate-severe-fatal disease, with the elderly / clinically vulnerable most at risk of these


----------



## SpokeyDokey (12 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> to clarify - I meant safety for the elderly person who had had the single/double jab. not the person visiting them.



I believe that JVT said during last weeks briefing that the first jab will prevent any subsequent Covid infection from being serious by reducing its impact on the individual.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (12 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> The injection doesn’t stop you getting Covid but it lowers the likelihood of moderate-severe-fatal disease, with the elderly / clinically vulnerable most at risk of these



Simultaneous post!


----------



## vickster (12 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Simultaneous post!


At least we said the same thing


----------



## PK99 (12 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> *The injection doesn’t *stop you getting Covid but it lowers the likelihood of moderate-severe-fatal disease, with the elderly / clinically vulnerable most at risk of these



I was under the impression that it was a case of* "It is not clear whether.."*
rather than your definitive statement.

Can someone clarify?


----------



## vickster (12 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> I was under the impression that it was a case of* "It is not clear whether.."*
> rather than your definitive statement.
> 
> Can someone clarify?


Ok maybe I misspoke. There are plenty of unknowns, it’s only been used outside trials for a month or so.
Similarly the issue with a 12 week gap, no one knows but it’s effect almost certainly doesn’t disappear after 3 weeks, that’s just what the trial protocol was. 
Certainly the two consultants I know who’ve had it aren’t concerned about the gap, and will continue to follow the measures in place to minimise spread (hand washing, masks, social distancing).


----------



## SpokeyDokey (12 Jan 2021)

According to this we are now up to 2.68m vaccinations (no breakdown of multiple doses):

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Jan 2021)

rualexander said:


> why they don't use bigger vials with more doses in them


(from Dr J Campbell video - why not 50ml vials so 100 doses per vial?)
Currently the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines are supplied with 6 doses, expecting assured 5 + wastage. And the Oxford-AZ vaccine is typically in vials containing 8/10 doses:
•80 dose packs (Ten 4 ml vials with 8 doses per vial)
•100 dose packs (Ten 5 ml vials with 10 doses per vial) (less common)
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/index.html
Edit: to add link to @mjr comment (downthread) which explains the practical reasons (not a 'finish and fill' issue) why this (rough) size of vial is used:
#https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/the-covid-vaccine-thread.267960/page-67#post-6269639


----------



## midlife (12 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> (from Dr J Campbell video - why not 50ml vials so 100 doses per vial?)
> Currently the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines are supplied with 6 doses, expecting assured 5 + wastage. And the Oxford-AZ vaccine is typically in vials containing 8/10 doses:
> •80 dose packs (Ten 4 ml vials with 8 doses per vial)
> •100 dose packs (Ten 5 ml vials with 10 doses per vial) (less common)
> https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/index.html



We have been told to use the special no waste syringes and get 6 doses out of each Pfizer vial.


----------



## tom73 (12 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> to clarify - I meant safety for the elderly person who had had the single/double jab. not the person visiting them.


oh sorry which ever vaccine they have, one dose or both they will have a level of protection. They may still go on to catch covid but more mild and less chance of needing hospital admission or death. Any vaccine if only one dose is a hell of a lot less risk than no vaccine at all. Which go's for anyone what ever age.


----------



## mjr (12 Jan 2021)

rualexander said:


> A question posed by Dr John Campbell in his video series on youtube today was why they don't use bigger vials with more doses in them if they are short of the vials they are using currently.


That was answered in this week's podcast from, I think, BBC Radio 4 ("How to vaccinate the world" with Tim Harford). Basically, bigger vials means you lose more each time a mistake is made or if there is any contamination. It's a trade-off or optimisation problem and no-one knows the best answer for sure before they set up all the tooling for a specific size.


----------



## Rusty Nails (12 Jan 2021)

A friend of mine aged 79 had his vaccination today, after being contacted yesterday. He has no underlying conditions and doesn't know whether it was part of the planned rollout or whether they had short notice spare capacity.

I might get mine by mid-Feb at this rate.


----------



## kingrollo (12 Jan 2021)

Getting mine tommorow. !


----------



## Julia9054 (12 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> A friend of mine aged 79 had his vaccination today, after being contacted yesterday. He has no underlying conditions and doesn't know whether it was part of the planned rollout or whether they had short notice spare capacity.
> 
> I might get mine by mid-Feb at this rate.


My mum is 79 and had hers just before Christmas. She thinks it was because she rung the surgery about something else and then asked


----------



## kynikos (12 Jan 2021)

Had mine this afternoon. 68, key worker, NHS 3rd party provider.


----------



## winjim (12 Jan 2021)

Just got my invitation to make an appointment this Fri or Sat. Bit weird as I'm sure there are people I work with who should be higher priority but I'm not going to turn it down.

Firstly I need to unblind myself to see if I've already had it...


----------



## vickster (12 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Just got my invitation to make an appointment this Fri or Sat. Bit weird as I'm sure there are people I work with who should be higher priority but I'm not going to turn it down.
> 
> Firstly I need to unblind myself to see if I've already had it...


Friend of mine (frontline hospital consultant) was involved in the trial...unblinded...she’s now (partially) vaccinated against Covid...
And meningitis!


----------



## winjim (12 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Friend of mine (frontline hospital consultant) was involved in the trial...unblinded...she’s now (partially) vaccinated against Covid...
> And meningitis!


Yes, my colleague is now fully vaccinated against meningitis.

But I've just unblinded myself and I was in the vaccine group. So I'm fully vaccinated and there's no need for me to have any more. Whoop whoop, I was fine all along...


----------



## vickster (12 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Yes, my colleague is now fully vaccinated against meningitis.
> 
> But I've just unblinded myself and I was in the vaccine group. So I'm fully vaccinated and there's no need for me to have any more. Whoop whoop, I was fine all along...


Now you can go out cycling for as long as you want...
oh hang on, the vaccine doesn't necessarily stop you giving it to others (or actually catching it)


----------



## winjim (12 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Now you can go out cycling for as long as you want...
> oh hang on, the vaccine doesn't stop you giving it to others (or actually catching it)


Yeah, I still don't want to give it to my kids (or anyone else for that matter). I wonder if and when there will be a children's vaccine.


----------



## vickster (12 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Yeah, I still don't want to give it to my kids (or anyone else for that matter). I wonder if and when there will be a children's vaccine.


Don't know, are there any trials? It is much lower risk for kids though (although they are little plague carriers obviously)


----------



## srw (12 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> According to this we are now up to 2.68m vaccinations (no breakdown of multiple doses):
> 
> https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations


https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

It's crap data, but it does at least break down the doses.


----------



## BoldonLad (12 Jan 2021)

rualexander said:


> A question posed by Dr John Campbell in his video series on youtube today was why they don't use bigger vials with more doses in them if they are short of the vials they are using currently.



At a guess, it seems reasonable to assume the filling of vials is done by machine, perhaps, it is not simple to switch and/or mix vial size?


----------



## winjim (12 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Don't know, are there any trials? It is much lower risk for kids though (although they are little plague carriers obviously)


Not as far as I'm aware. I don't know what the process is for kids, presumably it's an ethics nightmare.


----------



## vickster (12 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Not as far as I'm aware. I don't know what the process is for kids, presumably it's an ethics nightmare.


Plenty of other vaccines for kids though.
Pfizer and Moderna vaccines being trialled in children
www.keyc.com/2021/01/10/clinical-trials-underway-develop-childrens-covid-vaccine/


----------



## rualexander (12 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> At a guess, it seems reasonable to assume the filling of vials is done by machine, perhaps, it is not simple to switch and/or mix vial size?


Any decent pharmaceutical manufacturing plant would be able to fill vials of various sizes without much difficulty.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (13 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
> 
> It's crap data, but it does at least break down the doses.



Thanks.

Added to sticky until something better comes along!


----------



## mjr (13 Jan 2021)

rualexander said:


> Any decent pharmaceutical manufacturing plant would be able to fill vials of various sizes without much difficulty.


Which pharma plants have you built, please?


----------



## tom73 (13 Jan 2021)

Out the blue yesterday Mrs 73 was informed 100 doses are being delivered next week. With over 1000's to vaccinate on top of health care staff. It going to take some time to get it all done. As for the e-learning all I can say is which clown came up with it is totally clueless.


----------



## nickyboy (13 Jan 2021)

Son#2 had the Pfizer vaccine this morning at our local centre. All very efficient. Interesting that practically all the 30 or so folk in the "15 minutes post vaccination monitoring tent" were younger people who presumably were either front line workers or had significantly elevated risk. Almost no oldies


----------



## kynikos (13 Jan 2021)

Mostly front line workers when I had mine yesterday. The sad thing was that the doctor who went through my medical form with me to be sure I was OK to have the jab was an oncologist who was helping out as there were no theatres available to enable him to perform his normal work.


----------



## Blue Hills (13 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Son#2 had the Pfizer vaccine this morning at our local centre. All very efficient. Interesting that practically all the 30 or so folk in the "15 minutes post vaccination monitoring tent" were younger people who presumably were either front line workers or had significantly elevated risk. Almost no oldies


Suggests to you that in your area at least all the oldsters have had a first jab?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (13 Jan 2021)

What's the general feeling on here regarding the vaccination program impact on infection rates, hospitalisation numbers and death rates in, say, the next month or so?


----------



## accountantpete (13 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> What's the general feeling on here regarding the vaccination program impact on infection rates, hospitalisation numbers and death rates in, say, the next month or so?



Lockdown measures from before Christmas seem to be finally filtering through in reduced hospital admissions in certain areas - bit too early for the vaccination programme effects yet.

The 50/60 year olds are getting in hospital with covid but not dying so it's going to be late march/april before significant change unless the latest lockdown works wonders.


----------



## newfhouse (13 Jan 2021)

My mother (86, Kingston Upon Thames) received a letter in the post today inviting her to book a jab through the wider vaccine programme. Within minutes of opening it she had a phone call from her GP practice offering her an appointment on Sunday in the church hall next to the surgery. Two offers in a day, so the system seems to be working well.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (13 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Lockdown measures from before Christmas seem to be finally filtering through in reduced hospital admissions in certain areas - bit too early for the vaccination programme effects yet.
> 
> The 50/60 year olds are getting in hospital with covid but not dying so it's going to be late march/april before significant change unless the latest lockdown works wonders.



Boris being quoted as saying Lockdown v3 showing signs of already working (BBC - today's PMQ's) - hope the data leading to that view is shared asap.


----------



## vickster (13 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Boris being quoted as saying Lockdown v3 showing signs of already working (BBC - today's PMQ's) - hope the data leading to that view is shared asap.


Numbers have started to fall here, phew. And similarly in the next door borough
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274


----------



## mjr (13 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Suggests to you that in your area at least all the oldsters have had a first jab?


Or maybe that they cannot get to the vaccination centre easily in the morning with icy pavements/roads and reduced bus and dial-a-ride services?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (13 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Numbers have started to fall here, phew. And similarly in the next door borough
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274



Thanks for that - good news indeed.


----------



## tom73 (13 Jan 2021)

newfhouse said:


> My mother (86, Kingston Upon Thames) received a letter in the post today inviting her to book a jab through the wider vaccine programme. Within minutes of opening it she had a phone call from her GP practice offering her an appointment on Sunday in the church hall next to the surgery. Two offers in a day, so the system seems to be working well.


That's the problem the wider one has been set above the tried and tested primary care network and has no access to anything. Inc medical records. So invites are going out based on are only they have no idea of other health conditions GP's have no idea what it's up to I've know of a few multiple offers inc some with who have had 3 offers.
One word of warning it turns out if you have your first jab at one of national centres your GP can't give you the second one.


----------



## kingrollo (13 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> That's the problem the wider one has been set above the tried and tested primary care network and has no access to anything. Inc medical records. So invites are going out based on are only they have no idea of other health conditions GP's have no idea what it's up to I've know of a few multiple offers inc some with who have had 3 offers.
> One word of warning it turns out if you have your first jab at one of national centres your GP can't give you the second one.



....and that last paragraph says it all really.


----------



## BoldonLad (13 Jan 2021)

rualexander said:


> Any decent pharmaceutical manufacturing plant would be able to fill vials of various sizes without much difficulty.



If you say so, I am quite willing to accept I am wrong


----------



## newfhouse (13 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> One word of warning it turns out if you have your first jab at one of national centres your GP can't give you the second one.


In this case the simple option is for her to go via her GP. I assume that someone will find the regional centre more convenient so her doses there won’t be wasted.


----------



## BoldonLad (13 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Boris being quoted as saying Lockdown v3 showing signs of already working (BBC - today's PMQ's) - hope the data leading to that view is shared asap.



The "infections per hundred thousand" figure for my local authority area was quoted as being down by approximately 100, yesterday, at 430, on local BBC News.


----------



## BoldonLad (13 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> That's the problem the wider one has been set above the tried and tested primary care network and has no access to anything. Inc medical records. *So invites are going out based on are only* they have no idea of other health conditions GP's have no idea what it's up to I've know of a few multiple offers inc some with who have had 3 offers.
> One word of warning it turns out if you have your first jab at one of national centres your GP can't give you the second one.



I am assuming this means "on age only" ?

How are they determining this? ie, from electoral roll, or, from GP Patient records? (if you know that is)


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> What's the general feeling on here regarding the vaccination program impact on infection rates, hospitalisation numbers and death rates in, say, the next month or so?


In the next month the death rates are, sadly, more or less 'baked in'. However on a 2 month view I reckon the reduction in death rates due to vaccination (of at least one dose by today (13 Jan) will be significant. I think one of John Campbell's videos estimated 6,000 less deaths by 1 April, with an optimistic roll-out and delivery of the programme. Since this reduction would be spread roughly and increasing over Feb and March, this might be -50 on 1 Feb rising to -200 by 1 Apr.
On hospitalisation numbers, I think the vaccination programme will have a progressively beneficial effect (I bloody well hope so). These very recent PHE graphs:




The hospitalisations graph shows there's about an equal number of over 85s and under 85s admitted. By 1 Feb it'd reasonable to assume that every over 85 has had (or at least been offered, don't know what the take up is) the first dose and had 12 days to develop 80% resistance to infection and 80% will therefore not get infected and those that do (no vaccine gives complete assurance of immunity) will experience less severe symptoms, hopefully keeping many of that remaining 20% not needing treatment in hospital. So might we assume that (due to vaccination) admissions to hospital (due to COVID-19) of over 85s will be cut by 90+%?
On infection rates, only a small percentage of those testing positive for COVID-19 are over 80, so the effect of the vaccination programme (NB first dose + 12 days) will be very limited in the next month and be dwarfed by the effect of improved (enforced) reduction in risk of infection behavior by the population.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> One word of warning it turns out if you have your first jab at one of national centres your GP can't give you the second one.


Where did you get that from, Tom? The jabbed person will have a note saying which vaccine they've had (so their GP would be able to refer to that to make sure they could follow like with like (NB not before April if it's a 12 week interval). Or is this a records or an IT issue (of whatever variety)?


----------



## tom73 (13 Jan 2021)

newfhouse said:


> In this case the simple option is for her to go via her GP. I assume that someone will find the regional centre more convenient so her doses there won’t be wasted.


Look's to be best way if she's wan't someone who she knows and knows something about her. 
If anyone is wondering the GP lead large hubs are fine it's the big mass ones that's the problem. They look to be the next nightingale hospitals all for show and good PR but little else.


----------



## nickyboy (13 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Or maybe that they cannot get to the vaccination centre easily in the morning with icy pavements/roads and reduced bus and dial-a-ride services?



No, that's not correct

1) He was offered a number of slots at varying times of the day
2) No icy pavements or roads
3) There are buses every 10 minutes within a short walk of the vaccination centre

The reality is that all the over 80s who want a vaccination in the area have had their first dose. The second doses have been deferred leaving these slots available for other groups


----------



## nickyboy (13 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Suggests to you that in your area at least all the oldsters have had a first jab?


Correct, at least those that want it

We're a very young and hip town, not too many oldies it seems


----------



## roubaixtuesday (13 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> If you say so, I am quite willing to accept I am wrong



You're right. Revalidating a process for a new vial size is not a trivial exercise, even if the given filling line is capable of it, which it may or may not be.

Additionally, a new fill size may be deemed a significant change and require months of new stability data. That will depend on things like the headspace, container closure system etc. Particularly for sterile processes like this, changes requires a lot of data to prove the process is working in practice, not just that it's OK in principle.


----------



## PeteXXX (13 Jan 2021)

This is a calculation for me. 68 years old, not a care/NHS worker or with underlying health issues.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (13 Jan 2021)

PeteXXX said:


> View attachment 568724
> 
> 
> This is a calculation for me. 68 years old, not a care/NHS worker or with underlying health issues.



Scarily low uptake rate.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Jan 2021)

If the programme only achieves 1M a week, that would be an epic fail (in terms of the Tranches 1-4 done by mid-Feb target). Given you are an optimist, I suggest you change the rate to 2M in the tool.
Edit: I had a quick play with this yesterday (Monday).


----------



## PeteXXX (13 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> If the programme only achieves 1M a week, that would be an epic fail (in terms of the Tranches 1-4 done by mid-Feb target). Given you are an optimist, I suggest you change the rate to 2M in the tool.


I don't think it gave me the option to change the rate, just age and a few other questions. 
I got the link from the Independent news site if you want a play with it.


----------



## mjr (13 Jan 2021)

PeteXXX said:


> I don't think it gave me the option to change the rate, just age and a few other questions.


There's an "advanced" tab or expander which lets you mess with them. 70% uptake is consistent with other vaccines IIRC. The number is lowered by not only refusers, but also people who can't take it due to other drugs and so on.


----------



## rualexander (13 Jan 2021)

Vaccine deployment plan for Scotland now available online as a pdf.
https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-deployment-plan-2021/


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> 70% uptake is consistent with other vaccines IIRC.


Seems about right: the average 2017-18 and 2018-19 uptake percentage of over 65s (as offered) was 72.9% and 72.0% - GP data. Add to that about 1.7M doses administered by pharmacies (but likely not free and so not to over 65s, I guess).


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Jan 2021)

I had had a quick play with the tool (shared by @PeteXXX) yesterday (Monday) - https://www.omnicalculator.com/health/vaccine-queue-uk.
and simply changed the 1000000 to 2000000.
I have to observe the dates it comes up with seem erroneous to me (workings available). A 68 year old with no 'stuff' is in Tranche 5 (one of 3.4M) so if the vaccination programme hits its "mid Feb" target then Tranche 5 will be 'done' in the following 11 days (@ 2Mpw).
1) = 1.1M
2) = 5M
3) = 2.3M
4) = 3.3M
About 2.6M first doses given (13 Jan). Will need to get to over 2Mpw quite quickly (from less than 1Mpw now) to achieve target.
Add in police and teachers at some stage, perhaps.


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> We have been told to use the special no waste syringes and get 6 doses out of each Pfizer vial.


"Dr Ramsay added that staff had been using the narrower needles from the start of the rollout.
"Doctors and nurses are routinely able to get a sixth dose out of the Pfizer vials, which are supposed to contain five, and an extra dose out of both the AstraZeneca eight and 10-dose vials.
"Dr Ramsay said the practice was commonplace but not uniform because it partly depends on the individual technique of drawing the vaccine.
"The extra doses were confirmed later in the hearing by Nadhim Zahawi, the minister for vaccine deployment, who also said wastage of doses – for example due to breaks in the cold chain – were "much less" than the 10 per cent predicted by NHS England."


----------



## accountantpete (14 Jan 2021)

Some Regional comparisons here - Sadiq Khan is not a happy bunny
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...ss-england-as-midlands-leads-the-way-12187569


----------



## SpokeyDokey (14 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Some Regional comparisons here - Sadiq Khan is not a happy bunny
> https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...ss-england-as-midlands-leads-the-way-12187569



Well, i wouldn't advocate any region not getting a fair and appropriate share but Khan at least will maybe understand the unfair appropriation of resources to London that generally occur vs the rest of the country.


----------



## oldwheels (14 Jan 2021)

rualexander said:


> Vaccine deployment plan for Scotland now available online as a pdf.
> https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-deployment-plan-2021/


Link does not work on my macbook. Says page does not exist.


----------



## Hover Fly (14 Jan 2021)

oldwheels said:


> Link does not work on my macbook. Says page does not exist.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55663318


----------



## oldwheels (14 Jan 2021)

Hover Fly said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55663318


That works thanks.


----------



## kingrollo (15 Jan 2021)

Actually we are rolling out the vaccine pretty fast - over 900,000 jabs in the last 7 days - and around 3m in total. When I had mine the place was rammed.
Pfizer jab - and no side effects 48 hrs in.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (15 Jan 2021)

My 88 year old MIL here in Edinburgh still hasn’t been contacted for the first jag. 
Scottish Govt not even close to hitting their targets so far. Doesn’t bode well.


----------



## Mo1959 (15 Jan 2021)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> My 88 year old MIL here in Edinburgh still hasn’t been contacted for the first jag.
> Scottish Govt not even close to hitting their targets so far. Doesn’t bode well.
> View attachment 568996


Seems to be a bit down to luck what area you are in at the moment. Spoke to a lady yesterday that said she and her husband got theirs last week.


----------



## tom73 (15 Jan 2021)

Given the number of older people I've heard and spoke to who see getting a vaccine as a ticket to do what they like. 
The message is just not cutting though that it's not and won't be for some time.


----------



## mjr (15 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Some Regional comparisons here - Sadiq Khan is not a happy bunny
> https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...ss-england-as-midlands-leads-the-way-12187569


"Midlands leads the way". Remind me: which is the party of the Mayor of the West Midlands? And of the Mayor of London?


----------



## Blue Hills (15 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> "Midlands leads the way". Remind me: which is the party of the Mayor of the West Midlands? And of the Mayor of London?


any evidence for that charge?
Have you looked at the whole country for jabs related to ruling party?

On the plus side, unless there is serious misinformation afoot, credit where credit is due, I have the impression that the UK is doing pretty well in international comparisons on getting the jab done.


----------



## nickyboy (15 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> "Midlands leads the way". Remind me: which is the party of the Mayor of the West Midlands? And of the Mayor of London?


So you're suggesting that the political affiliation of the mayor influences the resoures to roll out the vaccination program?

Have you got any evidence whatsoever to back this up? I'd be fascinated to see it if you have


----------



## accountantpete (15 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> "Midlands leads the way". Remind me: which is the party of the Mayor of the West Midlands? And of the Mayor of London?



The "Midlands" is slightly bigger than Birmingham and Coventry!


----------



## Julia9054 (15 Jan 2021)

Father in law had an appointment for his vaccination yesterday. Unfortunately it got cancelled because of the snow. Bit worried about him at the moment. He is very lethargic and down. He says he has a cold but is refusing to get a Covid test.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (15 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Given the number of older people I've heard and spoke to who see getting a vaccine as a ticket to do what they like.
> The message is just not cutting though that it's not and won't be for some time.



Sadly, I agree:

From the Beeb yesterday:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55654127


----------



## tom73 (15 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> any evidence for that charge?
> Have you looked at the whole country for jabs related to ruling party?
> 
> On the plus side, unless there is serious misinformation afoot, credit where credit is due, I have the impression that the UK is doing pretty well in international comparisons on getting the jab done.


The figure are not the whole picture the roll out for health care works is a mess and no way on target. In the mean time the call for higher PPE use for all front-line staff has been turned down flat. So health care infections are going totally the wrong way not to forgetting the growing death numbers.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (15 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> The figure are not the whole picture the roll out for health care works is a mess and no way on target. In the mean time the call for higher PPE use for all front-line staff has been turned down flat. So health care infections are going totally the wrong way not to forgetting the growing death numbers.



What are the vaccination target/actual numbers for frontline workers? Where is the blockage?


----------



## tom73 (15 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> What are the vaccination target/actual numbers for frontline workers? Where is the blockage?


That's the issue they are not giving out that information. Everyone is suppose to get it as part of the first roll out so the February target. 
Blockages are all over the place it's become bit of pot luck as to who get's one and who don't. Even in Hospitals plenty are still waiting with no word as to when. Away from Hospitals and GP's into the wider parts it's a total mess. Students in some placers on placements many who are now back working filling in staff gaps look like not getting anytime soon.


----------



## mjr (15 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> any evidence for that charge?


Here's the link on gov.uk which says they're going to help Andy Street and screw Sadiq Kahn... get real! The government isn't quite so incompetent to leave such a smoking gun lying around: Grayling is no longer a minister.



> Have you looked at the whole country for jabs related to ruling party?


No. I've just noticed this looks like a second time recently where West Mids appears to be treated better than London. I'd like to see such an analysis.



> On the plus side, unless there is serious misinformation afoot, credit where credit is due, I have the impression that the UK is doing pretty well in international comparisons on getting the jab done.


Yes, it's both good compared to most (only Israel and UAE are going faster per head, excluded from the graph below because they are so high they make all the others difficult to read) and looking below-target.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (15 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Here's the link on gov.uk which says they're going to help Andy Street and screw Sadiq Kahn... get real! The government isn't quite so incompetent to leave such a smoking gun lying around: Grayling is no longer a minister.
> 
> 
> No. I've just noticed this looks like a second time recently where West Mids appears to be treated better than London. I'd like to see such an analysis.
> ...



How does anything in that post support what you said in #1054?


----------



## nickyboy (15 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Here's the link on gov.uk which says they're going to help Andy Street and screw Sadiq Kahn... get real! The government isn't quite so incompetent to leave such a smoking gun lying around: Grayling is no longer a minister.
> 
> View attachment 569031


So that's No, you don't have any evidence at all. Just a wild conspiracy theory.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (15 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> That's the issue they are not giving out that information. Everyone is suppose to get it as part of the first roll out so the February target.
> Blockages are all over the place it's become bit of pot luck as to who get's one and who don't. Even in Hospitals plenty are still waiting with no word as to when. Away from Hospitals and GP's into the wider parts it's a total mess. Students in some placers on placements many who are now back working filling in staff gaps look like not getting anytime soon.



A subjective assessment then?

Not being funny Tom but I'll wait until some hard numbers are issued until I take a view.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (15 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Sadly, I agree:
> 
> From the Beeb yesterday:
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55654127


Yes this is bothering me too. At the moment I’m finding it quite easy to keep 2m away from older people as they are mostly as scared of me as I am of them, we both try to give way. But once they have the vaccine will they still be so eager to keep their distance ? Based on current forecasts most of us won’t be getting the protection of the second jag until well into summer or even autumn.


----------



## tom73 (15 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> A subjective assessment then?
> 
> Not being funny Tom but I'll wait until some hard numbers are issued until I take a view.


Then you will be waiting some time as they won't publish any partly due to them not knowing how many need one.


----------



## tom73 (15 Jan 2021)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> Yes this is bothering me too. At the moment I’m finding it quite easy to keep 2m away from older people as they are mostly as scared of me as I am of them, we both try to give way. But once they have the vaccine will they still be so eager to keep their distance ? Based on current forecasts most of us won’t be getting the protection of the second jag until well into summer or even autumn.



This will be an ever growing problem as more get one and call for things to change. Once the big business boys join in the government up to now has been quick to follow them. They already are quick to push back when it's made clear it wont be that quick. Even if everyone in the first 2 rounds get a jab. A very large part of the population will still need a level of protection.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (15 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Then you will be waiting some time as they won't publish any partly due to them not knowing how many need one.



I thought you said that they were nowhere near being on target in your initial post - implying that someone, somewhere has set a target. Is there a target or not?

I would've also thought that the NHS had quantified the number of frontline staff eligible for an early dose vaccine?


----------



## Blue Hills (15 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Sadly, I agree:
> 
> From the Beeb yesterday:
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55654127


Not sure i see what's wrong with that to be honest spokey. Folks want to live again. From a swift read there is an implication that many of those punters are calculating on having had two jabs by the time their oddysey of sun sangria and sex rolls round. Or if heading off by national express maybe a fish and chip supper and a bit of fizz.


----------



## midlife (15 Jan 2021)

Had to wander into the hospital yesterday and came across the queue for the COVID vaccine hub. Surprised to see construction workers building the new radiotherapy centre in the queue....


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (15 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Folks want to live again.


That’s the problem. Just because they’ve had the 2 jabs it doesn’t mean that they should be allowed to ‘start living’ again. Because the rest of us will still be at risk.


----------



## winjim (15 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Had to wander into the hospital yesterday and came across the queue for the COVID vaccine hub. Surprised to see construction workers building the new radiotherapy centre in the queue....


A lot of trusts have done their patient facing staff and are now onto vaccinating their non-clinical and support staff.


----------



## Blue Hills (15 Jan 2021)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> That’s the problem. Just because they’ve had the 2 jabs it doesn’t mean that they should be allowed to ‘start living’ again. Because the rest of us will still be at risk.


Keep your distance then is surely the advice?
What do you think the "rules" should be for aged funsters who have had two jabs?


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (15 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Keep your distance then is surely the advice?


That’s part of the advice yes but the powers that be will have to think very carefully about how this is all going to work, its going to be a constantly changing picture as the different sets of people get the different jabs over the course of the summer.


----------



## midlife (15 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> A lot of trusts have done their patient facing staff and are now onto vaccinating their non-clinical and support staff.



Yesterday was running in a "drop in" mode without appointments. I was just surprised as all the forms require an NHS payroll number.


----------



## winjim (15 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Yesterday was running in a "drop in" mode without appointments. I was just surprised as all the forms require an NHS payroll number.


Yes, you'd think the construction staff would be contractors.


----------



## Blue Hills (15 Jan 2021)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> That’s part of the advice yes but the powers that be will have to think very carefully about how this is all going to work, its going to be a constantly changing picture as the different sets of people get the different jabs over the course of the summer.


Well i can't disagree with that reasonable statement.
Clearly there may still be ever changing travel restrictions depending on destination. Folks will have to take that risk when booking.
Skegness may be worth a punt.


----------



## tom73 (15 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I thought you said that they were nowhere near being on target in your initial post - implying that someone, somewhere has set a target. Is there a target or not?
> 
> I would've also thought that the NHS had quantified the number of frontline staff eligible for an early dose vaccine?



The only target set is the February one as the NHS define it so much is now provided by private sector we are very much part of the magically government narrative "frontline". What @midlife has seen is due to the government opening up the program a few days ago to include all contractors.Yet former NHS care staff who have been moved to private sector delivering face to face care are left with no word or access to the vaccine. The vaccine is suppose to be given based on risk but now has sadly turned into the next numbers game being lead by the top with little idea of the needs of the bottom.


----------



## newfhouse (15 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> The vaccine is suppose to be given based on risk but now has sadly turned into the next numbers game being lead by the top with little idea of the needs of the bottom.


The media only wants easily digested numbers. If success were measured by how quickly the vaccine programme worked through the priority categories I think we may see a better outcome with less regional variation.


----------



## mjr (15 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> So that's No, you don't have any evidence at all. Just a wild conspiracy theory.


How many times must London get shafted before you think it a bit sus?

I've been reminded by message about the different treatment of TfL and TfWM in the first lockdown, too. Again, I don't know how the other city transport bodies were handled.


----------



## nickyboy (15 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> How many times must London get shafted before you think it a bit sus?
> 
> I've been reminded by message about the different treatment of TfL and TfWM in the first lockdown, too. Again, I don't know how the other city transport bodies were handled.




Just provide a scintilla of evidence for your assertion....please. Otherwise I'll bin it along with all the other bonkers conspiracy theories such as Bill Gates is going to track me via my vaccination.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (15 Jan 2021)

3.24 million so far (to 14 Jan) is creditable to all involved. Especially with some areas affected by snow.


----------



## mjr (15 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Just provide a scintilla of evidence for your assertion....please. Otherwise I'll bin it along with all the other bonkers conspiracy theories such as Bill Gates is going to track me via my vaccination.


Midlands 447,329 vaccinations given.
London 237,524 vaccinations given.

Now, that is far far far from conclusive, but it is definitely a scintilla of evidence, more than actual tinfoil hat conspiracy theories.

And in case you don't know, I am a midlander with much more family there than London, but this still looks unfair to me.


----------



## winjim (15 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> 3.24 million so far (to 14 Jan) is creditable to all involved. Especially with some areas affected by snow.


Wife had to drive across town today in the snow despite us now having vaccine on site. Said she would have happily walked for it if necessary.


----------



## accountantpete (15 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Midlands 447,329 vaccinations given.
> London 237,524 vaccinations given.
> 
> Now, that is far far far from conclusive, but it is definitely a scintilla of evidence, more than actual tinfoil hat conspiracy theories.
> ...



Less people over 80 in London


----------



## mjr (15 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Less people over 80 in London


Maybe, but half as many? And the other priority groups?


----------



## nickyboy (15 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Maybe, but half as many? And the other priority groups?


Plus London has a higher ethnic minority percentage who are less likely to take up vaccination (helping to explain why London is at 30% of over 80s but some regions are over 50%)
NHS London has said that London is getting its fair share of vaccines. Let it go. There is zero evidence of manipulation of vaccine supplies by region. It's just a conspiracy theory


----------



## PK99 (15 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> *Plus London has a higher ethnic minority percentage who are less likely to take up vaccination* (helping to explain why London is at 30% of over 80s but some regions are over 50%)
> NHS London has said that London is getting its fair share of vaccines. Let it go. There is zero evidence of manipulation of vaccine supplies by region. It's just a conspiracy theory



UK 87% white
London 60%


----------



## kingrollo (15 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Had to wander into the hospital yesterday and came across the queue for the COVID vaccine hub. Surprised to see construction workers building the new radiotherapy centre in the queue....



Why ? - it's a numbers game. 

Don't know how long it will go on - but one place - you turn up with ID and your NHS number - you get a jab.


----------



## kingrollo (15 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Plus London has a higher ethnic minority percentage who are less likely to take up vaccination (helping to explain why London is at 30% of over 80s but some regions are over 50%)
> NHS London has said that London is getting its fair share of vaccines. Let it go. There is zero evidence of manipulation of vaccine supplies by region. It's just a conspiracy theory


Well the west midlands has high ethnic minorities as well.


----------



## mjr (15 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> NHS London has said that London is getting its fair share of vaccines.


Not on www.england.nhs.uk/london/news/ so where, please?



> Let it go. There is zero evidence of manipulation of vaccine supplies by region.


Not zero. Enough that BBC regional news were quizzing Hancock about it this evening. Might well not be the case, but half a statistic is hardly conclusive disproof either.


----------



## BoldonLad (15 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> The only target set is the February one as the NHS define it so much is now provided by private sector we are very much part of the magically government narrative "frontline". What @midlife has seen is due to the government opening up the program a few days ago *to include all contractors*.Yet former NHS care staff who have been moved to private sector delivering face to face care are left with no word or access to the vaccine. The vaccine is suppose to be given based on risk but now has sadly turned into the next numbers game being lead by the top with little idea of the needs of the bottom.



Presumably that would be "patient facing" or "front line" Contractors, not Contractors as in building workers, which is, I believe, from his post, what @midlife was referring to.

However, one simple explanation for the Building Contractors @midlife saw in the queue, may be that there were "no shows", or some other reason why Vaccine doses need to be used up, before being wasted, and, the Building Contractors were "available".


----------



## accountantpete (15 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> 3.24 million so far (to 14 Jan) is creditable to all involved. Especially with some areas affected by snow.




Our friends North of The Border published some future supply details yesterday which was deleted sharpish in case it hurt other customers but one paper managed to read it first:

_Documents accidentally published by the Scottish government yesterday suggested Britain may be on track to administer more than 500,000 vaccines each day by next week.

And more at Sky
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...-these-figures-are-anything-to-go-by-12188909_


----------



## winjim (15 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Presumably that would be "patient facing" or "front line" Contractors, not Contractors as in building workers, which is, I believe, from his post, what @midlife was referring to.
> 
> However, one simple explanation for the Building Contractors @midlife saw in the queue, may be that there were "no shows", or some other reason why Vaccine doses need to be used up, before being wasted, and, the Building Contractors were "available".


Many NHS trusts are currently in the process of vaccinating non-patient facing and non-clinical support staff.


----------



## mjr (15 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Many NHS trusts are currently in the process of vaccinating non-patient facing and non-clinical support staff.


Makes some degree of sense if they've done all the front line staff, as the others on site could still spread it to a lot of people and the effect on spreading is still unknown rather than definitely no effect, isn't it?


----------



## kingrollo (15 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Presumably that would be "patient facing" or "front line" Contractors, not Contractors as in building workers, which is, I believe, from his post, what @midlife was referring to.
> 
> However, one simple explanation for the Building Contractors @midlife saw in the queue, may be that there were "no shows", or some other reason why Vaccine doses need to be used up, before being wasted, and, the Building Contractors were "available".


Nope IME.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (15 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> Our friends North of The Border published some future supply details yesterday which was deleted sharpish in case it hurt other customers but one paper managed to read it first:
> 
> _Documents accidentally published by the Scottish government yesterday suggested Britain may be on track to administer more than 500,000 vaccines each day by next week.
> 
> ...


Yes that was our hapless Health Secretary who compounded the error by also revealing the location of the supposed to be secret depot where they are holding the vaccines ! 
Covid in Scotland: Freeman accused of breaching ministerial code https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55679023


----------



## accountantpete (15 Jan 2021)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> Yes that was our hapless Health Secretary who compounded the error by also revealing the location of the supposed to be secret depot where they are holding the vaccines !
> Covid in Scotland: Freeman accused of breaching ministerial code https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55679023




The vaccine procurement world makes the Cold War operatives look distinctly pedestrian.


----------



## midlife (15 Jan 2021)

My vaccine redeployment timetable has come through, looks like I have copped for 1pm to 8pm shifts to vaccinate people instead of my normal clinics on some days. so far only running 8am to 8pm but with a few phone calls and mouse clicks could well be 3 x 8 hour shifts....


----------



## kingrollo (15 Jan 2021)

Just caught the tail end of news of ten article - about the Brazilian variant - re infecting previous covid patients - with obvious implications for vaccines.

Not proven of course - but with this virus the worst case scenario has often become reality.


----------



## kingrollo (15 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> My vaccine redeployment timetable has come through, looks like I have copped for 1pm to 8pm shifts to vaccinate people instead of my normal clinics on some days. so far only running 8am to 8pm but with a few phone calls and mouse clicks could well be 3 x 8 hour shifts....



I'm yet to be convinced of 24/7 vaccine centres. Maybe when we get to the lower priority groups.

It just seems some medical staff will stay up all night - and vaccinate very few people after 8pm ???


----------



## midlife (15 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> I'm yet to be convinced of 24/7 vaccine centres. Maybe when we get to the lower priority groups.
> 
> It just seems some medical staff will stay up all night - and vaccinate very few people after 8pm ???



Yep, just seemed the way it was being set up was for a future third overnight shift. They have basically shut a whole building to move the current portacabin setup into when ready.


----------



## lane (15 Jan 2021)

Know someone works in a care home all staff and residents vacinated today. They were doing 9 care homes today.


----------



## classic33 (15 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> *Here's the link* on gov.uk which says they're going to help Andy Street and screw Sadiq Kahn... get real! The government isn't quite so incompetent to leave such a smoking gun lying around: Grayling is no longer a minister.
> 
> 
> No. I've just noticed this looks like a second time recently where West Mids appears to be treated better than London. I'd like to see such an analysis.
> ...


Where?
You've a missing link.


----------



## Mo1959 (16 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Just caught the tail end of news of ten article - about the Brazilian variant - re infecting previous covid patients - with obvious implications for vaccines.
> 
> Not proven of course - but with this virus the worst case scenario has often become reality.


Yep........I am not convinced the vaccine is going to be the cure all so many are hoping for


----------



## Low Gear Guy (16 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Know someone works in a care home all staff and residents vacinated today. They were doing 9 care homes today.


How do they vaccinate all the staff in one session? The night staff will be asleep at home when the vaccination team turns up.


----------



## vickster (16 Jan 2021)

Low Gear Guy said:


> How do they vaccinate all the staff in one session? The night staff will be asleep at home when the vaccination team turns up.


Later in the day? End of one shift, start of another? Two vaccination teams?


----------



## PK99 (16 Jan 2021)

Numbers in here are quite scary:
(And BAME scare stories are not the Grauniad's stock in trade)

_Advisers from the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) have raised fresh concerns over Covid vaccine uptake among black, Asian and minority ethnic communities (BAME) as research showed up to 72% of black people said they were unlikely to have the jab_.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/16/covid-vaccine-black-people-unlikely-covid-jab-uk


----------



## srw (16 Jan 2021)

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/covi...vid19-cases-activity-6754377724527181824-jX-d

Before everyone gets excited about the vaccine letting us all run wild, it's worth looking at this modelling. Vaccination, even if the government meets its optimistic targets for the at-risk, will only reduce death by about 20% by April. In the meantime, lockdown is likely to have done its job and reduced it by a lot more than that. So don't expect it to be releases earlier.


----------



## mjr (16 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Where?
> You've a missing link.


That was rather the point. They should have learned from "fark business" at least enough not to publish "fark London for electing Kahn" if that is a policy decision.


----------



## lane (16 Jan 2021)

Low Gear Guy said:


> How do they vaccinate all the staff in one session? The night staff will be asleep at home when the vaccination team turns up.



All staff had to go in even if it was there day off or whatever they all got vacinated. They all had to be there at a specific time.


----------



## lane (16 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/covi...vid19-cases-activity-6754377724527181824-jX-d
> 
> Before everyone gets excited about the vaccine letting us all run wild, it's worth looking at this modelling. Vaccination, even if the government meets its optimistic targets for the at-risk, will only reduce death by about 20% by April. In the meantime, lockdown is likely to have done its job and reduced it by a lot more than that. So don't expect it to be releases earlier.



Also its not just about death about hospital capacity. If the virus is allowed to rip enough people in lower priority groups could overwhelm the NHS even if they don't die.

However vacination plus a hell of a lot of people getting it now may reduce the R number so fewer restrictions are needed


----------



## SpokeyDokey (16 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/covi...vid19-cases-activity-6754377724527181824-jX-d
> 
> Before everyone gets excited about the vaccine letting us all run wild, it's worth looking at this modelling. Vaccination, even if the government meets its optimistic targets for the at-risk, will only reduce death by about 20% by April. In the meantime, lockdown is likely to have done its job and reduced it by a lot more than that. So don't expect it to be releases earlier.



Good source of data - thanks for the link.

With the caveats of 'things going broadly to plan' and the efficacy numbers etc being met I'm heartened by the extract below. Especially the potential impacts from mid-Feb onwards.

There has to be a realisation in the general population that this is a long haul project juggling the need to effectively suppress the virus impact on the population that in itself is seeking to get back to, at least a semblance of, normality.

Imo 'normality' is a long way off, hence, I was somewhat concerned that the hospitality sector was experiencing a marked upshift in bookings for holidays from the older population segments in response to their having had jab 1 or their imminent vaccination vis-a-vise the agreed rollout plan.

Probably the post jab 'it's not over yet' message will be as difficult to get through as 'stay at home' has been in some quarters?



*How soon will we see the benefits of the vaccine rollout?*
*The Spectator | John Roberts*

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-soon-will-we-see-the-benefits-of-the-vaccine-roll-out

How soon might we see the vaccine effect? With the programme in full swing, and over 2.5 million people with their first jab, the hope is that the prioritisation of the most vulnerable groups means that we will soon see a meaningful reduction in the number of cases, hospitalisations and deaths. But how soon? For some time now, my colleagues at the Covid-19 Actuaries Response Group have been looking at various figures.

We are familiar with modelling showing how Covid-19 deaths may rise if the rise of the virus were to continue unchecked. But what follows is modelling for a different scenario: how the Covid-19 figures would fall if things go broadly to plan.
As with all models, all depends on the assumptions. The following are used:-

The vaccine is 70 per cent effective at preventing infection (as per the view of the four countries’ Chief Medical Officers).
But that the vaccine is 100 per cent effective in preventing illness serious enough to prevent hospitalisation and death (there was only one serious illness reported across both the Pfizer and Oxford AstraZeneca trials).
For take-up, it’s likely that the most vulnerable groups will be very keen to be protected, and similarly for those working in health and care settings. The full take-up assumed will obviously include an element of overstatement, but still indicates the potential benefit that we could see.
That protection kicks in 14 days after the vaccine.
It takes 3 days for a case to show up, 10 days for hospitalisation and 17 days from infection to death. With another two or three days to then show up in the figures.
The official target – to vaccinate 14 million by mid-February – is hit.
So by mid-Feb, the first four priority groups (accounting for 90 per cent of deaths) are covered. With protection kicking in by early March.
Given the above, how would the Covid statistics change by March?












Covid-19 cases: a 15 per cent reduction by early March. The first four priority groups (who together make up a fifth of the population) are due to be vaccinated by mid-February: allowing for 70 per cent vaccine effectiveness, this could mean a reduction of around 15 per cent of Covid cases by early March. But more important are the implications for hospital capacity, particularly intensive care demand.
Hospital admissions: a 60 per cent reduction by mid-March. With the burden of disease much greater on the older population, the benefits of the vaccination strategy become apparent in terms of hospital admissions, with an 60 per cent reduction envisaged by mid-March.
Intensive care: only a third reduction. However, the impact on intensive care units is noticeably less, because the oldest and most vulnerable are less likely to be admitted to ICU (based on clinical assessment of the benefit of the treatment). So here we only expect a reduction of around one third, which is likely to leave these units very stretched.
Covid-19 deaths: down by 88 per cent. The good news is that we expect vaccinations of these first four groups to reduce deaths by up to 88 per cent (slightly fewer in hospitals). This should all have fed through by late March, a full year from the first wave peak, although reporting in ONS data will take a little longer to emerge.

Hopefully there will be an additional benefit, with those vaccinated being less likely to transmit the virus, reducing the rate of spread. With only 20 per cent vaccinated in this first phase, and no conclusive evidence yet of reduced transmission, we’ve not modelled any benefit from such an effect.

So deaths should be much lower from April onwards. But this is, of course, just one part of Covid. We must not forget that those yet to be vaccinated will remain at risk of serious illness in the short term, as well as the unknown long-term consequences of infection. Our modelling only looks at the over-70s (Groups 1-4), as that is the government’s immediate focus. But continued vaccine rollout, at pace, is needed to get the country back to as close to normal as is possible at the earliest opportunity. With recent progress encouraging, there's a possibility that the first milestone will not only be met but exceeded. We all must hope for that.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (16 Jan 2021)

A third of a million vaccinations yesterday (Friday 15th) - very good going!

Just under 3.6m in total.

Around 3m people after second doses stripped out.


----------



## kingrollo (16 Jan 2021)

I think it's Boris and back benchers that need convincing it's a long haul project.

Infections - down from approx 60k daily, to 48k daily ....and some are already shouting for "our freedom" to be restored.

You couldn't make this shite up !


----------



## srw (16 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> A third of a million vaccinations yesterday (Friday 15th) - very good going!
> 
> Just under 3.6m in total.
> 
> Around 3m people after second doses stripped out.


"Of the vaccinations provided over this time, 1,329,480 were provided to people aged
80 years old or over, which is 56% of the total vaccinations given."

From the usual NHS report. 

The targets are around the vulnerable, which focuses on the over-80s. We seem to be quite good at giving it to under 80s.


----------



## kingrollo (16 Jan 2021)

India - hoping to do 300m vaccinations by July. ! - wouldn't like to be the project manager on that one !


----------



## lane (16 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> I think it's Boris and back benchers that need convincing it's a long haul project.
> 
> Infections - down from approx 60k daily, to 48k daily ....and some are already shouting for "our freedom" to be restored.
> 
> You couldn't make this shite up !



No doubt my MP is one of them - she abstained in the vote because they couldn't vote again until March. Hard Brexit ERG as well.


----------



## newfhouse (16 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> The targets are around the vulnerable, which focuses on the over-80s. We seem to be quite good at giving it to under 80s.


How many of the 44% are vulnerable for reasons other than being octogenarians, or health and care workers?


----------



## midlife (16 Jan 2021)

Not sure if this link has been posted before, from lfgss thread.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/how-w...israels-real-world-stats-can-be-globes-guide/

Seems like Israel is one big covid vaccine clinical trial.


----------



## bikingdad90 (16 Jan 2021)

To brighten everyones day up, in between the stats, figures and discussions the Marsh family are back with a new release.


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnbOKH9Oe9s&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR149Hs6x0cBp5qMeqqNTguH7Z3W0cS4rORB8T2I5pErFxteitHoo-poAY0


For me, the daughter nearer the dad rocks the socks off the song and really shines. Her sister puts in a good show too. I can’t work out if she cracked up part way through with emotion or ran out of vocal range.


----------



## lane (16 Jan 2021)

newfhouse said:


> How many of the 44% are vulnerable for reasons other than being octogenarians, or health and care workers?
> [/QUO





kingrollo said:


> I think it's Boris and back benchers that need convincing it's a long haul project.
> 
> Infections - down from approx 60k daily, to 48k daily ....and some are already shouting for "our freedom" to be restored.
> 
> You couldn't make this shite up !



At odds with the voters though. According to a poll in the guardian majority want take aways closed, nurseries closed exercise with another person stopped.


----------



## Julia9054 (16 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Father in law had an appointment for his vaccination yesterday. Unfortunately it got cancelled because of the snow. Bit worried about him at the moment. He is very lethargic and down. He says he has a cold but is refusing to get a Covid test.


Turns out we were right to be worried. Collapsed yesterday and now in hospital covid positive.


----------



## nickyboy (16 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Not on www.england.nhs.uk/london/news/ so where, please?
> 
> 
> Not zero. Enough that BBC regional news were quizzing Hancock about it this evening. Might well not be the case, but half a statistic is hardly conclusive disproof either.


NHS London spokesman quoted on BBC News website. 

Anyway, are we really now at a point of having to "disprove" your conspiracy theory for which you still have provided zero evidence. This is bonkers. Tin foil hats a go go


----------



## kingrollo (16 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> At odds with the voters though. According to a poll in the guardian majority want take aways closed, nurseries closed exercise with another person stopped.



If Covid is as transmissible as we are led to believe - with intensive care beds almost full - I would support the above.

The news infections have come down to 48k - still way to high - but imo proves lockdowns work and the tiers system doesn't.


----------



## lane (16 Jan 2021)

The area which had the lowest tiers Isle of Wight and Cornwall now have a massive increase in cases


----------



## PK99 (16 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> The area which had the lowest tiers Isle of Wight and Cornwall now have a massive increase in cases



From reports, folk on the island are putting the rise down to holiday homers and boozers going across when the Island was Tier 1 - ie against the rules.


----------



## kingrollo (16 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> From reports, folk on the island are putting the rise down to holiday homers and boozers going across when the Island was Tier 1 - ie against the rules.



That's another point against the tiers - it's almost impossible to police people going into a lower tier for a pint or two !

We just grin and bear this lockdown until we have high numbers of people vaccinated - and significantly lower infections.

The stop/start approach has been a disaster. If we get case numbers right down to summer levels - we can then stamp on new variants quicker.


----------



## mjr (16 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> NHS London spokesman quoted on BBC News website.
> 
> Anyway, are we really now at a point of having to "disprove" your conspiracy theory for which you still have provided zero evidence. This is bonkers. Tin foil hats a go go


Not zero evidence, but not much. But all you had to do is give the link instead of waving at a website of hundreds of pages a day.



kingrollo said:


> If we get case numbers right down to summer levels - we can then stamp on new variants quicker.


Only if they get tracing working, which there seems little sign of.


----------



## Cirrus (17 Jan 2021)

Some averse reactions amongst the frail in Norway to the Pfizer jab, which are being looked into... 
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n149


----------



## winjim (17 Jan 2021)

Interesting change in tone from the test notification. Changed from 'you did not have the virus' to 'is is not likely you had the virus', which has been bugging me for months. Conspiracy theorists keep talking about false positives and I try to point out that as laboratory scientists _we know_ about that, but we do need also to acknowledge the potential of false negatives, especially in a population which may be self administering the test.

I don't know if this is a response to the vaccination program with its uncertainty regarding transmission, but to me it is a welcome change.


----------



## Profpointy (17 Jan 2021)

MntnMan62 said:


> I just read an article that said that a Colorado GOP Congressman is not going to take the vaccine because he's worried more about the safety of the vaccine than he is about the side effects of contracting the virus. I find this interesting. The US is seeing deaths currently at a rate of 3,600 per day. There have been no confirmed deaths related to people receiving the Covid vaccine. So, this guy won't take the vaccine because he's worried about it being safe, yet it's proven that it is safe and more importantly much safer than not taking it and getting Covid. I'd say this guy should be thrown out of office, not for refusing to take the vaccine, but because he's shown a complete lack of critical reasoning skills, making him nothing short of an imbecile.



Given the political leaders popular in the US being an imbecile is hardly a disadvantage


----------



## tom73 (17 Jan 2021)

The government look to be playing very loosely with what they see as when people have been vaccinated. 
Most of the talk of when more people will have been vaccinated turns out to mean 1st dose. Though that’s better than nothing it’s not the same thing by a long way.


----------



## Unkraut (17 Jan 2021)

I was just looking at some news and in the first care home in Rheinland-Pfalz to start the programme they have started to do the second injection, exactly three weeks after the first. They have discovered that some of those injected have subsequently become infected. In fact the first to be injected, a lady of 90 became infected. She came through though, so it it reckoned that one injection does at least give some protection against the illness being severe, even though it doesn't necessarily protect against subsequent infection.

This is the Biontech stuff, and it looks like the manufacturer's instructions are going to followed rather than vaccinating more people and delaying the second dose.


----------



## DaveReading (17 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> I was just looking at some news and in the first care home in Rheinland-Pfalz to start the programme they have started to do the second injection, exactly three weeks after the first. They have discovered that some of those injected have subsequently become infected. In fact the first to be injected, a lady of 90 became infected. She came through though, so it it reckoned that one injection does at least give some protection against the illness being severe, even though it doesn't necessarily protect against subsequent infection.



Isn't the incubation period for the virus around a couple of weeks?

That would mean that someone found to be infected 3 weeks after the first vaccination had actually caught Covid in the first few days after the jab (or perhaps even beforehand).

That's consistent with what we're being told - that immunity takes a few weeks to build up.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> If the virus is allowed to rip enough people in lower priority groups could overwhelm the NHS even if they don't die.


I suggest the statistics (lower priority groups = under 50s without other frailties) do not support this pessimistic possibility.


Unkraut said:


> They have discovered that some of those injected have subsequently become infected.
> This is the Biontech stuff, and it looks like the manufacturer's instructions are going to followed rather than vaccinating more people and delaying the second dose.


In the early days after the first dose, the immunity/resistance will not be present so it would be surprising (statistically) if people did NOT become infected, say in the first 12 days. But after that the trials suggest both increasing immunity and less severe symptoms if infected (and recall the 90% effective corollary: 10% ineffective).
On increasing the delay between doses to allow, in the first two months, twice as many people to be vaccinated (with one dose) and afford 70+% efficacy for the 80+% most likely to die, I think the judgement call by the UK JCVI is the right one. I understand the 'stick to the trial' evidence/protocol - and there may be legal issues/risks in some countries more than others (and of course there's history baggage around in various countries too), but on the balance of risk/benefit, content (happy even) that UK has grasped that nettle and is squeezing the juice. By mid March when the the second doses will need to be rolled out, the manufacturing and supply chains and systems will be (even) better, so that can be done concurrently with keeping the first dose rate of vaccination going for the under 50s.
Oh, and 'thank you' @midlife - here's the Marsh Family 'Have the New Jab' video for you (and all).
https://youtube.be/fn3KWM1kuAw


----------



## lane (17 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> That was rather the point. They should have learned from "fark business" at least enough not to publish "fark London for electing Kahn" if that is a policy decision.



It's funny where I live people are convinced London gets preferential treatment in absolutely everything.


----------



## lane (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I suggest the statistics (lower priority groups = under 50s without other frailties) do not support this pessimistic possibility.
> 
> In the early days after the first dose, the immunity/resistance will not be present so it would be surprising (statistically) if people did NOT become infected, say in the first 12 days. But after that the trials suggest both increasing immunity and less severe symptoms if infected (and recall the 90% effective corollary: 10% ineffective).
> On increasing the delay between doses to allow, in the first two months, twice as many people to be vaccinated (with one dose) and afford 70+% efficacy for the 80+% most likely to die, I think the judgement call by the UK JCVI is the right one. I understand the 'stick to the trial' evidence/protocol - and there may be legal issues/risks in some countries more than others (and of course there's history baggage around in various countries too), but on the balance of risk/benefit, content (happy even) that UK has grasped that nettle and is squeezing the juice. By mid March when the the second doses will need to be rolled out, the manufacturing and supply chains and systems will be (even) better, so that can be done concurrently with keeping the first dose rate of vaccination going for the under 50s.
> ...



Just read think it was 25% of admissions are under 55 and they are in hospital longer so yes we will need restrictions to stop them overwhelm ING the NHS.


----------



## tom73 (17 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Just read think it was 25% of admissions are under 55 and they are in hospital longer so yes we will need restrictions to stop them overwhelm ING the NHS.


That’s only the start of the story given the growing number of long COVID cases and the medical issues and effects of covid. It’s much more better to stop the infections in the first place. In terms of personal cost and longer running social ones. Add in the readmission rate for Covid is just short of 30% of which around 12% go onto die. It’s a lot of hospital beds, staff time your setting up for future. Not forgetting extra work for primary care in pre admission care and post discharge follow up’s.


----------



## matticus (17 Jan 2021)

I find these figures very odd. Nowt so queer as folk:

View: https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1350060245561864192?s=19


----------



## BoldonLad (17 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> It's funny where I live people are convinced London gets preferential treatment in absolutely everything.



Fancy that, same where I live...


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

Cirrus said:


> Some averse reactions amongst the frail in Norway to the Pfizer jab, which are being looked into...
> https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n149


23 very frail elderly patients died shortly after receiving the vaccine.
More than 20,000 doses of the vaccine have been administered since Christmas in Norway, most [?15,000] to residents in nursing homes [as per the Norwegian plan/priorities], most of whom are very elderly with underlying medical conditions and some of whom are terminally ill.
Around 400 deaths normally occur among care home residents every week [more per week in winter?]. [Total population of Norwegian nursing homes not known.] [23 deaths in 16,000 vaccinated among the 1200 (3 weeks x 400) deaths 'normally' expected seems, in the heartless world of statistics, entirely plausible with no causative effect.]
In 13 of the deaths they have "concluded that common adverse reactions of mRNA vaccines, such as fever, nausea, and diarrhoea, may have contributed to some" of these frail patients' deaths.
They are "carry[ing] out extra [pre-vaccination] evaluation of very sick people whose underlying condition might be aggravated by it.” This evaluation includes discussing the risks and benefits of vaccination with the patient and their families to decide whether or not vaccination is the best course.
“Our immediate thoughts are with the bereaved families.”


----------



## lane (17 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> That’s only the start of the story given the growing number of long COVID cases and the medical issues and effects of covid. It’s much more better to stop the infections in the first place. In terms of personal cost and longer running social ones. Add in the readmission rate for Covid is just short of 30% of which around 12% go onto die. It’s a lot of hospital beds, staff time your setting up for future. Not forgetting extra work for primary care in pre admission care and post discharge follow up’s.



All spot on I knew someone in their 50s taken to hospital twice. Unfortunately a lot of Tory MPs like to perpetuate the myth it is only the over 80s we need to worry about.


----------



## BoldonLad (17 Jan 2021)

Just spoken to eldest daughter, who is working at a vaccination hub, administering vaccine, in a nearby area. They are about to start on the 70+ age group, tomorrow, so, 75+ all done (well all of those who want it).

Thought I would strike a positive note, unpopular I know.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Thought I would strike a positive note, unpopular I know



I think most people have been extremely positive about vaccination tbf. I certainly am. 

My parents (79,81) haven't yet had a vaccine, and according to Hancock, only 50% of 80+ have, so there's some pretty significant regional variation at the moment, as you'd expect with such a massive programme.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> *I think most people have been extremely positive about vaccination tbf. I certainly am.*
> 
> My parents (79,81) haven't yet had a vaccine, and according to Hancock, only 50% of 80+ have, so there's some pretty significant regional variation at the moment, as you'd expect with such a massive programme.



Based on my experience I totally agree with you. Everyone I have spoken to are upbeat re the rollout figures and the way that the plan is being handled. I think that all parties involved so far are doing a very good job especially in the light of how far we are ahead of many other countries thus far.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Just spoken to eldest daughter, who is working at a vaccination hub, administering vaccine, in a nearby area. They are about to start on the 70+ age group, tomorrow, so, 75+ all done (well all of those who want it).
> 
> *Thought I would strike a positive note, unpopular I know.*



I'm fine with constructive criticism where due but sadly social media has been alive with politically biased denigrating which imo has often simply been for the sake of it imo. At every twist and turn the Gov's actions have been mocked and derided by some who seem to gleefully delight in bad news and mistakes.

Where mistakes have been made (they have been and more will be) these will be discussed in the inevitable (rightly so) official enquiry and will hopefully provide a platform for any future Gov' of any colour to cope better still with any similar situation that arises.

Great News today that we are now at c3.9m vaccinations which will no doubt be exceeded tomorrow.

Plus welcome News of the extra 10 hubs due on-stream tomorrow.


----------



## shep (17 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I think most people have been extremely positive about vaccination tbf. I certainly am.
> 
> My parents (79,81) haven't yet had a vaccine, and according to Hancock, only 50% of 80+ have, so there's some pretty significant regional variation at the moment, as you'd expect with such a massive programme.


There does, fella at work who's parents are both over 80 have had both jabs, live in Birmingham and the wife's step father and her mother, 84&76 have both had the single one. The Mother has COPD so in the vulnerable category, we're in Wolves.


----------



## Rocky (17 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I'm fine with constructive criticism where due but sadly social media has been alive with politically biased denigrating which imo has often simply been for the sake of it imo. At every twist and turn the Gov's actions have been mocked and derided by some who seem to gleefully delight in bad news and mistakes.
> 
> Where mistakes have been made (they have been and more will be) these will be discussed in the inevitable (rightly so) official enquiry and will hopefully provide a platform for any future Gov' of any colour to cope better still with any similar situation that arises.
> 
> ...


I'm happy to post another positive story about the vaccination programme in north London. At one centre, teachers from a local secondary school are volunteering at weekends to help patients navigate the process and assisting those who aren't particularly mobile. I am so impressed at the way the local community is pulling together to make this a success.

Yes, there's been a lot of criticism but IMO, many many more people want this to work and are putting in time to make it work. It makes you proud of our public sector.


----------



## PK99 (17 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I'm fine with constructive criticism where due but sadly social media has been alive with politically biased denigrating which imo has often simply been for the sake of it imo. At every twist and turn the Gov's actions have been mocked and derided by some who seem to gleefully delight in bad news and mistakes.
> 
> Where mistakes have been made (they have been and more will be) these will be discussed in the inevitable (rightly so) official enquiry and will hopefully provide a platform for any future Gov' of any colour to cope better still with any similar situation that arises.
> 
> ...



This also is good news:

_Britain will be able to vaccinate the entire nation against dangerous new Covid strains within four months after a £158m super-factory opens later this year, The Telegraph can disclose.

Dr Matthew Duchars, chief executive of the Vaccines Manufacturing Innovation Centre (VMIC), revealed the Oxfordshire facility will be capable of producing 70m doses of an emergency vaccine manufactured entirely on British soil.

The news comes amid fears that a new Covid strain from Brazil may prove resistant to current vaccines. All travel corridors into the UK were scrapped this week to prevent new variants entering the country.

“We’ll be able to make 70 million doses within a four to five month period, enough for everyone in the country, when we open late this year,” Dr Duchars told The Telegraph.

“New Covid variants are absolutely part of the thinking. We probably will need to make seasonal vaccine variants because there may well be mutations in the virus, as well as vaccines for other diseases. You never know what’s coming next.”

Currently under construction at the Harwell Science & Innovation Campus in Oxfordshire, the VMIC was first conceived in 2018 and originally planned to open in 2022. When the Covid pandemic struck, the UK government pumped a further £131 million into the not-for-profit company to bring the project forward by a year.

The centre is already helping to manufacture the Oxford vaccine by lending expertise and giant bioreactors to the AstraZeneca team and its partners._

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...e-vaccinate-nation-against-new-covid-strains/

Grauniad article from May;
https://www.theguardian.com/society...invest-93m-in-uk-vaccine-manufacturing-centre


----------



## TheDoctor (17 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Where mistakes have been made (they have been and more will be) these will be discussed in the inevitable (rightly so) official enquiry


I bet they're not. And I doubt an inquiry is inevitable, or even likely.


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

The vaccine roll is going well - the place I went to was zipping through the numbers - so no complaints on that front.

The only negative is that some Tories will jumping up and down to ease the lockdown in the next couple of weeks...time and time we have relaxed restrictions too early ....(the end of the November lockdown from memory will still had 12k daily new cases!) ....will they stand firm this time ?


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> This also is good news:
> 
> _Britain will be able to vaccinate the entire nation against dangerous new Covid strains within four months after a £158m super-factory opens later this year, The Telegraph can disclose.
> 
> ...



They might be able start such a rollout in 4 months. But unless we have permanent vaccination wing of the NHS - we won't get through the whole population in 4 months . So if the new variant threat becomes a reality - the above article offers false hope.


----------



## DCLane (17 Jan 2021)

Rode past the Dewsbury vaccination point this afternoon; I'm aware messages went out to patients locally via lots of GP practices. They appeared to be really busy. Doctors / nurses / pharmacists and the wider community have stepped up to help with taxi firms offering free taxis to those needing to get to their vaccination 

Given that many are helping on a voluntary basis SWMBO's going to be doing the same in Barnsley soon there'll be delivery of coffee / tea and buns to the centre at some point next weekend with a "thanks, it's appreciated" note.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> The only negative is that some Tories will jumping up and down to ease the lockdown in the next couple of weeks...time and time we have relaxed restrictions too early


It's useful to have several different opinions on the best way forward shared: I don't see why you whinge about it - we live in a democratic society and these guys were elected. This is not a "negative". Do you think it'd be a healthy society if NOONE argued for easing of the lockdown?
Were the restrictions relaxed too early in the summer (my answer = 'no' - maybe you disagree (with data)).
I think that it's unlikely that restrictions will be relaxed until after half term and same time as ALL over 70s have received at least one dose and time to develop resistance (in the expectation that 88% of those who might otherwise catch COVID-19 and die, will live).
We must get our children back to school. They only have limited time to learn and grow up.


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> It's useful to have several different opinions on the best way forward shared: I don't see why you whinge about it - we live in a democratic society and these guys were elected. This is not a "negative". Do you think it'd be a healthy society if NOONE argued for easing of the lockdown?
> Were the restrictions relaxed too early in the summer (my answer = 'no' - maybe you disagree (with data)).
> I think that it's unlikely that restrictions will be relaxed until after half term and same time as ALL over 70s have received at least one dose and time to develop resistance (in the expectation that 88% of those who might otherwise catch COVID-19 and die, will live).
> We must get our children back to school. They only have limited time to learn and grow up.



It was the November lockdown I was quoting. It hardly slowed the spread at all - yet we still came out of that lockdown. With very predictable results.

So in that respect those alternative views of the Tory backbenchers - we are at odds with the scientific experts views....were those views helpful ? - not if you lost a brother, dad, son , mom, sister - they weren't helpful views at all.


----------



## BoldonLad (17 Jan 2021)

Oh dear, I thought for a while there I had created a tide of optimism, nice to see things settling back to normal service


----------



## Unkraut (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> In the early days after the first dose, the immunity/resistance will not be present so it would be surprising (statistically) if people did NOT become infected, say in the first 12 days.


Yes I take the point that some of the infections could well have happened before you could expect the vaccine to take effect. There must have been some, however, where this wasn't the case and that is what struck me. To date there has been no hard evidence of this.


matticus said:


> I find these figures [take up rate of vaccines] very odd. Nowt so queer as folk:


A recent survey of the _Volk _here showed a substantial increase in the willingness to have the vaccine - it's now 90%, with two-thirds having no qualms up from 51%, and outright rejecters having halved. Those with reservations about it have more than halved.


kingrollo said:


> It was the November lockdown I was quoting. It hardly slowed the spread at all - yet we still came out of that lockdown. With very predictable results.
> 
> So in that respect those alternative views of the Tory backbenchers - we are at odds with the scientific experts views....were those views helpful ?


Compare the Irish experience. They had an exponential increase, went into lockdown for November, then in an attempt to get some normality back in time for Christmas relaxed too early and are now having to confront a massive rise again.

The minute the infection rate falls is not the time to starting talking of relaxing restrictions. The rate here per 100 000 over 7 days is around 150 (with hotspots much higher), but this needs to fall to 50 or preferably lower before any substantial relaxation can occur because contact tracing is then possible.

Relaxing too early gives the worst of all possible worlds - a yo yo effect in infections where the good a lockdown did is quickly undone requiring a further lockdown. This in turn is more damaging to the economy.


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> Yes I take the point that some of the infections could well have happened before you could expect the vaccine to take effect. There must have been some, however, where this wasn't the case and that is what struck me. To date there has been no hard evidence of this.
> 
> A recent survey of the _Volk _here showed a substantial increase in the willingness to have the vaccine - it's now 90%, with two-thirds having no qualms up from 51%, and outright rejecters having halved. Those with reservations about it have more than halved.
> 
> ...


Exactly.

Also the more infections we have the greater the chance of new variants developing.


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Oh dear, I thought for a while there I had created a tide of optimism, nice to see things settling back to normal service


I think there is optimism , there is also impatience to get back to normal from some quarters.


----------



## Cirrus (17 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> Many NHS trusts are currently in the process of vaccinating non-patient facing and non-clinical support staff.





Have a family member who is getting vaccinated today, the centre has more vaccines than patients for the day, instead of them going to waste they put out a call to "back office" staff to see if they could get the the centre and be willing to be jabbed.


----------



## newfhouse (17 Jan 2021)

newfhouse said:


> My mother (86, Kingston Upon Thames) received a letter in the post today inviting her to book a jab through the wider vaccine programme. Within minutes of opening it she had a phone call from her GP practice offering her an appointment on Sunday in the church hall next to the surgery. Two offers in a day, so the system seems to be working well.


First Pfizer dose successfully delivered. She’s been told to expect a call for the second jab in twelve weeks.

She saw a couple of last minute refusals by people that said they wanted the Oxford AZ vaccine rather than the foreign Pfizer one. Maybe that just reflects the age demographic, but it’s still a bit sad.

Overall It sounds like a well run process with several community volunteers shepherding and taking care of the old folks.


----------



## MntnMan62 (17 Jan 2021)

Profpointy said:


> Given the political leaders popular in the US being an imbecile is hardly a disadvantage



True. But I attribute that to the general stupidity level of the US citizen.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> It was the November lockdown I was quoting. It hardly slowed the spread at all - yet we still came out of that lockdown. With very predictable results.
> So in that respect those alternative views of the Tory backbenchers - we are at odds with the scientific experts views....were those views helpful ? - not if you lost a brother, dad, son , mom, sister - they weren't helpful views at all.


I read your post - I can see you were citing the November lockdown experience. What about the release of restrictions in the summer? Do you think those were "too soon"? With very predictable results?
Politicians - our parliament - have to balance the damage (and lives, and life experience) caused by lockdown against the efficacy of lockdown. And a range of views is vitally important: and I respect their views just as much as I respect your view of what's "helpful" or not. But do you want to live in a totalitarian state?
I'm sorry if you've lost loved ones. Making decisions is not easy and one group's set of priorities are not the same as another's so it's not surprising that views are different and decisions are both difficult and their correctness disputed (both ways). My children's education is being adversely affected. So pressure to release relaxations is a "helpful view" which needs to be taken into due account. The range of views of the scientific and judicial communities are also "helpful" eg Indie-SAGE, or Lord Sumption and Lady Hale for another.
Go and look at some views which don't accord with yours. It may be uncomfortable (I suspect too uncomfortable for you - your choice). Try this rational Irishman: Ivor Cummins - on Lockdown in Ireland


----------



## matticus (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Politicians - our parliament - have to balance the damage (and lives, and life experience) caused by lockdown against the efficacy of lockdown. And a range of views is vitally important: and I respect their views just as much as I respect your view of what's "helpful" or not. But do you want to live in a totalitarian state?


Exactly. Complex issues need debate.

(Relevance to Vaccine thread??)


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

You are, as so often the case, right, Matt: off topic. And such a gentle nudge 
@lane and @kingrollo - I'll see you on the other side.


----------



## mjr (17 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I'm fine with constructive criticism where due but sadly social media has been alive with politically biased denigrating which imo has often simply been for the sake of it imo. At every twist and turn the Gov's actions have been mocked and derided by some who seem to gleefully delight in bad news and mistakes.


I think that's ascribing bad motivations to people who are upset that the government's actions - or more often inaction? - are literally leading to deaths in their community. Surely you must think at least some of the decisions have been headdeskingly awful? Not even the dodgy PPE contract awards?

And it's all well and good to say it will come out in an inquiry later, but how many more will die before that even starts?


> Great News today that we are now at c3.9m vaccinations which will no doubt be exceeded tomorrow.


Well, it would be scandalous if they don't do any vaccinations at all tomorrow!



> Plus welcome News of the extra 10 hubs due on-stream tomorrow.


Yes, that will help a lot.


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I read your post - I can see you were citing the November lockdown experience. What about the release of restrictions in the summer? Do you think those were "too soon"? With very predictable results?
> Politicians - our parliament - have to balance the damage (and lives, and life experience) caused by lockdown against the efficacy of lockdown. And a range of views is vitally important: and I respect their views just as much as I respect your view of what's "helpful" or not. But do you want to live in a totalitarian state?
> I'm sorry if you've lost loved ones. Making decisions is not easy and one group's set of priorities are not the same as another's so it's not surprising that views are different and decisions are both difficult and their correctness disputed (both ways). My children's education is being adversely affected. So pressure to release relaxations is a "helpful view" which needs to be taken into due account. The range of views of the scientific and judicial communities are also "helpful" eg Indie-SAGE, or Lord Sumption and Lady Hale for another.
> Go and look at some views which don't accord with yours. It may be uncomfortable (I suspect too uncomfortable for you - your choice). Try this rational Irishman: Ivor Cummins - on Lockdown in Ireland



I don't see why you are widening the debate. My point was that a number of Tory backbenchers are keen to open up lockdown sooner than the scientific experts think is wise. Of course they are entitled to air there opinions - but to a greater or lesser degree they have been acted upon with massive and avoidable loss of life....not having learnt there lesson are now calling for the same thing. Indeed one was threatening to dethrone the PM if lockdown wasn't eased.


----------



## BoldonLad (17 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> I don't see why you are widening the debate. My point was that a number of Tory backbenchers are keen to open up lockdown sooner than the scientific experts think is wise. Of course they are entitled to air there opinions - but to a greater or lesser degree they have been acted upon with massive and avoidable loss of life....not having learnt there lesson are now calling for the same thing. Indeed one was threatening to dethrone the PM if lockdown wasn't eased.



I don’t see the connection between “Corona Virus Vaccine”, and the machinations of some MPs? Unless their machinations are about the vaccine programme. Tory or not.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> widening the debate


Off topic. This is not about vaccines. Now, the effective delivery of vaccines (and not just UK but world-wide) is both 'on topic' a dividend of the UK scientific community's expertise (especially the place just across from the Parks) assisted as soon as April by our government's earlyy decision to provide even more funding for the research and development, and the early decision to procure sufficient quantities of vaccine. Credit where credit's due.


----------



## tom73 (17 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> I don't see why you are widening the debate. My point was that a number of Tory backbenchers are keen to open up lockdown sooner than the scientific experts think is wise. Of course they are entitled to air there opinions - but to a greater or lesser degree they have been acted upon with massive and avoidable loss of life....not having learnt there lesson are now calling for the same thing. Indeed one was threatening to dethrone the PM if lockdown wasn't eased.



A good bit of messaging today was worryingly pointing to government still going on about opening up end of February. They say it will be slowly done but history shows they start slow but soon get bored. If they’d not bottled it 1st time we’d be well away by now.


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Off topic. This is not about vaccines. Now, the effective delivery of vaccines (and not just UK but world-wide) is both 'on topic' a dividend of the UK scientific community's expertise (especially the place just across from the Parks) assisted as soon as April by our government's earlyy decision to provide even more funding for the research and development, and the early decision to procure sufficient quantities of vaccine. Credit where credit's due.



I've really no idea what you are talking about. I would suggest you re read my posts. I have given credit for the vaccination programme going well.

The point you initially took up for debate was that some Tory backbenchers want restrictions lifted early. To wrap this one up perhaps you could clarify whether or not you agree with them ......(a yes or no will suffice)


----------



## mjr (17 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> I don’t see the connection between “Corona Virus Vaccine”, and the machinations of some MPs? Unless their machinations are about the vaccine programme. Tory or not.


Some MPs are indeed exploiting the vaccine programme to argue for unlocking earlier than safe for the unvaccinated willing.


----------



## BoldonLad (17 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Some MPs are indeed exploiting the vaccine programme to argue for unlocking earlier than safe for the unvaccinated willing.


Yes, but, then we come to the non-Covid implications, on health, and other aspects of life. But, I interpreted that as being a different topic to this thread.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

@kingrollo To be clear, I'm saying discussing the decisions on the response to the pandemic generally, made by those entrusted to make them, influenced by a wide range of interest groups, is off topic: there's another thread for that - so no 'ayes or noes' to that here. I am not suggesting you had (or had not) given credit for the vaccination programme going well. Who did you give credit to: the government? .....(a yes or no will suffice)?


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @kingrollo To be clear, I'm saying discussing the decisions on the response to the pandemic generally, made by those entrusted to make them, influenced by a wide range of interest groups, is off topic: there's another thread for that - so no 'ayes or noes' to that here. I am not suggesting you had (or had not) given credit for the vaccination programme going well. Who did you give credit to: the government? .....(a yes or no will suffice)?



Unlike yourself then 

YES.

.....and I thought the mods decided what was on or off topic.

So back to you (2nd time)- do agree with the Tory backbenchers who want to lift lockdown restrictions early ?

(Yes or No)


----------



## accountantpete (17 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> The point you initially took up for debate was that some Tory backbenchers want restrictions lifted early.




The key phrase is "backbenchers". With Tory "backbenchers" this is akin to the Labour "backbenchers" Clause IV calls - they know there is no chance of it happening but it helps with their personal "credentials" in the future.


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

accountantpete said:


> The key phrase is "backbenchers". With Tory "backbenchers" this is akin to the Labour "backbenchers" Clause IV calls - they know there is no chance of it happening but it helps with their personal "credentials" in the future.


Not so sure Baker was calling for letters to written, demanding a leadership contest if restrictions weren't lifted soon.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

Sorry - the subject you raise is off topic for this thread. I decided, nudged by 'he who must be obeyed'. Please don't get stressed.


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Sorry - the subject you raise is off topic for this thread. I decided, nudged by 'he who must be obeyed'. Please don't get stressed.



Lol - I can only take it you want restrictions lifted early but can't quite MTFU and say it.


----------



## classic33 (17 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Yes, but, then we come to the non-Covid implications, on health, and other aspects of life. But, I interpreted that as being a different topic to this thread.


They're often the unmentioned effects of this. But they are effects as real as the direct effey of catching the coronavirus.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

Maybe this has already been shared. One might presume that the supplies to the other home nations are planned to follow a similar pattern. 





Since the clear direction is to give a second dose of the same vaccine, we also might assume that nearly all the Pfizer vaccine projected to be received in late Jan to end March will be used (needed) for the second doses (NB < 12 weeks) for those vaccinated in December and the first week of January (with the Pfizer one, before Oxford AZ was distributed).


----------



## kingrollo (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Maybe this has already been shared. One might presume that the supplies to the other home nations are planned to follow a similar pattern.
> View attachment 569456
> 
> Since the clear direction is to give a second dose of the same vaccine, we also might assume that nearly all the Pfizer vaccine projected to be received in late Jan to end March will be used (needed) for the second doses (NB < 12 weeks) for those vaccinated in December and the first week of January (with the Pfizer one, before Oxford AZ was distributed).


I was jabbed with Pfizer last week - my second dose is booked for April 7
I think that by that time if not before the Oxford jab will be more widely used - due to cost ease of storage etc.


----------



## accountantpete (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Maybe this has already been shared. One might presume that the supplies to the other home nations are planned to follow a similar pattern.
> View attachment 569456
> 
> Since the clear direction is to give a second dose of the same vaccine, we also might assume that nearly all the Pfizer vaccine projected to be received in late Jan to end March will be used (needed) for the second doses (NB < 12 weeks) for those vaccinated in December and the first week of January (with the Pfizer one, before Oxford AZ was distributed).



This is the "deleted" internal Scottish Government post.

It implies that the whole of the UK will have been vaccinated (1&2) by the end of June - if you extend the figures for the whole of the UK assuming equal vaccine delivery to the regions.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/covi...vid19-cases-activity-6754377724527181824-jX-d
> Before everyone gets excited about the vaccine letting us all run wild, it's worth looking at this modelling. Vaccination, even if the government meets its optimistic targets for the at-risk, will only reduce death by about 20% by April. In the meantime, lockdown is likely to have done its job and reduced it by a lot more than that. So don't expect it to be releases earlier.


COVID-19 Actuaries Response Group:
"We expect that the impact of a successful vaccination programme will be most obvious in the hospitalisation and deaths data, with material reductions in hospitalisation starting from mid-February and reported deaths in early March. The impact on cases is expected to be seen sooner, but the reduction is likely to be smaller."
So if we might reasonably expect the vaccination programme to result in "material reductions in hospitalisation starting from mid-February" might that be a reasonable timeframe (end of half term), thanks to a combination of the successful vaccination programme and other measures, to start easing the restrictions and allowing society to prosper and become more productive? Or would that be too early? Vaccinations will continue apace, with the 5.6M in groups 5 and 6 to be complete by early in March.


----------



## accountantpete (17 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> COVID-19 Actuaries Response Group:
> "We expect that the impact of a successful vaccination programme will be most obvious in the hospitalisation and deaths data, with material reductions in hospitalisation starting from mid-February and reported deaths in early March. The impact on cases is expected to be seen sooner, but the reduction is likely to be smaller."
> So if we might reasonably expect the vaccination programme to result in "material reductions in hospitalisation starting from mid-February" might that be a reasonable timeframe (end of half term), thanks to a combination of the successful vaccination programme and other measures, to start easing the restrictions and allowing society to prosper and become more productive? Or would that be too early? Vaccinations will continue apace, with the 5.6M in groups 5 and 6 to be complete by early in March.



I think they are rapidly coming to the conclusion that a full vaccination programme has to be undertaken before any easing because of the risk of variants - look like May/June as I think they will boost existing Vaccines and have another few coming on tap from March - May. I'm not sure what that does to the international picture - probably still as it is now.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> COVID-19 Actuaries Response Group:
> "We expect that the impact of a successful vaccination programme will be most obvious in the hospitalisation and deaths data, with material reductions in hospitalisation starting from mid-February and reported deaths in early March. The impact on cases is expected to be seen sooner, but the reduction is likely to be smaller."
> So if we might reasonably expect the vaccination programme to result in "material reductions in hospitalisation starting from mid-February" might that be a reasonable timeframe (end of half term), thanks to a combination of the successful vaccination programme and other measures, to start easing the restrictions and allowing society to prosper and become more productive? Or would that be too early? Vaccinations will continue apace, with the 5.6M in groups 5 and 6 to be complete by early in March.



You are really keen to get this lockdown lifted aren't you ?

We don't yet know if vaccinated people can still pass on the virus 

Society can prosper - my arse ! - share prices and dividends more like !!!


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> We don't yet know if vaccinated people can still pass on the virus


Good point (and on topic). What do we know about that? And if we don't know then can we draw on experience from other diseases? 
When I get to the bottom of a hard climb I've never attempted before, I attack it, determined to get up without putting a foot down. I draw on my experience of other hard climbs, knowing that at the hardest moments just getting each pedal over top dead centre will see me through (and that getting off and walking will wear down my road cleats (and therefore to be avoided)). Has worked for me.
Generally if people are vaccinated against other viruses, a high proportion then don't catch it, and the transmission from a vaccinated person to one who isn't is typically low. Have I got that right?


----------



## Mo1959 (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Generally if people are vaccinated against other viruses, a high proportion then don't catch it, and the transmission from a vaccinated person to one who isn't is typically low. Have I got that right?


The problem is that they seem to think you can still catch it but with milder symptoms even with the vaccine......and also even the experts at this moment in time don't seem to know if you can still transmit it even if vaccinated. I guess it's going to be wait and see.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Good point (and on topic). What do we know about that? And if we don't know then can we draw on experience from other diseases?
> When I get to the bottom of a hard climb I've never attempted before, I attack it, determined to get up without putting a foot down. I draw on my experience of other hard climbs, knowing that at the hardest moments just getting each pedal over top dead centre will see me through (and that getting off and walking will wear down my road cleats (and therefore to be avoided)). Has worked for me.
> Generally if people are vaccinated against other viruses, a high proportion then don't catch it, and the transmission from a vaccinated person to one who isn't is typically low. Have I got that right?



We don't know. As I understand it goes like this [Happy to be corrected if this is wrong] 

1.You get infected 
2. 3 - 5 days later you get symptoms
3.14 days later you immune system kicks in and is ready to fight the virus
4. After 3 weeks most people start to feel better.

The vaccine idea - is that point 3 happens earlier - so you don't feel as sick - if you feel sick at all. The point is though you pick up the virus - can you still pass it on ? - All the testing of the vaccines has been that it stops people getting sick - its only now they are testing whether vaccinated people can still pass it on.


----------



## tom73 (18 Jan 2021)

Yes the vaccine program is mostly going ok, working and great to see and welcome news. Most of the views and media reporting on the vaccine and its roll out is for a mostly white , financially ok or about coping. The view from part's of society we don't like to talk about or other minority groups is not that rosey. The fact that so many members of the local community are getting involved shows one thing locally they want it to work. If you want the vaccine program to work as I have said before it has to be planned and delivered locally. Not planned and controlled by central government by people who never need to access the service or have a clue about who needs to access it. All they need to do is buy the stuff and get it delivered then primary care can do the rest it's well tested and effective. As with many thing in this pandemic side line, centralise and design by the elite is no way to go. 

I don't want to a vaccination program that get's one up on "Johny foreign" with look how good we are going. I want an effective , targeted and Clinical sound vaccination program which results in a sound public health outcome. Which after all vaccinations are suppose to be a public health issue. 

As for the rest I've also said before I don't care who in charge as none of them would have done much better I just wanted someone who has the bottle to ask for help and work with professionals across the health service to deal with this. Not side line or stick finger your ears and piss about.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> its only now they are testing whether vaccinated people can still pass it on.


Yes, that’s my understanding too. I’ve read that healthcare staff are the main focus of these studies now, they are getting the vaccine in the first wave and they are also being tested frequently. This will provide the data on which they can judge, over the coming weeks, whether the vaccine is having any effect on transmission.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> even the experts at this moment in time don't seem to know if you can still transmit it even if vaccinated. I guess it's going to be wait and see.


MSN short: "Many vaccines—including those for hepatitis A and B, measles, chickenpox, and human papillomavirus—do prevent people both from becoming ill and from passing the pathogen to others."
They don't know, but can draw inferences from similar diseases, to inform an assessment of likelihood. Such assessments will be taken into account (along with much else) when national and regional precaution regimes are being revised. It's entirely right for scientists to say they don't know (if they don't) but life (generally not individually) and societal choices are not monochrome.
Anyway, longer from MSN:
Susanna Naggie, an associate professor of medicine in the Duke University School of Medicine who specializes in infectious diseases: “With flu there is asymptomatic disease, but not at the level we see with SARS-CoV-2. This makes it particularly important to understand whether COVID-19 vaccines will prevent asymptomatic infections."
Jeffrey Bethony, a professor of microbiology, immunology, and tropical medicine at the George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences who works on vaccines for parasitic diseases and HIV:
"Many vaccines—including those for hepatitis A and B, measles, chickenpox, and human papillomavirus—do prevent people both from becoming ill and from passing the pathogen to others. Generally, we believe that if you have a vaccine that prevents disease, you’re likely preventing infections as well, but you can’t assume that that’s 100 percent [the case].
"Some pathogens can infect and reproduce in vaccinated people for short periods of time without making them sick, including . . . meningitis and whooping cough. This is also a problem for vaccines under development for parasitic illnesses such as malaria, schistosomiasis, and hookworm infection. The vaccine protects people against the most serious clinical manifestations of the disease but it doesn’t entirely stop infection. You still might have a person who is mildly infected, and they’re still able to spread the disease.”


----------



## matticus (18 Jan 2021)

So:
the worst case - vaccine doesn't dampen transmission. But as the roll-out continues people will eventually stop getting seriously sick in any number much greater than background serious illness (cancer, RTAs etc etc). The youngest groups - even if they all refused the vac! - will barely register on the serious illness stats. This might take many months, but: Good news!
the best case - vaccine also damps down transmission. So we'll get exponential reduction rate in cases as the roll-out proceed. Very very good news! :-)


----------



## PK99 (18 Jan 2021)

Interesting to reflect on this sober and balanced piece [  ] from the Guardian

_The UK’s decision not to join an EU plan to distribute a potential coronavirus vaccine to its most vulnerable citizens has been described as “unforgivable” and condemned by health charities and opposition politicians. _

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/10/uk-poised-to-shun-eu-coronavirus-vaccine-scheme


----------



## Unkraut (18 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> I don't want to a vaccination program that get's one up on "Johnny foreign" with look how good we are going.


Funny you should mention that. The British government took a calculated risk in ordering vaccine early. The ability to start vaccination early is of benefit to everyone, as the virus knows no borders.

The EU in the form of the European Commission, on the other hand, seems to have briefly lost the plot and reacted slowly. Biontech actually offered to double its offer of its vaccine to the EU, only to have this turned down! The result is a lack of vaccine available. This was inevitable at the beginning, and we now have hindsight. It's also true that EU solidarity was important as well. Someone got it wrong somewhere though.

In Germany this has led to the 400 000 injections per day capacity created being stymied by lack of vaccine. People turning up and being sent home. Whether the EU's slowness has made a massive difference to this I don't know, but I hope there will be an enquiry afterwards to make sure this doesn't ever happen again. Being too risk averse in a pandemic is not the right policy, and any money "wasted" on an ineffective vaccine would have been peanuts compared to the amounts needed to protect the economy from the effects of lockdown due to the ongoing infection rate.


----------



## PK99 (18 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> Funny you should mention that. The British government took a calculated risk in ordering vaccine early. *The ability to start vaccination early is of benefit to everyone, as the virus knows no borders.*
> 
> The EU in the form of the European Commission, on the other hand, seems to have briefly lost the plot and reacted slowly. Biontech actually offered to double its offer of its vaccine to the EU, only to have this turned down! The result is a lack of vaccine available. This was inevitable at the beginning, and we now have hindsight. It's also true that EU solidarity was important as well. Someone got it wrong somewhere though.
> 
> In Germany this has led to the 400 000 injections per day capacity created being stymied by lack of vaccine. People turning up and being sent home. Whether the EU's slowness has made a massive difference to this I don't know, but I hope there will be an enquiry afterwards to make sure this doesn't ever happen again. Being too risk averse in a pandemic is not the right policy, and any money "wasted" on an ineffective vaccine would have been peanuts compared to the amounts needed to protect the economy from the effects of lockdown due to the ongoing infection rate.



Interesting choice of phrase @Unkraut , !
From the article I cross-posted 1 up from your post


*“The crisis does not stop at any national border. It is about time the prime minister started showing leadership, including fully participating in all EU efforts to secure critical medical supplies and a vaccine.”*


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> MSN short: "Many vaccines—including those for hepatitis A and B, measles, chickenpox, and human papillomavirus—do prevent people both from becoming ill and from passing the pathogen to others."
> They don't know, but can draw inferences from similar diseases, to inform an assessment of likelihood. Such assessments will be taken into account (along with much else) when national and regional precaution regimes are being revised. It's entirely right for scientists to say they don't know (if they don't) but life (generally not individually) and societal choices are not monochrome.
> Anyway, longer from MSN:
> Susanna Naggie, an associate professor of medicine in the Duke University School of Medicine who specializes in infectious diseases: “With flu there is asymptomatic disease, but not at the level we see with SARS-CoV-2. This makes it particularly important to understand whether COVID-19 vaccines will prevent asymptomatic infections."
> ...



They is no way they are going to use other disease transmission rates for an active pandemic. We are probably in lockdown until March - Deal with it or get help.

PS:- the internet is a big place - you will always find some academic to support a niche POV - it really doesn't prove anything.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> people will eventually stop getting seriously sick in any number much greater than background serious illness (cancer, RTAs etc etc).


As you say, I think the key reductions we can reasonably expect (as a result of the vaccination programme) is not the infection rate (which will continue to drop as a result of other measures) but by the end of February*, the numbers needing hospitalisation and even more so, the death rate. I've said up thread we can hope the COVID-19 related seriously ill and death rates will plummet in March.
*14 days (for 80+% protection) after 15 Feb - 88% of the cohort who might die, will not (statistically)
Edit (thank you @kingrollo): The 80% figure above is unsubstantiated. We "do not know" what the %age is.
Second edit: Around 82% (moderate confidence level - we still don't know): see BMJ article referenced and quoted at Post 1224 below.


----------



## BoldonLad (18 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> So:
> the worst case - vaccine doesn't dampen transmission. But as the roll-out continues people will eventually stop getting seriously sick in any number much greater than background serious illness (cancer, RTAs etc etc). The youngest groups - even if they all refused the vac! - will barely register on the serious illness stats. This might take many months, but: Good news!
> the best case - vaccine also damps down transmission. So we'll get exponential reduction rate in cases as the roll-out proceed. Very very good news! :-)



It is some weeks ago now, but, my recollection of JVT's "presentation" when revealing the decision to concentrate of "first jab" vaccination, was very much in line with that. At no point did he claim "prevent infection", it was all about mitigating the risk of hospital admission. From the beginning of the Pandemic, I personally have assume that sooner or later, more or less everyone will become infected, it is a case of minimising the effects of infection.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> As you say, I think the key reductions we can reasonably expect (as a result of the vaccination programme) is not the infection rate (which will continue to drop as a result of other measures) but by the end of February*, the numbers needing hospitalisation and even more so, the death rate. I've said up thread we can hope the COVID-19 related seriously ill and death rates will plummet in March.
> *14 days (for 80+% protection) after 15 Feb - 88% of the cohort who might die, will not (statistically)



Where are you getting 80% protection after 14 days from ? -


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> Interesting to reflect on this sober and balanced piece form the Guardian
> _The UK’s decision not to join an EU plan to distribute a potential coronavirus vaccine to its most vulnerable citizens has been described as “unforgivable” and condemned by health charities and opposition politicians. _
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/10/uk-poised-to-shun-eu-coronavirus-vaccine-scheme


Note this sober and balanced piece is dated 10 July so let's add "dated and OBE" to that. I think "sober and balanced" must be Guardian chosen adjectives, not yours.
What is the view of "opposition politicians" to the UK's approach to vaccine procurement now I wonder? "Forgivable?"
Who decides what the best strategy for vaccination is in the various member countries? Who are the EU's "most vulnerable citizens"?


----------



## tom73 (18 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> Funny you should mention that. The British government took a calculated risk in ordering vaccine early. The ability to start vaccination early is of benefit to everyone, as the virus knows no borders.
> 
> The EU in the form of the European Commission, on the other hand, seems to have briefly lost the plot and reacted slowly. Biontech actually offered to double its offer of its vaccine to the EU, only to have this turned down! The result is a lack of vaccine available. This was inevitable at the beginning, and we now have hindsight. It's also true that EU solidarity was important as well. Someone got it wrong somewhere though.
> 
> In Germany this has led to the 400 000 injections per day capacity created being stymied by lack of vaccine. People turning up and being sent home. Whether the EU's slowness has made a massive difference to this I don't know, but I hope there will be an enquiry afterwards to make sure this doesn't ever happen again. Being too risk averse in a pandemic is not the right policy, and any money "wasted" on an ineffective vaccine would have been peanuts compared to the amounts needed to protect the economy from the effects of lockdown due to the ongoing infection rate.



That's one thing they got right by edging bets and buying into at least 7 different possibles and to do it early. Lack of supply is an issue here too some of which is the government cherry picking and diverting supply to mass centres leaving many GP's and other primary care services with plenty of apartments but no vaccine turn up. In some cases more with last minute appointments having to be sorted. The other big problem coming is letting this run away from us with plenty of at risk groups inc care homes still waiting for even the 1st dose.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Note this sober and balanced piece is dated 10 July so let's add "dated and OBE" to that. I think "sober and balanced" must be Guardian chosen adjectives, not yours.
> What is the view of "opposition politicians" to the UK's approach to vaccine procurement now I wonder? "Forgivable?"
> Who decides what the best strategy for vaccination is in the various member countries? Who are the EU's "most vulnerable citizens"?



Haven't you heard ? - Starmer and Labour are against the vaccine rollout - check todays daily mail, which has probably just popped through your letterbox.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Where are you getting 80% protection after 14 days from ?


Misremembered. What figure would you prefer? Analysis and deductions remains valid.


----------



## PK99 (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Note this sober and balanced piece is dated 10 July so let's add "dated and OBE" to that. I think "sober and balanced" must be Guardian chosen adjectives, not yours.
> What is the view of "opposition politicians" to the UK's approach to vaccine procurement now I wonder? "Forgivable?"
> Who decides what the best strategy for vaccination is in the various member countries? Who are the EU's "most vulnerable citizens"?



My apologies, the words were mine - I should have included an "ironic" smiley.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Misremembered. What figure would you prefer? Analysis and deductions remains valid.



It really isn't a question of what I prefer - it what is accurate. - and I don't believe 80% protection 14 days after the first jab is.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

Are you trying to get me to click the DM site? How do you know what the Daily Mail says?
Edit: here's a relevant (to cycling) link - I have not looked at it - @Drago shared it and doesn't give it a good review.
I really don't see the vaccination programme as a political issue, but maybe that's naive.
I do suggest you stick to topic and neither indulge in oblique ad hominems nor ascribe to me views which I have not expressed.
Please research a better figure (accurate will not be available) for the level of protection that vaccination gives after 'x' days and share it with us. I note you tacitly agree that my "analysis and deductions remain valid".


----------



## vickster (18 Jan 2021)

Wales seems to be lagging somewhat on the vaccine rollout...my friend whose 80+ year old parents have heard diddly squat about when they may get vaccinated (they live in Cardiff)

My friend said that Drakeford had been reported as saying it's not a sprint to get people vaccinated and in her words, she'd like to marmalise him (not a phrase I've heard but I guess it's not good!!)


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> she'd like to marmalise him (not a phrase I've heard but I guess it's not good!!)


Might it mean she wants to advise him to shift into the large ring and keep pedalling?


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Are you trying to get me to click the DM site? How do you know what the Daily Mail says?
> *I really don't see the vaccination programme as a political issue*, but maybe that's naive.
> I do suggest you stick to topic and neither indulge in oblique ad hominems nor ascribe to me views which I have not expressed.
> Please research a better figure (accurate will not be available) for the level of protection that vaccination gives after 'x' days and share it with us.



Forgive me if I am wrong but you appear to post a load irrelevant stuff . Then when taken task - scream its off topic.

You say you don't believe the vaccination is political ? - yet to quote you a couple of posts back:-

*"What is the view of "opposition politicians" to the UK's approach to vaccine procurement now I wonder? "Forgivable?"*


----------



## vickster (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Might it mean she wants to advise him to shift into the large ring and keep pedalling?


Ummm? Huh?


----------



## midlife (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> It really isn't a question of what I prefer - it what is accurate. - and I don't believe 80% protection 14 days after the first jab is.



I thought that this has been covered here. 89-92 percent efficacy if you discount infections in the first 14 days


----------



## PK99 (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Forgive me if I am wrong but you appear to post a load irrelevant stuff . Then when taken task - scream its off topic.
> 
> You say you don't believe the vaccination is political ? - yet to quote you a couple of posts back:-
> 
> *"What is the view of "opposition politicians" to the UK's approach to vaccine procurement now I wonder? "Forgivable?"*



To be fair, @Ajax Bay 's post was in response to a blatantly one-sided political article on the vaccine in the Guardian.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Wales seems to be lagging somewhat on the vaccine rollout...my friend whose 80+ year old parents have heard diddly squat about when they may get vaccinated (they live in Cardiff)
> 
> My friend said that Drakeford had been reported as saying it's not a sprint to get people vaccinated and in her words, she'd like to marmalise him (not a phrase I've heard but I guess it's not good!!)



Marmalise - that takes me back.

A thought occurred to me, great at the current vaccine stats are - are we in the 'low hanging fruit stage' - in that we are vaccinating people who are eager to come forward - we have a load more sites come on board today, and last week appeared to be getting through 300k jabs a day. It could well be that when we have shifted through the easy ones - it become harder to increase that figure even as we throw more resources at it.


----------



## accountantpete (18 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Wales seems to be lagging somewhat on the vaccine rollout...my friend whose 80+ year old parents have heard diddly squat about when they may get vaccinated (they live in Cardiff)
> 
> My friend said that Drakeford had been reported as saying it's not a sprint to get people vaccinated and in her words, she'd like to marmalise him (not a phrase I've heard but I guess it's not good!!)



What are they doing in Wales? Mark Drakeford was on the radio explaining that they have loads of Pfizer vaccines but are not getting any more until the end of Feb. So they are spreading the roll out of the Pfizer vaccines over that 6 weeks by slowing down the rate of vaccination.

His argument seems to be that the centres have to be kept open and running - so rather than vaccinate the needy as soon as possible the process will be streched out.

Seems an odd bit of logic to me - mind you he is a Labour party First Minister


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> I thought that this has been covered here. 89-92 percent efficacy if you discount infections in the first 14 days



I had heard around 60% - but perhaps that figure hadn't deducted the 14 days.

*https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4826*


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

Please don't shout @kingrollo - my hearing is unaided, currently.
Is there much divergence currently, between the various parties, on the vaccination programme? What they actually say, not what the DM says they say.
Back in July the benefits of UK choosing to adopt a national approach on vaccination procurement rather than one integrated with the EU (of which we were no longer a member) was a political issue, wrapped up into the effort to influence the mode of exit from the transition period.
"What is the view of "opposition politicians" to the UK's approach to vaccine procurement now I wonder?" I don't know. Do you? Best of luck finding out.


----------



## vickster (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Marmalise - that takes me back.
> 
> A thought occurred to me, great at the current vaccine stats are - are we in the 'low hanging fruit stage' - in that we are vaccinating people who are eager to come forward - we have a load more sites come on board today, and last week appeared to be getting through 300k jabs a day. It could well be that when we have shifted through the easy ones - it become harder to increase that figure even as we throw more resources at it.


It doesn't seem like in Wales that they have vaccinated the low hanging fruit - my friend says her elderly parents are desperate to be vaccinated, they are mobile and live in Cardiff, so why the delay?


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Please don't shout @kingrollo - my hearing is unaided, currently.
> Is there much divergence currently, between the various parties, on the vaccination programme? What they actually say, not what the DM says they say.
> Back in July the benefits of UK choosing to adopt a national approach on vaccination procurement rather than one integrated with the EU (of which we were no longer a member) was a political issue, wrapped up into the effort to influence the mode of exit from the transmission period.
> *"What is the view of "opposition politicians" to the UK's approach to vaccine procurement now I wonder?" I don't know. Do you? Best of luck finding out.*



I'm not aware that any opposition party have raised an objection to vaccine procurement - so a reasonable assumption that they broadly support it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

I agree that the approach the Wales medical system have decided to adopt (described above by @vickster and by the Welsh FM on the radio) is odd. I suspect this cunning plan will be revised (though public, medical and political pressure) and all supplies 'got of the shelf and into willing deltoids'. If that means some centres find they are out of vaccines, that would seem a good 'pedal spanner' to wrench an increase in supply from the central UK distribution system.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

Back to the 80% which @kingrollo queried and on which @midlife commented.


kingrollo said:


> I don't believe 80% protection 14 days after the first jab is [correct]


I think this is the BMJ article I read a fortnight ago (my emboldening):
https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n18

"How effective is just one dose?
A paper published in the _New England Journal of Medicine_ stated that the efficacy of the *Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine* was 52.4% between the first and second dose (spaced 21 days apart).5 However, in its “green book” Public Health England said that during the phase III trial most of the vaccine failures were in the days immediately after the first dose, indicating that the *short term protection starts around day 10*.6 Looking at the data from day 15 to 21, it calculated that the *efficacy* against symptomatic covid-19 was *around 89%* (95% confidence interval 52% to 97%). Meanwhile, Pfizer has said that it has no evidence that the protection lasts beyond the 21 days.
In the case of the *Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine*, PHE said, “High protection against hospitalisation was seen from 21 days after dose one until two weeks after the second dose, suggesting that a single dose will provide *high short term protection against severe disease* . . . An exploratory analysis of participants who had received *one standard dose* of the vaccine suggested that *efficacy* against symptomatic covid-19 *was 73%* (95% CI 48.79-85.76%).”

Most of groups 1-4 will or have received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (affects the calculation of 'average'). So might we estimate that the average 'protection' percentage 14 days after the first jab is actually above 80%? I will go back an edit my earlier post


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Back to the 80% which @kingrollo queried and on which @midlife commented.
> I think this is the BMJ article I read a fortnight ago (my emboldening):
> https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n18
> 
> ...



Depends what you want to prove\measure with the stats. From memory it was the impact on people not getting ill post vaccination - If thats the case, can you ignore those 14 days and the people who get ill in that period ? 

Have I read correctly the first pfizer jab may not offer any protection after 21 days ?


----------



## tom73 (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Marmalise - that takes me back.
> 
> A thought occurred to me, great at the current vaccine stats are - are we in the 'low hanging fruit stage' - in that we are vaccinating people who are eager to come forward - we have a load more sites come on board today, and last week appeared to be getting through 300k jabs a day. It could well be that when we have shifted through the easy ones - it become harder to increase that figure even as we throw more resources at it.



That's easy to fix and is another problem coming down the line. Most are fine with the groups getting 1st daps at the vaccine the problem than come's with the bun fight for who is next. At least 5 at the last count want it 1st many which will be popular with the public. Even if as now JCVI after reviewing evidence say it's not the way to go clinically. Going down the teachers, police ect route will be give easy government brownie points. So in one go the vaccine rate stay's nice and positive and ones with big political lobby are kept happy. Once we move that way it's a very slimy path to setting health policy and access based on social worth and not on need. 
Or we can do as we now and totally gloss over the bits of society we don't like.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Have I read correctly the first pfizer jab may not offer any protection after 21 days ?



No, that's entirely mistaken. 

The trial was run with a gap of 21 days, so there is no _direct_ evidence from the phase three trial of the exact level of protection beyond 21 days. 

Nobody, but nobody believes there is any risk of there being "no protection". Very few people believe there is any likelihood of anything other than a very good level of protection for weeks or months with a single jab.


----------



## tom73 (18 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> No, that's entirely mistaken.
> 
> The trial was run with a gap of 21 days, so there is no _direct_ evidence from the phase three trial of the exact level of protection beyond 21 days.
> 
> Nobody, but nobody believes there is any risk of there being "no protection". Very few people believe there is any likelihood of anything other than a very good level of protection for weeks or months with a single jab.



Not sure the government are keen for that to be mass public thinking right now. Since the weekend they have not been keen to still guarantee or confirm you will get the 2rd one.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Depends what you want to prove\measure with the stats. From memory it was the impact on people not getting ill post vaccination - If thats the case, can you ignore those 14 days and the people who get ill in that period ?
> Have I read correctly the first pfizer jab may not offer any protection after 21 days ?


I'm not trying to 'prove' anything. And I obviously had no input into what was measured.
I think the BMJ article is reasonably clear.
'My' 80% was after 14 days. Yes, of course one disregards any infections/getting ill for those who succumb before the vaccine has had time to have a beneficial effect. Pfizer's trials suggested that period to be 10 days.
Please remember that none of these vaccines is 100% effective so infection, serious illness and tragically death will occur in a few per cent, even 7 days after the second dose is administered.
@roubaixtuesday has answered your other point - you have read the article correctly: "Pfizer has said that it has no evidence that the protection lasts beyond the 21 days." But all the world's experience suggests that it will (and recently reported studies on the level of antibodies in those who had the disease in April reinforce experts' confidence in this).


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Not sure the government are keen for that to be mass public thinking right now. Since the weekend they have not been keen to still guarantee or confirm you will get the 2nd one.


1) I'm sure, Tom. The government surely are keen that the public understand the truth*. There is no risk of there being "no protection" (well actually there's a 5% risk (but that's close enough to 'none' for government work)). "Very few people believe there is any likelihood of anything other than a very good level of protection for weeks or months with a single jab" as @roubaixtuesday said.
2) Tell us more about these guarantees or confirmations you implicitly seek. JCVI have suggested that the gap between the first and second dose can be extended to 12 weeks (rationale - read the BMJ paper I linked to above), and except in exceptional circumstances, that the second dose should be the same vaccine. I expect both these directions to be followed. Don't you?
Has anyone of standing suggested that, down the line (eg March/April), the programme will 'chin off' the second dose? Of course it may (I think the chances are extremely slim: the cost/benefit analysis medically and politically and legally will be starkly against). Maybe UK will decide that, so that all those second doses can be given to poorer countries (and in the EU) WHO will otherwise see even more delay in receiving supplies. Do you think that'd be a good idea?
But no point wringing your hands about it now and asking for 'guarantees'. What's the point? I guarantee that (Roman not Greek Orthodox) Easter will be on the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox.
* What is 'truth'?


----------



## johnblack (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Note this sober and balanced piece is dated 10 July so let's add "dated and OBE" to that. I think "sober and balanced" must be Guardian chosen adjectives, not yours.
> What is the view of "opposition politicians" to the UK's approach to vaccine procurement now I wonder? "Forgivable?"
> Who decides what the best strategy for vaccination is in the various member countries? Who are the EU's "most vulnerable citizens"?


I've copied some of the responses from another site that gives you a flavour of the thoughts of opposition at the time. I know it's politics, and so their job, but you'd like to think that they'd at least hold their hands up and say they got it wrong.

*Labour’s Catherine West *(a Shadow Europe Minister) said _“UK opts out of EU vaccine scheme – Dumber and dumber.”_
*LibDem’s Munira Wilson* (Health spokesman) said_ “Shame we weren’t part of the EU vaccine procurement prog, or we’d have early access to the Moderna vaccine, as well as Pfizer vaccine.”_
*Labour’s Ruth Cadbury* said _“Brexit = leaving the EMA = longer waits & higher prices for new drugs”_
*LibDem’s Layla Moran* (Foreign Affairs spokesman) said _“Walking away from the EU vaccines scheme is putting ideology ahead of public health. You would think that during a pandemic ministers would put political dogma aside. But it seems for this government it’s Brexit over vaccines”_
*Labour’s Bell Ribeiro-Addy* said _“by refusing to join the EU’s vaccine scheme, the Government is yet again putting ideology before saving lives.”_
*LibDem’s Ed Davey* (LibDem leader) said_ “The PM must confirm that the UK will take part in the EU vaccine plan. This is no time for silly Brexit games.”_
*Labour’s Paul Blomfield* (a Shadow Brexit Minister) said _“Backing the EU initiative for a coronavirus vaccine is a positive step”_
Politics is sometimes down to taking a gamble and so far this one looks to have paid off.


----------



## mjr (18 Jan 2021)

johnblack said:


> I've copied some of the responses from another site that gives you a flavour of the thoughts of opposition at the time. I know it's politics, and so their job, but you'd like to think that they'd at least hold their hands up and say they got it wrong.
> 
> *Labour’s Catherine West *(a Shadow Europe Minister) said _“UK opts out of EU vaccine scheme – Dumber and dumber.”_
> *LibDem’s Munira Wilson* (Health spokesman) said_ “Shame we weren’t part of the EU vaccine procurement prog, or we’d have early access to the Moderna vaccine, as well as Pfizer vaccine.”_
> ...


Most of those comments are actually still accurate, especially if you consider saving all lives rather than saving only UK ones.



> Politics is sometimes down to taking a gamble and so far this one looks to have paid off.


Yes, they bet our lives on early vaccination and thankfully seem to have won — this time. Does that make risk-taking a good thing in a politician? They seem to have lost their bets on unlocking in August and December, and delaying in October and January, but of course, it was not only their lives they're betting.


----------



## mjr (18 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> The problem is that they seem to think you can still catch it but with milder symptoms even with the vaccine......and also even the experts at this moment in time don't seem to know if you can still transmit it even if vaccinated. I guess it's going to be wait and see.


I suspect we are likely to see results from Israel first, where they have vaccinated more than 25% of the population already IIRC.

Will the UK learn from abroad, for a change?


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Most of those comments are actually still accurate


With all due respect, most of the quotes @johnblack shared are _actually_ not. Have a re-read of each one in turn. As for your 'especially' caveat, your use of 'all' is open to a wide range of meaning (and therefore reasonable inference).
Don't all these decisions involve balancing risk/reward?


----------



## vickster (18 Jan 2021)

Wales situation
Covid vaccine: Mark Drakeford faces 'go-slow' roll-out criticism https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-55704017

Not sure why vaccinators would be sitting around doing nothing...aren't they mostly practising HCPs with a day job?


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Wales situation Covid vaccine: Mark Drakeford faces 'go-slow' roll-out criticism https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-55704017


I said upthread I thought this would not stand the test of scrutiny. More fool the FM for sharing. Is transparency always a good thing? Wales will have been allocated sufficient to achieve the groups 1-4 by 15 Feb (same with Scotland and Wales). But it has set up centres local and hub which have got ahead of themselves and the expected supply profile - well done the Welsh. Still think they'll (entirely reasonably) be forced to just get on with it. What's the priority: not giving vaccinators a few days off or getting as many people (within 1-4) vaccinated as the supply and delivery (into arms) capacity allows?


----------



## mjr (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> With all due respect, most of the quotes @johnblack shared are _actually_ not. Have a re-read of each one in turn. As for your 'especially' caveat, your use of 'all' is open to a wide range of meaning (and therefore reasonable inference).
> Don't all these decisions involve balancing risk/reward?



Going through each one in turn:

*Labour’s Catherine West *(a Shadow Europe Minister) said _“UK opts out of EU vaccine scheme – Dumber and dumber.”_ - true, the UK did opt out and arguably it was dumb.
*LibDem’s Munira Wilson* (Health spokesman) said_ “Shame we weren’t part of the EU vaccine procurement prog, or we’d have early access to the Moderna vaccine, as well as Pfizer vaccine.”_ - true, but only just: EMA approved Moderna's vaccine on the 6th whereas the UK's MHRA approved it on 8th.
*Labour’s Ruth Cadbury* said _“Brexit = leaving the EMA = longer waits & higher prices for new drugs”_ - too soon to tell.
*LibDem’s Layla Moran* (Foreign Affairs spokesman) said _“Walking away from the EU vaccines scheme is putting ideology ahead of public health. You would think that during a pandemic ministers would put political dogma aside. But it seems for this government it’s Brexit over vaccines”_ - true.
*Labour’s Bell Ribeiro-Addy* said _“by refusing to join the EU’s vaccine scheme, the Government is yet again putting ideology before saving lives.”_ - true.
*LibDem’s Ed Davey* (LibDem leader) said_ “The PM must confirm that the UK will take part in the EU vaccine plan. This is no time for silly Brexit games.”_ - false in that the PM didn't have to confirm it, but surely true in that it was no time for silly Brexit games.
*Labour’s Paul Blomfield* (a Shadow Brexit Minister) said _“Backing the EU initiative for a coronavirus vaccine is a positive step”_ - debatable.

So 4½ true, 2 undecided and ½ false. Please remember that I am not a member of any party and I am assessing the claims exactly as written, rather than the spirit or implication that they we may agree trying to convey.


----------



## tom73 (18 Jan 2021)

@kingrollo maybe this will hammer it home. 
Vaccine and it's back to normal ? Simple summary if anyone fails to see it's only part of way out and not a magic fix. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-b6360f40-84f9-469b-b6a3-a4568e161c4f


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Vaccine and it's back to normal ?


Strawman. @kingrollo has never suggested this; and nor has anyone else. Good out-of-date (4 Dec) link though, if a little long and wide-ranging: but that's the BBC for you.


----------



## matticus (18 Jan 2021)

Did I miss something?? What is @tom73 trying to achieve here?


----------



## nickyboy (18 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Lack of supply is an issue here too some of which is the government cherry picking and diverting supply to mass centres


You got any evidential numbers to back this up? Or is it another CC vaccine distribution conspiracy theory? I should be selling tin foil hats


----------



## PK99 (18 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Going through each one in turn:
> 
> *Labour’s Catherine West *(a Shadow Europe Minister) said _“UK opts out of EU vaccine scheme – Dumber and dumber.”_ - true, the UK did opt out and arguably it was dumb.
> *LibDem’s Munira Wilson* (Health spokesman) said_ “Shame we weren’t part of the EU vaccine procurement prog, or we’d have early access to the Moderna vaccine, as well as Pfizer vaccine.”_ - true, but only just: EMA approved Moderna's vaccine on the 6th whereas the UK's MHRA approved it on 8th.
> ...



I'm genuinely bemused by your post:

The contrast UK Vs Europe roll out is stark.
would you have preferred to see us following the pattern apparent in the following:


https://www.politico.eu/article/coronavirus-vaccination-europe-by-the-numbers/


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> @kingrollo maybe this will hammer it home.
> Vaccine and it's back to normal ? Simple summary if anyone fails to see it's only part of way out and not a magic fix.
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-b6360f40-84f9-469b-b6a3-a4568e161c4f



Are you drawing my attention to that article - out of interest -? or you feel I am advocating Jab and forget (I think you may have me mixed up with another poster)

I actually read that article at the weekend - its excellent. I see a couple of major threats to the vaccine and forget argument.

1.The calls to release lockdown early - as we get lots of people vaccinated. That decision should be based on infections and hospital capacity.

2.Any new variants (IMO these become more likely the more infections we have)


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

An alternative assessment, fwiw and reluctantly as this is so much water under the bridge, in italics:

mjr = True, the UK did opt out and arguably it was dumb. _Much stronger argument it wasn't dumb: so '*false*'._
mjr = True, but only just: EMA approved Moderna's vaccine on the 6th whereas the UK's MHRA approved it on 8th. _"early access" - true, but in retrospect, *irrelevant*: the amounts of Moderna being supplied under the EU scheme (160M) which might have come to UK would have been small and anyway UK secured 5M (later +2M) Moderna (early March delivery) to augment the Pfizer (40M + 13% (6 out of 5 dose vial)) and OxfordAZ (100M (+>10% for the 'extra' dose out of each 8/10 vial)) supplies. Hopefully we can send the Moderna stuff to the EU instead, to help their deeply flawed 'all together' approach since we procured (betted on) sufficient supplies of two vaccines which work (and much, much cheaper, on average)._
mjr = Too soon to tell. _Come on. Can't you even acknowledge that's just *False* and FALSE._
mjr = True. _*False*. Government rightly judged that shackling the UK to the EU Vaccines 'scheme' was putting public health ahead of political (communautaire) ideology._
mjr = True. *False. *_Government rightly judged that shackling the UK to the EU Vaccines 'scheme' was putting public health ahead of political (communautaire) ideology._
mjr = False in that the PM didn't have to confirm it, but surely true in that it was no time for silly Brexit games. _Agree *false* and though true in that it was no time for silly Brexit games, but *irrelevant* as not taking part was in the UK's interest, in prospect and doubly in retrospect, and merely perjorative use of labelling a sensible decision as a 'political game'._
mjr = Debatable. _Yes depending who it's positive for: EU maybe. UK: no (so *false*)._
HTH (but keep digging if you want)


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> The calls to release lockdown early - as we get lots of people vaccinated. That decision should be based on infections and hospital capacity.
> I see a couple of major threats to the vaccine and forget argument.


Decision basis sound, together with other factors, including the need to allow the NHS to provide treatment for all the other health ailments of the population.
A fatal threat to that 'strawman' is that noone is making that argument, well maybe the lunatic fringe (none on here).


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

Obligatory listening for all (well 'all' who come here to look!):
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000rdcd
'How to Vaccinate the World' - caught the second half, this morning.


----------



## tom73 (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Are you drawing my attention to that article - out of interest -? or you feel I am advocating Jab and forget (I think you may have me mixed up with another poster)
> 
> I actually read that article at the weekend - its excellent. I see a couple of major threats to the vaccine and forget argument.
> 
> ...


No i'm in full agreement with you thought some simple clear facts was in order. As some clearly don't want to face hard facts which you've been trying to get them to face on here.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

Hard facts? I wish.


----------



## Unkraut (18 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> “The crisis does not stop at any national border. It is about time the prime minister started showing leadership, including fully participating in all EU efforts to secure critical medical supplies and a vaccine.”


The EU delay to ensure fair distribution is justified in that Bavaria, for example, has 1000 km border with Czechia with a high infection rate, and Austria also with a high infection rate and not far from northern Italy. There is an element of enlightened self-interest in ensuring everyone can vaccinate sufficiently at the same time. Doesn't leave any excuse for not having got on with though.


mjr said:


> Will the UK learn from abroad, for a change?


There is a meeting of the States/Länder today to prepare for the big central federal government and States meeting tomorrow - brought forward a week, and likely to result in more severe measures to get the infection rate down as opposed to the plateau at present.

They are going to be advised by British scientists on all they have learnt about the new more infectious strain, as it has not yet been detected much on the continent, and the facilities for this need to be beefed up pretty quickly in Germany at least. There is a very real fear that if this new strain starts to run through the population before the rate is significantly reduced and the vaccination programme can get going it will become extraordinarily difficult to get it back under control.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Hard facts? I wish.






tom73 said:


> No i'm in full agreement with you thought some simple clear facts was in order. As some clearly don't want to face hard facts which you've been trying to get them to face on here.


I'm doing my best for humankind mate !


----------



## mjr (18 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> I'm genuinely bemused by your post:
> 
> The contrast UK Vs Europe roll out is stark.
> would you have preferred to see us following the pattern apparent in the following:
> ...


I'm genuinely bemused by your post in at least three ways: first, it uses week old numbers when the latest are available but it does not really matter in this case; second, being involved in the EU vaccine project would have been in addition to the UK projects; and thirdly, how can you have "UK vs Europe" when Brexiters keep telling us that we are still part of Europe but not the EU.

I've been quite consistent in acknowledging that the vaccine gamble seems to be paying off for gov.uk - while also being critical that it has led to and seems likely to lead to some deadly decisions, as the UK bet everything on vacc.



Ajax Bay said:


> An alternative assessment, fwiw and reluctantly as this is so much water under the bridge, in italics:
> 
> mjr = True, the UK did opt out and arguably it was dumb. _Much stronger argument it wasn't dumb: so '*false*'._


False? False? Do you think the UK didn't opt out? 



> mjr = True, but only just: EMA approved Moderna's vaccine on the 6th whereas the UK's MHRA approved it on 8th. _"early access" - true, but in retrospect, *irrelevant*:_


So still true then and even you only judge it irrelevant "in retrospect".



> mjr = Too soon to tell. _Come on. Can't you even acknowledge that's just *False* and FALSE._


So you're willing to declare something false, based on 18 days of new drug approvals (how many drugs is that?), rather than wait and see? 



> mjr = True. _*False*. Government rightly judged that shackling the UK to the EU Vaccines 'scheme' was putting public health ahead of political (communautaire) ideology._
> mjr = True. *False. *_Government rightly judged that shackling the UK to the EU Vaccines 'scheme' was putting public health ahead of political (communautaire) ideology._


Both of those seem to be based on the misunderstanding that we could not have had our own "scheme" as well as being part of the EU one, similar to some other EU nations.

Just think: if the gov.uk gamble hadn't paid off, how much could we have been hurt by not having access to the EU project?



> HTH (but keep digging if you want)


Not really any point on keeping digging now that we've unearthed the staggering bias in your assessment. [/i]


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

From the UK Actuaries Research Group:
How Soon to See the Vaccine's Benefits





"This bulletin explores the rate at which we might see the benefits of this programme [Groups 1-4 completed on schedule] in terms of the key metrics used to monitor the pandemic. We expect that the impact of a successful vaccination programme will be most obvious in the hospitalisation and deaths data, with material reductions in hospitalisation starting from mid-February and reported deaths in early March. The impact on cases is expected to be seen sooner, but the reduction is likely to be smaller."
[Note: this considers ONLY the effect of the vaccination programme and not the progressive reduction in all these metrics which we might expect to see as a result of other nation-wide precautionary and control measures, past, current and future, which will change at some stage (as early as late Feb, but who knows?]


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> From the UK Actuaries Research Group:
> How Soon to See the Vaccine's Benefits
> View attachment 569571
> 
> ...



Didn't you post this yesterday ?


----------



## nickyboy (18 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Just think: if the gov.uk gamble hadn't paid off, how much could we have been hurt by not having access to the EU project?


Just think: if the gov.uk decided to have access to the EU project how much could we have been hurt?


----------



## mjr (18 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Just think: if the gov.uk decided to have access to the EU project how much could we have been hurt?


Indeed! If done intelligently, instead of some of the later vaccine deliveries, it is difficult to see how we would have been hurt.


----------



## Low Gear Guy (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> From the UK Actuaries Research Group:
> How Soon to See the Vaccine's Benefits
> View attachment 569571
> 
> ...


This assessment does not mention the effect of the government removing restrictions or less adherence by the public to the current regulations. This is likely to counteract the benefits of the vaccination programme.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> If done intelligently, instead of some of the later vaccine deliveries


Cake it have eat can't your and


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Jan 2021)

Low Gear Guy said:


> This assessment does not mention the effect of the government removing restrictions or less adherence by the public to the current regulations. This is likely to counteract the benefits of the vaccination programme.


Indeed: see my note (subscribed):
"Note: this considers ONLY the effect of the vaccination programme and not the progressive reduction in all these metrics which we might expect to see as a result of other nation-wide precautionary and control measures, past, current and future, which will change at some stage (as early as late Feb, but who knows?"
Counteract: yes. Stop the steep decline in the important metrics? Not likely.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Low Gear Guy said:


> This assessment does not mention the effect of the government removing restrictions or less adherence by the public to the current regulations. This is likely to counteract the benefits of the vaccination programme.



Don't tell him that. His shares portfolio is taking on hell of a beating - he needs that lockdown lifting asap.


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Just think: if the gov.uk decided to have access to the EU project how much could we have been hurt?



Unless of course Pfizer tweak the vaccine to take account of new variants - then we have 5m people on the wrong version and needing an upgrade !!!


----------



## Low Gear Guy (18 Jan 2021)

If the vaccine has to modified to take account of mutations we are probably looking at annual injections for the whole adult population. Like the flu vaccine programme on a bigger scale.


----------



## srw (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Didn't you post this yesterday ?


I posted it last week....


----------



## mjr (18 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Cake it have eat can't your and


You are probably right in that expecting this govt to do things intelligently is a big leap!


----------



## kingrollo (18 Jan 2021)

Low Gear Guy said:


> If the vaccine has to modified to take account of mutations we are probably looking at annual injections for the whole adult population. Like the flu vaccine programme on a bigger scale.



Agreed. 

But if Pfizer put a change in the next few weeks...those countries that have vaccinated loads - suddenly slip to the bottom of countries in terms of effective vaccinated people.

It's the nightmare scenario - potentially even before we have finished this rollout - we potentially have to re vaccinate those early adopters .


----------



## Rusty Nails (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Unless of course Pfizer tweak the vaccine to take account of new variants - then we have 5m people on the wrong version and needing an upgrade !!!



Better to have waited 6 months then to make sure new variants are taken into account. Oh wait, there's a problem with that idea!


----------



## nickyboy (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Agreed.
> 
> But if Pfizer put a change in the next few weeks...those countries that have vaccinated loads - suddenly slip to the bottom of countries in terms of effective vaccinated people.
> 
> It's the nightmare scenario - potentially even before we have finished this rollout - we potentially have to re vaccinate those early adopters .


But there is nothing to suggest that this is even remotely likely. Unless you know differently of course. 
Surely it can't be an unsubstantiated, unresearched bit of scaremongering can it?


----------



## Unkraut (18 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> But if Pfizer put a change in the next few weeks...those countries that have vaccinated loads - suddenly slip to the bottom of countries in terms of effective vaccinated people.


From what I have heard and read, so far there is high confidence the current Pfizer vaccine will cope with mutations of the virus. If it doesn't it is easier/less difficult to adapt it than create it in the first place, and that should be possible fairly quickly. 

It may be another mutation has surfaced in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, on today's news. It is not the British version and is currently being investigated. Will take some time to evaluate as there is only limited laboratory capacity.


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Better to have waited 6 months then to make sure new variants are taken into account.


Think this is known as the Zimbabwean method - oh no, hang on, is that something 'entirely' different?


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> I posted it last week....


Sorry - I did check back at least 6 pages because I thought I'd seen it before. Anyway - nice coloured graph and a clear take-away estimating that the death rate will fall off a cliff (NB the effect of vaccines only - which I tried to make crystal clear).


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Jan 2021)

How many people will need to be vaccinated to stop the disease spreading? This depends on how infectious the viral strain is, how effective the vaccine is, and how much we are prepared to continue with lockdown measures. NB: These model predictions for the success of the vaccination programmes depend (i.e. assume) on the vaccine being able to limit the transmission of the virus – not just stop people getting ill. But we still don’t know (there are insufficient data) if the current batch of approved COVID vaccines stops transmission.





Critical vaccination levels depend on the estimated effective reproductive number, with the vaccine efficiency of 90%. 
We could continue with very strict social distancing indefinitely, bringing R below 1 so that the number of new infections decreases. In this case, we would not need any vaccination (point marked A on the graph). But the moment control measures were relaxed, R would jump back above 1 and the epidemic would start to spread again.

Or we could continue to combine some level of lockdown with the roll out of vaccines. In this scenario (point marked B on the graph) we would see a decline in cases once 40% of the population were immune to the virus. However, this strategy relies on keeping R just above 1. The disease would probably come back as soon as further relaxation occurred.

As we want to return to our activities and freedoms without social distancing, the vaccination levels need to be much higher, taking into account how effectively the virus can spread with no additional control.


----------



## lejogger (19 Jan 2021)

Received my first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine today.
Feeling incredibly privileged to have received it well before I otherwise would have been eligible, due to my non-patient facing role in the NHS.

I used to joke that the free flu vaccine was the only tangible 'bonus' of working in public health finance, as opposed to annual cash bonuses often received in the private sector. It's funny how perception can change in the light of a global pandemic, given the incalculable value of comparatively secure employment and a medical 'queue-jump' in these frightening times.

11 weeks until my 'booster'. Expect this will be when my phone picks up my 5G signal.

No side effects as yet. Interested to see if I develop any, as anecdotally the AstraZeneca is said to induce more severe reactions than the Pfizer. I tested positive for anti-bodies in June, so also interested if that may impact on side-effects, if any residue of them remain.


----------



## BoldonLad (19 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Don't tell him that.* His shares portfolio is taking on hell of a beating* - he needs that lockdown lifting asap.



Depends on what a person's portfolio consists of, but, actually, the FT100. has made reasonable progress, and, as with most assets, nothing lost, until you actually sell.

There are reasons for lifting or easing restrictions, other than money, like, for example non-covid health issues, mental health issues, education


----------



## BoldonLad (19 Jan 2021)

lejogger said:


> Received my first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine today.
> .........
> 
> 11 weeks until my 'booster'. Expect this will be when my *phone picks up my 5G signal.*
> ...



Once you have been micro-chipped, I thought you could get 5G without a phone?


----------



## BoldonLad (19 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Better to have waited 6 months then to make sure new variants are taken into account.* Oh wait, there's a problem with that idea!*



Not really, we could/would have had more deaths, leaving fewer people to vaccinate... every cloud...


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Jan 2021)

Meanwhile, something from Israel on the likelihood that successful vaccination will "not become carriers of the virus and will not spread it further." Do the vaccines simply prevent disease resulting from the virus or do any of them stop a human from carrying and transmitting the virus?


mjr said:


> results from Israel first


Professor Gili Regev-Yohai, director of Sheba’s Infectious Disease Epidemiology Unit, said that people who received both doses of the vaccine will most likely not become carriers of the virus and *will not spread it further* due to the high level of antibodies they have obtained. 
It is the first indication that a Covid-19 vaccine may stop transmission. By 18 Jan the hospital had vaccinated some 80% of its employees with the first dose - a total of 7,106 individuals - and 4,484 with the booster shot.
“The results of the survey are consistent with Pfizer’s experiment and even exceeded expectations,” he said.
Comment: It's reasonable to surmise that the effects of vaccination with one Pfizer dose will afford similar (but with lower assurance) results (from 11 days to 12 weeks) and also that vaccination with other vaccines (eg Oxford-AZ) will have similar beneficial effect: "stop a human from carrying and transmitting the virus".
Roll on the programme (and March).


----------



## winjim (19 Jan 2021)

lejogger said:


> Received my first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine today.
> Feeling incredibly privileged to have received it well before I otherwise would have been eligible, due to my non-patient facing role in the NHS.
> 
> I used to joke that the free flu vaccine was the only tangible 'bonus' of working in public health finance, as opposed to annual cash bonuses often received in the private sector. It's funny how perception can change in the light of a global pandemic, given the incalculable value of comparatively secure employment and a medical 'queue-jump' in these frightening times.
> ...


Ha. I had a shocking reaction to the first dose of the AZ vaccine, but my wife just had the Pfizer one and felt awful too. So potato potato.


----------



## srw (19 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> as with most assets, nothing lost, until you actually sell.


And nothing gained either, if you take that view. I don't - mark to market is the only sensible way to value a portfolio.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (20 Jan 2021)

News today that of the 700,000 doses of vaccine so far handed over to the inept Scottish govt, only 300,000 have been administered. It is reported that 400,000 are still sitting in storage. No wonder Scottish vaccination rates are currently so far behind England’s.


----------



## mjr (20 Jan 2021)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> News today that of the 700,000 doses of vaccine so far handed over to the inept Scottish govt, only 300,000 have been administered. It is reported that 400,000 are still sitting in storage. No wonder Scottish vaccination rates are currently so far behind England’s.


Whose storage, though? Last week, gov.scot said they did not have all the doses but did have a delivery schedule that would allow them to meet the target. If some has been delivered early, it's easy to see how it could take a while to ramp up to use it sooner, not least getting appointments made or setting up walk-in centres.


----------



## lejogger (20 Jan 2021)

AstraZeneca side effects update:

After feeling fine all afternoon and evening I woke up with fever at 2am. Took some ibuprofen and paracetamol but spent most of the remainder of the night either shivering or sweating. 
I had a night of very similar fever when I had Covid-19 in March last year - which makes sense, I guess. 

Not feeling wonderful today, but keeping dosed up and am able to continue working from home... albeit around browsing Cycle Chat, obviously.


----------



## kingrollo (20 Jan 2021)

Quick Question - Is the second dose the same as the first ? (In terms of volume of stuff injected)


----------



## kingrollo (20 Jan 2021)

Oh Feck.......
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...zers-vaccine-effective-expected-one-dose.html

Real-world data from Israel's world-beating rollout showed the first dose led to a 33 per cent reduction in cases of coronavirus between 14 and 21 days afterwards among people who got the jab. Another of the country's top doctors said it was 'really good news'.

But the figure is lower than the British regulator's estimate, which said it may prevent 89 per cent of recipients from getting Covid-19 symptoms. 

However, Israel's data does not prove anything about possible impacts of the UK's controversial 12-week gap between doses. The country does not give any more than three weeks between the first and second doses, during which time protection is expected to be minimal at best – and the vaccine is not intended to prevent infection, but severe disease and death.

Sir Patrick Vallance, the UK's chief scientific adviser, today said he would expect all vaccines to be less effective in the real world than in trials. He added that Britain should look 'very carefully' at data during the vaccine rollout to see what effect its having.


Pfizer's own data shows that protection from Covid starts from about 12 days after the first dose, but that one jab can only prevent around 52 per cent of cases of disease, compared to the 95 per cent reduction offered by two. It does not offer any proof that a single dose works for longer than three weeks.

*For this reason, the US pharmaceutical company refused to endorse Britain's decision to change the dosing schedule*, saying there was no proof it would work.


----------



## lejogger (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Quick Question - Is the second dose the same as the first ? (In terms of volume of stuff injected)


I'm not sure. With Pfizer I believe so. With AstraZeneca, I believe there was publicity before approval that they stumbled on a combination which provided greater efficacy when they accidentally dispensed an initial half dose. (Pretty sure it was half then full, but could have been the other way around.)
I forgot to ask whether this approach was actually being adopted or if they were just bunging two full doses into us - which would seem odd if they could provide greater protection using a lower quantity of vaccine.


----------



## oldwheels (20 Jan 2021)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> News today that of the 700,000 doses of vaccine so far handed over to the inept Scottish govt, only 300,000 have been administered. It is reported that 400,000 are still sitting in storage. No wonder Scottish vaccination rates are currently so far behind England’s.


I think this comes under the category of fake news. Looking at some other social media it appears the Tories are putting out what was kindly described as misleading information regarding Scottish covid vaccinations.


----------



## lane (20 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> How many people will need to be vaccinated to stop the disease spreading? This depends on how infectious the viral strain is, how effective the vaccine is, and how much we are prepared to continue with lockdown measures. NB: These model predictions for the success of the vaccination programmes depend (i.e. assume) on the vaccine being able to limit the transmission of the virus – not just stop people getting ill. But we still don’t know (there are insufficient data) if the current batch of approved COVID vaccines stops transmission.
> 
> 
> View attachment 569673
> ...



12.5% currently has some level of immunity due to having covid antibodies (previous infection) so 16.5 million vaccinations would get us roughly to 40% some time in March, by which time you are saying we could have some small relaxation and keep R to 1?


----------



## Julia9054 (20 Jan 2021)

My son (community carer) has finally been told that him and all his colleagues will be getting vaccination appointments in the next 2 weeks


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (20 Jan 2021)

oldwheels said:


> I think this comes under the category of fake news. Looking at some other social media it appears the Tories are putting out what was kindly described as misleading information regarding Scottish covid vaccinations.


Sturgeon isn’t denying it, in fact she’s trying to explain it away with talk of complex supply chains.


----------



## lane (20 Jan 2021)

Surprised of some of the criteria for allocating the vaccine. NHS non patient facing versus for example teachers?


----------



## BoldonLad (20 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> *12.5% currently has some level of immunity due to having covid antibodies (previous infection)* so 16.5 million vaccinations would get us roughly to 40% some time in March, by which time you are saying we could have some small relaxation and keep R to 1?



I recognise that these figures are not your's, so, not picking at you... but...

I do wonder how they arrived at this number? They have not tested the whole population (or, if they have, they have missed me out), for antibodies, so, as far as I can see, the "best" they can have done is to have tested a sub-set of the population, and then, extrapolated..... in which case, how do we know what the accuracy levels are?


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (20 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Whose storage, though? Last week, gov.scot said they did not have all the doses but did have a delivery schedule that would allow them to meet the target. If some has been delivered early, it's easy to see how it could take a while to ramp up to use it sooner, not least getting appointments made or setting up walk-in centres.


An early delivery of 400,000 doses ? Really ?


----------



## lane (20 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> I recognise that these figures are not your's, so, not picking at you... but...
> 
> I do wonder how they arrived at this number? They have not tested the whole population (or, if they have, they have missed me out), for antibodies, so, as far as I can see, the "best" they can have done is to have tested a sub-set of the population, and then, extrapolated.....



Yes that is exactly what they have done. That is the way they get the infection levels each week. However they also provide a confidence interval to give an idea of accuracy. I think this is a well respected methodology.


----------



## BoldonLad (20 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Yes that is exactly what they have done. That is the way they get the infection levels each week. However they also provide a confidence interval to give an idea of accuracy. * I think this is a well respected methodology.*



hmm.. maybe, but, so far, most of the figures, for infections per day and now this antibodies figure, do not "gel" with my personal experience... perhaps I am just not "typical"?


----------



## kingrollo (20 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Surprised of some of the criteria for allocating the vaccine. NHS non patient facing versus for example teachers?



Its numbers game. At the moment the numbers look good, I expect it will come out in the next couple of weeks - that the numbers are inflated by non NHS patient facing staff and on site contractors etc - not by massive amounts. IME not many people are turned away from vaccination centres - I will say no more than that.


----------



## lane (20 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> hmm.. maybe, but, so far, most of the figures, for infections per day and now this antibodies figure, do not "gel" with my personal experience... perhaps I am just not "typical"?



Quite likely. And don't forget, the number of people you know who you know have had covid will be less than those who have had it due to asymptomatic infection. 

I see no reason to doubt the figures on vaccines they are not an estimate.


----------



## BoldonLad (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Its numbers game. At the moment the numbers look good, I expect it will come out in the next couple of weeks - that* the numbers are inflated by non NHS patient facing staff *and on site contractors etc - not by massive amounts. IME not many people are turned away from vaccination centres - I will say no more than that.



Good to know that the NHS is looking after us....


----------



## lejogger (20 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Surprised of some of the criteria for allocating the vaccine. NHS non patient facing versus for example teachers?


FWIW I completely agree with you that the order of vaccinations can seem confusing.
However, these vaccine batches have been provided to our NHS Trust for the purposes of vaccinating their staff. I had no option to refuse on the basis that someone else 'more deserving' can have mine instead. If I'd not booked an appointment, the slot would have been filled with another employee of the Trust.

The greater risk of non patient-facing staff refusing vaccines at this stage is that they would be wasted. They wouldn't be reallocated.

There are potentially broader arguments to be made around keeping the entire NHS Trust infrastructure operating at as close to full capacity as possible. The clinical element are also somewhat reliant on the Corporate Support Services. 

In addition, my partner is an NHS employee in a front line patient-facing role, so albeit fairly tenuous, my vaccination helps to keep front line services operating.


----------



## lejogger (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Its numbers game. At the moment the numbers look good, I expect it will come out in the next couple of weeks - that the numbers are inflated by non NHS patient facing staff and on site contractors etc - not by massive amounts. IME not many people are turned away from vaccination centres - I will say no more than that.


I disagree. Numbers looked good before this week. Most NHS Trusts like mine have only started offering the vaccine to non patient facing employees this week, or very recently, once the clinical staff have been prioritised.


----------



## lejogger (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> *IME* not many people are turned away from vaccination centres - I will say no more than that.


What experience is that exactly? Vaccination centres are operating strictly by appointment. You cannot just turn up and get jabbed.


----------



## Julia9054 (20 Jan 2021)

lejogger said:


> What experience is that exactly? Vaccination centres are operating strictly by appointment. You cannot just turn up and get jabbed.


My friend is currently sat in the car at the vaccination centre in York with her father. His appointment was at 11am. It is currently 1.40pm and they are corralled into a holding area. The only food in the car is McD‘s tomato sauce sachets and wet wipes to suck!


----------



## lejogger (20 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> My friend is currently sat in the car at the vaccination centre in York with her father. His appointment was at 11am. It is currently 1.40pm and they are corralled into a holding area. The only food in the car is McD‘s tomato sauce sachets and wet wipes to suck!


Sounds horrendous!
Is this one of the pop-up mass vaccination centres? I imagine that these will operate very differently to internal NHS staff vaccination programmes.


----------



## mjr (20 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> My friend is currently sat in the car at the vaccination centre in York with her father. His appointment was at 11am. It is currently 1.40pm and they are corralled into a holding area. The only food in the car is McD‘s tomato sauce sachets and wet wipes to suck!


Unless new to England, why no snacks and drinks in the backpack? shoot happens sometimes.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (20 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> My friend is currently sat in the car at the vaccination centre in York with her father. His appointment was at 11am. It is currently 1.40pm and they are corralled into a holding area. The only food in the car is McD‘s tomato sauce sachets and wet wipes to suck!



Ok so not great but I think millions of people would swap places if they could (including me).


----------



## kingrollo (20 Jan 2021)

lejogger said:


> What experience is that exactly? Vaccination centres are operating strictly by appointment. You cannot just turn up and get jabbed.



Like I say my lips are sealed. But feel what you have posted above isn't uniform.


----------



## kingrollo (20 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Ok so not great but I think millions of *people would swap places if they could (including me)*.



Give me your address I will get a Mcdonalds sauce satchet and a wet wipe over to you !


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Surprised of some of the criteria for allocating the vaccine. NHS non patient facing versus for example teachers?


Assume you mean the JCVI priority list and the criteria used to decide on it.
Please be assured considerable consultation was undertaken to get the definitions of the NHS (plus) workers who should be in Group 2 'right'. And don't be distracted by aberrations of NHS and other people working in hospitals (say) who were pulled in last thing of an evening to just make sure no dose was wasted. There is now very clear direction to have short notice waiting list available to soak up any 'surplus' at the end of each day.
No doubt they are looking at the merits of certain *employment groups* getting the vaccine before others in their age cohort. But the current policy (and expectation) is that this will be only *after* Groups 1-9 have been vaccinated.
Besides teachers (but remember the mantra that schools are relatively 'safe' and, relative to others fora, not high in the list of transmission mechanisms) prison officers and police officers have a fair shout, oh and bus drivers and taxi drivers. Perhaps others can flesh out a list and we can try and put them in CycleChat priority order?
From a vulnerability to serious illness and death PoV (and please recall that's the driver informing JCVI's judgement) prioritising/targeting *BAME communities* and workers would also seem to have considerable merit.
Finally, shouldn't we be prioritising *men over women*? I can't remember the figures off hand but the threat of this disease to 50-55 year old men is similar to 55-60 year old women. So in Groups 7,8 and 9, move the men up one group (or the women down one). (My answer is 'no' btw: too many disadvantages.


----------



## nickyboy (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Oh Feck.......
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...zers-vaccine-effective-expected-one-dose.html
> 
> Real-world data from Israel's world-beating rollout showed the first dose led to a 33 per cent reduction in cases of coronavirus between 14 and 21 days afterwards among people who got the jab. Another of the country's top doctors said it was 'really good news'.
> ...


You have to be careful in reading too much into what the developers of vaccines say. They are extremely tightly regulated in terms of public announcements. Their "refusal" to endorse Britain's (and a lot of other countries') decision is because they aren't allowed to do so by the bodies that regulate them as they have not done trials beyond 21 days gap. It isn't because they don't think it's a good idea (although that may also be the case)

More broadly, it looks like there may need to be some refining of the 1st/2nd dose regime if it proves that the 12 week gap isn't optimal. Having said that, it's easy to get carried away without much hard evidence. Remember the stories coming out of Norway that "vaccinations caused thirty odd deaths" in care homes. That's been rowed back on now


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> my lips are sealed


Was that a side effect of your jab?


----------



## lejogger (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Like I say my lips are sealed. But feel what you have posted above isn't uniform.


How cryptic. I'd rather base my view on my personal experience.


----------



## lane (20 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Assume you mean the JCVI priority list and the criteria used to decide on it.
> Please be assured considerable consultation was undertaken to get the definitions of the NHS (plus) workers who should be in Group 2 'right'. And don't be distracted by aberrations of NHS and other people working in hospitals (say) who were pulled in last thing of an evening to just make sure no dose was wasted. There is now very clear direction to have short notice waiting list available to soak up any 'surplus' at the end of each day.
> No doubt they are looking at the merits of certain *employment groups* getting the vaccine before others in their age cohort. But the current policy (and expectation) is that this will be only *after* Groups 1-9 have been vaccinated.
> Besides teachers (but remember the mantra that schools are relatively 'safe' and, relative to others fora, not high in the list of transmission mechanisms) prison officers and police officers have a fair shout, oh and bus drivers and taxi drivers. Perhaps others can flesh out a list and we can try and put them in CycleChat priority order?
> ...



Personally I don't believe that school s are relatively safe - I think that is made up to keep schools open. Funny is transmission in schools is so low they have closed but lots of other places haven't.


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Oh Feck....... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...zers-vaccine-effective-expected-one-dose.html
> Real-world data from Israel's world-beating rollout showed the first dose led to a 33 per cent reduction in cases of coronavirus between 14 and 21 days afterwards among people who got the jab. Another of the country's top doctors said it was 'really good news'.
> But the figure is lower than the British regulator's estimate, which said it may prevent 89 per cent of recipients from getting Covid-19 symptoms.
> However, Israel's data does not prove anything about possible impacts of the UK's controversial 12-week gap between doses. The country does not give any more than three weeks between the first and second doses, during which time protection is expected to be minimal at best – and the vaccine is not intended to prevent infection, but severe disease and death.
> ...


Besides @nickyboy 's valid points.
1) I find it odd that someone who implicitly denigrates anyone who reads the Daily Mail then grabs another useless article and quotes it as if valid.
2) "data from Israel's world-beating rollout showed the first dose led to a 33 per cent reduction in cases of coronavirus between 14 and 21 days afterwards among people who got the jab. But the figure is lower than the British regulator's estimate, which said it may prevent 89 per cent of recipients from getting Covid-19 symptoms." Comment: The 33%/67% figure includes all those who caught COVID-19 after vaccination (any fule no that vaccination takes time to work) - in this case the Israeli study (which I quoted yesterday) says that after 10-11 days the percentage rises to 89%.
3) "Israel's data does not prove anything about . . . 12-week gap between doses. The country does not give any more than three weeks between the first and second doses, during which time protection is expected to be minimal at best "
Comment: First sentence entirely correct. Doesn't prove anything either way: positive or negative. First part of second sentence correct: the Israelis have stuck to the Pfizer protocol which did not look at the effects of extending the gap between doses. The Oxford-AZ trials did do this and produced useful data. Second part of second sentence is false/fake/wrong/out-of-date. See Israeli study I quoted yesterday. Does 89% = 'minimal'?
4) "Sir Patrick Vallance . . expect all vaccines to be less effective in the real world than in trials and . . . . look 'very carefully' at data during the vaccine rollout to see what effect its having." Entirely reasonable (but so what), and no sh1t Sherlock.
5) JCVI no doubt invited Pfizer to comment, even 'endorse' on extending the gap to 12 weeks. But they couldn't endorse that: they had no evidence that it would be better or worse. Led by the science.
I can't believe I've spent this time on a useless DM article, but it's raining and blowing a hooley outside.


----------



## mjr (20 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> There is now very clear direction to have short notice waiting list available to soak up any 'surplus' at the end of each day.


And is there clear direction who should be on it? Can mortals apply? Or only friends of Gove?


----------



## oldwheels (20 Jan 2021)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> Sturgeon isn’t denying it, in fact she’s trying to explain it away with talk of complex supply chains.


It is claimed by John Swinney that the 700000 figure is not correct and it is till fake news as far as I can tell.
Scotland has vaccinated more per head of population than eg London.
The emphasis on who gets the jab first seems to be different and the whole thing is being kicked around as a political football. 
I no longer have a TV but if this came from the BBC I would automatically question the veracity of anything they put out being even more anti SNP as now being run by a major donor to the Tories.
The Liberals seem to have a misleading leaflet which has now been withdrawn as well.


----------



## kingrollo (20 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Besides @nickyboy 's valid points.
> 1) I find it odd that someone who implicitly denigrates anyone who reads the Daily Mail then grabs another useless article and quotes it as if valid.
> 2) "data from Israel's world-beating rollout showed the first dose led to a 33 per cent reduction in cases of coronavirus between 14 and 21 days afterwards among people who got the jab. But the figure is lower than the British regulator's estimate, which said it may prevent 89 per cent of recipients from getting Covid-19 symptoms." Comment: The 33%/67% figure includes all those who caught COVID-19 after vaccination (any fule no that vaccination takes time to work) - in this case the Israeli study (which I quoted yesterday) says that after 10-11 days the percentage rises to 89%.
> 3) "Israel's data does not prove anything about . . . 12-week gap between doses. The country does not give any more than three weeks between the first and second doses, during which time protection is expected to be minimal at best "
> ...



The actual source of the story is Israels coronavirus Tsar Nachman Ash. I actually heard the story on the radio - its being reported by lots of different sources. Here's the guardian one - if you dare to stick your blue nose there.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...e-dose-in-israel-less-effective-than-we-hoped

So its an actual story - not 'The daily mail understands' . Of course you are free to put your opinion and draw your own conclusions (Keep them brief though ! )


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (20 Jan 2021)

oldwheels said:


> being kicked around as a political football.


Also known as holding the First Minister and her woeful Government to account.


----------



## oldwheels (20 Jan 2021)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> Also known as holding the First Minister and her woeful Government to account.


You have been listening to too much biased reporting.
I think we are far better looked after by our government than the shambles at Westminster.
We are never going to agree on this so best just agree to disagree.


----------



## Julia9054 (20 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> My friend is currently sat in the car at the vaccination centre in York with her father. His appointment was at 11am. It is currently 1.40pm and they are corralled into a holding area. The only food in the car is McD‘s tomato sauce sachets and wet wipes to suck!


Finally vaccinated at 3pm. Lucky he had someone to take him in the car (whilst technically breaking lockdown rules). There were no facilities there for anyone arriving by public transport or taxi.


----------



## kingrollo (20 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Finally vaccinated at 3pm. Lucky he had someone to take him in the car (whilst technically breaking lockdown rules). There were no facilities there for anyone arriving by public transport or taxi.


4 hours ? - Glad he got jabbed in the end - what was the problem ? - just too many in attendance ?


----------



## lane (20 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Finally vaccinated at 3pm. Lucky he had someone to take him in the car (whilst technically breaking lockdown rules). There were no facilities there for anyone arriving by public transport or taxi.



Not ideal but worth the wait. May not have been breaking the rules probably an exemption.


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Quick Question - Is the second dose the same as the first ? (In terms of volume of stuff injected)


The doses are 0.3ml and same for both doses. My mother had hers on 18 Dec/8 Jan at the local MIU community hospital. I am so looking forward to seeing her in March when restrictions allow.

After dilution, the Pfizer vial contains nominally 5 doses of 0.3 ml, but actually and practically, using low-wastage needles, you can get 6 doses of 0.3ml out of every vial. This is now standard and directed practice in the NHS. Though Pfizer have no doubt "refused to endorse" it. Note that this means the 40M doses ordered back in the summer by the UK will actually offer an extra 20% doses (and the individual dose cost drops to under $20). This will help allow us to carry on using the Pfizer in February and first half of March, after which most of the Pfizer supply will go to giving second doses (1 Jan -14 Mar = 11 weeks).

Bear in mind that Pfizer did not test a 'one dose only' regime. If they had (drawing on the recently shared Israeli report) they'd have found one dose gave 89% efficacy at least in the short term (NB 89% is WAY above the performance threshold specified during vaccine research). We don't know what the longer term efficacy is and to what extent it reduces over time because there is no evidence. All the Israelis got their second jab in the 20-25 day period so longer term data from there is and will be non-existent. I note it would not be to Pfizer's commercial advantage to have a 'one dose' regime so they did not test for it. The Oxford-AZ trials did gather diverse data which informed the JCVI judgement.

The UK Government's decision to go for a 12 week gap to allow double the number of people to receive one dose and the protection it confers is wise, and led by the science (but not 'evidence-based). We are also doing the world an experimental favour: I expect it to be a success and sincerely hope that around the world the billion most vulverable to serious illness or/and death can be vaccinated at twice the rate.
NB Especially with the Oxford-AZ vaccine stored in the fridge and costing less than $3 per dose.


----------



## Julia9054 (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> 4 hours ? - Glad he got jabbed in the end - what was the problem ? - just too many in attendance ?


I guess so. My friend said that everyone who had appointments at 11 turned up early and were waved through whereas they turned up at their allotted time. At least the toilets were open.


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

" NHS - very clear direction to have short notice waiting list available to soak up any 'surplus' at the end of each day."


mjr said:


> And is there clear direction who should be on it? Can mortals apply?


Sorry - I should have made that clear. Understand Head of NHS (Sir SS) has said that every centre should have a short notice waiting list available to soak up any unplanned 'surplus' at the end of each day and the people on that list should be from the Group(s) currently being vaccinated, NOT Tom Dick or Harry, even if they live next door (unless they are in the relevant group in which case forename is no obstacle). This seems entirely sensible vaccination centre management but aberrations in a couple of places meant it had to be centrally spelt out.


----------



## BoldonLad (20 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> I guess so. My friend said that everyone who had appointments at 11 turned up early and were waved through whereas they turned up at their allotted time. At least the toilets were open.



quite believable. The “early arrivers” caused chaos at our local hub on day one. Some arriving 2 or 3 hours before their allotted appointment time. Not sure if it is sorted now.


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> The actual source of the story is Israels coronavirus Tsar Nachman Ash. I actually heard the story on the radio - its being reported by lots of different sources. Here's the guardian one - if you dare to stick your blue nose there.
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...e-dose-in-israel-less-effective-than-we-hoped
> So its an actual story - not 'The daily mail understands' . Of course you are free to put your opinion and draw your own conclusions (Keep them brief though ! )


Thank you. The Guardian's report seems reasonable. My emboldening.
"Israel’s coronavirus tsar (Ash) has warned that a single dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine *may* be providing less protection than originally hoped, as the country reported a record 10,000 new Covid infections on Monday." _Comment: no causal link suggested: see other reasons later in article (gatherings of 300, we've been vaccinated so we can relax stupidly)_
"Nachman Ash said a single dose appeared “*less effective than we had thought*”, and also lower than Pfizer had suggested [52%]." _Comment: I note NO figures. What was the initial "thought" that it was "less effective than"?_
By contrast, those who had received their second dose of the Pfizer vaccine had a six- to 12-fold increase in antibodies, according to data released by Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer on Monday." _Comment: 6-12-fold increase over what: the average level of antibodies in the unvaccinated population? No sh1t Sherlock. If it was 6 to 12-fold better the level immediately before the second dose, then was the level of antibodies enough before the second dose to offer high percentage (89%) protection against serious illness/death?
Edit: I have subsequently found that the 6-12-fold increase is from the average level of antibodies found in a cohort of the population which had a record of having previously 'had' the viral disease (so had produced antibodies as a result of that)? This is clearly good news: the vaccine works.

Later in the article Israel's PHS head explained/implied why reports of infections after vaccination were not an indicator of the first dose not by itself offering protection: it was because people were ignorantly assuming that a vaccination offered immediate protection: it doesn't, it takes 10-11 days (see the Sheba Medical Center report - 89% - see next post which I shared earlier and repost below). I quote:_
"Questions over the effectiveness of the vaccine were raised amid reports that thousands of Israelis were still becoming sick after receiving the vaccine, although the public health services head, Sharon Alroy-Preis, said that in most cases this was because the individuals had not built up sufficient antibodies after being inoculated before being exposed to the virus."


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

Professor Gili Regev-Yohai, director of Sheba’s Infectious Disease Epidemiology Unit, said that people who received both doses of the vaccine will most likely not become carriers of the virus and *will not spread it further* due to the high level of antibodies they have obtained.
It is the first indication that a Covid-19 vaccine may stop transmission. By 18 Jan the hospital had vaccinated some 80% of its employees with the first dose - a total of 7,106 individuals - and 4,484 with the booster shot.
“The *results* of the survey are consistent with Pfizer’s experiment and even *exceeded expectations*,” she said.
Comment: It's reasonable to surmise that the effects of vaccination with one Pfizer dose will afford similar (but with lower assurance) results (from 11 days to 12 weeks) and also that vaccination with other vaccines (eg Oxford-AZ) will have similar beneficial effect: "stop a human from carrying and transmitting the virus".

Israel’s coronavirus tsar Nachman Ash's messaging, which could be read in variance to this, is to address the concern that the Israeli population are not adhering to prudent restrictive regulations/guidance and so transmission is increasing. This is an issue the UK will have too (maybe everywhere in the free world).


----------



## fossyant (20 Jan 2021)

1820 deaths today !


----------



## matticus (20 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> quite believable. The “early arrivers” caused chaos at our local hub on day one. Some arriving 2 or 3 hours before their allotted appointment time. Not sure if it is sorted now.



What did anyone expect from pensioners??


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

As an aside for @kingrollo - I fail to see that your mild ad hominems are useful: they reduce your credibility and distract you from articulacy, perhaps. I am not a Daily Mail reader, nor a fan of the Guardian. I don't know what you mean by blue-nosed, but maybe you saw me at 3am finishing a 400k last October in near freezing temperatures. I have no idea how my share portfolio is doing (but I assume your pension also depends on the success of the UK and the world economy). If have been gratuitously 'rude' to you in some way I do apologise (I have had a look but can't find anything).
Of course it may be you are joking, in which case, do say.
Edit:
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/f...d-be-agreeable-even-when-you-disagree.227879/


----------



## kingrollo (20 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Thank you. The Guardian's report seems reasonable. My emboldening.
> "Israel’s coronavirus tsar (Ash) has warned that a single dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine *may* be providing less protection than originally hoped, as the country reported a record 10,000 new Covid infections on Monday." _Comment: no causal link suggested: see other reasons later in article (gatherings of 300, we've been vaccinated so we can relax stupidly)_
> "Nachman Ash said a single dose appeared “*less effective than we had thought*”, and also lower than Pfizer had suggested [52%]." _Comment: I note NO figures. What was the initial "thought" that it was "less effective than"?_
> By contrast, those who had received their second dose of the Pfizer vaccine had a six- to 12-fold increase in antibodies, according to data released by Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer on Monday." _Comment: 6-12-fold increase over what: the average level of antibodies in the unvaccinated population? No sh1t Sherlock. If it was 6 to 12-fold better the level immediately before the second dose, then was the level of antibodies enough before the second dose to offer high percentage (89%) protection against serious illness/death?
> ...



TLDR


----------



## lane (20 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> " NHS - very clear direction to have short notice waiting list available to soak up any 'surplus' at the end of each day."
> 
> Sorry - I should have made that clear. Understand Head of NHS (Sir SS) has said that every centre should have a short notice waiting list available to soak up any unplanned 'surplus' at the end of each day and the people on that list should be from the Group(s) currently being vaccinated, NOT Tom Dick or Harry, even if they live next door (unless they are in the relevant group in which case forename is no obstacle). This seems entirely sensible vaccination centre management but aberrations in a couple of places meant it had to be centrally spelt out.



Aberrations = mates rates


----------



## mjr (20 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Not ideal but worth the wait. May not have been breaking the rules probably an exemption.


Supporting someone like that is definitely an exemption. Exception 2 charitable work (in this case patient transport) for driver and of course exception 4 medical need for the patient.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (20 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> What did anyone expect from pensioners??



What are you getting at there?


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (20 Jan 2021)

MrsF just checked with her 88 year old mother, still no news about the vaccine. She’s in touch with another 88 year old registered with the same Edinburgh surgery, they haven’t heard anything either.


----------



## nickyboy (20 Jan 2021)

Well something went wrong today. MiL was booked via text for 2nd dose at about 5pm today. Turns up to the centre to find lights out and nobody around. Called GP and they said that all 2nd dosers are being rescheduled

Cue a bit of a convo about how can they not notify cancellation by text if they can advise appointment by text. Dunno the ins and outs but something went wrong. At least she got the first dose promptly I guess


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

The direction to move to one dose and then a second at the 12 week point was sent out by NHS HQ (passing it on from JCVI) on 31 Dec. So I expect the numbers of second doses given to drop to negligible from this week till mid [Edit: 6] March.


----------



## midlife (20 Jan 2021)

Had the date for my second dose 11th March exactly 9 weeks after the first which is the interval my Trust has chosen.


----------



## lane (20 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The direction to move to one dose and then a second at the 12 week point was sent out by NHS HQ (passing it on from JCVI) on 31 Dec. So I expect the numbers of second doses given to drop to negligible from this week till mid March.



What happens mid march? Mainly second doses given through to end of May or middle of June? So it you don't get it by mid March you gotta long wait or have I misunderstood?


----------



## midlife (20 Jan 2021)

I thought the plan was to ramp up the delivery of vaccinations so that by mid March first and second doses could run in parallel. Roughly twice as many vaccinations by mid march than at the moment?


----------



## vickster (20 Jan 2021)

Presumably March second doses will be Pfizer while first might be AZ?

Friend of mine (NHS & ECV) got her first today, she thought it would be Pfizer but actually AZ


----------



## midlife (20 Jan 2021)

AFAIK there is no plan to mix and match.


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jan 2021)

Yes. The plan is to ensure enough Pfizer vaccine from mid-March onwards for a second dose to match the Pfizer vaccination profile of 1 Jan - mid March (12 weeks) as well as further first doses. So from then the Pfizer supplies (profile) will go on second doses for 12 weeks (end May) and then revert back to Pfizer and Oxford-AZ together. Remember that a small amount (7M doses ordered) of Moderna are due mid March as well. Their use will need to be husbanded so that there's enough for first and second doses so I expect, for management ease) its use will be geographically focused rather than spread around the countries.
Increasingly the heavy lifting will be with Oxford-AZ (NB at 1/8 the price).


midlife said:


> Roughly twice as many vaccinations by mid march than at the moment?


Don't think that's a stated target.


vickster said:


> Presumably March second doses will be Pfizer while first might be AZ?


There is clear direction NOT to 'mix'. Except in extremis (detail in Green Book) the second dose is to be the same make as the first.


----------



## vickster (20 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> AFAIK there is no plan to mix and match.


Never said that. I was pondering whether In March, those already vaccinated get Pfizer while those who get their first in March more likely to get AZ (and then second AZ in June). There’ll be a mix of use across the population not individuals. 40m Pfizer doses ordered will only vaccinate 20m people


----------



## midlife (20 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Never said that. I was pondering whether In March, those already vaccinated get Pfizer while those who get their first in March more likely to get AZ (and then second AZ in June). There’ll be a mix of use across the population not individuals. 40m Pfizer doses ordered will only vaccinate 20m people



Ah, sorry. Misunderstood your post. Makes sense now.


----------



## DCLane (20 Jan 2021)

SWMBO was due hers a while ago but only had the first injection today - AZ version. She's NHS on a Covid support/rehab ward.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Called GP and they said that all 2nd dosers are being rescheduled


I said: "The direction to move to one dose and then a second at the 12 week point was sent out by NHS HQ (passing it on from JCVI) on 31 Dec."
I have a little more guidance from the BMA site:
"The MHRA, JCVI and [national] CMOs announced that the gap between doses should be extended . . . to 12 weeks in order to offer a first dose of the vaccine to more people in priority cohorts [faster].
". . . difficulties . . . hundreds or thousands of appointments with patients to receive the second dose [already made] . .
"As a transitional arrangement, pre-arranged appointments for the administering of second doses up to and including 10 January 2020 can still take place with written notification of clinical judgement.
"Appointments for second doses due to take place after that date [10 Jan] should be rescheduled to reflect the current guidance to delay for up to 12 weeks."
My 90+ year young mother received her second dose on 7 Jan - she expected that to be cancelled, but it wasn't.
Also that guidance reflects what @tom73 said a week ago about the second dose having to be given by the same organisation as the first dose.
"Patients will need to receive the second dose from the same practice grouping. In some cases, patients receiving a second AZ dose may do so at their own practice (as opposed to the original designated site), but only where their practice is part of their original practice grouping that delivered the first dose."


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Yes. The plan is to ensure enough Pfizer vaccine from mid-March onwards for a second dose to match the Pfizer vaccination profile of 1 Jan - mid March (12 weeks) as well as further first doses. So from then the Pfizer supplies (profile) will go on second doses for 12 weeks (end May) and then revert back to Pfizer and Oxford-AZ together. Remember that a small amount (7M doses ordered) of Moderna are due mid March as well. Their use will need to be husbanded so that there's enough for first and second doses so I expect, for management ease) its use will be geographically focused rather than spread around the countries.
> Increasingly the heavy lifting will be with Oxford-AZ (NB at 1/8 the price).
> 
> That's not a stated target.
> ...





Ajax Bay said:


> Yes. The plan is to ensure enough Pfizer vaccine from mid-March onwards for a second dose to match the Pfizer vaccination profile of 1 Jan - mid March (12 weeks) as well as further first doses. So from then the Pfizer supplies (profile) will go on second doses for 12 weeks (end May) and then revert back to Pfizer and Oxford-AZ together. Remember that a small amount (7M doses ordered) of Moderna are due mid March as well. Their use will need to be husbanded so that there's enough for first and second doses so I expect, for management ease) its use will be geographically focused rather than spread around the countries.
> Increasingly the heavy lifting will be with Oxford-AZ (NB at 1/8 the price).
> 
> That's not a stated target.
> ...



Thinking about this some more, I can't see the rate at which first vaccination are given not slowing after they start on second doses. They would need to get close to 4m a day and at the moment they are struggling to consistently do 2m. The target for the 4 top groups of mid Feb looks like it will slip to end of March by which time they will be doing the second doses. I can't see any way they will then get through all the over 50s by Easter - I would think more like late May early June.


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

My mum originally went for the Pfizer vaccination at Grantham but was refused due to allergies and told to wait for the Oxford vaccine. They booked her in at Boston then transferred her booking to Grantham. She decided to phone Grantham to double check and they said no they are only doing Pfizer so she then had to get back in touch with someone else to get re booked ta Boston for Monday next week. As she said right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. Good that in her 80s she is able to resolve these issues herself.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I can't see the rate at which first vaccination are given not slowing after they start on second doses. They would need to get close to 4m a day and at the moment they are struggling to consistently do 2m. The target for the 4 top groups of mid Feb looks like it will slip to end of March by which time they will be doing the second doses. I can't see any way they will then get through all the over 50s by Easter - I would think more like late May early June.


I agree that daily delivery of first doses will surely fall from about 3 Mar as all those who received their first dose from 20 Dec onwards 'need' their second.
I do not discount the possibility that, based on the science of course, the 12 weeks may be extended. If at the 8 week gap point antibody levels remain as high as they had been found to be after 4 weeks, then there's clearly a case to be made for giving a million a second dose at 12 weeks and another million a 4 week extension. I would be amazed if the data capture programme was not ready to roll. The first cohort who were given a dose after 20 Dec have just hit the 4 week point and a lot of NHS staff are in that cohort so testing will be logistically easy. There will be a communications challenge with that, but the JCVI and MHRA were pretty robust with the '12 week gap' decision and so they have the palmares. We (the UK) is brilliantly served by those groups (and a side shout out to UK's superlative genomic capability, effort and honesty).
I am optimistic that the clear target of all those in Groups 1-4 to be offered a vaccine by 15 Feb WILL be hit. (I think you must mean 'end of Feb' as the slip date)
Comments:
1) We don't know what the refusal or can't be bothered rate is - 20%? - that'd be 3M less so 12M actually given.
2) Assumes supplies of the vaccine are not interrupted by 'events, dear boy, events'.
Still need to get the daily rate consistently up above 300,000.
Has anyone suggested that all over 50s might be given a first dose by Easter (4 Apr)?
There's about 6M in Groups 5 and 6 combined: 20 days? So by 6 Mar. About the time the second doses will need to be started.
Hope your mother's Boston date comes off.


----------



## BoldonLad (21 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> What did anyone expect from pensioners??



Quite! (I say that as a member of that illustrious group)


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Jan 2021)

Am no fan of this government but if this is true/no clever statistics jiggery pokery, I must say that this sounds like a very creditable performance.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55748645

Good points made above about very probable fall-off in march as doses have to be sent to second jab folk.

My mum had her first jab in semi rural lancs at the very end of december - am hoping/trusting she will get the second around the middle of march.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (21 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Am no fan of this government but if this is true/no clever statistics jiggery pokery, I must say that this sounds like a very creditable performance.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55748645
> 
> ...



Huge step up to around 340000 vaccinations for the day on Tuesday 19th as well.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations


----------



## SpokeyDokey (21 Jan 2021)

Still doing v.well on the doses/100 people index:


----------



## mjr (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I am optimistic that the clear target of all those in Groups 1-4 to be offered a vaccine by 15 Feb WILL be hit. (I think you must mean 'end of Feb as the slip date)


"offered" is a weasel word there, as pointed out on BBC More or Less, and was not in the 15 Feb target originally, was it? If the rephrasing is allowed, expect a mass mailshot of appointment letters on that date to allow yet another testing-style "Mission Accomplished!" banner announcement.



> Comments:
> 1) We don't know what the refusal or can't be bothered rate is - 20%? - that'd be 3M less so 12M actually given.


Equating refusal with "can't be bothered" seems extremely insulting to those who refuse or are refused vaccination due to concerns about their health or other drug interactions or other reasons which few would disagree with. I already know someone who has been turned away due to flu-like symptoms. They intend to rebook when recovered: they can be bothered and it is crass to imply otherwise.


----------



## nickyboy (21 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> "offered" is a weasel word there, as pointed out on BBC More or Less, and was not in the 15 Feb target originally, was it? If the rephrasing is allowed, expect a mass mailshot of appointment letters on that date to allow yet another testing-style "Mission Accomplished!" banner announcement.
> 
> 
> Equating refusal with "can't be bothered" seems extremely insulting to those who refuse or are refused vaccination due to concerns about their health or other drug interactions or other reasons which few would disagree with. I already know someone who has been turned away due to flu-like symptoms. They intend to rebook when recovered: they can be bothered and it is crass to imply otherwise.



20% is the number (actually its 23%) based on independent polling. However, I haven't seen an age breakdown of this. Suspect older folk would be keener. You can see that in the "reasons" for not getting vaccinated which included "not high risk group" and "too busy", neither of which apply to old folk. 

The good news is that UK is one of the most pro-vaccination countries in the world at 77%. I recall only China at 80% was higher. France was at about 30%


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I agree that daily delivery of first doses will surely fall from about 3 Mar as all those who received their first dose from 20 Dec onwards 'need' their second.
> I do not discount the possibility that, based on the science of course, the 12 weeks may be extended. If at the 8 week gap point antibody levels remain as high as they had been found to be after 4 weeks, then there's clearly a case to be made for giving a million a second dose at 12 weeks and another million a 4 week extension. I would be amazed if the data capture programme was not ready to roll. The first cohort who were given a dose after 20 Dec have just hit the 4 week point and a lot of NHS staff are in that cohort so testing will be logistically easy. There will be a communications challenge with that, but the JCVI and MRHA were pretty robust with the '12 week gap' decision and so they have the palmares. We (the UK) is brilliantly served by those groups (and a side shout out to UK's superlative genomic capability, effort and honesty).
> I am optimistic that the clear target of all those in Groups 1-4 to be offered a vaccine by 15 Feb WILL be hit. *(I think you must mean 'end of Feb as the slip date)*
> Comments:
> ...



Correct I did mean end of Feb as the slip date

Don't know if anyone specifically mentioned 4th April for over 50s now you come to mention it. I thought that was the mood music from Boris - back to normal at Easter. In fact "Have Christmas at Easter". Read yesterday they are now meeting to see how much mixing will be allowed at Easter!


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

I said: "We don't know what the refusal or can't be bothered rate is"


mjr said:


> Equating refusal with "can't be bothered" seems extremely insulting to those who refuse or are refused vaccination due to concerns about their health or other drug interactions or other reasons which few would disagree with. I already know someone who has been turned away due to flu-like symptoms. They intend to rebook when recovered: they can be bothered and it is crass to imply otherwise.


As you can see I did not "equate refusal with "can't be bothered" ": they are clearly different (though there may be an overlap). I can also see how you could read that as me equating the two categories: it was not my thought or intent. It would be better phrased: "We don't know what the refusal or can't be bothered rates are, combined."
You're absolutely right: I did not include the sad category of people who have rational "concerns about their health or other drug interactions". Any idea what sort of percentage or numbers we're talking about? Add some value, here.
People who have transient illness (you gave an example) will as you say rebook - I do not categorise them as 'refusers', and nor will the stats, and your aggressive assertion that I've implied that is itself 'crass' imho. That illness maybe COVID-19. Clearly we don't want symptomatic people to come to a vaccination centre. People are not stupid.
Do you think some will fall into the "can't be bothered" category (dressed up as something else perhaps)? @nickyboy gives you some pointers above


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

Vaccine supplies to the north-east and Yorkshire will be halved next week, mainly to allow other regions to catch up with the progress it has been making, the* Health Service Journal* reports.

In its story, which it attributes to well-placed sources, the HSJ says this will mean around 100,000 doses will be available for vaccination centres in the region run by GPs, where most vaccinations are taking place - down from around 200,000 this week.

The HSJ says people have been told “the main reason is that large parts of the north-east and Yorkshire have vaccinated a greater percentage of their population than other regions, including very many of the over 80s, meaning they are more quickly moving on to groups under 80”.


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

Bit OT for this thread but Boris not ruling not restrictions until summer. Might be a case of "have Easter at Christmas", and have "Christmas at Christmas"...sometime


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

You're right: Off topic. There's another thread for general COVID-19 stuff. There will be restrictions through till the summer, so it'd be disingenuous for the PM to say otherwise.


----------



## nickyboy (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I said: "We don't know what the refusal or can't be bothered rate is"
> 
> As you can see I did not "equate refusal with "can't be bothered" ": they are clearly different (though there may be an overlap). I can also see how you could read that as me equating the two categories: it was not my thought or intent. It would be better phrased: "We don't know what the refusal or
> 
> ...


Here's the linky to the IPSOS polling I was trying to remember

U.S. and U.K. are optimistic indicators for COVID-19 vaccination uptake | Ipsos

And interesting info on the reasons people gave as to why they didn't want to be vaccinated...and how startling the differences are between countries and what that might mean in terms of how and when the virus is brought under control internationally

Clue: don't be going to your holiday home in the Dordogne any time soon


----------



## C R (21 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Here's the linky to the IPSOS polling I was trying to remember
> 
> U.S. and U.K. are optimistic indicators for COVID-19 vaccination uptake | Ipsos
> 
> ...


The predominance of anti vax attitudes in France and Germany is startling, but does match the popularity of homeopathy and other woo "therapies". I could never understand why those things are so popular there.


----------



## Milkfloat (21 Jan 2021)

My Indian colleagues have just told me of a fire at the world's biggest Covid vaccine supplier who are making the AZ vaccine that we all rely on. It is now clear after initial confusion that the Covid vaccine will not be affected, but it did make me think how badly supplies could be affected by problems in the supply chain. I think we only have one or two bottling plants in the UK, a problem there could cause the whole system to grind to a halt.


----------



## Venod (21 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Vaccine supplies to the north-east and Yorkshire will be halved next week, mainly to allow other regions to catch up with the progress it has been making, the* Health Service Journal* reports.



This seems a bit strange, have other regions received less of the vaccine than North East and Yorkshire or are they just slower administering it, surely the best solution is to get the other regions working more efficiently and let the North East carry on, the quicker its rolled out the better.


----------



## mjr (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> As you can see I did not "equate refusal with "can't be bothered" ": they are clearly different (though there may be an overlap). I can also see how you could read that as me equating the two categories: it was not my thought or intent. It would be better phrased: "We don't know what the refusal or can't be bothered rates are, combined."


I can see how you may have meant something different to how I read it. Thanks for clarifying.



> You're absolutely right: I did not include the sad category of people who have rational "concerns about their health or other drug interactions". Any idea what sort of percentage or numbers we're talking about? Add some value, here.


No and it is currently tedious to check and I am busy. As the UK used the emergency process, the Patient Information Leaflets don't seem to be in the usual places and formats yet, so it looks like checking the clinical notes for each one and then looking up the various components mentioned as potentially giving rise to contraindications. For the BioNTech one, that includes PEG and sensitivity to that is an active research topic, while for the Oxford one, it includes E433 Polysorbate 80 which a few people seem to be hypersensitive to and it's an ingredient that really sets the anti-vaxxers off... but that's a different topic.



> People who have transient illness (you gave an example) will as you say rebook - I do not categorise them as 'refusers', and nor will the stats,


Are you sure? I did not find the current methodology on https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/covid-19-vaccination-programme or linked pages but I am fairly sure that even temporary refusal is usually counted as refusal in other vaccination stats collections until such time that they are actually vaccinated.



> and your aggressive assertion that I've implied that is itself 'crass' imho.


Well, my obvious interpretation of the phrasing was very offensive!



> Do you think some will fall into the "can't be bothered" category (dressed up as something else perhaps)?


I think a few may, but it doesn't seem to show up high in the reasons in the Ipsos survey linked earlier (top reasons were side-effects, effectiveness, low perceived risk from covid and general opposition to vaccination), or in the OCEANS II research https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...ey-oceans-ii/C30FDB5C3D87123F28E351FDAAD5351A

Where did you get the idea that it was a significant factor?


----------



## vickster (21 Jan 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> My Indian colleagues have just told me of a fire at the world's biggest Covid vaccine supplier who are making the AZ vaccine that we all rely on. It is now clear after initial confusion that the Covid vaccine will not be affected, but it did make me think how badly supplies could be affected by problems in the supply chain. I think we only have one or two bottling plants in the UK, a problem there could cause the whole system to grind to a halt.


There was concern about flooding at a vaccine plant in Wales


----------



## mjr (21 Jan 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> My Indian colleagues have just told me of a fire at the world's biggest Covid vaccine supplier who are making the AZ vaccine that we all rely on. It is now clear after initial confusion that the Covid vaccine will not be affected, but it did make me think how badly supplies could be affected by problems in the supply chain. I think we only have one or two bottling plants in the UK, a problem there could cause the whole system to grind to a halt.


Yes, 5 dead but the vaccine production unaffected: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/reuter...-by-deadly-indian-fire--company-says/46306504 :/

This is an aspect where gov.uk's tactic of ordering different vaccines is the correct decision (and used by most governments).

The bioreactor production used for the Oxford vaccine is planned to make 2bn doses by the end of 2021 - which is OK and should allow for some mishaps, but there are 7½bn people and while not everyone will need vaccinating, it'll take much more than 2bn to stamp out this bug.

Vaccine storage facilities are more likely to become targets for terrorists and thieves.


----------



## Unkraut (21 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I thought that was the mood music from Boris - back to normal at Easter.


Even with a relatively high rate of vaccination, I would have thought that a very foolish thing to entertain. I don't think I have heard anyone claim that a moderate 'normality' will be possible until at least the autumn. Better that than raise false hopes or give the impression the end is in sight and we can all relax now.


C R said:


> The predominance of anti vax attitudes in France and Germany is startling, ...


The information on the link is now out-of-date as far as Germany is concerned. The latest figures given on the news were 67% take up with no qualms, and only about 10% reject outright. The remainder cover those likely to agree to those unlikely to agree split about 50/50. This I suspect is down to less credence being given to non-expert conspiracy theorists coupled with more awareness of what a nasty thing covid is.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (21 Jan 2021)

Up to and including yesterday (20 Jan):

363 508 vaccinations on the day

4 973 248 first dose to date.

464 036 second dose to date.

That's some going and a credit to all concerned.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> I am fairly sure that even temporary refusal is usually counted as refusal in other vaccination stats collections until such time that they are actually vaccinated.


The stats on a reasonable timescale (which is what matters, not a daily 'fight') will show the temporary refuser as having been vaccinated and therefore they'd not appear in the 'refuse/other' figure/percentage.


mjr said:


> Where did you get the idea that it [can't be bothered] was a significant factor?


I have not implied that it is (a significant percentage).


----------



## dodgy (21 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Up to and including yesterday (20 Jan):
> 
> 363 508 vaccinations on the day
> 
> ...



Doing the sums knowing how far down the queue you are is quite encouraging, I'm 55 and reckon I should be called forward late Feb


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

23 Nov - No 10 Briefing: "PM suggested the "vast majority" of people most vulnerable to coronavirus could be vaccinated against the disease by Easter."
And I reckon that is true. By Easter (4 Apr) we might expect 27M to have received their first vaccination, (and of those about 4M should have had their second dose as well).
Any reasonable definition of "people most vulnerable to coronavirus" cannot be more than 35M (say) and 27M is a 'vast majority' within that.


----------



## dodgy (21 Jan 2021)

Could the vaccination program be one of the vanishingly small successes of this government? I hope so.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

dodgy said:


> Doing the sums knowing how far down the queue you are is quite encouraging, I'm 55 and reckon I should be called forward late Feb


To manage your expectations, if the programme achieves vaccinating Groups 1-4 (over 70s ++) by 15 Feb, the programme will show (stats) a 'sigh of relief', I suspect in part caused by an all out effort to hit 15 Feb and a temporary slight drop in subsequent supply volumes. Progress will be steady in for the rest of February and the ~6M in Groups 5-6 can expect to be 'done' by then.
Group 7 = 3.8M (5 days @ 400k and 9 days @ 200k) so, @dodgy the over 55s in Group 8 might hope for mid March onwards.
Note (see my earlier posts) there will be a slowing down in first dose progress from 6 Mar onwards as 200,000 doses per day (and increasing) will be required for those who received their first dose after 20 Dec.





As to your other point @dodgy , we should put negotiating a good deal down as a contributory success.


----------



## dodgy (21 Jan 2021)

I'll take March @Ajax Bay


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

dodgy said:


> I'll take March @Ajax Bay


Get back in the queue; well, behind me anyway


----------



## classic33 (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> 23 Nov - No 10 Briefing: "PM suggested the "vast majority" of people most vulnerable to coronavirus could be vaccinated against the disease by Easter."
> And I reckon that is true. By Easter (6 Apr) we might expect 27M to have received their first vaccination, (and of those about 4M should have had their second dose as well).
> Any reasonable definition of "people most vulnerable to coronavirus" cannot be more than 35M (say) and 27M is a 'vast majority' within that.


I've been told I can expect May, the earliest possible. Then they changed the dosage period.

I can't have it anyway, but that's the earliest given for CEV.


----------



## mjr (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> 23 Nov - No 10 Briefing: "PM suggested the "vast majority" of people most vulnerable to coronavirus could be vaccinated against the disease by Easter."
> And I reckon that is true. By Easter (6 Apr) we might expect 27M to have received their first vaccination, (and of those about 4M should have had their second dose as well).
> Any reasonable definition of "people most vulnerable to coronavirus" cannot be more than 35M (say) and 27M is a 'vast majority' within that.


Of course it is true: it says "could" not "will".

A more testing target is from the PM's speech on 4 Jan: "By the middle of February, if things go well and with a fair wind in our sails, we expect to have offered the first vaccine dose to everyone in the four top priority groups identified by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. That means vaccinating all residents in a care home for older adults and their carers, everyone over the age of 70, all frontline health and social care workers, and everyone who is clinically extremely vulnerable."

Notably, that excludes "offered" meaning an appointment letter has been sent like the BBC show fears.


----------



## dodgy (21 Jan 2021)

You'll find bad news, if you look hard enough 🤷‍♂️
I try to be an optimist.


----------



## mjr (21 Jan 2021)

dodgy said:


> You'll find bad news, if you look hard enough 🤷‍♂️
> I try to be an optimist.


Me too. Just being clear on the current target. I hope they hit it.


----------



## classic33 (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I said: "We don't know what the refusal or can't be bothered rate is"
> 
> As you can see I did not "equate refusal with "can't be bothered" ": they are clearly different (though there may be an overlap). I can also see how you could read that as me equating the two categories: it was not my thought or intent. It would be better phrased: "We don't know what the refusal or can't be bothered rates are, combined."
> You're absolutely right:* I did not include the sad category of people who have rational "concerns about their health or other drug interactions".* Any idea what sort of percentage or numbers we're talking about? Add some value, here.
> ...


As one who falls into your category of _"sad category of people who have rational "concerns about their health or other drug interactions"_, your comment is an insult, nothing less.

I've to watch what is taken due to interactions with current medications. Even simple everyday medications, tried and tested the world over, have put me in A&E's more than once. Painkillers are a big no-no.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

Building on some of the figures above and looking forward to herd immunity kicking in. 
If we take 73% as the percentage of the population which need to be immune before that's achieved. With a UK population of 62M that's 45M 
A reasonably supported estimate is that 20% of the population have 'had' COVID-19, a good proportion asymptomatic and/or not tested (12M).
Since there will be overlap (ie people who've been infected, knowingly or not, who then get vaccinated and another element who had been infected but whose antibodies have dropped below protective level) of, say, 4M, once we've vaccinated 37M (first or both doses), we'll be over the 73%. (NB 5+M fewer if we exclude the 8M under 10s from the calculation.)
From one of my posts above, if the UK programme continues on plan, we should have 32M vaccinated by end April (assumes 400,000 a day from 6 March split half and half (1st/2nd dose)).
So 10 May to hit 37M and expectations of (effective) herd immunity. (NB 15 days quicker if we exclude the 8M under-10s from the calculation.)
Caveats: Depends on 
= vaccination programme continues at pace (300,000 daily rising to 400,000 by 6 Mar, and maintained, 7-day averages)
= how effective the vaccine is (we hope 90-95%)
= how infectious the viral strain is (come May) - factors into 'R' and NB it's going to be a lovely May (well last year it was )
= restriction measures reducing R - these measures will have been progressively revised across the UK by then
assumes vaccines stop person transmitting (as well as getting infected with symptoms).
Copied from my previous post:


----------



## mjr (21 Jan 2021)

That graph implies 85ish% needed, doesn't it? Not 73%


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> As one who falls into your category of _"sad category of people who have rational "concerns about their health or other drug interactions"_, your comment is an insult, nothing less.


Sorry you took it that way. I described the category as 'sad'. Sad because they "_have rational concerns about their health or other drug interactions" _and therefore entirely sensibly would be advised by their doctor not to be vaccinated. And therefore not have the protection vaccination affords, so "sad", nothing more.


----------



## classic33 (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Building on some of the figures above and looking forward to herd immunity kicking in.
> *If we take 73% as the percentage of the population which need to be immune before that's achieved. *With a UK population of 62M that's 45M
> A reasonably supported estimate is that 20% of the population have 'had' COVID-19, a good proportion asymptomatic and/or not tested (12M).
> Since there will be overlap (ie people who've been infected, knowingly or not, who then get vaccinated and another element who had been infected but whose antibodies have dropped below protective level) of, say, 4M, once we've vaccinated 37M (first or both doses), we'll be over the 73%. (NB 5+M fewer if we exclude the 8M under 10s from the calculation.)
> ...


That figure is unknown, at present. Are you just plucking figures out of thin air to support your theories.
_"The proportion of the population that must be vaccinated against COVID-19 to begin inducing herd immunity is not known."_
Taken from
https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-d...ercentage of people who,immunity is not known.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> That graph implies 85ish% needed, doesn't it? Not 73%


Only if R = 4.5 with the new variant and ?complete relaxation of restrictions. (see caveat list)


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> That figure is unknown, at present. Are you just plucking figures out of thin air to support your theories.
> _"The proportion of the population that must be vaccinated against COVID-19 to begin inducing herd immunity is not known."_
> Taken from
> https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-d...ercentage of people who,immunity is not known.


Absolutely: the figure is unknown. That's why I said "If" as in "If we take 73% as the percentage of the population which need to be immune before that's achieved." 73% lines up with R=3 on the graph. I sincerely hope that with all the nation's privations this year so far R will be well below 3 by May!!!
Less and it'll be sooner; more and it'll be later. For a disease which is much less transmissible than, for example measles, clever people (can't find where I got the graph from immediately - I did have look before posting) can do the sums - and the range is shown on the graph.
The figure is also not the same for all communities: that's the point. But every community WILL have a figure. You choose a figure and I can do the sums for you.👍 Give me a range, even!


----------



## classic33 (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Sorry you took it that way. I described the category as 'sad'. Sad because they "_have rational concerns about their health or other drug interactions" _and therefore entirely sensibly would be advised by their doctor not to be vaccinated. And therefore not have the protection vaccination affords, so "sad", nothing more.


I've already been told I'd not be allowed it. Which doesn't quite tie in with the other post about having been given May as the earliest possible.

That came from a seperate source, not local health care, who also advised me twice to get the flu jab. Something else that can't be given. Concerns by medically trained people, not me, over the possible side effects.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> I can't have it anyway, but that's the earliest given for CEV.
> . . .
> I've already been told I'd not be allowed it.


I've not given you a 'like' for that: bummer.
I thought CEV (who CAN have it) were Group 6, anyway, so early March.


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

CEV are group 4 along with the over 70s.

"At risk" are group 6 and not very well specified but last I saw I think there were 8 million of them so they need adding in before the under 65s are done, which might make quite a difference to when some people get the vaccination.


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

Well according to what I have just looked at 12m groups 1 to 4 supposed to be done by mid February

the over 65 2.8m

Then at risk (underlining heath conditions not CEV) 4.3m

So 19m before they start on the under 65s

Then 7m to get all the over 50s complete


----------



## kingrollo (21 Jan 2021)

It's when Boris gets bored of staying in.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

Not authoritative:
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-01-06...of-the-coronavirus-jab-with-our-daily-tracker
"The vaccine will be distributed to these groups in the following order, according to the list drawn up by the JCVI. In brackets is the estimated number of people in each group in the UK:

1 - Residents in a care home for older adults, and their carers (0.8M)
2 - Those aged 80 and over, and frontline health and social care workers (a total of 7.1M: 3.3M over 80s, 2.4M healthcare workers, 1.4M social care workers)
3 - Those aged 75 and over (2.3M)
4 - Those aged 70 and over and clinically extremely vulnerable individuals (3.2M)
Sub-total = 13.4M (target by 15 Mar)
5 - Those aged 65 and over (2.9M)
6 - All individuals aged 16 to 64 with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality (7.3M)
(and includes unpaid carers who are in receipt of Carer’s Allowance or are the main carer of an elderly or disabled person whose welfare may be at risk if the carer contracted Covid-19)
7 - Those aged 60 and over (1.8M)
8 - Those aged 55 years and over (2.4M)
9 - Those aged 50 years of age and over (2.8M)"

Bit surprised at how big Group 6 is (7.3M (ITV) - I have seen and used 2.2M - a fair bit less). But I note that the (ITV estimate) Groups 7-9 are all much smaller than my figures (see graph in post above for actual UK population numbers in the 5 year age ranges - assume the balance is represented in Groups 2 and 6 (the sums roughly add up).
The BBC says the Group 6 figure is (only) 1.2M !!

https://assets.publishing.service.g...-covid-19-vaccination-30-dec-2020-revised.pdf
lists the JCVI main risk groups identified of the underlying health conditions increase the risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. and therefore inclusion in Group 6.


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

Don't know if this is authoritative or not - but it is where I got my figures.

https://www.health.org.uk/publications/long-reads/the-covid-19-vaccine-who-gets-it-first

However it is different to yours.

For example in my figures "All individuals aged 16 to 64 with underlying health conditions" is only 4.3m where as yours is 7.3m. I thought that I had seen circa 8m for that group previously. However I don't think they have yet worked out who is in that group - which is poor in my opinion given they have had nearly a year to do so. This is certainly not as transparent as it could be. Then we have random people being vaccinated out of order.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

I agree - there seems to be no authoritative set of figures for the numbers in each group (and I have looked looked!). I'm close to convinced there cannot be 7.3M in Group 6 (the ITV figure). I had 2.2M gleaned from ?somewhere a week ago. Your link has it at 4.3M. The BBC says it's 1.2M. All in all: quite a wide speed.
This gives the 'real' 2019 population figures (released in June 2020):
https://www.statista.com/statistics/281174/uk-population-by-age/


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

@Ajax Bay the link you provide includes chronic respiratory disease, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cystic fibrosis and severe asthma in the list of underlining health conditions. However as i have noted previously these are shielding groups and (AFAIU) therefore also CEV. So I don't think this has been properly thought through and hence we don't know actual numbers. When it comes to it I would also expect to see inconstancy in who gets vaccinated in each group as there is no database and it be down to a doctor or admin person making lots of individual decision based on not very clear guidance.

https://www.health.org.uk/publications/long-reads/the-covid-19-vaccine-who-gets-it-first


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

Also I am sure that no one knows how many are in group 6 who will be vaccinated in groups 1-5. When shielding was introduced Doctors had to go through records manually and compile a list and there were many inconsistencies and outright mistakes.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

I trust the system to do its level best. The GP Surgeries are sending out the letters/communications.
Agree there are overlaps and sub-sets (eg CEV elements with ailments listed in the JCVI Gp 6 list) will have been 'done' in Gp 4.
And all the health and care workers in Gp 2 who are not discounted in the age group figures.
Life is not fair.


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

I am not saying it is not fair - I am saying it is not an exact science and hence the wide disparity in different numbers per group. It does mean it's quite difficult to draw reliable conclusions at an individual level.


----------



## kingrollo (21 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I am not saying it is not fair - I am saying it is not an exact science and hence the wide disparity in different numbers per group. It does mean it's quite difficult to draw reliable conclusions at an individual level.



Number of first jabs is one thing. Capacity in the NHS will also be a factor in lifting lockdown.

So if we hit the mid Feb target for first jabs - we aren't necessarily lifting lockdown if hospital s are still rammed with Covid patients.


----------



## classic33 (21 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I trust the system to do its level best. The GP Surgeries are sending out the letters/communications.
> Agree there are overlaps and sub-sets (eg CEV elements will ailments listed in the JCVI Gp 6 list) will have been 'done' in Gp 4.
> And all the health and care workers in Gp 2 who are not discounted in the age group figures.
> Life is not fair.


Last point first, it ain't fair. But if you feel like swapping, for an appointment for something I can't have let me know.

It present it seems that the system isn't working. Letters giving the dates have come from NHS England and NHS Improvement, according to the letterhead. Acting entirely separate from my GP, who has full access to the medical records.


----------



## kingrollo (21 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Last point first, it ain't fair. But if you feel like swapping, for an appointment for something I can't have let me know.
> 
> It present it seems that the system isn't working. Letters giving the dates have come from NHS England and NHS Improvement, according to the letterhead. Acting entirely separate from my GP, who has full access to the medical records.



It's a numbers game at the moment. I got my jab at short notice and had to Q for an hour - Staff were being vaccinated on a walk in basis - all good at the moment as we have a willing supply of people wanting and able to get jabs.

Next challenge will be the harder to reach folk.


----------



## lane (21 Jan 2021)

I set out below the criteria for CEV and Underlining risk groups. I have put in bold where the same people are in both groups but there is clearly quite a bit of overlap on the others although not exactly the same. However in fairness I have noticed that it says that "*Individuals within these risk groups who are clinically extremely vulnerable are discussed separately (see above*)". So the underlying risk group is acknowledged to include people are are also CEV. There is quite a bit of overlap. 

I would imagine the big numbers in cat 6 not covered at last partly in cat 4 are:

Morbid obesity (approx. 2m according to google)
Diabetes (3.9 million per google)
Chronic heart disease (7.4 million people living with heart and circulatory disease in the UK per google but I don't know if this is exactly the same classification)
So just those few (and there are a few more I haven't counted) is approx. 13 million. Maybe 50% will fall in groups 1 to 5 (large margin of error there obviously) but I could see group 6 might be as high as the higher estimates of 7 million. 

f you think there are good clinical reasons why you should be added to the *Shielded Patient List*, discuss your concerns with your GP or hospital clinician. People with the following conditions are automatically deemed clinically extremely vulnerable:

*solid organ transplant recipients*
*people with specific cancers:*
people with cancer who are undergoing active chemotherapy
people with lung cancer who are undergoing radical radiotherapy
people with cancers of the blood or bone marrow such as leukaemia, lymphoma or myeloma who are at any stage of treatment
people having immunotherapy or other continuing antibody treatments for cancer
people having other targeted cancer treatments that can affect the immune system, such as protein kinase inhibitors or PARP inhibitors
people who have had bone marrow or stem cell transplants in the last 6 months or who are still taking immunosuppression drugs

*people with severe respiratory conditions including all cystic fibrosis, severe asthma and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)*
people with rare diseases that significantly increase the risk of infections (such as severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), homozygous sickle cell disease)
people on immunosuppression therapies sufficient to significantly increase risk of infection
problems with your spleen, for example splenectomy (having your spleen removed)
*adults with Down’s syndrome*
adults on dialysis or with chronic kidney disease (stage 5)
women who are pregnant with significant heart disease, congenital or acquired
other people who have also been classed as clinically extremely vulnerable, based on clinical judgement and an assessment of their needs. GPs and hospital clinicians have been provided with guidance to support these decisions


The Committee’s advice is to offer vaccination to those aged 65 years and over followed by those in *clinical risk groups* aged 16 years and over. The main risk groups identified by the Committee are set out below. •* Chronic respiratory disease, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cystic fibrosis and severe asthma* • Chronic heart disease (and vascular disease) • Chronic kidney disease 8 • Chronic liver disease • Chronic neurological disease including epilepsy • *Down’s syndrome* • *Severe and profound learning disability* • Diabetes • *Solid organ, bone marrow and stem cell transplant recipients* •* People with specific cancers* • Immunosuppression due to disease or treatment • Asplenia and splenic dysfunction • Morbid obesity • Severe mental illness Other groups at higher risk, incl


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Next challenge will be the harder to reach folk.


I agree. Through whatever influence mechanisms that will work best, we have to get a good vaccine take up in the vulnerable elements of the BAME communities because that identifiable element of the population has, for whatever reason (vitamin D deficiency - correlation), been found disproportionately adversely affected by COVID-19 in terms of serious illness and death.
When I said "Life is not fair" what I tried to imply was that there will be anomalies in the figures and categorisations, but I thought that GP Surgeries will do their level best.


----------



## classic33 (21 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I set out below the criteria for CEV and Underlining risk groups. I have put in bold where the same people are in both groups but there is clearly quite a bit of overlap on the others although not exactly the same. However in fairness I have noticed that it says that "*Individuals within these risk groups who are clinically extremely vulnerable are discussed separately (see above*)". So the underlying risk group is acknowledged to include people are are also CEV. There is quite a bit of overlap.
> 
> I would imagine the big numbers in cat 6 not covered at last partly in cat 4 are:
> 
> ...



*Definition of clinically extremely vulnerable groups*
People who are defined as clinically extremely vulnerable are at very high risk of severe illness from coronavirus. There are 2 ways you may be identified as clinically extremely vulnerable:

1. You have one or more of conditions listed below, or
2. *"Your clinician or GP has added you to the Shielded Patient List because, based on their clinical judgement, they deem to you be at higher risk of serious illness if you catch the virus."*

It's not as simple as it sounds, or seems on paper.


----------



## mjr (22 Jan 2021)

Pfizer is delaying vaccine deliveries while they upgrade production, but Italy threatens to sue https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-vaccines-idUSKBN29P1RC


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

@PK99 shared this link earlier:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/16/covid-vaccine-black-people-unlikely-covid-jab-uk
"Overall, the study [polling was in November, mind, figures come from the UK Household Longitudinal Study] found high levels of willingness to be vaccinated, with 82% of people saying they were likely or very likely to have the jab – rising to 96% among people over the age of 75.
"Women, younger people and those with lower levels of education were less willing, but hesitancy was particularly high among people from black groups, where 72% said they were unlikely or very unlikely to be vaccinated. Among Pakistani and Bangladeshi groups this figure was 42%. Eastern European groups were also less willing.
"These figures are higher than previous estimates by the Royal Society for Public Health. Its poll of 2,076 UK adults found 57% of respondents from BAME backgrounds would take a Covid jab if advised by their GP or another health professional, compared with 79% of white respondents."


----------



## lane (22 Jan 2021)

Reported on the BBC website today 98% of over 70s will have the vaccine. 

New research suggests the older a person is, the more likely they are to intend to take up a coronavirus vaccine.

Around eight in 10 people aged 16-29 - 81% - said they would be very likely or fairly likely to take up an offered vaccine, the Office for National Statistics found.

This rose to 98% of adults aged 70 and over.

Overall, around nine in 10 - 89% - respondents said they would be very likely or fairly likely to have the vaccine if offered, and around one in 20 (5%) very or fairly unlikely.

Most of those reluctant to get the jab said they were worried about potential long-term health effects.

The research also suggests there has been a slight gradual increase in positive attitudes towards getting vaccinated.

In early December, 78% of adults said they would be likely or fairly likely to take up the offer of a jab.


----------



## mjr (22 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Reported on the BBC website today 98% of over 70s will have the vaccine.



Just a small note that it's "would" not "will":



> Around eight in 10 people aged 16-29 - 81% - said they would be very likely or fairly likely to take up an offered vaccine, the Office for National Statistics found.
> 
> This rose to 98% of adults aged 70 and over.



There is also the "if offered" caveat later. Has anyone a good list of who is not being offered it? (other than children which is not really relevant yet)


----------



## roubaixtuesday (22 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Pfizer is delaying vaccine deliveries while they upgrade production, but Italy threatens to sue https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-vaccines-idUSKBN29P1RC



Bound to help production, legal threats.


----------



## lane (22 Jan 2021)

There is approximately 600,000 teachers and police in the UK and some discussion over when they will be vaccinated, but will be after all over 50s, CEV and at risk groups. Interesting to note that 2 million morbidly obese people are being prioritised in group 6 "at risk".


----------



## vickster (22 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> There is approximately 600,000 teachers and police in the UK and some discussion over when they will be vaccinated, but will be after all over 50s, CEV and at risk groups. Interesting to note that 2 million morbidly obese people are being prioritised in group 6 "at risk".


Because they are based on morbidity and mortality data from coronavirus presumably


----------



## lane (22 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Because they are based on morbidity and mortality data from coronavirus presumably



Yes I know. On the other hand that was known quite early on and people were told, so people have had a year to do something about it themselves. You could argue that if they haven't that's really their problem.


----------



## matticus (22 Jan 2021)

How often do the morbidly obese move out of that category in 10 months?
How has Biffer Boris done in this regard, after his moment of insight?


----------



## Julia9054 (22 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Yes I know. On the other hand that was known quite early on and people were told, so people have had a year to do something about it themselves. You could argue that if they haven't that's really their problem.


Weight is a lot, lot more complicated than that.
Also all the research into health behaviours will tell you that making difficult lifestyle changes is even more difficult in times of stress


----------



## lane (22 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> How often do the morbidly obese move out of that category in 10 months?
> How has Biffer Boris done in this regard, after his moment of insight?



Fair point. Morbidly obese does suggest someone very fat, probably would take a while to get down to an appropriate size.


----------



## vickster (22 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Yes I know. On the other hand that was known quite early on and people were told, so people have had a year to do something about it themselves. You could argue that if they haven't that's really their problem.


Jesus wept...


----------



## Julia9054 (22 Jan 2021)

Vaccination priorities are not about who is most deserving. It’s not even really about who will personally benefit the most.
It is
1. Who is most likely to die/be seriously ill therefore overwhelm NHS resources
2. Who needs to keep working/not pass it on to vulnerable people so that others don’t die and the NHS can keep functioning.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

For ease of access (expect all on here have read this through, some several times):

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) advice on priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination, 30 December 2020 (Updated 6 January 2021) - advises that the first priorities for the current COVID-19 vaccination programme should be the prevention of COVID-19 mortality and the protection of health and social care staff and systems. Secondary priorities could include vaccination of those at increased risk of hospitalisation and at increased risk of exposure, and to maintain resilience in essential public services.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> You could argue that if they [morbidly obese people] haven't [moved themselves out of that category] that's really their problem.


You could but:
a) this is the vaccine thread,
b) giving them a vaccination as a priority (Gp 6) is to address the community problem that they are more likely to need hospital admission and stays therein, and other valuable resources.
So it's OUR problem, and the JCVI prioritisation is our balanced way of addressing it.
In the meantime, they would be well advised to take a (double a 75kg person's) daily wedge of Vitamin D3.


----------



## Blue Hills (22 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Jesus wept...


Well it made me laugh amidst this hell, which is welcome, more use to my health than a shot of religion.
Glad i checked back in.
Note,not criticising lane.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Note,not criticising lane.


Why you no criticise @lane ? No laughing matter (100+psi in rear wheel).


----------



## lane (22 Jan 2021)

Could consider running 32mm tubeless


----------



## SpokeyDokey (22 Jan 2021)

For 21 Jan:

410 000 first doses in a day which is brilliant.

5 380 000 first doses in total.

467 000 second doses in total.

Estimated R number 0.8 - 1.0 (improving) as of 22 Jan.

Good news as per previous days - not getting many 'likes' though.


----------



## midlife (22 Jan 2021)

Have been stood down from my redeployment as a vaccinator. Been told there are enough to do the job for the time being..........back to teeth !


----------



## kingrollo (22 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Have been stood down from my redeployment as a vaccinator. Been told there are enough to do the job for the time being..........back to teeth !



Yes I'm hearing similar. Law of diminishing returns - more vaccinators = more jabs ...up to a point.

But we will run out of willing arms - and vaccinators will stand idle. At least until we move onto the next group.


----------



## mjr (22 Jan 2021)

"A simplistic formula used to distribute coronavirus vaccines that did not take into account the size of GP practices has meant fewer people receiving one in London, according to the mayor, Sadiq Khan." https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...n-london-missed-out-on-early-share-of-vaccine


----------



## nickyboy (22 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> For 21 Jan:
> 
> 410 000 first doses in a day which is brilliant.
> 
> ...


And even more remarkably is that the total UK vaccinations given is more than Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Sweden combined
Appreciate that this doesn't fit in with the very popular but very tired old trope on this subforum that anything that the Conservative government does is rubbish but, in this, case, in the interests of balance, they have done an astonishingly good job so far on vaccinations.


----------



## mjr (22 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Appreciate that this doesn't fit in with the very popular but very tired old trope on this subforum that anything that the Conservative government does is rubbish but, in this, case, in the interests of balance, they have done an astonishingly good job so far on vaccinations.


It is strange that this trope is mainly mentioned to argue against it. It is all a bit like Millwall or Wimbledon football fans who used to chant "nobody likes us" when most of us didn't have preconceptions.

So far, so good, indeed.

But the man falling off a cliff said the same until he reached the ground! Let's not count our chickens before they hatch.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> But we will run out of willing arms - and vaccinators will stand idle.


You're making it up, again. See my other (longer) posts wrt willingness to take the vaccine.


----------



## Blue Hills (22 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> It is strange that this trope is mainly mentioned to argue against it. It is all a bit like Millwall or Wimbledon football fans who used to chant "nobody likes us" when most of us didn't have preconceptions.
> 
> So far, so good, indeed.
> 
> But the man falling off a cliff said the same until he reached the ground! Let's not count our chickens before they hatch.


Haven't you left a few metaphors unused there?


----------



## mjr (22 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Haven't you left a few metaphors unused there?


Have I made you think of a man falling onto eggs?


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

Note: Doesn't seem to take account of overlapping second dose required from 6 March.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

What did the man falling off the cliff say? I'm intrigued. The AArgh factor?


----------



## kingrollo (22 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> And even more remarkably is that the total UK vaccinations given is more than Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Sweden combined
> Appreciate that this doesn't fit in with the very popular but very tired old trope on this subforum that anything that the Conservative government does is rubbish but, in this, case, in the interests of balance, they have done an astonishingly good job so far on vaccinations.


I've not heard many detractors on here about the vaccine rollout TBF.

Other elements yes. But the vaccine roll out I think has pretty well received.


----------



## nickyboy (22 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> It is strange that this trope is mainly mentioned to argue against it. It is all a bit like Millwall or Wimbledon football fans who used to chant "nobody likes us" when most of us didn't have preconceptions.
> 
> So far, so good, indeed.
> 
> But the man falling off a cliff said the same until he reached the ground! Let's not count our chickens before they hatch.


I said, about a zillion pages ago on this thread that a country's government's performance in the face of this pandemic could only truly be assessed after the event. There is still a long way to go for all countries. The UK's government has, in my estimation, done a very poor job in terms of lockdowns, consistent health messaging etc but a very good one so far on vaccinations. Who can say where the UK will finish up in the league table of government responses? At the moment it's near the bottom but, and as a fan of metaphors you'll like this, we're only half way through the season and there is still a lot to play for


----------



## dodgy (22 Jan 2021)

My Doctor did tell me today that she thinks it's bad we're stretching out the 2nd dose to 12 weeks, this was after I had asked for some good news. I had to tell her to stop as I do tend to worry about stuff.
Anyway, over 400k doses in a day is amazing. Like others have said, we should wait till the end to decide if a good job has been done, but the numbers are definitely encouraging.


----------



## Julia9054 (22 Jan 2021)

My son Joe (freelance trumpet player currently working in community care) got his vaccine today. The Pfizer one.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (22 Jan 2021)

dodgy said:


> *My Doctor did tell me today that she thinks it's bad we're stretching out the 2nd dose to 12 weeks,* this was after I had asked for some good news. I had to tell her to stop as I do tend to worry about stuff.
> Anyway, over 400k doses in a day is amazing. Like others have said, we should wait till the end to decide if a good job has been done, but the numbers are definitely encouraging.



Your GP must be struggling with the simple math's articulated by Whitty (for at least the second time) in today's briefing.


----------



## kingrollo (22 Jan 2021)

dodgy said:


> My Doctor did tell me today that she thinks it's bad we're stretching out the 2nd dose to 12 weeks, this was after I had asked for some good news. I had to tell her to stop as I do tend to worry about stuff.
> Anyway, over 400k doses in a day is amazing. Like others have said, we should wait till the end to decide if a good job has been done, but the numbers are definitely encouraging.



Yeah it's a bit like a manufacturer who constantly produces crappy GPS units ....then suddenly they produce a decent one.... People are understandably cautious !


----------



## kingrollo (22 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> My son Joe (freelance trumpet player currently working in community care) got his vaccine today. The Pfizer one.



To right ! I've been saying for weeks Freelance Trumpet players should be in the priority groups ....


----------



## dodgy (22 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Your GP must be struggling with the simple math's articulated by Whitty (for at least the second time) in today's briefing.



Enlighten me please, I don't watch the news for reasons explained in my last post.


----------



## kingrollo (22 Jan 2021)

dodgy said:


> Enlighten me please, I don't watch the news for reasons explained in my last post.



Double the amount of people vaccinated lowers your risk more than fewer people with higher protection.


----------



## PaulB (22 Jan 2021)

I heard something this afternoon that gave me a real WTF moment! A senior nurse we know has now had two Covid-19 vaccinations. That's good, isn't it? Well, not when you learn that this nurse has had one Pfizer jab and the other was the Astra/Zeneca one! We don't know if this nurse is double-covered, or not covered at all. It came to light on the system which has to log all such vaccinations given.


----------



## dodgy (22 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Yeah it's a bit like a manufacturer who constantly produces crappy GPS units ....then suddenly they produce a decent one.... People are understandably cautious !



I still have not forgiven Garmin for producing a unit that, by design, turns on when you take it off charge. Idiots.


----------



## dodgy (22 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Double the amount of people vaccinated lowers your risk more than fewer people with higher protection.



That seems like a reasonable risk based decision and it was my understanding before hearing the doctor lamenting it today. Ah well.


----------



## lane (22 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Your GP must be struggling with the simple math's articulated by Whitty (for at least the second time) in today's briefing.



I was only paying limited attention because he so bloody boring but I thought he didn't completely discount the possibility of it resulting in a vaccine resistant mutation?


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

dodgy said:


> Enlighten me please, I don't watch the news for reasons explained in my last post.





kingrollo said:


> Double the amount of people vaccinated lowers your risk more than fewer people with higher protection.


As well as @kingrollo 's concise answer (lowers the likely number of people becoming ill to the extent they need hospital admission).
Someone put the two with one as opposed to the one with two decision that JCVI et al decided on on 30 December in this way:
For those with two over 70 year old parents still alive, would you want one to be protected after 28 days at 95% or both to be protected at over 80% after 14 days?
For more detail, I posted this BMJ article earlier (my emboldening) which has been complemented by further data from Israel in the last 10 days:
https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n18
"How effective is just one dose?
A paper published in the _New England Journal of Medicine_ stated that the efficacy of the *Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine* was 52.4% between the first and second dose (spaced 21 days apart).5 However, in its “green book” Public Health England said that during the phase III trial most of the vaccine failures were in the days immediately after the first dose, indicating that the *short term protection starts around day 10*.6 Looking at the data from day 15 to 21, it calculated that the *efficacy* against symptomatic covid-19 was *around 89%* (95% confidence interval 52% to 97%). Meanwhile, Pfizer has said that it has no evidence that the protection lasts beyond the 21 days.
In the case of the *Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine*, PHE said, “High protection against hospitalisation was seen from 21 days after dose one until two weeks after the second dose, suggesting that a single dose will provide *high short term protection against severe disease* . . . An exploratory analysis of participants who had received *one standard dose* of the vaccine suggested that *efficacy* against symptomatic covid-19 *was 73%* (95% CI 48.79-85.76%).”


----------



## kingrollo (22 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I was only paying limited attention because he so bloody boring but I thought he didn't completely discount the possibility of it resulting in a vaccine resistant mutation?



Was that towards the end ? - because I didn't hear that.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

Of course he can't completely discount the possibility . . . almost by definition. But he can infer from other similar viral experience that that possibility is low (or lower) in the timeframe which will make a difference. But then the media can say: "there's a possibility of it resulting in a vaccine resistant mutation", and away we go.


----------



## lane (22 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Was that towards the end ? - because I didn't hear that.



It was a question asked by one of the public / press if it was a possibility.

Edit not sure how near the end I gave up watching


----------



## lane (22 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Of course he can't completely discount the possibility . . . almost by definition. But he can infer from other similar viral experience that that possibility is low (or lower) in the timeframe which will make a difference. But then the media can say: "there's a possibility of it resulting in a vaccine resistant mutation", and away we go.



Not quite sure how to quantify "low" or "lower" but would hope it was vanishingly small because it would be quite a problem if it happened


----------



## kingrollo (22 Jan 2021)

Lol - we have an actual Tory MP posting on here !!!! Incredible !!! - not content with the right wing press support - they are now planting spin doctors on forums.....


----------



## BoldonLad (22 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Lol - we have an actual Tory MP posting on here !!!! Incredible !!! - not content with the right wing press support - they are now planting spin doctors on forums.....



Does he have a bicycle? I assume all of the Labour Party Member on here have?


----------



## lane (22 Jan 2021)

Blimey.......

*"Could the gap lead to vaccine resistant strains of SARS-CoV-2?*
Paul Bieniasz, a retrovirologist from Rockefeller University who is studying how the virus can acquire mutations, has warned that the UK was taking a gamble that risked fostering vaccine resistant forms of the virus. He told the news site STAT, “My concern, as a virologist, is that if you wanted to make a vaccine-resistant strain, what you would do is to build a cohort of partially immunized individuals in the teeth of a highly prevalent viral infection.”14

When asked about this concern, a Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson did not directly answer the question, saying rather that it was “vital we do everything we can to quickly and safely protect as many vulnerable people as possible from this virus” and that data from manufacturers showed considerable protection for patients after the first dose."


----------



## dodgy (22 Jan 2021)

This is why I avoid the news. And probably this thread now 🤷‍♂️


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> But then the media can say: "there's a possibility of it resulting in a vaccine resistant mutation", and away we go.





lane said:


> "Could the gap lead to vaccine resistant strains of SARS-CoV-2?
> Paul Bieniasz, a retrovirologist from Rockefeller University who is studying how the virus can acquire mutations, . . .


Full bmj article from which your quote is drawn (Covid-19 vaccination: What’s the evidence for extending the dosing interval?).
Think you've proved my point (media and 'away we go'). There's a possibility. And it'd be amazing if you could find at least one scientist to point up that it's a possibility and how a vaccine-resistant strain might come about. But his 'best way' to increase the chances of it happening model: "build a cohort of partially immunized individuals in the teeth of a highly prevalent viral infection" will thankfully not be realised because the science shows that the "UK 10" (million) who will receive one dose, then a gap of up to 12 weeks, and then a second March-May) is a cohort with 89% protection after 11 days first dose (see my previous posts with the detail/evidence) immunised individuals. This high level of protection will very likely confound the PhD doctor's model.
There WILL be variants: the virus has been mutating since inception. And UK organisations I trust acknowledge that a vaccine-resistant strain might come about, but think it unlikely.
If it does come about, what action might we take? If it does come about - this spring - in retrospect what would you have done differently?
Just your father with two doses or both parents with one, (89%) for the time being?
Does the PM use hair gel? It's a possibility but there's no available evidence.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Jan 2021)

dodgy said:


> This is why I avoid the news. And probably this thread now 🤷‍♂️



Don't do that - once you wade through the politically tinted rhetoric it's quite interesting and informative.


----------



## tom73 (23 Jan 2021)

PaulB said:


> I heard something this afternoon that gave me a real WTF moment! A senior nurse we know has now had two Covid-19 vaccinations. That's good, isn't it? Well, not when you learn that this nurse has had one Pfizer jab and the other was the Astra/Zeneca one! We don't know if this nurse is double-covered, or not covered at all. It came to light on the system which has to log all such vaccinations given.


Really ? Did both happen at the same centre ? 
This sort of thing should not happen and is not great any mixing of vaccine types of any vaccine is only to be done in exceptional circumstances that's been standard for years. The big push for bigger and bigger vaccine centres that have been set up not to work with the tried and tested Primary care networks. Even the system for recording covid vaccinations is not the same as the one that records every other one.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Jan 2021)

Very sadly more woes in Europe - a double whammy from Pfizer and Oxford/AZ in the supply chain. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55771223

Also, I hadn't realised that the Oxford/AZ vaccine still isn't approved for use there. Why the delay I wonder?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Really ? Did both happen at the same centre ?
> This sort of thing should not happen and is not great any mixing of vaccine types of any vaccine is only to be done in exceptional circumstances that's been standard for years. The big push for bigger and bigger vaccine centres that have been set up not to work with the tried and tested Primary care networks. Even the system for recording covid vaccinations is not the same as the one that records every other one.



What's the disconnect between the BVC's and the PCN?


----------



## Blue Hills (23 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Don't do that - once you wade through the politically tinted rhetoric it's quite interesting and informative.


yep somewhat to my surprise I find this thread a very handy way of keeping up with the latest developments/progress


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Jan 2021)

fossyant said:


> My brother's got his staff vaccinated at his dental practice. Two younger female staff won't have it as they are worried about fertility issues. FFS too much social media influence from conspiracy theorists.


Putting this here, @fossyant , in the 'vaccine' thread.


----------



## Blue Hills (23 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Very sadly more woes in Europe - a double whammy from Pfizer and Oxford/AZ in the supply chain.


I know Italy has descended to some very low jabs per day figure compared to ours.
Sardinia has just gone up a level of lockdown with daily curfews. As an island which cut travel fairly early it was somewhat protected from the worst ravaging Italy but such is the sodding virus it was bound to take hold and run riot eventually. Infection rates now approaching the really bad levels in many urban east london boroughs I think. At least they bought time until the vaccine.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> I know Italy has descended to some very low jabs per day figure compared to ours.
> Sardinia has just gone up a level of lockdown with daily curfews. As an island which cut travel fairly early it was somewhat protected from the worst ravaging Italy but such is the sodding virus it was bound to take hold and run riot eventually. Infection rates now approaching the really bad levels in many urban east london boroughs I think. At least they bought time until the vaccine.



I think there will be some harmonisation of death rates across Europe before this thing runs it's course - bad news that Germany who were very quick off the mark in the early Covid phase are now up to 50k deaths and with a very slow vaccine rollout thus far.


----------



## Blue Hills (23 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I think there will be some harmonisation of death rates across Europe before this thing runs it's course - bad news that Germany who were very quick off the mark in the early Covid phase are now up to 50k deaths and with a very slow vaccine rollout thus far.


yes quite possibly.
That's the horrible logic of the thing - mass isolate folk and you are just keeping a stock of nice virginal meat for the sodding thing to come and chomp on. If it weren't for the vaccines produced extremely quickly this would be hell indeed.
Hang in there folks.


----------



## tom73 (23 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> What's the disconnect between the BVC's and the PCN?


BVC are ran by NHS England are very much under central government control. Hence why many are getting letters from NHS and GP's the latter to many who already have had a vaccine from the GP. In same case people have had 3 letter. Once you have your 1st one at BVC you can't have your 2rd at the GP even if that turns out to be easier for you eg unable to travel ect. The letter clearly are coming off other data base and not directly of medical records and not being crossed ref either. So GP's have no idea if you've had a letter or not or if you've had one dose.
BVC don't even have access to medical records even basic info. The simple way is provide primary care with the means to increase numbers and together with the wider NHS at a local level do it in a way that best meet's local need. It's a big mess waiting to happen just playing a numbers game is not a great idea. T&T sadly showed what happens.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> yes quite possibly.
> That's the horrible logic of the thing - mass isolate folk and *you are just keeping a stock of nice virginal meat for the sodding thing to come and chomp on.* If it weren't for the vaccines produced extremely quickly this would be hell indeed.
> Hang in there folks.



For sheer evocative-ness you can have 10/10 for that.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> BVC are ran by NHS England are very much under central government control. Hence why many are getting letters from NHS and GP's the latter to many who already have had a vaccine from the GP. In same case people have had 3 letter. Once you have your 1st one at BVC you can't have your 2rd at the GP even if that turns out to be easier for you eg unable to travel ect. The letter clearly are coming off other data base and not directly of medical records and not being crossed ref either. So GP's have no idea if you've had a letter or not or if you've had one dose.
> BVC don't even have access to medical records even basic info. The simple way is provide primary care with the means to increase numbers and together with the wider NHS at a local level do it in a way that best meet's local need. It's a big mess waiting to happen just playing a numbers game is not a great idea. T&T sadly showed what happens.



Merci!

I thought that the BVC's were being run in concert with a wider control group than central government? Is this not the case? 

As a layman I think that the case for the BVC's seems the way to go for me. I can't imagine that the PCN could cope with the extra volume as my understanding is that they are stretched at the best of times?

With such a large rollout project I think that we have to accept that some errors will always be made. As the project progresses these will probably/hopefully be ironed out. At the end of the day the moot point is that 'jabs' are getting into arms very quickly and if some things need improving behind the scenes, so to speak, then it's a small price to pay imo.


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> This sort of thing should not happen and is not great any mixing of vaccine types of any vaccine is only to be done in exceptional circumstances that's been standard for years. The big push for bigger and bigger vaccine centres that have been set up not to work with the tried and tested Primary care networks. Even the system for recording covid vaccinations is not the same as the one that records every other one.


JCVI direction is clear: the second dose should be the same as the first. Surprised the medically qualified nurse herself didn't say 'no' I'll pause for a second dose (why are they giving her a second dose btw) till I can get a Pfizer one (same as 'my' first one). The criteria for going ahead are unlikely to be met in her case: "individual is likely to be at immediate high risk or is considered unlikely to attend again".

Worth pointing out, though, that there is no evidence that giving a second dose of the 'other' vaccine is detrimental, or beneficial, or 'doesn't make any difference'. It's just that, in normal times (for other two dose vaccination regimes) it'd be avoided, on a precautionary basis, with no time pressure, vaccine paucity or opportunity benefit.

Tom is right to highlight the apparent disconnect between the IT systems being used to record and track the COVID-19 vaccination effort. NHS are apparently working hard to get this sorted. But @tom73 pointed out weeks ago that it would make complete sense to have both jabs in the same place, indeed the 'system' may seek to 'force' this, only offering second dose appointments at the centre where the first was given.
*JCVI direction Vaccine schedule*
"JCVI advises that the second vaccine dose should be with the same vaccine as for the first dose. Switching between vaccines or missing the second dose is not advised as this may affect the duration of protection."
Link to NHS 'Green Book' Chapter 14a gives the circumstances where a second dose of the 'other' vaccine may be given.
"There is no evidence on the interchangeability of the COVID-19 vaccines although studies are underway. Therefore, every effort should be made to determine which vaccine the individual received and to complete with the same vaccine. For individuals who started the schedule [had the first dose] and who attend for vaccination at a site where
the same vaccine is not available, or
if the first product received is unknown,
it is reasonable to offer one dose of the locally available product to complete the schedule [second dose]. This option is preferred if the individual is likely to be at immediate high risk or is considered unlikely to attend again. In these circumstances, as both the vaccines are based on the spike protein, it is likely the second dose will help to boost the response to the first dose."


----------



## PaulB (23 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Really ? Did both happen at the same centre ?
> This sort of thing should not happen and is not great any mixing of vaccine types of any vaccine is only to be done in exceptional circumstances that's been standard for years. The big push for bigger and bigger vaccine centres that have been set up not to work with the tried and tested Primary care networks. Even the system for recording covid vaccinations is not the same as the one that records every other one.


Yes, it did happen at the same centre. I've been corrected though in that the person involved isn't necessarily a nurse but is certainly a health professional of some sort and this was discovered through their NHS number. It hasn't been divulged if it was male or female.


----------



## tom73 (23 Jan 2021)

PaulB said:


> Yes, it did happen at the same centre. I've been corrected though in that the person involved isn't necessarily a nurse but is certainly a health professional of some sort and this was discovered through their NHS number. It hasn't been divulged if it was male or female.


Right ok then in that case assuming it's not a mass vaccine centre and all records are fully available then the giver has failed to do standard checks before giving it. If that person is a HCP then it's hot water time. In any case that is a drug error and will need be formally reported and investigated blood will be on carpet for someone.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Tom is right to highlight the apparent disconnect between the IT systems being used to record and track the COVID-19 vaccination effort. NHS are apparently working hard to get this sorted.



That's reassuring. 



Ajax Bay said:


> But @tom73 pointed out weeks ago that it would make complete sense to have both jabs in the same place, *indeed the 'system' may seek to 'force' this, only offering second dose appointments at the centre where the first was given.*



That would make sense to me under 'disconnect' circumstances.


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Jan 2021)

PaulB said:


> it [second dose given, different to first dose] did happen at the same centre. I've been corrected though in that the person involved isn't necessarily a nurse but is certainly a health professional of some sort and this was discovered through their NHS number. It hasn't been divulged if it was male or female.


Are second doses being given as a matter of course (to, say, NHS front-line staff) at much less than the 12 weeks 'allowed' in this centre and elsewhere? Is that not depriving a person in the same group or Gps 3-6 an early first dose? I guess that an 'end-of-the-day' shortlist might include the opportunity to complete the vaccination schedule for a proportion of hospital (say) staff.
Is the sex of the "health professional of some sort" an issue or relevant? Just asking?
Tom's " investigated [and] blood will be on carpet" suggestion seems OTT. Haven't the NHS got better things to do or (don't have knowledge of any) other minor reasons to self-flagellate?


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Can I ask how he's managed it [brother's got his staff vaccinated at his dental practice]? As access in the wider health service is a right mix bag and a mess. Only ask as Mrs 73 can't access it for her or her staff and the wider centres she is over seeing.





fossyant said:


> I'll try and find out. He's been given 6 months supply of covid tests as well. That's mad as your wife is on the front line.





fossyant said:


> My brother was sent a link from GM Dental for frontline dental and social workers.


Hope you don't mind, but I've pasted these across here.
Green Book
"Front line healthcare staff (Group 2 - NOW, along with over 80s and front line social care workers)
This includes the following groups:
Staff involved in direct patient care
This includes staff who have frequent face-to-face clinical contact with patients and who are directly involved in patient care in either secondary or primary care/community settings. This includes doctors, dentists, midwives and nurses, paramedics and ambulance staff, pharmacists, optometrists, occupational therapists, physiotherapists and radiographers. It should also include those working in independent, voluntary and non-standard healthcare settings such as hospices, and community-based mental health or addiction services.
Staff working on the COVID vaccination programme, temporary staff, students, trainees and volunteers who are working with patients must also be included.
Non-clinical staff in secondary or primary care/community healthcare settings This includes non-clinical ancillary staff who may have social contact with patients but are not directly involved in patient care. This group includes receptionists, ward clerks, porters and cleaners.
Laboratory and pathology staff
Hospital-based laboratory and mortuary staff who frequently handle SARS-CoV-2 or collect or handle potentially infected specimens, including respiratory, gastrointestinal and blood specimens should be eligible as they may also have social contact with patients. This may also include cleaners, porters, secretaries and receptionists in laboratories.
Frontline funeral operatives and mortuary technicians / embalmers are both at risk of exposure and likely to spend a considerable amount of time in care homes and hospital settings where they may also expose multiple patients.
[Implicitly not included] Staff working in non-hospital-based laboratories and those academic or commercial research laboratories who handle clinical specimens or potentially infected samples will be able to use effective protective equipment in their work and should be at low risk of exposure."


----------



## tom73 (23 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Merci!
> 
> I thought that the BVC's were being run in concert with a wider control group than central government? Is this not the case?
> 
> ...



No sadly not they are totally central government and don't join up. The best way is allow primary to do they can do it they just need to be allowed to get on with it. Much of the time, effect and money going into the big centres can be better spent in providing primary care with what it needs. They also need the vaccine which is not reaching them when they are told or even if it will arrive at all. Mrs 73 has at least had one lot never arrive and no word on if any is come. She and her staff can get though all they need both staff and patients across 3 sites they just need the stuff. 

Back room errors are one thing the real issue are drug errors or worse. The other issues is people being missed or bypassed all together. 
The rate at which the government what's to push this it's in danger of running away with it's self. The MVC are not needed really until we get to wide mass wider public vaccination time. Even then all they need is use the staffing model they have now just put them under primary care control and supervision. Mass public health is what they do and have for years they know the needs of the areas they cover and how best to get this rolled out. If the government really want's to help then what ever spare effect, energy and money it has should be going into getting hold of as much vaccine it can find. Not playing a political game.


----------



## kingrollo (23 Jan 2021)

BMA calling for 2nd Jab to be given within 6 weeks of the first.

Seems to be a bit of head of steam building up about the 12 week delay.


----------



## tom73 (23 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> BMA calling for 2nd Jab to be given within 6 weeks of the first.
> 
> Seems to be a bit of head of steam building up about the 12 week delay.



They've be calling for an end to it for health care workers for some time. Though at the moment many would welcome even the possible hope of the 1st one.


----------



## midlife (23 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Are second doses being given as a matter of course (to, say, NHS front-line staff) at much less than the 12 weeks 'allowed' in this centre and elsewhere? Is that not depriving a person in the same group or Gps 3-6 an early first dose? I guess that an 'end-of-the-day' shortlist might include the opportunity to complete the vaccination schedule for a proportion of hospital (say) staff.
> Is the sex of the "health professional of some sort" an issue or relevant? Just asking?
> Tom's " investigated [and] blood will be on carpet" suggestion seems OTT. Haven't the NHS got better things to do or (don't have knowledge of any) other minor reasons to self-flagellate?



Our hospital are booking second dose at 9 weeks. AFAIK we only have the Pfizer vaccine so getting a second AZ dose by mistake shouldn't be a problem. Last time I heard we have vaccinated about half the staff.


----------



## tom73 (23 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Hope you don't mind, but I've pasted these across here.
> Green Book
> "Front line healthcare staff (Group 2 - NOW, along with over 80s and front line social care workers)
> This includes the following groups:
> ...



I know what say's but getting one is the problem or getting someone join up the dot's.


----------



## lane (23 Jan 2021)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55777084

Doctors call for 6 week gap saying the UK is increasingly isolated internationally and 12 weeks difficult justify.

Of course I have no idea what's right or best. However on the basis Whitty etc. have got so many of the big calls wrong it is at least a "realistic possibility" they got this wrong.


----------



## tom73 (23 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Are second doses being given as a matter of course (to, say, NHS front-line staff) at much less than the 12 weeks 'allowed' in this centre and elsewhere? Is that not depriving a person in the same group or Gps 3-6 an early first dose? I guess that an 'end-of-the-day' shortlist might include the opportunity to complete the vaccination schedule for a proportion of hospital (say) staff.
> Is the sex of the "health professional of some sort" an issue or relevant? Just asking?
> Tom's " investigated [and] blood will be on carpet" suggestion seems OTT. Haven't the NHS got better things to do or (don't have knowledge of any) other minor reasons to self-flagellate?


No it's not it's a drug error and will be looked into things like this can have lead to deaths. How much blood get's spilled depends on how keen the place is or how keen the senior clinical manger is on clinical record keeping. It also depend on if the giver has made other recording errors in the past. At best it's a formal warning and going some sort of clinical reflection to do at worse if they are known for it and if a HCP it can go all the way to the professional body.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> No sadly not they are totally central government and don't join up.



From here:

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/coronavirus-vaccine-rollout

The rollout is the responsibility of the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), working with NHS England, NHS Improvement and Public Health England to co-ordinate vaccinations across a large network of vaccination sites including in hospitals, GPs and pharmacies. 

Are you saying that all these departments are not working effectively together and that NHS England, NHS Improvement and PHE are not involved in the strategic & tactical decision making processes of the rollout?

Judging by output it seems to me that all the above must be contributing effectively and I can't imagine that without them working together thus that we would be achieving the incredible vaccination numbers thus far.



tom73 said:


> Much of the time, effect and money going into the big centres can be better spent in providing primary care with what it needs.



How have you come to that conclusion? Some hard evidence would be useful.



tom73 said:


> The MVC are not needed really until we get to wide mass wider public vaccination time.



Presume you mean Big Vaccination Centres?

Are we not in mass wider public vaccination time? We have a schedule to vaccinate the whole population and need to work through this as fast as possible.

The current approach using the BCV's in conjunction with the PCN must surely be the fastest way to achieve this?



tom73 said:


> If the government really want's to help then what ever spare effect, energy and money it has should be going into getting hold of as much vaccine it can find.



I think you'll find that they have been putting a huge amount of effort into this via the BEIS and VTF.

As an aside they are certainly doing a much better job than the rest of Europe so every credit to them.



tom73 said:


> Not playing a political game.



For sure they (like any other Government of any political colour or nation) will try and claim some of the credit at some stage but I find it hard to believe that decisions are being made, along with all the various agencies involved, that are politically motivated.

What made you say that apart from you not being a fan of the current Government?

Even the Labour Shadow Health Secretary Jonathan Ashworth yesterday praised the rollout program thus far (adding it needs to go further and faster - _for completeness on my part_).

Whitty, Vallance and Stevens have also added their praise to the fantastic achievements thus far by everyone involved in the rollout program.

Something must be working well somewhere.


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> BMA calling for 2nd Jab to be given within 6 weeks of the first.
> Seems to be a bit of head of steam building up about the 12 week delay.


Yes - well reported. My immediate reaction (warning may be tl;dr) was that their argument seemed to be rather weak, not science based and unpersuasive. Fails to acknowledge (and/or refute) the benefit of increasing the gap between first and second doses to allow twice the number of the vulnerable element of the UK population to receive their first vaccine *two months earlier* than otherwise. Think there is some media 'puffing' involved: too much good news on the vaccination programme; we need to report the disagreements more - better clickbait.
BMA's line - Joe:
1) The trials used 3 weeks/4 weeks so we should do what's been trialed. We reluctantly agree that we might stretch to 6 weeks. [iaw WHO guidance]
2) The international community generally think we should stick to doing what's been trialed - WHO Guidelines. UK is an outlier in deferring the second dose.
Some Reuters reporting:
Britain is prioritising giving first doses of COVID-19 vaccine, allowing up to 12 weeks before a second dose, to give the maximum number of people some initial protection.
But Pfizer/BioNTech have warned they have no evidence their vaccine would continue to be protective if the second dose is given more than 21 days after the first. [Comment: Because they chose not to gather such evidence; and no evidence that it wouldn't.]
The British Medical Association (BMA) said it supports giving a second dose up to 42 days [6 weeks] after the first dose, but that a longer gap is not in line with WHO guidance. “The UK’s strategy has become increasingly isolated from many other countries,” the BMA said. “BMA members are also concerned that, given the unpredictability of supplies, there may not be any guarantees that second doses of the Pfizer vaccine will be available in 12 weeks’ time.”
Oxford/AZ has supported the gap between its jabs, saying data showed an 8-12 week gap was a “sweet spot” for efficacy.
The Department of Health and Social Care said that its priority was to protect as many people as possible as quickly as possible. “The decision...to change vaccine dosage intervals followed a thorough review of the data and was in line with the recommendations of the UK’s four chief medical officers.”
On 30 December NHS England said the decision had been taken to prioritise giving the first doses of vaccine (whether the Pfizer and BioNTech one or that of Oxford University and AstraZeneca) to as many people as possible on the priority list to “protect the greatest number of at-risk people overall in the shortest possible time.”1 Delaying the second dose meant that the prioritisation process “will have the greatest impact on reducing mortality, severe disease and hospitalisations and in protecting the NHS and equivalent health services,” it said.
*How effective is just one dose?*
A paper published in the _New England Journal of Medicine_ stated that the efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 52.4% between the first and second dose (spaced 21 days apart).5 However, in its “green book” Public Health England said that during the phase III trial most of the vaccine failures were in the days immediately after the first dose, indicating that the short term protection starts around day 10.6 Looking at the data from day 15 to 21, it calculated that the efficacy against symptomatic covid-19 was around 89% (95% confidence interval 52% to 97%). Meanwhile, Pfizer has said that it has no evidence that the protection lasts beyond the 21 days.
WHO Guidelines:
"WHO acknowledges that a number of countries face exceptional circumstances of vaccine supply constraints combined with a highdisease burden. Some countries have therefore considered delaying the administration of the second dose to allow for a higher initial coverage. This is based on the observation that efficacy has been shown to start from day 12 after the first dose and reached about 89% between days 14 and 21, at the time when the second dose was given. No data on longer term efficacy for a single dose of the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 currently exist,"


----------



## PaulB (23 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Are second doses being given as a matter of course (to, say, NHS front-line staff) at much less than the 12 weeks 'allowed' in this centre and elsewhere? Is that not depriving a person in the same group or Gps 3-6 an early first dose? I guess that an 'end-of-the-day' shortlist might include the opportunity to complete the vaccination schedule for a proportion of hospital (say) staff.
> Is the sex of the "health professional of some sort" an issue or relevant? Just asking?
> Tom's " investigated [and] blood will be on carpet" suggestion seems OTT. Haven't the NHS got better things to do or (don't have knowledge of any) other minor reasons to self-flagellate?


i don't know about that but the second dose may have been erroneously considered the first one by the vaccinator and the person involved went along to the appointment anyway because one thing is known for sure, they must have said that they hadn't had one previously in order to receive it. 
The sex of the recipient would help my wife's nurse team uncover who it is as they may belong to her team.
My M-I-L isn't a member of any health profession and she received her second (Pfizer) vaccination two weeks ago.


----------



## tom73 (23 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> From here:
> 
> https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/coronavirus-vaccine-rollout
> 
> ...


Yes hard work is going in it's ones on the ground working flat out just like they have been though out this. 
Vaccine program is at the end of a day all about public health and should be done in a way to achieve clinical outcomes and done in a way that is effect and best meets patient needs. Not something to be used to play political games so much of this current public health emergency has been total derailed by it all ready.
If NHS improvement are anywhere near this it's not a great sign to start with they pick up from Monitor. 
What I mean is once the 1st two rounds are done. Which are the real numbers needed to be a maximum effect. 
Like I've said have one route in and build capacity as you go but still having some overall management via ones who know how to do this in an effective , safe , tried and tested way. We don't need to reinvent the wheel the government tried that and it's not a great idea. 

Can we at least get done group one first making sure no-one has been missed before running heading into group 2 and up. We need to get this right at the 1st go both in terms of getting the vaccinations done in a safe and effective way together with the public health messaging round it. People on the ground away from Mrs who I know and have worked tell me what's happening on the ground they all want to do this and make it work. (Ones been cheeky and already bagged me to lend a hand once ambo support is less full on) But the communication coming down is not happening and vaccine supply is getting cut at the last minute with little notice. We either have the supply or not the government needs to be open about. Why open even more placers if we don't have the supply in place for the places we already have?


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Jan 2021)

PaulB said:


> My M-I-L isn't a member of any health profession and she received her second (Pfizer) vaccination two weeks ago.


My mother (well over 80) also had two Pfizer jabs: on 17 Dec and 7 Jan (21 days).
After the change in JCVI direction (to 'up to 12 weeks') in late Dec, the BMA negotiated an arrangement to agree that all arranged appointments for second doses up to 10 Jan should be met, but after that, they should be rearranged for (up to 12 weeks) later.
I have shared the date maths in a previous post, but essentially that means that the vast majority who got their first jab before 21 Dec (like your m-i-l, just) received their second dose at the 21 day point.
For those after 20 Dec it's March onwards (for example @midlife OTP). That will allow the programme to deliver (nearly) only first doses all the way through to 6 March. If the programme stays on track that'll mean that nearly all of Group 6 will get their first dose by that date.
If we'd stuck to the 3/4 week gap we'd still be giving the first dose to the later element of Group 3 (over 75s). Which is why I sincerely trust JCVI will not be swayed by the latest BMA representation.


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Is it me or this thread significantly less useful and has less contributors since @Ajax Bay started to contribute - with his overly long posts - which meander here and there - but ultimately have him crawling ever further up Boris Johnson s arse ?
> Well there's one more joining the exodus. Bye all.


Edit: Yes, it's you. Please don't go: you started this thread back in October and have helped it along for 3 months, despite all the oddities. You will miss all the useful detail and I will miss all your attractive ad hominems. Anyway BJ is from Balliol and I wouldn't walk up the Turl and cross the Broad for him.
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/f...d-be-agreeable-even-when-you-disagree.227879/


----------



## nickyboy (23 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> Is it me or this thread significantly less useful and has less contributors since @Ajax Bay started to contribute - with his overly long posts - which meander here and there - but ultimately have him crawling ever further up Boris Johnson s arse ?
> 
> Well there's one more joining the exodus. Bye all.


I want a balanced discussion on important topics. It's interesting that there are fewer posters on the Vaccine thread than on the Pandemic thread. Some less charitable than me may draw the conclusion this is because the Vaccine thread doesn't pass their first filter of it being a good place to criticise the government's performance

Because someone presents a view different than your own doesn't mean they are "crawling even further up Boris Johnson's arse". If you can't handle a viewpoint different than yours maybe this isn't the place for you and go back to other threads that are set up to bash the government


----------



## rualexander (23 Jan 2021)

PaulB said:


> I heard something this afternoon that gave me a real WTF moment! A senior nurse we know has now had two Covid-19 vaccinations. That's good, isn't it? Well, not when you learn that this nurse has had one Pfizer jab and the other was the Astra/Zeneca one! We don't know if this nurse is double-covered, or not covered at all. It came to light on the system which has to log all such vaccinations given.



Given that both brands of vaccine work by generating the spike protein to stimulate the immune response, I wonder if it matters much how the spike protein is actually generated. 
The Pfizer does it by directly inserting synthetic mRNA into the human cells which then generate spike proteins via the ribosomes to present to the immune system.
The AstraZeneca does it by a modified adenovirus which inserts its DNA into the human cells nuclei, which then produces mRNA and generates the spike protein in the same way as the Pfizer.
So the end result is much the same.


----------



## dodgy (23 Jan 2021)

478k vaccines yesterday, just thought I'd pop in to say that. Bye!


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Jan 2021)

kingrollo said:


> [is this] thread significantly less useful and has less contributors since @Ajax Bay started to contribute


We are indebted to you starting this thread @kingrollo
And (in the spirit of 'facts') you are absolutely right: there are less contributors now than in that first euphoric month of pessimism and speculation. Is it less useful? I guess the community will be the judge. So here's a 'shout out' to those who were there before or as the first vaccine's efficacy rate was released to the world.



@Adam4868@Beebo@DCLane@dodgy@Drago@Electric_Andy@Hover Fly@ikdo01@Julia9054@kingrollo@Landsurfer@lane@lazybloke@marinyork@matticus@midlife@Ming the Merciless@newfhouse@oldwheels@PK99@RoadRider400@roubaixtuesday@Rusty Nails@Seevio@slowmotion@srw@steveindenmark@tom73@Unkraut@winjim


----------



## winjim (23 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> We are indebted to you starting this thread @kingrollo
> And (in the spirit of 'facts') you are absolutely right: there are less contributors now than in that first euphoric month of pessimism and speculation. Is it less useful? I guess the community will be the judge. So here's a 'shout out' to those who were there before or as the first vaccine's efficacy rate was released to the world.
> 
> 
> ...


TBH my contributions are less relevant and I feel less special now that everybody else is starting to get vaccinated.


----------



## Adam4868 (23 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> We are indebted to you starting this thread @kingrollo
> And (in the spirit of 'facts') you are absolutely right: there are less contributors now than in that first euphoric month of pessimism and speculation. Is it less useful? I guess the community will be the judge. So here's a 'shout out' to those who were there before or as the first vaccine's efficacy rate was released to the world.
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not to sure what your on about regarding me ?


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Jan 2021)

winjim said:


> TBH my contributions are less relevant and I feel less special now that everybody else is starting to get vaccinated.


We are in your debt for being a volunteer on the trial.


Adam4868 said:


> I'm not to sure what your on about regarding me ?


I was just including you as someone who'd contributed to this thread in its early days. Am pleased that your parent has now had both doses (like mine).


Adam4868 said:


> You could ward off vampires with a bombay bad boy and pickled onions monster munch!
> I'm hoping they'll have a anti gove vaccine by the time they get to me.


----------



## lane (23 Jan 2021)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55783042

Vaccine queue jumping. Council staff forwarding emails to mates so they can book a slot even though they are not in a priority group.


----------



## classic33 (23 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55783042
> 
> Vaccine queue jumping. Council staff forwarding emails to mates so they can book a slot even though they are not in a priority group.


Hopefully they get caught by the system if they try.


----------



## Blue Hills (24 Jan 2021)

Apparently Lancashire expects to have all over 50s done by early to mid March.
also everyone over 16 with underlying health issues.
Though may then have to pause a bit for other areas to catch up.


----------



## Julia9054 (24 Jan 2021)

The vaccine calculator is now telling me I will have my first dose end of February. 
That is assuming I am in group 6 - the what sort of asthma puts you in what group debate.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

As far as I can see no one with asthma will be in group 6. I have asthma so have looked into it.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (24 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Apparently Lancashire expects to have all over 50s done by early to mid March.
> also everyone over 16 with underlying health issues.
> Though may then have to pause a bit for other areas to catch up.



*As long as every area/region has adequate supplies* I'm of the opinion that those that are ahead of the curve in numbers vaccinated should carry on and not pause.

Unless there is a strong medical reason as to why this shouldn't be the case then why stop?


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

I see the South African variant is in the UK - but luckily "no evidence of community transmission" now where have I heard that before. So before we have even rolled out 6m doses we have managed to let let in a variation the vaccine does not fully work against.


----------



## mjr (24 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I think there will be some harmonisation of death rates across Europe before this thing runs it's course - bad news that Germany who were very quick off the mark in the early Covid phase are now up to 50k deaths and with a very slow vaccine rollout thus far.


You write that, but the UK headline death figure is about to cross double that with about 10m smaller population and a new case rate still over 30k/day while Germany is still about 12k/day. If you think Germany is  then what about us?

I don't think the death rates will even out that much. The best tactic has always looked like using test and trace, occasional lockdowns and entry requirements to keep areas safe until vaccines are deployed or treatments are discovered. The UK is doing well with vaccines so far but has pretty much erred repeatedly on four of the others (too late, too little and/or not really getting it working at all) and even the fastest possible vaccination won't bring people back.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I see the South African variant is in the UK - but luckily "no evidence of community transmission" now where have I heard that before. So before we have even rolled out 6m doses we have managed to let let in a variation *the vaccine does not fully work against.*



I thought they said in the briefing the other day that they don't know whether or not they (the current vaccines used in the UK) would be as effective against the two new variants.

I may be wrong - happy to be corrected.


----------



## mjr (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I see the South African variant [...] a variation the vaccine does not fully work against.


Is that confirmed now and not still just an unknown?


----------



## Blue Hills (24 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> *As long as every area/region has adequate supplies* I'm of the opinion that those that are ahead of the curve in numbers vaccinated should carry on and not pause.
> 
> Unless there is a strong medical reason as to why this shouldn't be the case then why stop?


I assume IT is to do with redirecting limited supplies.
They are of course going to have to get all the second jabs out - I can't imagine they would delay beyond 12 weeks for the folks they have already jabbed once.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (24 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> You write that, but the UK headline death figure is about to cross double that with about 10m smaller population and a new case rate still over 30k/day while Germany is still about 12k/day. If you think Germany is  then what about us?
> 
> I don't think the death rates will even out that much. The best tactic has always looked like using test and trace, occasional lockdowns and entry requirements to keep areas safe until vaccines are deployed or treatments are discovered. The UK is doing well with vaccines so far but has pretty much erred repeatedly on four of the others (too late, too little and/or not really getting it working at all) and even the fastest possible vaccination won't bring people back.




I think that the UK is very .

I know that the population in Germany is larger than ours by what 20% - ish.

My point was that it is sad that even Germany that had a tight grip on matters early in the pandemic are starting to record some heavy death tolls and as this rises their rollout plan is off to a bad start which won't be helping matters.

We'll have to agree to differ on harmonisation of statistics - whist I don't see any of this as an inter-country race my view is that those countries who execute a rapid and effective vaccine rollout will see the benefits of reduced death rates before the countries that don't - the conclusion being obvious.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Is that confirmed now and not still just an unknown?



Your right my post was poorly worded - not yet confirmed but appears a possibility.


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> As long as every area/region has adequate supplies I'm of the opinion that those that are ahead of the curve in numbers vaccinated should carry on and not pause.
> Unless there is a strong medical reason as to why this shouldn't be the case then why stop?


Are people (who) suggesting that an area/region 'stop' vaccinating? Just because they have done well, presumably with good supply and good organisation to administer the doses (bravo!).
From a 'levelling-up' PoV, it makes sense to pull levers to keep regions within England roughly in step. The devolved (for health) administrations have taken different approaches to Groups 1 and 2, because of the special needs of Group 1 (mobility of residents, their dependency on carers, Pfizer vaccine cold storage complexity).
But for England, it would make sense to me for 'Vaccine Central England' to reprofile weekly supply volumes increasing them to a region (or area within) that is behind the curve, inevitably at the expense of other regions, a region (or area within). This assumes that the poorer performing region vaccination rate is being constrained by supply, and not less good organisation. Of course concurrently I trust that the good organisational practice is being shared to allow any regions/areas lagging or with other difficulties to 'level up'
Given the primary aim (vaccinate in order of vulnerability, nationally) the downside of regions (or areas within) complaining their supplies have been reduced is inevitable but justifiable.


----------



## Rusty Nails (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55783042
> 
> Vaccine queue jumping. Council staff forwarding emails to mates so they can book a slot even though they are not in a priority group.



From the article:

_"It is not clear if anyone not entitled succeeded in getting a Covid jab"_

Cheats will always try to cheat, but apparently not a major problem.......yet. In the time available building cheat-proof measures into the booking system was not really as much of a priority as getting the jabs done.


----------



## srw (24 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> In the time available


Even a slow and cumbersome behemoth like Microsoft could have got basic functionality like that into a IT system they literally had nine months to deliver.

The vaccine rollout isn't a surprise. The world knew in early 2020 that vaccines for Covid could well be available towards the end of the year, and would need a delivery system. The world already has quite a lot of the infrastructure to deliver vaccines on a massive scale - in this country it's done via GP surgeries. All that needed to happen was to add to the existing infastructure and make sure that the different vaccine dosers could talk to each other and update appropriate records.

Compared with the monstrously difficult tasks of developing the vaccine in the first place and getting the doses of vaccine where they needed, that was a relatively easy problem. But for all the success of getting first doses into arms surprisingly quickly we don't seem to have solved it.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

Mum now having vaccine next Saturday at Grantham!


----------



## mjr (24 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> We'll have to agree to differ on harmonisation of statistics - whist I don't see any of this as an inter-country race my view is that those countries who execute a rapid and effective vaccine rollout will see the benefits of reduced death rates before the countries that don't - the conclusion being obvious.


The conclusion is obvious. As the chart I think @AjaxBay posted correctly showed, vaccine deployment gives you a percentage reduction (estimates of what percentage vary).

However, even after a month's head start on vaccination, the UK is >300% of Germany's now-decreasing death rate IIRC. Germany has some slack to cock up vaccination and still come out ahead of the UK, but I hope they don't cock it up more!


----------



## Rusty Nails (24 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Even a slow and cumbersome behemoth like Microsoft could have got basic functionality like that into a IT system they literally had nine months to deliver.
> 
> The vaccine rollout isn't a surprise. The world knew in early 2020 that vaccines for Covid could well be available towards the end of the year, and would need a delivery system. The world already has quite a lot of the infrastructure to deliver vaccines on a massive scale - in this country it's done via GP surgeries. All that needed to happen was to add to the existing infastructure and make sure that the different vaccine dosers could talk to each other and update appropriate records.
> 
> Compared with the monstrously difficult tasks of developing the vaccine in the first place and getting the doses of vaccine where they needed, that was a relatively easy problem. But for all the success of getting first doses into arms surprisingly quickly we don't seem to have solved it.



They could have. They didn't because they probably didn't anticipate it would have been a big problem.

Is it a big problem, or just another thing for the media to hype, and to criticise "them"?

I don't know the scale of the problem, do you?


----------



## Julia9054 (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> As far as I can see no one with asthma will be in group 6. I have asthma so have looked into it.


So if you meet the clinical definition of severe asthma you are in group 4 and everyone else with asthma is just in with their age group? Despite having been classed as clinically vulnerable under previous definitions? (I vaguely remember this has already been discussed here but can't remember what was said)


----------



## winjim (24 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Hopefully they get caught by the system if they try.


If it's like ours we needed payroll number and staff ID.


----------



## vickster (24 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> So if you meet the clinical definition of severe asthma you are in group 4 and everyone else with asthma is just in with their age group? Despite having been classed as clinically vulnerable under previous definitions? (I vaguely remember this has already been discussed here but can't remember what was said)


Severe Asthma is group 6 according to gov.Uk
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...id-19-vaccination-first-phase-priority-groups


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> So if you meet the clinical definition of severe asthma you are in group 4 and everyone else with asthma is just in with their age group? Despite having been classed as clinically vulnerable under previous definitions? (I vaguely remember this has already been discussed here but can't remember what was said)



That's my reading of the current situation based on the guidance. Group 6 definition included everything but says some of these will be dealt with under group 4. Severe asthma is in group 4 and there is no other asthma categories in group 6. You never know with Covid, but I have just had a cold that went straight to an upper respiratory infection and has listed three weeks making my asthma quite a lot worse. I am therefore quite worried about how covid would impact me. But it seems that, based on the evidence I guess, that asthma isn't regarded as too much of a risk. Although I think we are still included in vulnerable group but it does not seem to read across to criteria for vaccinations.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Asthma is group 6 according to gov.Uk
> https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...id-19-vaccination-first-phase-priority-groups


Severe asthma is a different thing


----------



## vickster (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Severe asthma is a different thing


Yeah I missed severe. I didn’t think mild-moderate asthma was ever in clinically vulnerable?
if concerned, talk to GP


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

Last I heard British Heart Foundation / Asthma UK were seeking Futher clarification regarding asthma


----------



## vickster (24 Jan 2021)

Heart for Lung Foundation?
yep seems to be the case
https://www.asthma.org.uk/advice/tr...hat-should-people-with-asthma-do-now/#Vaccine


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Heart for Lung Foundation?
> yep seems to be the case
> https://www.asthma.org.uk/advice/tr...hat-should-people-with-asthma-do-now/#Vaccine



It says they HAVE been told people with asthma not CEV WILL be in group 6 but are urgently seeking confirmation on this. They have been doing that urgently for some weeks. Clear as mud really.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Yeah I missed severe. I didn’t think mild-moderate asthma was ever in clinically vulnerable?
> if concerned, talk to GP



I believe that the vulnerable group - not CEV - included all who had flu vaccine - which is people with asthma so my reading they were vulnerable group.


----------



## vickster (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I believe that the vulnerable group - not CEV - included all who had flu vaccine - which is people with asthma so my reading they were vulnerable group.


Indeed. You’ll presumably find out when group 6 is ready to be vaccinated. A while off yet


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Indeed. You’ll presumably find out when group 6 is ready to be vaccinated. A while off yet



Yep. I'm 58 so probably won't make a vast difference for me either way.


----------



## vickster (24 Jan 2021)

Indeed. My 78 year old CeV father is only being vaccinated on Tuesday and my 75 year old mother hasn’t yet heard. Plenty still to be vaccinated in groups 1-3 as well

im 48 with no conditions, I don’t expect to get called up before the summer if that soon, can’t control it beyond sticking to the rules so no point stressing


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

Over 4 million adults with asthma in the UK so one way or the other will make a big difference to the size of group 6


----------



## vickster (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Over 4 million adults with asthma in the UK so one way or the other will make a big difference to the size of group 6


Many will be in groups 1-5 though. Similar to other clinically vulnerable groups


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Many will be in groups 1-5 though



True


----------



## nickyboy (24 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Even a slow and cumbersome behemoth like Microsoft could have got basic functionality like that into a IT system they literally had nine months to deliver.
> 
> The vaccine rollout isn't a surprise. The world knew in early 2020 that vaccines for Covid could well be available towards the end of the year, and would need a delivery system. The world already has quite a lot of the infrastructure to deliver vaccines on a massive scale - in this country it's done via GP surgeries. All that needed to happen was to add to the existing infastructure and make sure that the different vaccine dosers could talk to each other and update appropriate records.
> 
> Compared with the monstrously difficult tasks of developing the vaccine in the first place and getting the doses of vaccine where they needed, that was a relatively easy problem. But for all the success of getting first doses into arms surprisingly quickly we don't seem to have solved it.


I'm confused.

If the world knew about the vaccine rollout and it is a relatively straightforward matter, why are most countries comparable with UK in terms of development and resources unable to ramp up their vaccination program thus far?

Maybe it's not quite so straightforward as you suggest?


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Jan 2021)

This shows how the various parts of England have done (provenance of data unstated and as at 17 Jan):





Worth noting that, like the other COVID-19 reporting, there is a weekly cycle of vaccinations delivered, so the 7-day rolling average will start being a more useful metric, now that we've got to well over 2M a week and, I sense, stabilising.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> I'm confused.
> 
> If the world knew about the vaccine rollout and it is a relatively straightforward matter, why are most countries comparable with UK in terms of development and resources unable to ramp up their vaccination program thus far?
> 
> Maybe it's not quite so straightforward as you suggest?



I had the impression it is because of our early approval of the Oxford vaccine and access to more supplies of that.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> I'm confused.
> 
> If the world knew about the vaccine rollout and it is a relatively straightforward matter, why are most countries comparable with UK in terms of development and resources unable to ramp up their vaccination program thus far?
> 
> Maybe it's not quite so straightforward as you suggest?



Probably more helpful to find out how countries that have done it quicker than is have managed to


----------



## BoldonLad (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I had the impression it is because of our* early approval of the Oxford vaccine *and access to more supplies of that.



From memory, we didn't approve the Oxford Vaccine early, the Pfizer Vaccine was approved and in. use 2 or 3 weeks before the Oxford Vaccine.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> From memory, we didn't approve the Oxford Vaccine early, the Pfizer Vaccine was approved and in. use 2 or 3 weeks before the Oxford Vaccine.



Were we the first country to approve Oxford though


----------



## BoldonLad (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Were we the first country to approve Oxford though



Don't know, I just recall that the Pfizer Vaccine was in use, and, it seemed to take quite a while for the Oxford Vaccine to obtain approval.


----------



## vickster (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Probably more helpful to find out how countries that have done it quicker than is have managed to


Much smaller countries with much smaller and younger populations (Israel/UAE)?


----------



## vickster (24 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Were we the first country to approve Oxford though


Yes


----------



## SpokeyDokey (24 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> *Are people (who) suggesting that an area/region 'stop' vaccinating?* Just because they have done well, presumably with good supply and good organisation to administer the doses (bravo!).
> From a 'levelling-up' PoV, it makes sense to pull levers to keep regions within England roughly in step. The devolved (for health) administrations have taken different approaches to Groups 1 and 2, because of the special needs of Group 1 (mobility of residents, their dependency on carers, Pfizer vaccine cold storage complexity).
> But for England, it would make sense to me for 'Vaccine Central England' to reprofile weekly supply volumes increasing them to a region (or area within) that is behind the curve, inevitably at the expense of other regions, a region (or area within). This assumes that the poorer performing region vaccination rate is being constrained by supply, and not less good organisation. Of course concurrently I trust that the good organisational practice is being shared to allow any regions/areas lagging or with other difficulties to 'level up'
> Given the primary aim (vaccinate in order of vulnerability, nationally) the downside of regions (or areas within) complaining their supplies have been reduced is inevitable but justifiable.



I was originally commenting on @Blue Hills post #1496 (which I had liked).


----------



## SpokeyDokey (24 Jan 2021)

Third day in a row now with over 400k vaccinations (as at 23 Jan).

Only 8k short of half a million on the day @ 491 970

Total first dose now at 6 353 321 and second dose @ 469 660 
Sky News (Breaking Live) reporting this:

_Matt Hancock says 75% of all over-80s in the UK have been vaccinated so far_

(Not checked this in the official data yet.)


----------



## Julia9054 (24 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> Many will be in groups 1-5 though. Similar to other clinically vulnerable groups


And many are children so won't be vaccinated


----------



## vickster (24 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> And many are children so won't be vaccinated


I was responding to a post that quoted the number of adults at 4m (I assumed that was an accurate validated figure). Presumably many have very mild/transient/seasonal symptoms and may not even need regular treatment And may be almost no more at risk than the non asthma population


----------



## Julia9054 (24 Jan 2021)

Based on my age (53) and assuming I am not in group 6 then, the calculator is saying first dose between 28/03 and 07/04. Still quite encouraging if accurate


----------



## Julia9054 (24 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> I was responding to a post that quoted the number of adults at 4m (I assumed that was an accurate validated figure). Presumably many have very mild/transient/seasonal symptoms and may not even need regular treatment And may be almost no more at risk than the non asthma population


Oops - I should read better!
Yes, asthma is a huge range. Many of the classifications are based on how severe your symptoms would be without your regular preventative medication. Not hugely helpful as I have no intention of finding out!


----------



## SpokeyDokey (24 Jan 2021)




----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> If the world knew about the vaccine rollout and it is a relatively straightforward matter, why are most countries comparable with UK in terms of development and resources unable to ramp up their vaccination program thus far?


The reason UK has got going promptly and ramped up faster is (together with no doubt other factors) because:
1) *Vaccine Supply*. Our VTF (procurement) in the summer outperformed (at some cost) to secure early supplies of a variety of vaccines under development ('made bets' in some people's speak)(led by Kate Bingham) - see earlier posts - NB Edit: unshackled from its EU counterpart the EMA choosing not to join the EU vaccine procurement (VMT @srw ). @mjr has previously pointed out we could have been 'IN' the EU scheme and procured our own as well (aka having our cake and eating it). It's likely we would have delayed and missed the boat: look at the angst caused when Germany became frustrated by the cock-up and bought some 'extra', with difficulty and at a cost.
2) *Authorisation*. Our authorisation body, the MHRA (Edit: unshackled from its EU counterpart the EMA after @roubaixtuesday comment below) had its act well and truly together and in bed with Pfizer and Oxford-AZ (which had become the front runners in terms of Phase 3 trial progress) and so once those trials could declared a(n outrageous) success (effectiveness over ?60% threshold (WHO?)) data was being exchanged (in trust) so that the MHRA could get on with authorising first Pfizer (in early December) and then Oxford-AZ in late December. History and investigation will no doubt reveal what affected the EMA's ability to get on and authorise the various vaccines, but it won't be a happy tale (and will have resulted in thousands more deaths in Europe than if they'd been as well served as we've been by the VTF and the MHRA.
3) *NHS*. I don't think we can judge whether UK has particular circumstances (cf other nations) which favour efficient delivery (ie from bulk storage to arm, population density, geographic factors) but surmise that having a National Health Service (including W, S and NI) must be a positive.
4) *Vaccine acceptance*. And finally let's add in national confidence that the brilliant British (and NI) population have overwhelmingly recognised the merits of taking a vaccination, and have treated anti-vax falsehoods with the contempt that they deserve. Look at the concerns in France and the friction and delays caused there. On this last point, there is work still required to reach out and communicate the benefits and the miniscule size of the risk to some ethnic minorities in UK (especially in urban areas where they are generally concentrated) which need to receive 'facts' from people they trust.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (24 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> unshackled from its EU counterpart the EMA)



Take the politics out of this one. 

The head of the MHRA herself pointed out it was incorrect.


----------



## srw (24 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> NB unshackled from its EU counterpart the EMA


No. You've only deleted one of the instances. When we were prepping we did it under EMA rules. 

This is a government lie that needs to be stamped out.


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Jan 2021)

Apologies to @srw and @roubaixtuesday for getting the relevance of the EMA and UK's changing relationship with it wrong. Edit: Please say whether I've now got it right below, or whether I have succumbed to one "government lie" or another.
I'll deal with the *procurement* arrangement first:
Letter from UK Ambassador to the EU to Secretary-General of the European Commission, July 2020
Extract (@mjr note first sentence - you commented on this earlier):
The [European] Commission has . . confirmed that it is not possible for the UK to pursue parallel negotiations with potential vaccine suppliers, meaning the UK would be required to stop its negotiations with manufacturers with which the EU launched negotiations. The Commission has also confirmed that it is not possible for the UK to have a role in the governance shaping decisions [EMA led] on which manufacturers to negotiate with, or the price, volume and delivery schedule negotiated.
The UK Government has [therefore] decided on this occasion not to join this internal EU initiative, [goes on to note full engagement on procurement of vaccines for the world, generally]
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...19-vaccines-letter-to-the-european-commission
https://assets.publishing.service.g.../Letter_from_Tim_Barrow_to_Ilze_Juhansone.pdf

And the *authorisation* challenge:
The-roles-of-the-mhra-and-jcvi-in-covid-19-vaccines
Precis:
As part of the transition period up to 31 Dec, COVID-19 vaccine candidates could be licensed via the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and that authorisation will automatically be valid in the UK. [Observation: In the event the EMA managed to authorise the Pfizer vaccine about 20 days after the MHRA had qv]
If a suitable COVID-19 vaccine candidate . . . becomes available before the end of the transition period, EU legislation allows for temporary authorisation of supply in the UK [Think this is the point you were making @roubaixtuesday], based on the public health need. [For Pfizer: 2 Dec aiui, and in late Dec: Oxford-AZ]
In the event of a temporary authorisation for supply,
[and] once the MHRA has thoroughly reviewed the data, they will seek advice from the Government’s independent advisory body, the Commission on Human Medicines. The Commission will critically assess the data too before advising the UK government on the safety, quality and effectiveness of any potential vaccine.
Any COVID-19 vaccine candidate submitted after the transition period ended on 1 January 2021 will not need to go through a European marketing authorisation for use in Great Britain and will instead be assessed directly by the MHRA. [Moderna]

Please do not impute a leaver/remainer mantra to this, or view this through that lens. I'm trying to highlight how the UK has done well and the likelihood of it having done significantly worse if the UK had chosen to join and rely on the EU Commission (EMA-led) procurement scheme and if the UKMHRA had NOT gone for national authorisation but instead waited for the EMA to authorise Pfizer 3 weeks later, and Oxford-AZ 4+ weeks later (see below).
"The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has been conducting an ‘accelerated’ review of AstraZeneca/Oxford University’s COVID-19 vaccine.* . . . *and following the ‘accelerated’ review, it could issue an opinion on the marketing authorisation for the vaccine by 29 January, when its Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) is due to meet."


----------



## roubaixtuesday (24 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Apologies to @srw and @roubaixtuesday for getting the relevance of the EMA and UK's changing relationship with it wrong.
> I'll deal with the *procurement* arrangement first:
> Letter from UK Ambassador to the EU to Secretary-General of the European Commission, July 2020
> Extract (@mjr note first sentence - you commented on this earlier):
> ...



Kudos for responding so.

Whilst I do think the UK has done a lot right on vaccines, as their availability is limited by manufacturing capacity at the moment, if the whole of the EU had done what we did, there would be no more vaccines across the continent, they'd just be spread differently, and Pfizer would have more cash. We're not safe until everyone is safe. 

And of course, as you say, we would be equally free to respond as we did inside the EU.

Just as an aside, our policy on new Medicines authorisation for the next two years is to follow EMA authorisations.


----------



## mjr (24 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Letter from UK Ambassador to the EU to Secretary-General of the European Commission, July 2020
> Extract (@mjr note first sentence - you commented on this earlier):
> The [European] Commission has . . confirmed that it is not possible for the UK to pursue parallel negotiations with potential vaccine suppliers, meaning the UK would be required to stop its negotiations with manufacturers with which the EU launched negotiations.


I would rather read what the EU actually said, rather than what the UK ambassador says they said. The ambassador is not a neutral reporter there, or may have been misinformed by gov.uk.

And if this was true, how did Germany negotiate its own supplies in addition? https://apnews.com/article/europe-virus-outbreak-germany-science-77602589aa8e6132732ac50cbea97d2d


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> I would rather read what the EU actually said, rather than what the UK ambassador says they said. The ambassador is not a neutral reporter there.
> And if this was true, how did Germany negotiate its own supplies in addition?


Fill your boots: go and find out what the European Commission (says they) said. I am a bit surprised you think a British diplomat would obfuscate or be economical with the truth in a published letter. Perhaps the Commission changed its 'rules' after the UK had decided not to join in - which allowed Germany to complies with the spirit [if not the letter] of the EU vaccine agreement qv.
I don't know the tos and fros of the German frustration approach. Go and find out (in the same way as I've sought to establish the UK to EMA relationship after @roubaixtuesday and @srw pointed out I'd got it wrong. Perhaps they (shock, horror) broke EU 'rules'.
I couldn't restrain myself  Here's what I found reported about the additional German procurement:

"When it comes to EU vaccine solidarity, Germany is looking to have its cake and eat it, too.
"While Berlin championed the bloc's joint purchasing of coronavirus vaccines while holding the European Union's rotating presidency in the second half of 2020, it simultaneously made additional agreements with vaccine producers — including BioNTech/Pfizer and CureVac — for extra doses. And it's now purchasing additional vaccines other EU countries didn't want.
"Germany’s actions are technically a violation of the Commission’s vaccination strategy*, *as the bloc agreed to allocate coronavirus vaccines by population and not talk bilaterally with the companies it was negotiating with. But a Commission official said it complies with "the spirit of the EU vaccine agreement" because Germany’s extra doses will come after the Commission’s supply."

Edit: After @mjr pointed out I'd not noted the source of the above text was Politico, I came back and added this. I note that wikipedia says: "According to a 2020 Knight Foundation study, _Politico_ is generally read by a moderate audience, leaning slightly toward the left.[63]
. . . and a 2012 study found that the percentage of _Politico_ readers who identify as Democrats—29%—is equal to the percentage who identify as Republicans."
I'm afraid I have no idea what 'axe' Politico might have 'to grind' but its reporting gives an insight into Germany's (imo very sensible almost 'French') approach to sort things out for themselves when the EU mechanism can be seen to be weak, and likely to cost German lives.


----------



## mjr (24 Jan 2021)

It would be nice to name "Politico" as the source when you quote from it! And they have no axe to grind whatsoever(!)


----------



## Unkraut (24 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Whilst I do think the UK has done a lot right on vaccines, as their availability is limited by manufacturing capacity at the moment, if the whole of the EU had done what we did, there would be no more vaccines across the continent, they'd just be spread differently, and Pfizer would have more cash. We're not safe until everyone is safe.


I have to say, to be honest, that the EU stance on the vaccines badly needs questioning. In particular what appears to have been slowness to respond, an unwillingness to go out on a limb, and worrying too much about costs. 

The party line here is that initially the vaccine would be in short supply and we couldn't expect anything else. Fair enough. The chief of staff at the Chancellor's office was taking this line but was rightly and bluntly asked why is it that the Americans ordered the Pfizer vaccine towards the end of July, and it took the EU until towards the end of November? That's a long period of time. They were offered double the supply by BioNTech but turned it down. Why? It's likely that this is at last in part why there are insufficient supplies of vaccine available compared with the infrastructure to administer then, ready mid December. Those who risked ordering early are not suffering the lack of supply.

Why was (even!) Johnson's government able to start vaccinating nearly a month before continental Europe? The knock-on effect of this could be very serious with the new version now starting to spread and far too few vulnerable vaccinated.

I think this may be why the govt's handling of the virus has taken a marked turn for the worse here, with just over 50% dissatisfied. It would restore confidence if they were willing to admit they and the EU didn't get it right, and would take steps to deal with the supply situation more urgently.

I understand the EU wanting collective action, and of course I don't know all the ins and outs of how negotiations on procurement were conducted, and we now have hindsight, but ... I hope this wasn't von der Leyen going back to form and/or the medical agency taking its time slavishly following the rules in the face of a high rate of infection of the virus. 

It hasn't turned me into a Brexiteer, but you really couldn't blame people for thinking if this is how the EU responds to such a crisis the British may not have been so silly to go it alone.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> And many are children so won't be vaccinated



My numbers were for adult only.


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Third day in a row now with over 400k vaccinations (as at 23 Jan).
> 
> Only 8k short of half a million on the day @ 491 970
> 
> ...



That's excellent if we can maintain around half a million a day we will make rapid progress


----------



## lane (24 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> I was responding to a post that quoted the number of adults at 4m (I assumed that was an accurate validated figure). Presumably many have very mild/transient/seasonal symptoms and may not even need regular treatment And may be almost no more at risk than the non asthma population



Figure from Google. One would assume diagnosed and receiving some treatment. Adults. If we assume asthma in group 6 I see no reason not to assume something like that many will be included less those already in older age groups etc.


----------



## mjr (24 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> Why was (even!) Johnson's government able to start vaccinating nearly a month before continental Europe? The knock-on effect of this could be very serious with the new version now starting to spread and far too few vulnerable vaccinated.


The UK could start earlier because it granted emergency use authorisation and expected its more vaccination-comfortable population to be OK with that. Other more vaccine-sceptical countries decided to wait for conditional authorisation from EMA in the hope it would help bolster confidence there. In the end, it seems the approvals aligned but it could have become very very interesting if EMA had found some problem the UK MHRA emergency authorisation process missed.

The B117 variant may be a side effect of the UK policy of betting everything on vacc, not keeping case numbers down, and thereby giving the virus too many chances to mutate. So in addition to buying up vaccine, gov.uk farked over the rest of the world a second time.


----------



## classic33 (25 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> The UK could start earlier because it granted emergency use authorisation and expected its more vaccination-comfortable population to be OK with that. Other more vaccine-sceptical countries decided to wait for conditional authorisation from EMA in the hope it would help bolster confidence there. In the end, it seems the approvals aligned but it could have become very very interesting if EMA had found some problem the UK MHRA emergency authorisation process missed.
> 
> The B117 variant may be a side effect of the UK policy of betting everything on vacc, not keeping case numbers down, and thereby giving the virus too many chances to mutate. So in addition to buying up vaccine, gov.uk farked over the rest of the world a second time.


Pfizer vaccine was only given EMA in the US on the 11th December last year. As far as I'm aware the UK followed that quite quickly.
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/pre...ng-emergency-use-authorization-first-covid-19


----------



## Blue Hills (25 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> This shows how the various parts of England have done (provenance of data unstated and as at 17 Jan):
> View attachment 570454
> 
> Worth noting that, like the other COVID-19 reporting, there is a weekly cycle of vaccinations delivered, so the 7-day rolling average will start being a more useful metric, now that we've got to well over 2M a week and, I sense, stabilising.


thanks.
Lancashire clearly doing well which matches my three elderly relatives' experience - intrigued by the "Healthier lancashire" tag though - can't immediately see that tag on any other counties/areas and my mum certainly isn't healthy.


----------



## srw (25 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> In particular what appears to have been slowness to respond, an unwillingness to go out on a limb, and worrying too much about costs.


I genuinely don't know, but I do wonder whether this has something to do with it. 

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-now-operating-amsterdam

If the figure of 25% staff loss is right, that will have been an enormous disruption to the work of the EMA. A pandemic a year later is just about the worst possible timing.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (25 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> I have to say, to be honest, that the EU stance on the vaccines badly needs questioning. In particular what appears to have been slowness to respond, an unwillingness to go out on a limb, and worrying too much about costs.
> 
> The party line here is that initially the vaccine would be in short supply and we couldn't expect anything else. Fair enough. The chief of staff at the Chancellor's office was taking this line but was rightly and bluntly asked why is it that the Americans ordered the Pfizer vaccine towards the end of July, and it took the EU until towards the end of November? That's a long period of time. They were offered double the supply by BioNTech but turned it down. Why? It's likely that this is at last in part why there are insufficient supplies of vaccine available compared with the infrastructure to administer then, ready mid December. Those who risked ordering early are not suffering the lack of supply.
> 
> ...



Don't disagree with any of that, but AZ, Pfizer and Moderna have essentially maxxed out production, and there has not been time to build whole new facilities.

So regardless of the various issues raised. There still would be no more capacity, just shared around a bit differently.


----------



## tom73 (25 Jan 2021)

Pfizer just made the job that little bit harder as we've been so carful to get an extra dose out of each vial. They have now cut the number of vials per order. All to maximise profit the sooner we can bin it the better can't see us using this as the go to vaccine if this becomes a yearly thing.


----------



## PK99 (25 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> It hasn't turned me into a Brexiteer, but you really couldn't blame people for thinking if this is how the EU responds to such a crisis the British may not have been so silly to go it alone.



You are not alone in thinking that.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> name "Politico" as the source when you quote from it!


Was the best I could find on that. You do seem to prefer to criticise the source of a contribution (I don't believe the UK Ambassador(!)) rather than comment on its accuracy. Why not comment on the substance of what I shared (Germany argued for a EU-united procurement yet simultaneously made additional agreements with vaccine producers for extra doses (and kept it quiet for a while), in violation of agreed EU vaccination strategy: the EU agreed to allocate coronavirus vaccines by population and prohibited its states talking bilaterally with the companies.


mjr said:


> Other more vaccine-sceptical countries decided to wait for conditional authorisation from EMA in the hope it would help bolster confidence there. In the end, it seems the approvals aligned but it could have become very very interesting if EMA had found some problem the UK MHRA emergency authorisation process missed.


"The (countries and EMA) approvals aligned." You mean they procrastinated in concert, delaying the start of vaccination by 3 weeks.
"very very interesting" An odd description. But remember the UK medicines regulation MHRA has a very strong reputation. Who would you rely on, if you could only choose one: the EMA or the MHRA?


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Pfizer vaccine was only given EMA in the US on the 11th December last year. As far as I'm aware the UK followed that quite quickly.
> https://www.fda.gov/news-events/pre...ng-emergency-use-authorization-first-covid-19


Think the UK MHRA authorised use of the Pfizer vaccine on 2 Dec, followed by the USA FDA on 11 Dec (and Bahrain and Israel, I think). Followed by the European EMA, reluctantly (they had planned to wait till 29 Dec) but political pressure forced them to consider it a week earlier.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Lancashire clearly doing well which matches my three elderly relatives' experience - intrigued by the "Healthier Lancashire" tag though


I guess some branding consultants got in there, early doors!
"Healthier Lancashire and [healthier] South Cumbria"
https://www.healthierlsc.co.uk/
Glad your relatives have been well served.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (25 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> "The (countries and EMA) approvals aligned." You mean they procrastinated in concert, delaying the start of vaccination by 3 weeks.
> "very very interesting" An odd description. But remember the UK medicines regulation MRHA has a very strong reputation. Who would you rely on, if you could only choose one: the EMA or the MRHA?



Posing the question as "who would you rely on if you could only choose one?" isn't really meaningful. I'll try to explain why.

The way medicines approvals works in the EU is that there's a centralised review, with a lead country (rapporteur) and second country (co-rapporteur).

So review of files is shared amongst countries. The same applies to inspection of manufacturing facilities.

Individual country authorisations follow the central review.

The UK (MHRA) has historically been strong, particularly in oncology, so will be missed by the EMA.

However, the MHRA does not remotely have the resource to fully review all applications, so will simply follow the EMA for the first two years:

_For a period of two years from 1 January 2021, when determining an application for a Great Britain Marketing Authorisations (MA), the MHRA may rely on a decision taken by the European Commission (EC) on the approval of a new MA in the centralised procedure. _

Beyond that, you can expect the UK to essentially follow either EMA or FDA. That's the reality for most countries outside of EU and US now.

Additionally, guidance on requirements for approval will come from EMA, FDA and to a lesser extent PMDA (Japan) and CDE (China). Guidance is harmonised through the activities of the ICH (International conference on harmonisation). The MHRA will have far less influence here than the big agencies. 

So, the reality is that you don't have an option to choose; we'll continue to rely on EMA review of files into the future anyway, and will lose most of our influence on future guidance on what companies need to include in filings. Companies will design their development programmes to meet the needs of FDA, EMA, PMDA, CDE, and smaller authorities like UK, Switzerland, and developing countries will either accept those data or not get the new medicines coming through.

I hope that makes some sense. It's quite a good exemplar of how Brexit works out in the real world.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (25 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> I have to say, to be honest, that the EU stance on the vaccines badly needs questioning. In particular what appears to have been slowness to respond, an unwillingness to go out on a limb, and worrying too much about costs.
> 
> The party line here is that initially the vaccine would be in short supply and we couldn't expect anything else. Fair enough. The chief of staff at the Chancellor's office was taking this line but was rightly and bluntly asked why is it that the Americans ordered the Pfizer vaccine towards the end of July, and it took the EU until towards the end of November? That's a long period of time. They were offered double the supply by BioNTech but turned it down. Why? It's likely that this is at last in part why there are insufficient supplies of vaccine available compared with the infrastructure to administer then, ready mid December. Those who risked ordering early are not suffering the lack of supply.
> 
> ...



My guess is that once the inevitable post-crisis rationalistion takes place across the globe that all Governments and organisations will be found wanting in some areas and mistakes will have been made. 

Whilst there is no delight in reading about issues such as the above in other countries it does show what a tough beast this virus is to get to terms with.

In my mind I have Germany earmarked as a pretty slick country in most respects (based on media reports and one visit to Koblenz many years ago) and I shudder to think of what is happening in some countries across the globe where the political and operational infrastructure is somewhat shaky.


----------



## mjr (25 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Don't disagree with any of that, but AZ, Pfizer and Moderna have essentially maxxed out production, and there has not been time to build whole new facilities.
> 
> So regardless of the various issues raised. There still would be no more capacity, just shared around a bit differently.


AZ will be using the Vaccines Manufacturing Innovation Centre in Oxfordshire once it is open for another 70m doses a year, plus has signed manufacturing deals in New Hampshire, Japan and Russia, in addition to the Indian one.

So capacity is being built and what countries are paying more for is essentially earlier access... which does not matter as much if outbreaks can be suppressed because, as someone wrote a few pages ago, this is not a race between countries and we are not really safe until we are all safe.


----------



## Mo1959 (25 Jan 2021)

77 cases of the South African strain in the UK which they think might be 50% more resistant to vaccine so hope the research is ongoing to keep on top of things.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> they think might be 50% more resistant to vaccine


Where do you get this from, Mo? Who is 'they'? Or is this "they don't know whether it will be (insert figure here)% more resistant"?
Would this drop the two dose Pfizer regime efficacy down from 95% to 47%?


----------



## Mo1959 (25 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Where do you get this from, Mo? Who is 'they'? Or is this "they don't know whether it will be (insert figure <100 here)% more resistant"?
> Would this drop the two dose Pfizer regime efficacy down from 95% to 47%?


Just a link to a newspaper, but it is quoting Matt Hancock?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-55793063


----------



## srw (25 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Would this drop the two dose Pfizer regime efficacy down from 95% to 47%?


No. 95% to 92.5%. 5 cases in 100 become 7.5.


----------



## lane (25 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> 77 cases of the South African strain in the UK which they think might be 50% more resistant to vaccine so hope the research is ongoing to keep on top of things.



77 cases they know about.


----------



## lane (25 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> No. 95% to 92.5%. 5 cases in 100 become 7.5.


Thanks for the clarification. 50@% more resistant sounds a lot worse.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (25 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Where do you get this from, Mo? Who is 'they'? Or is this "they don't know whether it will be (insert figure <100 here)% more resistant"?
> Would this drop the two dose Pfizer regime efficacy down from 95% to 47%?



Nobody knows any of these things to any degree of quantification.

What we do know is that in some people, the serum (blood antibodies) has reduced effect in neutralising the virus for some of these variants. I think that's where the 50% figure came from - in 50% of samples there was a drop in neutralising titre.

But nobody knows how significant this will be in the real world, it's impossible to measure directly and most if not all experts seems to think the actual hit on efficacy will be small, and these vaccines will still be effective against severe disease, which is what really matters.


----------



## Mo1959 (25 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Nobody knows any of these things to any degree of quantification.
> 
> What we do know is that in some people, the serum (blood antibodies) has reduced effect in neutralising the virus for some of these variants. I think that's where the 50% figure came from - in 50% of samples there was a drop in neutralising titre.
> 
> But nobody knows how significant this will be in the real world, it's impossible to measure directly and most if not all experts seems to think the actual hit on efficacy will be small, and these vaccines will still be effective against severe disease, which is what really matters.


Maybe the doom and gloom media trying to make it sound worse as usual?


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Pfizer just made the job that little bit harder as we've been so careful to get an extra dose out of each vial. They have now cut the number of vials per order. All to maximise profit the sooner we can bin it the better can't see us using this as the go to vaccine if this becomes a yearly thing.


From reporting Pfizer have asked the FDA to allow the '5-dose' vials to be relabelled '6-dose' (FDA has not yet approved). As well as the commercial benefit, another motive seems to be that that would increase the chances of hitting some target of supplying 200M doses by whenever to the USA.
With the Oxford-AZ vaccine coming in at a fraction of the price (of Pfizer/Moderna) with an easy transport/storage regime, it must be a prime candidate for the 'go to' vaccine, provided it retains its efficacy against the SARS-COV-2 variants as they emerge.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> What we do know is that in some people, the serum (blood antibodies) has reduced effect in neutralising the virus for some of these variants. I think that's where the 50% figure came from - in 50% of samples there was a drop in neutralising titre.
> But nobody knows how significant this will be in the real world, it's impossible to measure directly and most if not all experts seems to think the actual hit on efficacy will be small, and these vaccines will still be effective against severe disease, which is what really matters.


Thank you, and for the 95% --> 92% clarification: one has to be careful with this stuff.

"the vaccines might become less effective than expected should these new variants spread widely.
Vaccine-virus mismatch is an ongoing challenge for scientists charged with developing the seasonal flu vaccine. But even with a virus-vaccine mismatch, the flu vaccine reduces the likelihood, and the severity, of disease. The question is therefore not whether the vaccines will be effective, but rather how effective they will be. The severity of the mismatch matters, but the only way to determine its impact in this case is through scientific study, and to my knowledge, no data on that has yet been collected. In other words, it’s too early to say whether and how this new variant [B.1.1.7 when this was written] will influence the overall effectiveness of the . . vaccines."
Prof D Kennedy (Penn State)
Some additional info here: https://www.bioworld.com/articles/5...fectiveness-of-vaccines-for-covid-19-variants


----------



## mjr (25 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Thanks for the clarification. 50@% more resistant sounds a lot worse.


It is still a lot worse, but not as bad as suggested.


----------



## lane (25 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Thank you, and for the 95% --> 92% clarification: one has to be careful with this stuff.
> 
> "the vaccines might become less effective than expected should these new variants spread widely.
> Vaccine-virus mismatch is an ongoing challenge for scientists charged with developing the seasonal flu vaccine. But even with a virus-vaccine mismatch, the flu vaccine reduces the likelihood, and the severity, of disease. The question is therefore not whether the vaccines will be effective, but rather how effective they will be. The severity of the mismatch matters, but the only way to determine its impact in this case is through scientific study, and to my knowledge, no data on that has yet been collected. In other words, it’s too early to say whether and how this new variant [B117 when this was written] will influence the overall effectiveness of the . . vaccines."
> ...



Some years the death toll from flu is significantly higher due to the vaccine not targeting the correct strain.


----------



## PK99 (25 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Thank you, and for the 95% --> 92% clarification: *one has to be careful with this stuff*.



ditto the Kent variant.

30% more dangerous, 

10 in 1000 to 13 in 1000 for (iirc) age around 60,


----------



## numbnuts (25 Jan 2021)




----------



## Landsurfer (25 Jan 2021)

PK99 said:


> ditto the Kent variant.
> 
> 30% more dangerous,
> 
> 10 in 1000 to 13 in 1000 for (iirc) age around 60,


 ... surely 0.3% increase ...... Maths .....


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

Since you didn't include a wink @Landsurfer - just in case (apologies if your comment was in jest):
Fatality rate of 'original' virus = circa 1%. 
Fatality rate of B117 variant of virus = 1.3%. (NB Tentative finding and in region 1.1% - 1.5%)
How much more dangerous? 30% more dangerous.


----------



## mjr (25 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Was the best I could find on that. You do seem to prefer to criticise the source of a contribution (I don't believe the UK Ambassador(!)) rather than comment on its accuracy.


To be clear, it was more that I don't trust that gov.UK hasn't misinformed its ambassador, but OK, in case this wasn't clear enough: I doubt the accuracy of reports from the likes of the Republican-supporting Politico.



> Why not comment on the substance of what I shared (Germany argued for a EU-united procurement yet simultaneously made additional agreements with vaccine producers for extra doses (and kept it quiet for a while), in violation of agreed EU vaccination strategy: the EU agreed to allocate coronavirus vaccines by population and prohibited its states talking bilaterally with the companies.


Because that substance appears to be right-wing horse shoot, often missing key details to make it appear worse. I'd point out that all countries have been keeping bits of vaccination deals quiet, arguing commercial sensitivities to avoid freedom-of-information laws, and participating countries were allowed to negotiate with the companies involved once the EU concluded its talks (which mostly happened in August), as well as with companies not in talks with the EU.

But what's the alternative you prefer? Every country for itself and outbidding and gazumping each other, driving the price up for something that won't truly protect until it's been bought for enough willing takers in each area?



> "very very interesting" An odd description.


Think of it in terms of the curse "may you live in interesting times".

Others have addressed the MHRA/EMA point, including pointing out the disruption caused by EMA relocation due to Brexit.


----------



## Joey Shabadoo (25 Jan 2021)

Wife got her letter today inviting her in for the jab on the 11th


----------



## tom73 (25 Jan 2021)

Heard yet again another phone on the vaccine. Same sort of questions and concerns that are flying around what have no truth. 
It's not down to phone ins with experts to plug a hole in the public health message. The government need to get a grip of this and stop people having unnecessary worries about this. It's not going to work if they don't. "If asked go get the jab" and "once you have your still a danger" message fall well short.


----------



## Rocky (25 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Heard yet again another phone on the vaccine. Same sort of questions and concerns that are flying around what have no truth.
> It's not down to phone ins with experts to plug a hole in the public health message. The government need to get a grip of this and stop people having unnecessary worries about this. It's not going to work if they don't. "If asked go get the jab" and "once you have your still a danger" message fall well short.


The problem is finding someone in the government that the population believe.


----------



## nickyboy (25 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Heard yet again another phone on the vaccine. Same sort of questions and concerns that are flying around what have no truth.
> It's not down to phone ins with experts to plug a hole in the public health message. The government need to get a grip of this and stop people having unnecessary worries about this. It's not going to work if they don't. "If asked go get the jab" and "once you have your still a danger" message fall well short.


Yet, despite this, public of acceptance of the vaccination is one of the highest in the world. Whilst it would be nice to get from 80% to, say, 90% (there will always be some who refuse despite whatever messaging is used) it doesn't have a major impact on when herd immunity is achieved. If someone in a higher risk group refuses the vaccine it means someone in a lower risk group gets vaccinated more quickly.

Countries like France have a massively bigger issue regarding vaccine messaging than UK does


----------



## matticus (25 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Whilst it would be nice to get from 80% to, say, 90% (there will always be some who refuse despite whatever messaging is used) it doesn't have a major impact on when herd immunity is achieved. If someone in a higher risk group refuses the vaccine it means someone in a lower risk group gets vaccinated more quickly.


This agrees with my intuitive view on the situation 

Citation?

[The only problem may be the uneven spread e.g. BAME communities seem especially reluctant.]


----------



## nickyboy (25 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> This agrees with my intuitive view on the situation
> 
> Citation?
> 
> [The only problem may be the uneven spread e.g. BAME communities seem especially reluctant.]


My common sense (way better than any citation IMV )

I actually think that the more high riskers who pass the vaccination (leading to low riskers having it more quickly), the quicker herd immunity is achieved on the basis that low riskers probably have a lifestyle more aligned with spreading the virus.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

Citation (perhaps)
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/fears-bame-community-more-refuse-4898861

An undated document released by SAGE on 10 days ago (15 Jan) found “marked difference existed by ethnicity, with black ethnic groups the most likely to be Covid-19 [vaccine] hesitant, followed by Pakistani/Bangladeshi groups”.
"Adults in minority ethnic groups were less likely to receive the vaccine than those in white groups, by between 10-20%."

On 18 Jan? BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Vaccines minister Nadhim Zahawi said he is concerned that vaccine uptake may be lower in BAME communities. “I am worried about BAME communities, which is why I’m spending a lot of time with the mayors, with Sadiq (Khan), and of course other parts of local government to make sure we reach those hard-to-reach groups.
“My big worry is if 85% of the adult population get vaccinated, if the 15% skews heavily to the BAME community, the virus will very quickly infect that community.” [Comment: Think the last bit is doubtful, at least I see no reason why the virus would spread quicker than with current behaviours.]

I have commented about this a few times in the last week: it needs pro-activity and I understand the NHS has reached out to the wide medical community, in particular those with whom the BAME communities can identify with (and trust more (assumed)) to urge them to communicate the facts, persuasively, counter unfounded concerns and invite people to recognise that while this is an individual choice, there are wider family and community responsibilities.


----------



## classic33 (25 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> To be clear, it was more that I don't trust that gov.UK hasn't misinformed its ambassador, but OK, in case this wasn't clear enough: I doubt the accuracy of reports from the likes of the Republican-supporting Politico.
> 
> 
> Because that substance appears to be right-wing horse shoot, often missing key details to make it appear worse. I'd point out that all countries have been keeping bits of vaccination deals quiet, arguing commercial sensitivities to avoid freedom-of-information laws, and participating countries were allowed to negotiate with the companies involved once the EU concluded its talks (which mostly happened in August), as well as with companies not in talks with the EU.
> ...


Those developed under "Operation Warp Speed", were all to be of a similar price and spec. This in order to make large scale manufacturing easier and to ensure they got the Emergency User Agreement, in exchange for their product.

Pfizer was just one of many that used "Operation Warp Speed" to get their product approved* and onto the market.

*FDA approval.


----------



## C R (25 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Those developed under "Operation Warp Speed", were all to be of a similar price and spec. This in order to make large scale manufacturing easier and to ensure they got the Emergency User Agreement, in exchange for their product.
> 
> Pfizer was just one of many that used "Operation Warp Speed" to get their product approved* and onto the market.
> 
> *FDA approval.


I didn't think Pfizer were part of warp speed.


----------



## Landsurfer (25 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Citation (perhaps)
> https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/fears-bame-community-more-refuse-4898861
> 
> An undated document released by SAGE on 10 days ago (15 Jan) found “marked difference existed by ethnicity, with black ethnic groups the most likely to be Covid-19 [vaccine] hesitant, followed by Pakistani/Bangladeshi groups”.
> ...



What is the reason some members of the BAME community will not / are unsure of .. taking the Vaccine.


----------



## classic33 (25 Jan 2021)

_"When the Department of Health and Human Services released Pfizer's $1.95 billion coronavirus vaccine contract with Operation Warp Speed last Wednesday"_

https://khn.org/morning-breakout/pf...warp-speed-excludes-common-government-rights/


----------



## shep (25 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> What is the reason some members of the BAME community will not / are unsure of .. taking the Vaccine.


Some on religious grounds apparently, Pig in the Vaccine!

Simplifying it but you get the gist.


----------



## tom73 (25 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Yet, despite this, public of acceptance of the vaccination is one of the highest in the world. Whilst it would be nice to get from 80% to, say, 90% (there will always be some who refuse despite whatever messaging is used) it doesn't have a major impact on when herd immunity is achieved. If someone in a higher risk group refuses the vaccine it means someone in a lower risk group gets vaccinated more quickly.
> 
> Countries like France have a massively bigger issue regarding vaccine messaging than UK does


Oh well it's ok than as long someone has one it's not a problem. It's plainly not i'm not talking about anti vac mob. Some real work needs doing on that front. This is a public health matter end off and no one who is willing to have access to to it. Should be put off or fearful of once I've had it then what. We don't do public health like that or should be going down that road. Anyone who's ever seen what happens when we get things wrong or it's effects on them or wider society. Understands why yet more health inequalities will being. It's ok to for others to think it is but they don't have to worry about it.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (25 Jan 2021)

Well, the message must be getting through somehow - vaccine acceptance rates growing in UK since mid-November +20% up from 61% then to 81% now.

Germany struggling and France a nightmare - although both are improving.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/interna...s/2021/01/22/europe-becoming-more-pro-vaccine


----------



## C R (25 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> _"When the Department of Health and Human Services released Pfizer's $1.95 billion coronavirus vaccine contract with Operation Warp Speed last Wednesday"_
> 
> https://khn.org/morning-breakout/pf...warp-speed-excludes-common-government-rights/


That's distribution, not development. When the initial results on the effectiveness of the vaccine came out, Trump said that was a result of warp speed funding, but Pfizer were quick to point out that they were not part of that effort, see for instance here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrew...though-company-did-not-take-government-funds/


----------



## mjr (25 Jan 2021)

Amusingly, at tonight's press conference, Hancock said "We are stronger together, and Europe is stronger together in the fight against this pandemic."

OK, really he said the UK is stronger together, arguing against Scottish autonomy on vaccine supply, but the same argument cuts both ways. It remains a nonsense to argue that the nations of the UK should work together on vaccines but the nations of Europe or even the world should not.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

Remind me who is arguing or suggesting that the nations of the European Union should not work together on vaccines.
[SPOILER/]Noone[/SPOILER/]


----------



## midlife (25 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> ... surely 0.3% increase ...... Maths .....



Going from 10 to 13 is circa 30% change for an individual . Doesn't matter if that's per hundred, per thousand....... for an individual


----------



## srw (25 Jan 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> ... surely 0.3% increase ...... Maths .....


0.3 percentage points. 30%.

To calculate the percentage increase, do (Y-X)/X and express the result as a percentage by multiplying by 100.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jan 2021)

0.3%-30% TMN award please! #1585 ^^


----------



## SpokeyDokey (26 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Amusingly, at tonight's press conference, Hancock said "We are stronger together, and Europe is stronger together in the fight against this pandemic."
> 
> OK, really he said the UK is stronger together, arguing against Scottish autonomy on vaccine supply, but the same argument cuts both ways. It remains a nonsense to argue that the nations of the UK should work together on vaccines *but the nations of Europe or even the world should not.*



I must've missed that bit bit. Maybe my old ears are failing me. 

The whole thrust of his response (to the journo who simply _had_ to bring up the topical Scottish devolution issue) was that MH was lauding the world beating success and capability of the UK when all four nations worked together.

I thought it was a good response; my only other thought was that does MH really advocate the Union remaining or was he simply following the party line.


----------



## mjr (26 Jan 2021)

Results of the AZ vaccine in Germany causing some concern https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-astrazeneca-ger-idUSKBN29U2D9


----------



## mjr (26 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I must've missed that bit bit. Maybe my old ears are failing me.
> 
> The whole thrust of his response (to the journo who simply _had_ to bring up the topical Scottish devolution issue) was that MH was lauding the world beating success and capability of the UK when all four nations worked together.


Your old ears do seem to be failing you. Hancock started the "UK is stronger together" stuff in his opening statement. He was using covid to stir that shoot before anyone could ask.


----------



## tom73 (26 Jan 2021)

Some smoke and mirrors are at work along the line. One neighbouring area had no supply yesterday at 10 out of 15 centres. Two won't get any more till later this week. Across my wider area around 500 GP's and pharmacy staff have been vaccinating none stop. Now a bigger centre has opened with all the fanfare at a cost to the NHS at 60K a month with capacity to have 15 vaccination staff currently only 10. No vaccine supply issues and having people from all over turning up. 
More local to me I been helping with transport to get people to centres I've yet to take anyone to the GP near them. They are being sent all over the place bypassing ones more local. I'm off on a ride out tomorrow to a totally different county. 
Do we have the supply or not and if we don't why set even more centres what are not needed when it's working. All local primary need is the vaccine.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (26 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Results of the AZ vaccine in Germany causing some concern https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-astrazeneca-ger-idUSKBN29U2D9



Bit of a thin article from Reuters.



mjr said:


> Your old ears do seem to be failing you. Hancock started the "UK is stronger together" stuff in his opening statement. He was using covid to stir that shoot before anyone could ask.





I must confess that I did miss the bolded bit - whether or not it is mischevious is open to interpretation:


_I want to extend that thanks also to our ambulance service workers and in particular I want to thank ambulance service staff who stepped up over the weekend when an appeal went out from the Scottish Ambulance Service for extra help and ambulance services from the other nations stepped forward.

Our health systems across the UK routinely work closely together – offering support when its needed. *From vaccines to ambulance services, and the UK is stronger together in the fight against this pandemic.*

I know how tough that fight is. Thankfully, there are early signs that the actions we’re taking are working. The rise in the number of cases is slowing – and falling in some parts of the country like London and Scotland. At the same time, the number of vaccinations is going up._


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Some smoke and mirrors are at work along the line. One neighbouring area had no supply yesterday at 10 out of 15 centres. Two won't get any more till later this week. Across my wider area around 500 GP's and pharmacy staff have been vaccinating none stop. Now a bigger centre has opened with all the fanfare at a cost to the NHS at 60K a month with capacity to have 15 vaccination staff currently only 10. No vaccine supply issues and having people from all over turning up.
> More local to me I been helping with transport to get people to centres I've yet to take anyone to the GP near them. They are being sent all over the place bypassing ones more local. I'm off on a ride out tomorrow to a totally different county.
> Do we have the supply or not and if we don't why set even more centres what are not needed when it's working. All local primary need is the vaccine.



People from Nottingham beings sent to Boston and those from Derbyshire to Birmingham, which is surprising because Derby has a large vaccination centre at the velodrome.


----------



## tom73 (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> People from Nottingham beings sent to Boston and those from Derbyshire to Birmingham, which is surprising because Derby has a large vaccination centre at the velodrome.


Exactly yet another massive costly political stunt. If this has to become an annual thing we need a more sustainable and effective model maybe we can call it primary care. Even more are planned just how much is this costing ? The rent bill must be costly alone.


----------



## C R (26 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Exactly yet another massive costly political stunt. If this has to become an annual thing we need a more sustainable and effective model maybe we can call it primary care. Even more are planned just how much is this costing ? The rent bill must be costly alone.


How else are de Pfeffel's chums going to benefit?


----------



## mjr (26 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Bit of a thin article from Reuters.


Yeah, I think they might be being cautious. There are bigger articles on a couple of UK tabloid websites but all they appeared to add is outrage along the lines of how dare those Krauts question our Great British Oxford vaccine.

Still, it's worth keeping an eye on the news, eh?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (26 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Yeah, I think they might be being cautious. There are bigger articles on a couple of UK tabloid websites but all they appeared to add is outrage along the lines of how dare those Krauts question our Great British Oxford vaccine.
> 
> *Still, it's worth keeping an eye on the news, eh?*



Definitely.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Results of the AZ vaccine in Germany causing some concern https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-astrazeneca-ger-idUSKBN29U2D9


As @SpokeyDokey said "thin". Reuters is reporting facts. And your description of 'causing some concern' is bang on, but maybe better put "causing some concern in Germany". There are no results in Germany sfaik.
It quotes 'German Media', specifically the daily papers: Handelsblatt and Bild, who appear to have selected a small section of the trial report data to allow this story to 'run' and link it with the European (et al?) vaccine supply 'crisis'. The EMA meet on 29 Jan to consider authorising the Oxford-AZ vaccine. But I guess there's no hurry if they aren't going to receive supplies for a while (see other story). This mirrors the approach of the UK MHRA to authorising the Moderna vaccine: not getting it till March so there was no hurry.
The UK will now have data, growing by the day, on the effectiveness of the Oxford-AZ vaccine after one dose after 4+ weeks in over 80s. I think this may help alleviate any rational concerns the EMA has, OR confirm that there's an issue. This does seem to be another 'we have no evidence' approach, and in normal times that'd be the default approach. But times are not normal: these are emergency authorisations and it's likely that on balance, delay will cost more lives than prudence, waiting for the evidence.
I think it might have been reasonable for you to then include in your post that AstraZeneca had described the German media reports . . . . . as “completely incorrect”.

"In a written response, AstraZeneca described the German media reports saying its COVID-19 vaccine was shown to have a very low efficacy in the elderly as “completely incorrect”.
"It said Britain’s JCVI supported the vaccine’s use in the elderly. It also said that a strong immune responses to the vaccine had been shown in blood analysis of elderly trial participants.
"Britain on Dec. 30 became the first country to approve the two-shot vaccine and did not impose an upper age limit. It has so far focused on the elderly and healthcare workers for its immunisation campaign.
"AstraZeneca’s main trial in Britain started testing on adults no older than 55 because it initially focused on healthcare personnel and front line workers in active duty." [Comment: Because AZ knew that those trial participants (like @winjim maybe) were more likely to be exposed to the virus and therefore the trial requirement (volume of infections in the placebo group) could be met in a shorter time frame.]


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

AstraZeneca had described the German media reports as “completely incorrect”. But then the reports seemed to go on top say that there was little evidence either way?

@Ajax Bay do you mind me asking if you have particular expertise in this area?


----------



## mjr (26 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> But times are not normal: these are emergency authorisations and it's likely that on balance, delay will cost more lives than prudence, waiting for the evidence.


Are these emergency authorisations? I thought the EMA had so far issued the more-stringent conditional authorisations, not emergency ones like the UK MHRA.

"It's likely" - I suspect that is correct but only time will tell and, also, what works for the UK may not work as well for more vaccine-sceptical nearby countries.



> I think it might have been reasonable for you to then include in your post that AstraZeneca had described the German media reports . . . . . as “completely incorrect”.


Apparently based on nothing and, well, they would say that, wouldn't they? I thought it unremarkable, but I did give the link so anyone interested can read it, which is more than certain source-hiders on here do.

I await the UK data on effectiveness with interest, as I do the Israeli experience data. Is any published yet?


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> [have] you . . . particular expertise in this area?


No, sorry. Being the positive type, I'll take that enquiry as a compliment, but I appreciate that you may be 'just asking'.
I agree that the AZ response in the Reuters article seems 'strong' but I suspect that in saying 'completely incorrect' they are saying that "to say that the Oxford-AZ COVID-19 vaccine is not very effective for people over 65" is incorrect. They go on to say that the volume of over 65s in the Phase 3 trial was low, hence the numbers infected/hospitalised or not was low in the O/65s, so the numbers meant that the confidence level in the effectiveness in that cohort was low. But AZ elaborated to note that "a strong immune responses to the vaccine had been shown in blood analysis of elderly trial participants".
Of course in UK we now have close to a million over 80s who had their first dose before 12 Jan so the data being captured this weeks will reinforce (or not) the vaccine's efficacy in that cohort, and indeed more than a million for the Pfizer jab to offer evidence of its efficacy out beyond 21 days, or not.


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

It is sobering to be constantly reminded, at the briefings and elsewhere, that despite having come so far so quickly, there is so much we still don't know.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Are these emergency authorisations? I thought the EMA had so far issued the more-stringent conditional authorisations, not emergency ones like the UK MHRA.
> Apparently based on nothing


@roubaixtuesday is the expert on this area, I think. I don't know if this is primarily terminology (see his earlier post on this, and the governance of medicines regulation EMA/MHRA). I wonder whether "more-stringent conditional authorisations" are the best approach for a pandemic emergency. Happy to back the UK approach here.
I've answered the 'completely incorrect' aspect and its basis in my post above.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @roubaixtuesday is the expert on this area, I think. I don't know if this is primarily terminology (see his earlier post on this, and the governance of medicines regulation EMA/MRHA). I wonder whether "more-stringent conditional authorisations" are the best approacch for a pandemic emergency. Happy to back the UK approach here.
> I've answered the 'completely incorrect' aspect and its basis in my post above.



UK approval is "Temporary" - available to member states when they deem it necessary for public health regardless of EMA review - there does not even have to be any EMA review of the data whatsoever for this. Hungary have said they will do this for the Russia vaccine, I believe, which is not being reviewed by EMA at all.

EMA approval will be "conditional" for the whole EU - conditional on completion of further studies. A routine procedure for areas of high unmet medical need eg if a company has very good early data on a cancer drug, it might get conditional approval.

Full approval will not be given yet.

"Emergency" is often used interchangeably with either or both of the above, unhelpfully.


----------



## winjim (26 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> "AstraZeneca’s main trial in Britain started testing on adults no older than 55 because it initially focused on healthcare personnel and front line workers in active duty." [Comment: Because AZ knew that those trial participants (like @winjim maybe) were more likely to be exposed to the virus and therefore the trial requirement (volume of infections in the placebo group) could be met in a shorter time frame.]


I had already volunteered but we got an email at work asking for participants. We also only signed up for a single dose initially but they changed the study protocol part way through.


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

It does seem in some ways the Oxford trial data is inferior to the others. Or at least more questions.


----------



## Milkfloat (26 Jan 2021)

I would love to see some up to date figures on who is getting the vaccine. I know locally at least 5 people in their 40s with no clinical need who have had their first dose. A couple of NHS backroom staff who work from home almost exclusively and a 3 volunteers at a local vaccination centre. One of them even called me up and offered a dose if I could get down within the next 30 minutes. Surely, like flights they could just overbook by a small percentage rather than dragging randoms off the street.


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

The German government has challenged reports of a lower-than-expected efficacy rate of the AstraZeneca vaccine for older people, while reiterating concerns about the British-Swedish pharmaceutical giant’s data reporting.

A later statement by the German health ministry suggested that the report had mixed up the efficacy rate for over 65s with the number of seniors involved in AstraZeneca’s trials.

“At first sight it appears that two things have been muddled in the reports”, said the statement. “Around 8% of participants in the AstraZeneca efficacy trials were aged between 56 and 69 years old, only three to four percent were over 70. This does not result in an efficacy of only 8% among seniors.”

But the German government also voiced concerns about AstraZeneca’s data reporting: “It has been known since the autumn that fewer seniors were included in the trials supplied by AstraZeneca than the trials of other manufacturers.”

Scientists have previously raised questions about the representative value of AstraZeneca’s trial design.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...es-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-efficacy-reports


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> I would love to see some up to date figures on who is getting the vaccine. I know locally at least 5 people in their 40s with no clinical need who have had their first dose. A couple of NHS backroom staff who work from home almost exclusively and a 3 volunteers at a local vaccination centre. One of them even called me up and offered a dose if I could get down within the next 30 minutes. Surely, like flights they could just overbook by a small percentage rather than dragging randoms off the street.


I understand that Head NHS addressed this head on last week. He said that all centres should assemble and maintain a list of eligible (ie over 80s or others in Groups 1 and 2) who could be called on at short notice to come and take a vaccine, at the end of each day. And that that list should NOT be randoms: it needed to be people in Groups 1 and 2 (maybe implied at a stretch people from Groups 3 and 4). NB This will be easier with the increased and independent mobility of O/75s.
There is a natural and proper reluctance not to 'waste' doses (so give them to whomever we can 'get in'), but there are also communication/PR issues if this is not handled as well as it could be. I guess the additional effort to do that has to be balanced against everything else to make the campaign a success. The numbers vaccinated outside the first 4 groups will be miniscule, but each of those allows a 'look at what's going wrong' story (which I know was not your thrust, @Milkfloat ).
Part of the framework is that (talking GP surgeries here) primary care go out of their way, year in, year out, to look after people. So the idea of inviting a surplus to attend (aka overbooking) and then turning a few away at the end of the day (or when supplies run out) is an anathema. You'd never do that in normal times. But better that all the doses available go into O/70 arms and a few are disappointed each day (with a stab promise the following day I suggest), than doses are wasted, heaven forbid disposed of (which Head NHS did not suggest).
Note for my GP surgery: I can ride down to you in about 3 minutes with 3 minutes warning. You have my phone number.


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

Is there a policy on volunteers working at vaccination centers getting vaccinated. There was an MP on the news the other day - in his 40s - getting his. Working at a vaccination centre and said it was to encourage others to get the vaccine.


----------



## newfhouse (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Is there a policy on volunteers working at vaccination centers getting vaccinated. There was an MP on the news the other day - in his 40s - getting his. Working at a vaccination centre and said it was to encourage others to get the vaccine.


“Volunteer” may be overstating his involvement. It seems he spent an afternoon there and there’s a vague hint that he may consider offering another couple of hours now he’s been caught out.


----------



## vickster (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Is there a policy on volunteers working at vaccination centers getting vaccinated. There was an MP on the news the other day - in his 40s - getting his. Working at a vaccination centre and said it was to encourage others to get the vaccine.


They use left over Pfizer doses rather than wasting them is my understanding from a friend who has been vaccinated (she’d be in group 6 I believe). She has done at least 4 shifts and has been a very active volunteer since last spring (doing lots of shopping for shielders etc)

I don't understand why non clinical non frontline nhs staff who work at home are being called in and not just being used to mop up and avoid waste?


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

There does seem to be lack of transparency in all this.


----------



## vickster (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> There does seem to be lack of transparency in all this.


In what?


----------



## mjr (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> There does seem to be lack of transparency in all this.


In how the unexpectedly-unallocated doses are being used?

I suggest it is inevitable in such a large fast rollout. Personally, I am fairly relaxed with a "jab now, punish later if needed" approach if some centres are found to have strayed from the now-stated more-doses-than-booked-patients approach and been phoning friends.

No-one will thank anyone if doses are dumped when they could have been used.


----------



## BoldonLad (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> People from Nottingham beings sent to Boston and those from Derbyshire to Birmingham, which is surprising because Derby has a large vaccination centre at the velodrome.



I have no idea if this is true of not, but, eldest daughter, (Senior Practice Nurse in GP Surgery), who, in addition to her day job, is working one (midweek) day, and Saturday/Sunday doing vaccinations, tells me that, some appointments are being arranged by GP's, these are directing people to local vaccination points, other appointments are being sent out to PHE, and, these are directing people all over the place.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Is there a policy on volunteers working at vaccination centers getting vaccinated.


Think the JCVI direction offers this "Frontline health and social care workers . . . . This group includes those working in hospice care and those working temporarily in the COVID-19 vaccination programme who provide face-to-face clinical care."
So this must include those volunteers (as well as employed) in vaccination centres 'in the booths' and similar employ.
I think we should not denigrate the 'leadership' aspect of a local MP taking the vaccine. Communities vary and elders/leaders leading by example are valuable in those who might otherwise refuse.


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> In what?



My post relates to the many previous posts on who is getting the vaccination.


----------



## vickster (26 Jan 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> I would love to see some up to date figures on who is getting the vaccine. I know locally at least 5 people in their 40s with no clinical need who have had their first dose. A couple of NHS backroom staff who work from home almost exclusively and a 3 volunteers at a local vaccination centre. One of them even called me up and offered a dose if I could get down within the next 30 minutes. Surely, like flights they could just overbook by a small percentage rather than dragging randoms off the street.


With elderly or vulnerable people who may have had to travel some distance (about which there has also been moaning? And then these people have to wait outside all day (as centres won't necessarily have a safe comfortable waiting area) on the off chance there’s leftovers?
There’s no easy solution to what to do with leftover Pfizer doses. Presumably as the AZ vaccine becomes the one being more widely used this potential wastage becomes less of a question


----------



## BoldonLad (26 Jan 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> I would love to see some up to date figures on who is getting the vaccine. I know locally at least 5 people in their 40s with no clinical need who have had their first dose. A couple of NHS backroom staff who work from home almost exclusively and a 3 volunteers at a local vaccination centre. One of them even called me up and offered a dose if I could get down within the next 30 minutes. Surely, like flights they could just overbook by a small percentage rather than dragging randoms off the street.



Indeed. My next door neighbour, (age approximately 50, works for Local Authority, currently working from home, no health issues), received vaccination yesterday.


----------



## vickster (26 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Indeed. My next door neighbour, (age approximately 50, works for Local Authority, currently working from home, no health issues), received vaccination yesterday.


That’s more unacceptable to me than a handful of volunteers who’ve given up their time to support the vaccination effort receiving a vaccine that would otherwise be wasted.


----------



## BoldonLad (26 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> With elderly or vulnerable people who may have had to travel some distance (about which there has also been moaning? And then these people have to wait outside all day (as centres won't necessarily have a safe comfortable waiting area) on the off chance there’s leftovers?
> *There’s no easy solution to what to do with leftover Pfizer doses*. Presumably as the AZ vaccine becomes the one being more widely used this potential wastage becomes less of a question



This is true, but, would it not be more fair to have a transparent "reserve list" open to all, and not just those "in the know"?


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Think the JCVI direction offers this "Frontline health and social care workers . . . . This group includes those working in hospice care and those working temporarily in the COVID-19 vaccination programme who provide face-to-face clinical care."
> So this must include those volunteers (as well as employed) in vaccination centres 'in the booths' and similar employ.
> I think we should not denigrate the 'leadership' aspect of a local MP taking the vaccine. Communities vary and elders/leaders leading by example are valuable in those who might otherwise refuse.



Deciding a random MP can have the vaccine to show leadership is a very poor argument indeed. Have you any evidence that he either represents a constituency with low take up or is a leader among communities which have a poor take up. He was a middle aged white male, hardly likely to be seem as a leader or influencer among the demographic that has been shown to be vaccine hesitant (which you have previously documented in detail). I don't even know what party he represents - are you defending him because of his party?


----------



## vickster (26 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> This is true, but, would it not be more fair to have a transparent "reserve list" open to all, and not just those "in the know"?


They’re not in the know (or certainly weren’t perhaps before the media started shoot stirring as usual). My friend volunteered to help at a centre, not to jump the queue. All of the medics working at the centre were prioritised over non medical volunteers for spares


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> My next door neighbour, (age approximately 50, works for Local Authority, currently working from home, no health issues), received vaccination yesterday.


Perhaps your neighbour has a health issue placing them in Group 4 which they do not wish to share (with you).


----------



## mjr (26 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> That’s more unacceptable to me than a handful of volunteers who’ve given up their time to support the vaccination effort receiving a vaccine that would otherwise be wasted.


I'm not sure. That Local Authority worker may be "currently working from home" but if they are not normally working from home then it may be that they are desired back on the front line to deliver key services which have been cut temporarily, whereas the vaccination volunteer may be off back to estate agency or whatever soon. The devil is in the details here and hopefully it is only a difference of at most of a few months.


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> They’re not in the know (or certainly weren’t perhaps before the media started simtorring as usual). My friend volunteered to help at a centre, not to jump the queue. All of the medics working at the centre were prioritised over non medical volunteers for spares



I think its fairly clear some are getting the vaccine because they are in the know


----------



## BoldonLad (26 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Perhaps your neighbour has a health issue placing them in Group 4 which they do not wish to share (with you).



Not according to her Facebook post, informing all of her FB "friends"... but... you could be right


----------



## vickster (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I think its fairly clear some are getting the vaccine because they are in the know


How many people in reality however out of 67m?


----------



## mjr (26 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Not according to her Facebook post, informing all of her FB "friends"... but... you could be right


I did not admit my health issues online for about 20 years.


----------



## BoldonLad (26 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> They’re not in the know (or certainly weren’t perhaps before the media started simtorring as usual).* My friend volunteered to help at a centre*, not to jump the queue. All of the medics working at the centre were prioritised over non medical volunteers for spares



Fair enough, that does not, in my mind, constitute being "in the know".


----------



## BoldonLad (26 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> I did not admit my health issues online for about 20 years.



hmm.. but, then again, I doubt you are a prolific FB poster either 

I would assume (perhaps foolishly) that none of us would like to see a "black market" in Vaccine Slots, but, I do accept if the objective is to vaccinate everyone, ultimately, the same end will be achieved, with or without queue jumping.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Deciding a random MP can have the vaccine to show leadership is a very poor argument indeed. Have you any evidence that he either represents a constituency with low take up or is a leader among communities which have a poor take up. He was a middle aged white male, hardly likely to be seem as a leader or influencer among the demographic that has been shown to be vaccine hesitant (which you have previously documented in detail). I don't even know what party he represents - are you defending him because of his party?


Please read what I said*. I have not decided "a random MP can have the vaccine to show leadership": I just pointed out the potential leadership benefit, which I don't think is a "very poor argument indeed" (bit strong, don't you think?). I have not gone 'looking' for this story. I have absolutely NO IDEA the skin shade of this MP and, like you, have no idea which party he belongs to, nor what his constituency is.
*Edit: I said: "I think we should not denigrate the 'leadership' aspect of a local MP taking the vaccine. Communities vary and elders/leaders leading by example are valuable in those who might otherwise refuse."


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> How many people in reality however out of 67m?



No idea. Probably not that many.


----------



## srw (26 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> They use left over Pfizer doses rather than wasting them is my understanding from a friend who has been vaccinated (she’d be in group 6 I believe). She has done at least 4 shifts and has been a very active volunteer since last spring (doing lots of shopping for shielders etc)
> 
> I don't understand why non clinical non frontline nhs staff who work at home are being called in and not just being used to mop up and avoid waste?


One of my colleagues - nothing to do with the NHS and not a volunteer - got a call from his GP surgery to say "If you're here in 5 minutes it's yours, otherwise it's going to be tipped down the sink." He might just scrape into priority group 9 (over-50).

I've got no problem with that - it's a sensible use of a scarce resource. Better to give it to someone than to nobody, and if you know at the close of the working day you've got to find someone to give it to it makes sense to find someone close and able-bodied who can nip down quickly.


----------



## vickster (26 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> One of my colleagues - nothing to do with the NHS and not a volunteer - got a call from his GP surgery to say "If you're here in 5 minutes it's yours, otherwise it's going to be tipped down the sink." He might just scrape into priority group 9 (over-50).
> 
> I've got no problem with that - it's a sensible use of a scarce resource. Better to give it to someone than to nobody, and if you know at the close of the working day you've got to find someone to give it to it makes sense to find someone close and able-bodied who can nip down quickly.


How did they select him over someone much higher up the groups?


----------



## srw (26 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> How did they select him over someone much higher up the groups?


Probably a combination of address and randomisation. "Receptionist, get some arms into the surgery PDQ" is probably as far as the instructions went.


----------



## Rusty Nails (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Is there a policy on volunteers working at vaccination centers getting vaccinated. There was an MP on the news the other day - in his 40s - getting his. Working at a vaccination centre and said it was to encourage others to get the vaccine.


Not a policy that they should get vaccinated, but there is a practice whereby people volunteering at a vaccination site may get offered the vaccine to use up "surplus" at the end of a day. I know a 60 year old who had the vaccine last week because she has been volunteering to help with managing people visiting the vaccination site. She was asked at the end of the day if she wanted it.

Nothing wrong with that imo.


----------



## Rusty Nails (26 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> This is true, but, would it not be more fair to have a transparent "reserve list" open to all, and not just those "in the know"?



Much less fun for the curtain twitchers, however.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

Heard (World at 1) an expert reflecting on the potential impact of not giving a second dose.
I said 10 days ago:
I do not discount the possibility that, based on the science of course, the 12 weeks may be extended. If at the 8 week gap point antibody levels remain as high as they had been found to be after 4 weeks, then there's clearly a case to be made for giving a million a second dose at 12 weeks and another million a 4 week extension. I would be amazed if the data capture programme was not ready to roll. The first cohort who were given a dose after 20 Dec have just hit the 4 week point and a lot of NHS staff are in that cohort so testing will be logistically easy. There will be a communications challenge with that, but the JCVI and MHRA were pretty robust with the '12 week gap' decision and so they have the palmares.
In a month you'd be able to give an extra 6M their first dose (eg by Easter). Assumes daily average dose delivery rate of 400Kpd (and supplies to allow that).
Those who were given a dose after 20 Dec will have been given a date 12 weeks later (eg 14 Mar).
14M by 15 Feb (<1M having had second dose as well) if we hit the stated target (NB 'offer' so I've taken 1M off the quoted 15M)
Another 11M by 14 Mar (total 27M - half adult population ( 54M over 16)
If then start giving second doses to all those who got their first dose after 20 Dec, 200kpd to them and rate of first dose drops to (about) 200kpd.
By Easter (6 Apr) on current plan: +4.6M. 
By Easter (6 Apr) on 'delay second dose by 4 more weeks' plan: +9M. Total = 36M (66% adult population - getting towards herd immunity, maybe).


----------



## tom73 (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Is there a policy on volunteers working at vaccination centers getting vaccinated. There was an MP on the news the other day - in his 40s - getting his. Working at a vaccination centre and said it was to encourage others to get the vaccine.


Even the archbishop of Canterbury get one last week for volunteering to "help out" his own clergy working in the hospital. 
Typical church anything going and they take it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Even the archbishop of Canterbury get one last week for volunteering to "help out" his own clergy working in the hospital.
> Typical church anything going and they take it.


Leadership. Infuencer for and of Anglican and Christian communities across the world. And not just taking the vaccine but encouraging people across the world to volunteer to help - like you, Tom, for example (I know you've said you've volunteered already - chapeau - so you don't need nudging from Lambeth Palace). Try to take a less parochial outlook and assess other people's decisions with a little more charity; you might find it therapeutic. Justin Welby is 62 btw (Group 7).


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> AstraZeneca had described the German media [Handelsblatt and Bild] reports [only 8% effective in over 65s] as “completely incorrect”. But then the reports seemed to go on top say that there was little evidence either way?





mjr said:


> [AZ said "completely incorrect" - Apparently based on nothing and, well, they would say that, wouldn't they? I thought it unremarkable, but I did give the link so anyone interested can read it, which is more than certain source-hiders on here do.


"well, they would say that, wouldn't they?" Yes they would because it's complete rubbish, as the world has heard today (go look).
To tie this up for the doubters, I think the Reuters reporter in the Monday article @mjr shared will get a good talking to: they failed to check the Handelsblatt unsourced story:
"Nach Informationen des Handelsblatts aus Koalitionskreisen rechnet die Bundesregierung nur mit einer Wirksamkeit von acht Prozent bei den über 65-Jährigen."
[According to Handelsblatt from coalition circles, the Federal Government expects only an eight percent effectiveness among the over-65s.) Wikipedia
As for Bild: " Its nearest English-language stylistic and journalistic equivalent is often considered to be the British national newspaper _The Sun_, the second-highest-selling European tabloid newspaper (Bild is Number 1) - probably doesn't do maths per se. Wiipedia
(Full disclosure) - I am a Reuters shareholder.)
Reuters Health (today, Tuesday): "There is no data that would suggest efficacy of only 8% among older people for AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine, the German health ministry said on Tuesday in response to corresponding media reports."





Has 'Playbook' got an 'agenda' - I don't know? But seems a balanced, informed comment to me.


----------



## mjr (26 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> "well, they would say that, wouldn't they?" Yes they would because it's complete rubbish, as the world has heard today (go look).
> To tie this up for the doubters, I think the Reuters reporter in the Monday article @mjr shared will get a good talking to: they failed to check the Handelsblatt unsourced story:


I went look. As of now, the Reuters story remains up, uncorrected and unretracted. We will see. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-astrazeneca-ger-idUSKBN29U2D9



> "Has 'Playbook' got an 'agenda' - I don't know? But seems a balanced, informed comment to me.


What is "Playbook"? You seem to be posting unattributed stuff again.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

You asked about data from Israel, @mjr . Here's a fresh report (Times of Israel).
In the 7 days immediately after their 2nd Pfizer vaccine dose (~21 day gap), only 20 of 128,000 Israelis got COVID-19 (reported by Israel’s Maccabi Healthcare Services). This represents 0.015%, indicating vaccine is hitting the 95% efficacy rate predicted by Pfizer clinical trials.
Leading immunologist Cyrille Cohen (a Bar Ilan University professor) hailing ‘exciting results’ said that among the general unvaccinated population (several million), around 0.65% are infected in a given week. So this can be used as an albeit imperfect 'control' group (but the best they can do). And doing the maths that works out as just >95% effectiveness.
Also noted that of those 20, none ran a high fever (>38.5oC) nor were any hospitalised (for COVID-19). Maccabi researcher noted that this may be an indicator that the vaccine prevents serious illness even when people are infected, but that it is impossible to know what trajectory their symptoms/illness would have taken without the vaccine.

*Vaccine* *efficacy* is the percentage reduction of disease in a vaccinated group of people compared to an unvaccinated group in ideal conditions (RCT eg Phase 3 trials).
*Vaccine effectiveness* is the ability of vaccine to prevent outcomes of interest in the “real world”
Primary care settings
Less stringent eligibility
Assessment of relevant health outcomes
Clinically relevant treatment selection and follow-up duration
Assessment of relevant adverse events
Adequate sample size to detect clinically relevant differences
Intention to treat analysis


----------



## mjr (26 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> You asked about data from Israel, @mjr . Here's a fresh report (Times of Israel).


The report is interesting, but it seems the data is not published yet.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

In what form would you accept the data, sir: a peer-reviewed study? 'Interesting@ as in 'we live in interesting times' I presume?
Do you think what's reported is likely to be false or flawed in some way?
https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-maccabi-001-infections-after-second-covid-dose-1001358431
"The data from Maccabi Health Services digital health services division found that only 20 out of 128,600 people who received their second dose of the vaccination more than a week ago have been infected with Covid-19 to date. Maccabi stresses that this is only very preliminary data but nevertheless very encouraging.
"Maccabi reported that most of the 20 people who have been infected, despite having two doses of the vaccine, are over 55. Half of them have underlying conditions and half have none. All are experiencing mild symptoms such as headaches, coughing, weakness and tiredness. None of the 20 have been hospitalized [and none] have even experienced a temperature above 38.5°C. Most of them were infected by another patient who had tested positive for the virus."


----------



## Milkfloat (26 Jan 2021)

Whilst nobody wants to see vaccine being thrown away due to a lack of bodies it does store up problems for 12 weeks time when those without a clinical need are getting it now.


----------



## lane (26 Jan 2021)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...given-to-older-people-says-eu-medicines-chief

EU may not give Oxford vaccine to older people.


----------



## Milkfloat (26 Jan 2021)

This is a long but very detailed article, well worth a read.
https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2...azeneca_coronavirus_covid_vaccines-284349628/


----------



## tom73 (26 Jan 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> Whilst nobody wants to see vaccine being thrown away due to a lack of bodies it does store up problems for 12 weeks time when those without a clinical lead are getting it now.


Many clinical staff would love the 1st one never mind looking forward to the 2rd one.
Mrs 73 was all set to get going but for the forth time the vaccine failed to show. Now they've been given mid feb at the earliest.  
As for down the road your totally right more you do now less you can do later. Given it’s not clear just have much supply we really have it may not turn out well.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Jan 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> This is a long but very detailed article, well worth a read.
> https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2...azeneca_coronavirus_covid_vaccines-284349628/


@Milkfloat that is a quite excellent article. Thank you very much for finding and sharing it. I commend all of those 'here' to read it: a long interview with the CEO of Astra Zeneca, but gives a wider insight across the spectrum.


----------



## lane (27 Jan 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> This is a long but very detailed article, well worth a read.
> https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2...azeneca_coronavirus_covid_vaccines-284349628/



Read it. Excellent article.


----------



## mjr (27 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> In what form would you accept the data, sir: a peer-reviewed study?


A spreadsheet would do, attached to a study or not.



> "Maccabi reported that most of the 20 people who have been infected, despite having two doses of the vaccine, are over 55. Half of them have underlying conditions and half have none. All are experiencing mild symptoms such as headaches, coughing, weakness and tiredness. None of the 20 have been hospitalized [and none] have even experienced a temperature above 38.5°C. Most of them were infected by another patient who had tested positive for the virus."


It is good that none were hospitalised but curious that most infectees are 50+. It wonder what proportion of vaccinees are 50+.


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Jan 2021)

https://theconversation.com/anti-va...accine-hesitancy-of-black-communities-153836?
Addressing and 'fighting' vaccine hesitancy among Black (and ethnic minority) communities is complex because just as the SARS-CoV-2 virus evolves, so does that hesitancy.


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> curious that most infectees are 50+. I wonder what proportion of vaccinees are 50+.


BBC (3 Jan):
Israel began vaccinations on 19 December and is now (2 Jan) delivering Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine jabs to about 150,000 people a day, with priority given to the over-60s, health workers and people who are clinically vulnerable.
So (with no data ) I suggest it's very likely that the majority of the 128,000 vaccinated with their second 2 dose (21 days apart) by 17 Jan were over 50 and surmise that those who subsequently displayed COVID-19 symptoms (in the week 18-25 Jan) and were tested (all 20 of 128,000) reflected that proportion. Note that in the (imperfectly matched) general population the infection rate experienced was 20 times more, and some of those (statistically and actually) have or will develop(ed) severe symptoms and few will tragically go on to die. Israel are currently experiencing about (7-day average) 50 deaths reported each day.
What's slightly surprises me, looking at the stats (WHO), is that the death rate seems to have peaked about the same day as the daily reported cases (infections) whereas you'd expect a lag of maybe ~ 21 days. The UK case rate peaked on 7 Jan iirc.
Hope that sates your curiosity.


----------



## fossyant (27 Jan 2021)

My mother is due for her first next week - 75 years old. Dad at my practice, so shouldn't be far behind.


----------



## mjr (27 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> [...] So (with no data ) I suggest [...] Hope that sates your curiosity.


Not really, as it is guesswork based on piecing together news reports and apparently taking the most optimistic interpretation possible. Like the poster next to my old university office door (left by the previous occupant) said: In god we trust: all others must bring data.

I expect we'll find out soon. Until then, as I wrote earlier, "I await the UK data on effectiveness with interest, as I do the Israeli experience data."


----------



## lane (27 Jan 2021)

The Government have not been shy about spending vast sums to tackle the pandemic. Mostly, obviously, with little impact given the massive death toll. However, it would seem that willingness to commit funds early to vaccines is paying dividends now.


----------



## Joey Shabadoo (27 Jan 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> This is a long but very detailed article, well worth a read.
> https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2...azeneca_coronavirus_covid_vaccines-284349628/


Thank you for that. Makes the quite aggressive language coming out of the EU (as reported by the BBC) quite perplexing.


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Jan 2021)

https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work...response/public-health_en#eu-vaccine-strategy
CEO notes in that interview that supply of the Oxford-AZ vaccine is on a 'when available' basis, presumably with a prediction offered of the month-by-month supply profile, to inform the purchase process.
The European Parliament site gives the background (my emboldening):

"On 17 June, the European Commission presented a European vaccine strategy to accelerate the development, manufacturing and deployment of vaccines against COVID-19. Safe and effective vaccines against COVID-19 is our best bet to overcome the pandemic.
That is why the Commission mobilised a significant part of the budget available under the Emergency Support Instrument to secure sufficient vaccine supplies for Member States through a wide portfolio of Advance Purchase Agreements with vaccine manufacturing companies.
To date, 2 safe and effective vaccines against COVID-19 have been authorised for use in the EU following positive scientific recommendations by the European Medicines Agency: 

BioNTech-Pfizer: up to 600 million doses: *On 11 November 2020,* the Commission approved a *contract to purchase* up to 300 million doses (of which the Commission *decided to purchase* 100 million additional doses on 15 December 2020). On 8 January 2021, the Commission proposed Member States to purchase another 200 million vaccine doses, with the option to acquire 100 million additional doses. 
Moderna: up to 160 million doses (of which the Commission *decided** to purchase* 80 million additional doses on 15 December 2020).
The Commission has reached agreements with 4 pharmaceutical companies to *allow the purchase* of vaccines against COVID-19 once they pass clinical trials and are proven to be safe and effective: 

AstraZeneca: up to 400 million doses 
Sanofi-GSK: up to 300 million doses 
Johnson & Johnson: up to 400 million doses 
CureVac: up to 405 million doses. With the agreement of CureVac, the redacted Advance Purchase Agreement is available here.
Exploratory talks for further contracts have concluded with:

Novavax: up to 200 million doses
 
Valneva: up to 60 million doses


----------



## Joey Shabadoo (27 Jan 2021)

> *Production of the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine has resumed at a plant after it was suspended when a suspicious package was received.*
> The Wockhardt UK plant on Wrexham Industrial Estate was evacuated and the Army sent a bomb disposal unit.
> Police said the package had been made safe and its contents would be "taken away for analysis".



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55822838

'sakes


----------



## qigong chimp (28 Jan 2021)

What must it be like to live in a grown up country?







The Britain [sic] for the win.


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

"BRUSSELS, Jan 27 (Reuters) - The European Union is asking AstraZeneca AZN.L to publish the contract it signed with the bloc on COVID-19 vaccine supplies after the company's chief executive revealed confidential clauses" https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/eu-...ract-after-ceos-disclosures-source-2021-01-27

All may not be as reported so far? I assume the EU is bound by the usual public-sector rules and possibly also contract clauses against publishing the contract while others are negotiating with AZ, so has to ask their permission to do so. Asking publicly isn't normal, though. Edit to add: if it's similar to the CureVac contract which has been published, linked from @AjaxBay's recent post, I wonder if AZ listed the UK manufacturers as planned manufacturing sites in the contract.

I've also some sympathy for South Africa's President Ramaphosa accusing the UK and EU of "hoarding" vaccines at this week's virtual Davos. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/26/sou...rich-countries-to-stop-hoarding-vaccines.html

It is not difficult to forsee that vaccinating everyone and their dog in Europe but only the vulnerable in Africa and not superspreaders there might mean leaving enough virus around for yet more new variants to arise, maybe with one that the current vaccines don't stop. Then what will the money and effort expended by "the Britain" to "storms ahead" have achieved?


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

Joey Shabadoo said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55822838
> 
> 'sakes


Well, how else did you expect the black marketeers to keep the prices of their Sputnik V and Sinopharm up?


----------



## Blue Hills (28 Jan 2021)

where is 


qigong chimp said:


> What must it be like to live in a grown up country?
> 
> View attachment 570898
> 
> ...


where is that clipping from?


----------



## Blue Hills (28 Jan 2021)

Update on my post above on Lancashire.
Apologies if already posted.
Supplies ARE going to be cut to a big area of the north west in February
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-55819088


----------



## Blue Hills (28 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @Milkfloat that is a quite excellent article. Thank you very much for finding and sharing it. I commend all of those 'here' to read it: a long interview with the CEO of Astra Zeneca, but gives a wider insight across the spectrum.


yes excellent - thanks from me as well @Milkfloat all credit to la repubblica - I hope the piece is read widely in Italy.


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Jan 2021)

We should consider asking Astra Zeneca to divert a few million doses of the batches expected for the UK vaccination programme to Eire, asking them to concentrate this generosity on their programme in Donegal, Meath, Cavan, Louth, Monaghan, Leitrim and Sligo.
NB Population of Eire is 5M and of these counties about 600k. This would be entirely consistent with several policies, would demonstrate our good neighbourliness (with a dose of self-interest) and also takes into account the free movement between Eire and the UK (not just NI): the 'Common Travel Area'.


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Jan 2021)

qigong chimp said:


> What must it be like to live in a grown up country?


Would you care to be a little less cryptic, in the context of vaccines and their supply across the world? Are you resident in a country other than the British Isles?






Blue Hills said:


> where is that clipping from?


This ^^. Think it packed a lot of factual info into a small space.


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> We should consider asking Astra Zeneca to divert a few million doses of the batches expected for the UK vaccination programme to Eire, asking them to concentrate this generosity on their programme in Donegal, Meath, Cavan, Louth, Monaghan, Leitrim and Sligo.
> NB Population of Eire is 5M and of these counties about 600k. This would be entirely consistent with several policies, would demonstrate our good neighbourliness (with a dose of self-interest) and also takes into account the free movement between Eire and the UK (not just NI): the 'Common Travel Area'.


I suspect such dictation of changes to Ireland's vaccine deployment plan would be unwelcome and it was reported they had 600,000 ordered for now until March anyway, so all gov.uk should do is urge AZ to fulfil their contracts. All their contracts. As the WHO has said, no one is safe until all countries are safe.


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

A warning about the future:

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/Trump_ton/status/1354714472653402113


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> urge AZ to fulfil their contracts. All their contracts.



It's very clear that AZ are unable to fulfil the anticipated deliveries (what the contracts demand, neither you nor I know) due to technical difficulties. 

"Urging" more will have no more effect than "urging" the tide to recede. 

That neither Pfizer nor AZ have managed to deliver unprecedented scaleups of manufacturing should be a surprise to nobody.


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Jan 2021)

The chances of Astra Zeneca (or indeed Pfizer) having contracted to deliver x vaccines by y date to a particular customer without caveats (eg on manufacturing disruptions) is 'nil'. They are commercial companies; not desperate politicians looking for unity and scapegoats.


----------



## tom73 (28 Jan 2021)

A good example of why this need's to be delivered and ran from the bottom my ones who really know local people and the community. Only by real peer to peer support can we make this work central top down way won't fix this. It's just making it even worse this is not about one life mattering over another it's about equal access to health. 

New paper shows white people in England aged 80+ are being vaccinated at twice the rate of black people, and rates in deprived neighbourhoods are lagging behind less deprived areas and it's growing. 
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.25.21250356v1.full.pdf


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> It's very clear that AZ are unable to fulfil the anticipated deliveries (what the contracts demand, neither you nor I know) due to technical difficulties.
> 
> "Urging" more will have no more effect than "urging" the tide to recede.
> 
> That neither Pfizer nor AZ have managed to deliver unprecedented scaleups of manufacturing should be a surprise to nobody.


Yes, maybe I should have written that gov.uk should urge AZ to fulfil its contracts equitably. If manufacturing capacity is 90% of needed, then deliver everyone at 90% rate.



Ajax Bay said:


> The chances of Astra Zeneca (or indeed Pfizer) having contracted to deliver x vaccines by y date to a particular customer without caveats (eg on manufacturing disruptions) is 'nil'. They are commercial companies; not desperate politicians looking for unity and scapegoats.


It seems equally low chance that AZ's contracts only list UK-based manufacturing plants to supply the UK, EU-based ones to supply the EU and so on, as their CEO has suggested. I expect they will have listed as many plants as possible in order to make themselves look dependable and keep the prices up. I suspect this is why the EU now wants the contract published.

The AZ CEO is a politician. Just not elected by the public.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> I expect they will have listed as many plants as possible in order to make themselves look dependable and keep the prices up.



AZ are supplying on a no profit basis. Prices are a fraction of eg Pfizer.


----------



## Fab Foodie (28 Jan 2021)

Joey Shabadoo said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55822838
> 
> 'sakes


Meanwhile, NHS staff are being abused just trying to get to and from work....

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...vid-deniers-putting-lives-at-risk-say-leaders


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> in order to make themselves look dependable and keep the prices up.
> The AZ CEO is a politician. Just not elected by the public.


The Oxford-AZ vaccine is being supplied 'at cost'. "Keeping the prices up?" Do keep up.

Pascal Soriot has been the chief executive of AstraZeneca since 2012. He is a trained vet. His pay of £9.4m in salary and bonuses made him "the lowest-paid CEO in the whole industry", he said (in 2018). "It is annoying to some extent. But at the end of the day it is what it is."


----------



## Rocky (28 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The Oxford-AZ vaccine is being supplied 'at cost'. "Keeping the prices up?" Do keep up.


Do you mind me asking - were you formerly called Maggot? (On cc)


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> AZ are supplying on a no profit basis. Prices are a fraction of eg Pfizer.


I have worked in non profit organisations. It is an accounting trick to some extent. You just pay your Chiefs more and don't give them profit-related pay and hey presto, non profit.

Also, I think AZ have been clear that different countries are paying different amounts and reportedly, the US is paying $4/shot while COVAX and Bangladesh have been reported at $3/shot. There may be differences such as transport that explain some of the difference, but I am sure you know that there are different ways of allocating costs.


----------



## BoldonLad (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> I have worked in non profit organisations. It is an accounting trick to some extent. You just pay your Chiefs more and don't give them profit-related pay and hey presto, non profit.
> 
> Also, I think AZ have been clear that different countries are paying different amounts and reportedly, the US is paying $4/shot while COVAX and Bangladesh have been reported at $3/shot. There may be differences such as transport that explain some of the difference, but I am sure you know that there are different ways of allocating costs.



Medicines, and other products, have always had different prices in different countries. Price is partly determined by what the market will bear. When I worked in Ukraine, in 1990's many Western branded products, including medicines when available at a fraction of their price in the UK.


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Jan 2021)

@Rocky - Have had no previous CycleChat ID, since you ask. Was @maggot a useful contributor who tried to stick to facts and offered useful analysis?


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The Oxford-AZ vaccine is being supplied 'at cost'. "Keeping the prices up?" Do keep up.


If you don't know what that conceals, I have a container load of PPE that you might like to buy. At cost. (including my salary)



> Pascal Claude Roland Soriot has been the chief executive of AstraZeneca since 2012. He is a trained vet. His pay of £9.4m in salary and bonuses made him "the lowest-paid CEO in the whole industry", he said (in 2018). "It is annoying to some extent. But at the end of the day it is what it is."


So? Does being a vet or a CEO mean they are not a politician? Did the former CEO of The Trump Organization never hold political office?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> I have worked in non profit organisations. It is an accounting trick to some extent. You just pay your Chiefs more and don't give them profit-related pay and hey presto, non profit.
> 
> Also, I think AZ have been clear that different countries are paying different amounts and reportedly, the US is paying $4/shot while COVAX and Bangladesh have been reported at $3/shot. There may be differences such as transport that explain some of the difference, but I am sure you know that there are different ways of allocating costs.



Quibbling over details. To suggest that this is somehow driven by profiteering is absurd, given the prices charged by Pfizer and Moderna.







https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...identally-tweets-eus-covid-vaccine-price-list

Accounting trick? Be serious.


----------



## Grant Fondo (28 Jan 2021)

EU bureucracy in a nutshell.... AZ vaccine not yet approved by them. Bendy banana anyone?


----------



## Rusty Nails (28 Jan 2021)

It is clear that the EU was slow to act in ordering the vaccines. Whether this was due to its bureaucratic nature and the decision to act as a whole rather than allow its members to act individually, as it did with the various lockdown regimes is something that could well be a factor. There is an element, now that criticism of the slowness of the vaccination programme is starting to come from its members, of the EU leaders wanting to deflect that criticism, and the UK is now a convenient target.

It is possible that, just for once in this pandemic, the UK approach on this issue has been quite successful, but sadly I feel we are now starting to see a continuation of the "UK bad...EU good" narrative on this forum.


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Quibbling over details. To suggest that this is somehow driven by profiteering is absurd, given the prices charged by Pfizer and Moderna.


I didn't suggest it was profiteering. I suggested AZ probably listed UK manufacturing sites in their EU contract to make it look more attractive.

That price list is interesting, as it suggests the EU is paying AZ €1.78/shot, a little over half of the US's €3.30/shot. It also disagrees with other reports of €2.50/shot such as https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...azeneca-vaccine-from-indias-sii-idUSKBN29Q0JL - Has it been reported how much the UK is paying?

Do we think the per-shot price difference has anything to do with the delivery priority?



> Accounting trick? Be serious.


How many non-profits have you worked for? Directed? Owned part of? It is relatively easy to avoid making profit if you want to, and much more difficult to make a business behave in an ethical and socially-responsible manner.


----------



## Rocky (28 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @Rocky - Have had no previous CycleChat ID, since you ask. Was @maggot a useful contributor who tried to stick to facts and offered useful analysis?


Thanks!!

I don’t think I’d use those terms to describe Maggot.


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> [...] EU leaders wanting to deflect that criticism, and the UK is now a convenient target.


They mostly seem to be criticising AZ not the UK, so how do you arrive at that conclusion?



> It is possible that, just for once in this pandemic, the UK approach on this issue has been quite successful, but sadly I feel we are now starting to see a continuation of the "UK bad...EU good" narrative on this forum.


Funny how that accusation always comes on the end of a post hurling unjustified accusations of Help! Help! EU're oppressing me!

It is indeed possible that the UK approach on vaccination has been quite successful, but only time will tell - and it won't bring back all the people dead from the other fark ups.


----------



## Rusty Nails (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> They mostly seem to be criticising AZ not the UK, *so how do you arrive at that conclusion?*
> 
> 
> Funny how that accusation always comes on the end of a post hurling unjustified accusations of Help! Help! EU're oppressing me!
> ...



From reading articles in the press and on internet news reports, and, before you ask, no, I have no intention of trawling back through them to justify my statement. You are more than capable of doing that yourself.

Only time will tell is indeed true, it usually is.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> I feel we are now starting to see a continuation of the "UK bad...EU good" narrative on this forum.



As a dedicated remoaner, I certainly don't see it that way. 

I think there's not enough information to judge fault against any of the parties involved, though some of the things coming from the EU in particular seem problematic. 

Some observations:

1. AZ seem to be in a very difficult position, taking a whole lot of flak despite having only entered this as a not for profit exercise, in massive contrast to the other companies. 

2. Cool heads are needed. There is insufficient vaccine to meet all needs at the moment. Expecting this to be be played out on a simple "this is what the contract says" basis is hopelessly naive, as huge numbers of lives are at stake, and govts, not contracts, control borders. 

3. Ending up as a UK/EU row will damage both parties in the end. 

4. None of us here know what's actually been agreed by who.

5. It *appears* that UK govt paid for a uk supply chain, so understandable that uk govt will wish to insist on uk supply for uk.

6. It *appears* that early uk supply was actually sourced from EU due to uk technical problems, so understandable that EU now try to insist on reciprocation. 

(neither 5 nor 6 are certain, but seem to have been reliably reported)

7. Far more people will die overall if low risk uk people are vaccinated ahead of high risk eu people. 

8. Very difficult, probably impossible, for UK govt politically to allow significant vaccine quantity to go to EU. Attempts to use force majeure by EU to enforce this only make it less likely. However even small quantities for humane purposes may make things feel much better. 

9. EU are probably in a weak position, or they wouldn't need to be making such a loud fuss with implied threats of preventing exports. 

10. Whoever in the German govt was leaking false information on vaccine efficacy in an apparent attempt to damage AZ was acting despicably and against public health interest of the entire world. 

True leadership would be trying to find the best way forward. Imaginative and generous proposals to make this a joint enterprise rather than a stand off could include:
- mobilising the currently unused AZ US supply chain (I don't know how practical that could be)
- agreeing at least the same quantity of vaccine back that was previously sent to us
- scientific/ technical task force from uk to help struggling EU factories

These might make little or even no difference to supply, but make this episode a bridge to future cooperation rather than a route to further conflict between UK/EU.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Do we think the per-shot price difference has anything to do with the delivery priority?



I think you need to look at the big picture on pricing rather than the details.

AZ seems to be at ~10-20% of price quoted by others. To keep on coming back to insinuations that they're driven by profit here is palpably absurd given the market rate is at least 5x what they're charging.

You're flogging a dead horse.


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> To keep on coming back to insinuations that they're driven by profit here is palpably absurd [...] You're flogging a dead horse.


I think you need to check your imagination. I insinuated no such thing. Even non-profit, surely it is possible that someone might be trying to minimise costs? So delaying shots sold for €2 instead of those sold for €3 or more would be an understandable decision, even if probably not the most ethical one.

I still think AZ probably listed the UK manufacturing sites in the EU contract. Early UK supplies from EU sites makes it seem like the opposite is true.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> I think you need to check your imagination. I insinuated no such thing. Even non-profit, surely it is possible that someone might be trying to minimise costs? So delaying shots sold for €2 instead of those sold for €3 or more would be an understandable decision, even if probably not the most ethical one.



That price is still >5x below market, and you're entirely in the realms of speculation over any uk/eu differential.

That AZ would choose to antagonise the EU (AZ EU sales 2019 $4.35 *billion*) over a marginal price difference (AZ stated gross margin 2019 is 80%) on a politically red hot product is ridiculous. In fact I need a new thesaurus - it's absurd, fantastical, almost delusional!

Honestly, look elsewhere to try and understand this. As I said, I certainly don't know enough to come to any judgements but it *is* abundantly clear that short term profit isn't a motive.


----------



## rockyroller (28 Jan 2021)

boss man told me about a loophole to getting a shot, worked for his Secretary, but by time I got there, they closed the loophole. oh well, just gotta wait my turn, like everybody else, right?


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Honestly, look elsewhere to try and understand this. As I said, I certainly don't know enough to come to any judgements but it *is* abundantly clear that short term profit isn't a motive.


And as I wrote, I am not saying otherwise. If you "don't know enough" to reply to the actual questions then please stop arguing so vociferously against points that I am not making, seemingly to imply that I was.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> And as I wrote, I am not saying otherwise. If you "don't know enough" to reply to the actual questions then please stop arguing so vociferously against points that I am not making, seemingly to imply that I was.



You keep on writing about price and profit as a motive. In every post. If you don't think its about price, then why you do that is rather mysterious. 

We don't know everything, but do know enough to be very sure pricing/profit is not driving this.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

Johnson may have been taking my advice...


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1354775961095589890?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw


----------



## Grant Fondo (28 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> It is clear that the EU was slow to act in ordering the vaccines. Whether this was due to its bureaucratic nature and the decision to act as a whole rather than allow its members to act individually, as it did with the various lockdown regimes is something that could well be a factor. There is an element, now that criticism of the slowness of the vaccination programme is starting to come from its members, of the EU leaders wanting to deflect that criticism, and the UK is now a convenient target.
> 
> It is possible that, just for once in this pandemic, the UK approach on this issue has been quite successful, but sadly I feel we are now starting to see a continuation of the "UK bad...EU good" narrative on this forum.


Ok fair point, so no more EU baiting from me. Just been watching EU Spokesman Eric Mamer on the news, sounds like he is trying to deflect his vaccine roll-out issues our way?


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> New paper shows white people in England aged 80+ are being vaccinated at twice the rate of black people, and rates in deprived neighbourhoods are lagging behind less deprived areas and it's growing.


https://opensafely.org/research/2021/covid-vaccine-coverage/
Do you think that that disparity is because of refusals in the BAME communities (hopefully with a change of mind now that 7M have been vaccinated with minimal reports of side effects of any consequence - if the concern is 'not me first; after you, Tom')?
What might be the reasons for the low uptake in less deprived areas? Hesitancy? Mobility/transport? Proximity (to GP/centre? Letter opening and/or reading ability)?
How can the programme be tweaked to maximise the availability and take-up in those over 80s/70s from the most deprived postcodes?


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> You keep on writing about price and profit as a motive. In every post.


Easy to check by looking at my previous five posts:
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/post-6291143 no mention of profit.
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/post-6291113 only mentions non-profit and even that is in reply to your misunderstanding.
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/post-6291052 no mention of profit.
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/post-6291047 only mentions profit when challenging your apparent misunderstanding of what selling on a "no profit" basis means. And you didn't answer.
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/post-6291030 no mention of profit.

You seemed to be misinterpreting things badly and now escalated to making obviously false statements about my posts instead of stopping as asked


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

Grant Fondo said:


> Ok fair point, so no more EU baiting from me. Just been watching EU Spokesman Eric Mamer on the news, sounds like he is trying to deflect his vaccine roll-out issues our way?


What did he say? Which news, even?

No copy of that statement yet on the EC website, but there is https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_21_267 by the Health Commissioner which focuses on criticising AZ not the UK.

It also confirms "four production plants named in the Advance Purchase Agreement. Two are located in the EU and two are located in UK."

That makes it look like AZ might not have a contractual leg to stand on if they refuse to supply the EU from UK plants, doesn't it?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

@mjr my final word on this. I will quote your words on price, profit and your other words insinuating the motive behind this is profit or pricing.

They are in every single one of your posts. My bold throughout.
_
I expect they will have listed as many plants as possible in order to make themselves look dependable and *keep the prices up. *

*It is an accounting trick *to some extent. *You just pay your Chiefs more* and don't give them profit-related pay and hey presto, non profit. 

Do we think the* per-shot price difference* has anything to do with the delivery priority? 

*So delaying shots sold for €2 instead of those sold for €3* or more would be an understandable decision, even if probably not the most ethical one._

I'll finally note one last time that AZ prices, as far as they are known, are a small fraction of those charged by others.

I'm done on this issue and won't be responding further.


----------



## mjr (28 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> @mjr my final word on this. I will quote your words on price, profit and your other words insinuating the motive behind this is profit or pricing.


And now this is trying to change the claim that I wrote about "profit or pricing" instead of the "and" previously claimed. That's why all of those were not about a profit motive, except for this one:



> *It is an accounting trick *to some extent. *You just pay your Chiefs more* and don't give them profit-related pay and hey presto, non profit.


This was a general point about some people misunderstanding what "no profit" means, not directly about the AZ vaccine.



> I'll finally note one last time that AZ prices, as far as they are known, are a small fraction of those charged by others.


Yet again repeating a point that literally no-one is contesting in what looks like an attempt to imply I disagree!



> I'm done on this issue and won't be responding further.


At least this ends the horrible stream of misinterpretations and Aunt Sallys, then.


----------



## Grant Fondo (28 Jan 2021)

Only side effects are a floating-in-space feeling before plummeting back to earth.


----------



## Rusty Nails (28 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> @mjr my final word on this. I will quote your words on price, profit and your other words insinuating the motive behind this is profit or pricing.
> 
> They are in every single one of your posts. My bold throughout.
> 
> ...



Or to sum up: "I'm not saying you're taller than me, I'm just saying I'm shorter than you"


----------



## Yellow Fang (28 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> No copy of that statement yet on the EC website, but there is https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_21_267 by the Health Commissioner which focuses on criticising AZ not the UK.


_The view that the company is not obliged to deliver because we signed a ‘best effort' agreement is neither correct nor is it acceptable._

So why aren't they telling this to the other vaccine makers they have contracts with who have so failed to make a vaccine? Why aren't they jumping up and down and shouting at the Pasteur Institute. Tell them their failure is not acceptable. Tell them they paid money up front. I doubt Oxford AstraZenica would have guaranteed delivery because they could not have been sure they would be able to.

_We signed an Advance Purchase Agreement for a product which at the time did not exist, and which still today is not yet authorised. And we signed it precisely to ensure that the company builds the manufacturing capacity to produce the vaccine early, so that they can deliver a certain volume of doses the day that it is authorised._

Yes, but they did not do it early enough.

_The logic of these agreements was as valid then as it is now: we provide a de-risking investment up front, in order to get a binding commitment from the company to pre-produce, even before it gets authorisation._

If Oxford AstraZenica is making the vaccines on a not-for-profit basis then it would be a bit rich to expect them to take all the financial risk.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Jan 2021)

Great results from Novavax including good, albeit reduced, efficacy against South Africa variant. 

https://ir.novavax.com/news-release...-vaccine-demonstrates-893-efficacy-uk-phase-3


----------



## Pale Rider (29 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Great results from Novavax including good, albeit reduced, efficacy against South Africa variant.
> 
> https://ir.novavax.com/news-release...-vaccine-demonstrates-893-efficacy-uk-phase-3



From macro to micro.

No word on my jab yet, which I should have by February 15 if the government is to reach its target.

Even if a letter arrived tomorrow, there would still be a week or so before the appointment.

Looks like this one is going down to the wire.


----------



## lane (29 Jan 2021)

Meanwhile article in the guardian says lots on non priority groups being vaccinated and also GPs have lots of vaccine they are not allowed to use.


----------



## fossyant (29 Jan 2021)

My mum and dad have now had their first jab. No adverse reactions.


----------



## potsy (29 Jan 2021)

fossyant said:


> My mum and dad have now had their first jab. No adverse reactions.


My mum had hers yesterday, a sore arm is the only thing she has mentioned, 2nd jab in 11 weeks time.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> From macro to micro.
> 
> No word on my jab yet, which I should have by February 15 if the government is to reach its target.
> 
> ...



Good luck Paley. My parents had theirs yesterday, AZ, only got 3 days notice.

The Novavax product will not be available for quite some weeks yet.


----------



## vickster (29 Jan 2021)

My dad had his (AZ) on Tuesday (next in April), my mum got her letter yesterday, so hopefully next week (they're 2 miles if that from the Epsom Downs super centre)


----------



## Pale Rider (29 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Good luck Paley. My parents had theirs yesterday, AZ, only got 3 days notice.
> 
> The Novavax product will not be available for quite some weeks yet.



Ta.

As regards side effects, a mate's sister reported an unpleasantly sore arm.

It appears an overwhelming majority have no reaction.


----------



## mjr (29 Jan 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> _The view that the company is not obliged to deliver because we signed a ‘best effort' agreement is neither correct nor is it acceptable._
> 
> So why aren't they telling this to the other vaccine makers they have contracts with who have so failed to make a vaccine?


Probably something to do with those other companies not using factories listed in their EU contracts to supply another customer fully first.


----------



## Yellow Fang (29 Jan 2021)

Say a company signs contracts with two customers that are mutually incompatible in terms of delivery, what happens? This must happen all the time. The UK insisted on a legally binding clause with AstraZenica that Britain be served first. I am not a lawyer, but I would have thought the contract signed first had priority.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> Say a company signs contracts with two customers that are mutually incompatible in terms of delivery, what happens? This must happen all the time. The UK insisted on a legally binding clause with AstraZenica that Britain be served first. I am not a lawyer, but I would have thought the contract signed first had priority.



We have no idea about the uk contract and if it insists Britain be served first, or the EU one. 

Most contract disputes are settled by negotiation or arbitration. Formal legal proceedings take a lot longer and cost a lot more.


----------



## lane (29 Jan 2021)

My understanding as that the UK contract is binding the EU one is "best effort". So UK gets priority. But probably won't be as simple once the lawyers get involved.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> My understanding as that the UK contract is binding the EU one is "best effort".



And that understanding would be from...?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> My understanding as that the UK contract is binding the EU one is "best effort". So UK gets priority. But probably won't be as simple once the lawyers get involved.



Fill your boots- eu contact published!


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1355111404622241794


Look forward to your analysis of it!


----------



## Rocky (29 Jan 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> From macro to micro.
> 
> No word on my jab yet, which I should have by February 15 if the government is to reach its target.
> 
> ...


Good luck - I hope the appointment comes through soon. My 70yr old BiL had his a week ago. My sister is 65; and is scheduled for one next week. They live in Bedfordshire.


----------



## Yellow Fang (29 Jan 2021)

From the Torygraph:

_However the redacted contract, which does not reveal how much was paid, states that "AstraZeneca has committed to use its Best Reasonable Efforts... to build capacity to manufacture 300 million Doses of the Vaccine, at no profit and no loss to AstraZeneca, at the total cost currently estimated to be [redacted] Euros for distribution within the EU, with an option for the Commission, acting on behalf of the Participating Member States, to order an additional 100 million Doses." 

This morning the Spectator reports that when ministers saw a similar offer in the UK contract, Alok Sharma and Matt Hancock "insisted on a legally binding promise to serve Britain first", which they later received._


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> This morning the Spectator reports



Might not be an entirely authoritative source, and might not stand up in court even if correct. 

I'd caution anyone who
(1) isn't an international corporate law expert 
(2) hasn't seen both contracts

to opine on the legal position. 

And even if you are in that position, the politics of this might cause a negotiated settlement different to the formal contract.


----------



## Pale Rider (29 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> Good luck - I hope the appointment comes through soon. My 70yr old BiL had his a week ago. My sister is 65; and is scheduled for one next week. They live in Bedfordshire.



Thanks, but I'm not downhearted about my vaccine situation.

I tested negative again on Wednesday, so my anti-Covid measures are working.

It's also apparent everyone involved is really putting their backs into getting to me as soon as possible.

I can't ask anymore than that.


----------



## matticus (29 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I'd caution anyone who
> (1) isn't an international corporate law expert
> (2) hasn't seen both contracts
> 
> to opine on the legal position.


Dammit! I am just about to appear in front of a select committee - they ARE going to ask about this. I thought this thread was the place to come for upto date legally watertight info.

Quick - where should I get 100 easy words on this to help me opine??

: panicking:


----------



## Yellow Fang (29 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Might not be an entirely authoritative source, and might not stand up in court even if correct.
> 
> I'd caution anyone who
> (1) isn't an international corporate law expert
> ...



What, you have to be a professional and to have studied all the literature before commenting on any thread in CycleChat/News & Current Affairs subforum?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> What, you have to be a professional and to have studied all the literature before commenting on any thread in CycleChat/News & Current Affairs subforum?



It is hilarious how many people have such strong opinions on this without any rationale other than wanting it to be so.


----------



## lane (29 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> Dammit! I am just about to appear in front of a select committee - they ARE going to ask about this. I thought this thread was the place to come for upto date legally watertight info.
> 
> Quick - where should I get 100 easy words on this to help me opine??
> 
> : panicking:



The only advice I can give you is whatever they ask don't answer that question answer something else. Bash the incompetent EU and praise the UK Government. Say it wouldn't have been possible without Brexit. Say no foreigners will be getting our vaccine. Try to avoid legalities and technicalities for which you are not qualified. Job done.


----------



## matticus (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Try to avoid legalities and technicalities for which you are not qualified.


So I'm screwed then. 😠

Unless I can get them talking about the advantages of rim-brakes ...


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> the advantages of rim-brakes ...


----------



## Pale Rider (29 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> So I'm screwed then. 😠
> 
> Unless I can get them talking about the advantages of rim-brakes ...



You could say the legalities are a 'known unknown' and see what linguistic hoops that leads you to.

(With a nod to that American bloke who did the wonderful thing of inventing a phrase which was taken up as common parlance.)


----------



## matticus (29 Jan 2021)

I could probably do the speech Richard Feynman gave at the Challenger Disaster press conference.


----------



## Cirrus (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> My understanding as that the UK contract is binding the EU one is "best effort". So UK gets priority. But probably won't be as simple once the lawyers get involved.



From what I've seen of the publish document it's "best reasonable efforts" as opposed to "best efforts", am pretty sure there's a fair bit of difference between the two (a legal bod would obvs have a better understanding).

I was under the impression that there was a non disclosure agreement associate with the contract, when giving it a cursory look the confidentiality section seems to imply that the parties must not make public the contents, will be interesting to see if AZ have any recourse against the EU for publishing it , again a legal bod will know far more than I.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

Cirrus said:


> ... will be interesting to see if AZ have any recourse against the EU for publishing it , again a legal bod will know far more than I.



AZ will have agreed to the publication.

[Edit: yes indeed: 
_
Following the renewed request from the European Commission on 27 January 2021, pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca has agreed to publish the redacted contract signed between the two parties on 27 August 2020.

The Commission welcomes the company's commitment towards more transparency in its participation in the rollout of the EU Vaccines Strategy_. ]


----------



## lane (29 Jan 2021)

I suppose on a pure practical note if, as seems likely it goes to arbitration, until it is resolved the UK will continue to get the disputes doses. If so wonder how long it will take. A sort of finders keepers scenario.


----------



## Cirrus (29 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> AZ will have agreed to the publication.
> 
> [Edit: yes indeed:
> 
> ...


Transparency on both sides then it seems, something to be applauded...

(edit for typo)


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

More good news: J&J announce positive results on the single shot arm of their trial

https://www.jnj.com/johnson-johnson...nterim-analysis-of-its-phase-3-ensemble-trial

Sounds broadly similar to AZ results to me.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

Cirrus said:


> Transparency on both sides then it seems, something to be applauded...
> 
> (edit for typo)



I think you can probably infer from this also that the contract doesn't support either side absolutely (as was always likely given the fact there was a dispute). But we will see what happens.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> I suppose on a pure practical note if, as seems likely it goes to arbitration, until it is resolved the UK will continue to get the disputes doses. If so wonder how long it will take. A sort of finders keepers scenario.



Note that the EU is wielding a big stick in that negotiation which is the option to prevent export of vaccines. In which case they get finders keepers on the Pfizer vaccine...


----------



## lane (29 Jan 2021)

Which doesn't seem to be about contracts or arbitration but just grabbing what you can because you can.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Which doesn't seem to be about contracts or arbitration but just grabbing what you can because you can.



They could be (and are!) saying the exact same about us insisting UK manufactured vaccine stays in the UK. 

I've no idea on what the contracts say on that, but there's no current reason to believe we're in the right keeping hold of AZ vaccine, or EU doing likewise on Pfizer.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (29 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Note that the EU is wielding a big stick in that negotiation which is the option to prevent export of vaccines. In which case they get finders keepers on the Pfizer vaccine...


that would be a very stupid move and i sure hope it's just a negotiation tactic, for the eu's sake that is.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (29 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> They could be (and are!) saying the exact same about us insisting UK manufactured vaccine stays in the UK.
> 
> I've no idea on what the contracts say on that, but there's no current reason to believe we're in the right keeping hold of AZ vaccine, or EU doing likewise on Pfizer.


The difference is the company has made that decision not the uk goverment


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> The difference is the company has made that decision not the uk goverment



Given that the other party to AZ contracts is... ...the uk government, I don't think that's a line that will hold in the real world.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> that would be a very stupid move and i sure hope it's just a negotiation tactic, for the eu's sake that is.



I expect the UK govt would be making similar threatening noises if AZ were cutting off UK supply to deliver their vaccine to the EU.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (29 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Given that the other party to AZ contracts is... ...the uk government, I don't think that's a line that will hold in the real world.





roubaixtuesday said:


> I expect the UK govt would be making similar threatening noises if AZ were cutting off UK supply to deliver their vaccine to the EU.


Uk preordered months ago, az had the time to prepare infrastructure, so if the uk would make that noises they would be in a stronger position then the eu. It's not because the eu bursts in at the last minute means az has to change there whole approach to accommodate them. It does'nt work that way.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> . It does'nt work that way.



Ah well, glad it's that simple. 

*Oxford/AstraZeneca will rely on European plants for initial supplies after UK supply chain holdup

https://www.irishtimes.com/business...ses-held-up-by-manufacturing-delays-1.4430676*


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (29 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Ah well, glad it's that simple.
> 
> *Oxford/AstraZeneca will rely on European plants for initial supplies after UK supply chain holdup
> 
> https://www.irishtimes.com/business...ses-held-up-by-manufacturing-delays-1.4430676*


Which is something completely different let me explain, the article you are referring to is before the EU order, it's not that the evil uk stole vaccine's away from the EU, the eu simply had'nt ordered them yet. 

It's the very basics of economics of you buy something before it's even released or in this case approved you have it faster then when you burst in at the very last minute especially if it is an very big order.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> the article you are referring to is before the EU order



No, it isn't. EU signed contract August, that article is December.


----------



## Yellow Fang (29 Jan 2021)

Apparently the Canadians have been assured their Pfizer vaccines won't be blocked for export by the EU. They chose the European Pfizer plant in preference to those in the US because they had good reason to fear Trump would ban exports. So is it just the UK's Pfizer orders they are considering commandeering? I read somewhere a Pfizer vaccine ingredient is made in the UK.

Novamax are at the end of 3rd stage trials. Now they have to be approved and go into production in Stockton on Tees. So the Novamax vaccine should be available in a matter of months. Days would be better.


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Jan 2021)

I have just placed a comment on deaths, lifting lock down, and the effect of vaccinations on summer 2021 but am putting the vaccines bit here as well.

Vaccination of the first tranche by 15 Feb (Groups 1-4 - say 12M - takes into account 20% refusals (variety of reasons)) will mean that, by 26 Feb (15 Feb + 11 days) 88% of people who unvaccinated would catch COVID-19, then develop serious illness (some then dying), will NOT (even) develop serious illness. Win! (for those vaccinated, and for the NHS both in terms of numbers of patients and staff illness and self-isolation absence, and probably for all those (1.2M, say) that the 12M don't transmit the infection to - but we haven't got evidence for that vaccine effect.)
Provided vaccine supplies remain sufficient (to allow 2.5M doses delivered per week), we should have *vaccinated all the Groups (1-9* - #27M (NB 33M less 20%)) laid out by JCVI *by mid Apr* (all over 50s and and - see JCVI list). NB takes into account that second doses will take about half the delivery from 14 Mar onwards.
The adult (over 16) population of UK is 67M - ONS, (54M adults). At that vaccination rate (2.5M per week, half is second dose) we might hope to reach *herd immunity at 80%* (of adult population so 43M, opinions vary on the percentage required which depends on several factors) *by early July*. (NB I am not counting in any of the unvaccinated million + who've had COVID-19 and retained sufficient antibodies to get to 80%.) The summer months will also help (the average number of excess deaths mid-Jun to mid-Sep 2020 was very low). And in July and August the remainder (10M) of the adult population (O/16) and vulnerable under 16s (clinical judgement at this stage) can be vaccinated. If the decision is taken to vaccinate under 16s, this might neatly be achieved by doing so on in the first week of term.
Summer holiday in UK everyone? Let's hope for good weather and tailwinds.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

European Medicines Agency approves the Oxford/AZ jab

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-recommends-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-authorisation-eu

Note: for all ages including >65 years.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (29 Jan 2021)

And the EU also introduced ''export controls'' on vaccines. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55860540 very silly move, since the eu's slow response is the culprit not something else.


----------



## IaninSheffield (29 Jan 2021)

With the excellent news re Novavax, not least because


> Novavax’s candidate differs from those currently being used in the UK, combining an engineered protein from the virus that causes COVID-19 with a plant-based ingredient to help generate a stronger immune response. Having a diverse portfolio of vaccines ...


and assuming the vaccine passes scrutiny by the MHRA, it would appear that the UK has access to in excess of 200 million doses across those which have been approved ... and there may of course be further success from other candidates 🤞

So what would be the best use of that surplus?

Source - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/novavax-publishes-positive-efficacy-data-for-its-covid-19-vaccine


----------



## SpokeyDokey (29 Jan 2021)

Yesterday (28th) was a good one on the vaccination front:

414 419 first dose and 1956 second dose on the day

7 891 184 first dose total

478 254 second dose total

Good effort!


----------



## vickster (29 Jan 2021)

IaninSheffield said:


> With the excellent news re Novavax, not least because
> 
> and assuming the vaccine passes scrutiny by the MHRA, it would appear that the UK has access to in excess of 200 million doses across those which have been approved ... and there may of course be further success from other candidates 🤞
> 
> ...


Donate to hard hit countries within the developing world


----------



## srw (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Meanwhile article in the guardian says lots on non priority groups being vaccinated and also GPs have lots of vaccine they are not allowed to use.


From the NHS website:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statisti...ly-announced-vaccinations-28-January-2021.pdf
"In the week ending the 24th January an additional 2,234,312 people were reported to have received an NHS vaccination for COVID-19 in England. This took the total number of people vaccinated since vaccinations began on 8th of December to 5,792,159 and the total vaccinations given to 6,232,584. 

• Priority groups for vaccination in this initial phase were determined by Government following advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) and included care home residents and their carers, people aged 80 years old and over, and frontline health and social care workers. 

• Of the vaccinations provided over this time, 2,590,390 were provided to people aged 80 years old or over, which is 42% of the total vaccinations given."

The government haven't got around to breaking down the data by the other priority groups (which you'd have thought would be a basic bit of data), but actually 2.5m doses to people aged 80 and over is most of them - the total is somewhere in the region of 3m. Most of the doses at the moment are first doses.


----------



## mjr (29 Jan 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> Say a company signs contracts with two customers that are mutually incompatible in terms of delivery, what happens? This must happen all the time. The UK insisted on a legally binding clause with AstraZenica that Britain be served first. I am not a lawyer, but I would have thought the contract signed first had priority.


I am not a lawyer either, but I don't think "signed first" matters unless the second customer wishes to accuse the seller of acting in bad faith, of selling something that they knew they would not have by the delivery date.

I think ideally, the seller would try to renegotiate one or both of the contracts as soon as they realise there's a delivery problem. They would probably offer better terms to the most profitable contract or customer (and those are not always the same thing in the long term) if they can, but if they can't renegotiate anything, then they would have to terminate whichever contract has the cheapest termination payments stated in it, rather than land in court over it... and if that customer wanted to try to take them to court over it, I hope the courts would take a dim view over them rejecting the agreed termination payment. If there is no termination clause in one or both contracts, then it's a cluster fark mixed with a shoot show and the negotiators should be chewed out, or at least nibbled a bit.

To all who are saying that it is the EU's fault, I would suggest that it is very likely that the EU factories were listed as production capacity for the UK order, in a mirror-image of the EU contract. Of course we don't know that unless the UK-AZ contract is published too, but I suspect we are basically in @Yellow Fang's example, but with the glare of publicity and politics involved.

One complication is that having sold production from the UK factories to someone else does not appear to be a permitted reason for AZ to terminate their EU contract - and even if they had somehow contrived to fail to obtain EMA authorisation today, section 12 seems to they cannot legally sell the vaccines from the UK and EU factories to anyone else in that case (edit to add: but there is a large redacted part).


----------



## srw (29 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Yesterday (28th) was a good one on the vaccination front:
> 
> 414 419 first dose and 1956 second dose on the day
> 
> ...


Your glasses are curiously rose-tinted. Here is the government's own chart of recent weeks.





Bear in mind that the number of vaccine centres has consistently grown through this period, which should really have resulted in more jabs. This last week we actually gave out _fewer_ doses than the previous week, and not many more than the week before that.

I've said it before - this isn't a sprint, it's a marathon. One day's success is irrelevant if the month isn't very good. Success in vaccinating the UK population is meaningless for as long as there are other countries which are less protected than we are. It's a _global_ pandemic. The whole world needs protection for humanity to be safe.


----------



## lane (29 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Your glasses are curiously rose-tinted. Here is the government's own chart of recent weeks.
> View attachment 571123
> 
> Bear in mind that the number of vaccine centres has consistently grown through this period, which should really have resulted in more jabs. This last week we actually gave out _fewer_ doses than the previous week, and not many more than the week before that.
> ...



Ludicrous to say it's meaningless if it saves thousands of lives and gets us a bit more back to normal. Agreed for complete protection the who world needs doing. It's good for people in this country we are among the first.

Edit - shame the EU are trying to gatecrash our party


----------



## Yellow Fang (29 Jan 2021)

I read that the EU are preparing to invoke Article 122 against AstraZenica, which would allow them to take control of their business and raid their intellectual property with a view to reproducing their vaccines by other manufacturers. What is the point? By the time they do that AZ would probably have sorted out their yield issues. The same article says the EU spent 1/7th as much per capita on their vaccines as the UK.


----------



## Yellow Fang (29 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Your glasses are curiously rose-tinted. Here is the government's own chart of recent weeks.
> View attachment 571123
> 
> Bear in mind that the number of vaccine centres has consistently grown through this period, which should really have resulted in more jabs. This last week we actually gave out _fewer_ doses than the previous week, and not many more than the week before that.
> ...



So do you suggest we vaccinate the rest of the world before our own vulnerable population?


----------



## Unkraut (29 Jan 2021)

Needless to say, in yesterday's press round-up on the radio there was a lot of criticism of the delay in getting vaccination going, and the government's and the EU's role in this. In particular, the EU worrying about costs.

Today it has changed somewhat. It is true that the UK ordered AZ first. The EU also later ordered with a contract for 80 million doses. This was suddenly reduced a few days ago to 31 million doses, and don't forget Pfizer last week announced a temporary cut back in the amount it had agreed to provide at 24 hours notice. This has hardly helped accelerate vaccination, worse with the British mutation threatening.

The EU's complaint it seems to me is that the supplies to the continent have been drastically reduced, whilst maintaining those to the UK. The fact the UK ordered first isn't relevant to this. Nor is where the product is produced. It seems reasonable that reductions in the supply should be spread equally to all customers with a contract with AZ. 

Brexit isn't relevant to this issue. I found Gove, quoted in the _Frankfurter Allgemeine_, as wanting to help European friends and partners patronising.

Some of the delay in EU approval was caused by dealing with the concerns of all 27 members. Some of them don't have unlimited money to throw at the problem, and 'rich first' needs to be avoided. An emergency licence might have damaged take up rates.

An Italian journalist last night was saying that increasing European solidarity on dealing with the vaccine, Germany taking Italian patients, the financial package to aid economic recover, has been well received by the Italian people and has taken the wind out of the sails of Italian populists. It's shut them up for a while, which is a nice thought!


----------



## srw (29 Jan 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> So do you suggest we vaccinate the rest of the world before our own vulnerable population?


Straw man alert!

I am saying that whatever we do to vaccinate our own vulnerable population (and it's really good that we're doing well) is meaningless for long-term protection while there are still unvaccinated vulnerable out there in whom the virus can mutate.


----------



## Rusty Nails (29 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> *I am not a lawyer either, *but I don't think "signed first" matters unless the second customer wishes to accuse the seller of acting in bad faith, of selling something that they knew they would not have by the delivery date.
> 
> I think ideally, the seller would try to renegotiate one or both of the contracts as soon as they realise there's a delivery problem. They would probably offer better terms to the most profitable contract or customer (and those are not always the same thing in the long term) if they can, but if they can't renegotiate anything, then they would have to terminate whichever contract has the cheapest termination payments stated in it, rather than land in court over it... and if that customer wanted to try to take them to court over it, I hope the courts would take a dim view over them rejecting the agreed termination payment. If there is no termination clause in one or both contracts, then it's a cluster fark mixed with a shoot show and the negotiators should be chewed out, or at least nibbled a bit.
> 
> ...



Exactly this. Is anyone on here a lawyer with experience of international agreements such as this? 

If it goes to a legal case then we will find out, but in the meantime I suspect opinions will vary based in part on how much people are for or against Brexit.

I do not trust Johnson's opinion on this matter but neither do I really trust von Der Leyen or Kyriakides. They all have constituencies to serve, and I suspect it will be resolved by negotiation, compromise and a few threats.


----------



## srw (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> gets us a bit more back to normal


It doesn't. That's precisely my point. "Normal" life can't resume until most of the world is protected. We can have a semblance of normal life as the Australians and New Zealanders are experiencing it, in which no-one can enter the UK. But that's not normality. And it's why this:


lane said:


> gatecrash our party


is fatuous. It's not "our party". It's the world's party. And like it or not, our world starts in Europe. It's in our national interest to get the rest of Europe vaccinated as quickly as is humanly possible, because a semi-normality in which we can travel freely around Europe and other Europeans can come and visit is a damn sight more normal than a semi-normality in which we're stuck in the UK.


----------



## mjr (29 Jan 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> I read that the EU are preparing to invoke Article 122 against AstraZenica, which would allow them to take control of their business and raid their intellectual property with a view to reproducing their vaccines by other manufacturers. What is the point? By the time they do that AZ would probably have sorted out their yield issues. The same article says the EU spent 1/7th as much per capita on their vaccines as the UK.


Article 122 of what? There are only Articles 1 to 6 in the published EU-AZ agreement. Sections 11 and 12(c)(ii) of that agreement would assign the intellectual property and manufacturing contracts to the EC if terminated anyway — including the UK manufacturing, which might cause problems for the UK-AZ contract!

There doesn't seem to be much need for the EU to take control of AZ and I think I can see why AZ isn't rushing to terminate the contract!


----------



## mjr (29 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> It's not "our party". It's the world's party. And like it or not, our world starts in Europe. It's in our national interest to get the rest of Europe vaccinated as quickly as is humanly possible, because a semi-normality in which we can travel freely around Europe and other Europeans can come and visit is a damn sight more normal than a semi-normality in which we're stuck in the UK.


Amen. Were we "gatecrashing the EU's party" when we only had the vaccine developed by Biontech in Germany and made by Puurs in Belgium? Nationalists seem to have short memories.


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Jan 2021)

An insight (not new - Oct 20) into the background of *UK's vaccine procurement strategy* - in 'The Lancet' written by the Head of VTF, Kate Bingham. (I have precised.) Comment: I wonder if she (with no doubt excellent help) is as good as picking winning horses?
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32175-9/fulltext

The Vaccine Task Force (VTF) strategy was to build a *diverse portfolio* across different formats to give the UK the greatest chance of providing a safe and effective vaccine, recognising that many, and possibly all, of these vaccines could fail. *Scalability of vaccine manufacture* was also a key criterion, with the goal being to manufacture* in the UK*, if possible, to secure supply and create long-term resilience. We considered only vaccines that have the potential for . . . delivery as early as the end of 2020 or, at the latest, in the second half of 2021.

VTF has now *secured access to six vaccines* (from more than 240 vaccines in development) across four different formats: adenoviral vectors, mRNA, adjuvanted proteins, and whole inactivated viral vaccines, which are promising in different ways. The most advanced [in terms of trials as at Oct 20] vaccines, such as those developed by *AstraZeneca/University of Oxford, BioNTech and Pfizer, and Janssen*, are based on novel formats . . . , although the initial immunogenicity and safety data are encouraging.

To help to accelerate the development of successful vaccines, we launched the NHS COVID-19 vaccine registry and have enrolled over 295 000 volunteers, [eg @winjim ]👍👍 [Think it ended up at over 400,000.]

A major challenge is that *the global manufacturing capacity for vaccines is vastly inadequate for the billions of doses that are needed*, and the UK manufacturing capability to date has been equally scarce. The VTF has provided *funding for flexible and surge production in several new UK sites for vaccine manufacture to provide the UK population with a new vaccine . . . . We also plan to bring new vaccine technologies and capabilities to the UK for future pandemic preparedness.*

We cannot, however, protect the UK without working with our international partners to *protect the world*. SARS-CoV-2 is a global pandemic with a toll of over 1·1 million deaths. No one is safe until we are all safe. Pandemic viruses do not respect national borders.
There will not be one successful vaccine, or one single country, that is able to supply the world. We urgently *need international cooperation* to pool risks and costs, address barriers to access, and scale up the manufacturing capacity to produce sufficient doses to protect everyone at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection globally.

The UK is committed to ensuring that . . . the world, has access to a safe and effective vaccine. The [world] COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility, to which the UK has committed £548 million, will deliver vaccines for the UK population and provide *access to vaccines for lower income countries*. Working with GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, WHO [https://www.who.int/initiatives/act-accelerator/covax], and a broad alliance of 180 nations, this pooling of resources maximises the chances of securing access to a vaccine and making it available to all who need it.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus is likely to evolve, and other zoonotic pathogens are likely to pose future risks. China, Europe, the USA, and the UK need to work together. If we establish international collaboration right now, then we will be better prepared to *control future pandemics* without causing the largest global recession in history and the biggest threat to lives in living memory.


----------



## Yellow Fang (29 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Straw man alert!
> 
> I am saying that whatever we do to vaccinate our own vulnerable population (and it's really good that we're doing well) is meaningless for long-term protection while there are still unvaccinated vulnerable out there in whom the virus can mutate.



I am sure AZ's vaccine will come in very useful there; it being sold at cost price and not needing cold storage. Mind you, I am not sure it's true that vaccinating our older population is meaningless long-term unless the entire world is vaccinated. Scientists think Covid will become endemic like cold and flu. Flu vaccine makers have to change their vaccines every couple of years. I don't think the entire world is vaccinated against flu, and still our older population get some protection. There is probably no point in vaccinating the world for flu because of all the cross species virus jumps, particular in the far east. They'd have to vaccinate all the poultry and livestock as well. Still, I am not arguing against vaccinating the entire world population, but I expect a lot of populations will be hard to reach, and they won't be under our control.


----------



## Yellow Fang (29 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Article 122 of what? There are only Articles 1 to 6 in the published EU-AZ agreement. Sections 11 and 12(c)(ii) of that agreement would assign the intellectual property and manufacturing contracts to the EC if terminated anyway — including the UK manufacturing, which might cause problems for the UK-AZ contract!
> 
> There doesn't seem to be much need for the EU to take control of AZ and I think I can see why AZ isn't rushing to terminate the contract!


Article 122 of the Lisbon Treaty.


----------



## mjr (29 Jan 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> Article 122 of the Lisbon Treaty.


The Lisbon Treaty had 7 Articles. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:TOC

Has someone been feeding you shoot?


----------



## Yellow Fang (29 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> The Lisbon Treaty had 7 Articles. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:TOC
> 
> Has someone been feeding you shoot?


That's odd. I thought I heard a lot about an Article 50 the last few years.


----------



## BoldonLad (29 Jan 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> From macro to micro.
> 
> *No word on my jab yet, which I should have by February 15 if the government is to reach its target.*
> 
> ...



Same here.

Not related to Covid, but, had my annual medication review today, Nurse told me, my GP Surgery is not doing the Jabs (not sure why, lack of available space I would guess), so, presumably we will be sent to a vaccine centre somewhere. The Sunderland Nightingale Hospital is almost within walking distance, so, presumably, we will be sent elsewhere.


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Jan 2021)

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12008E122:EN:HTML
*Article* *122* (ex *Article* 100 TEC) 1. Without prejudice to any other procedures provided for in the Treaties, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, may decide, in a spirit of solidarity between Member States, upon the measures appropriate to the economic situation, in particular if severe difficulties arise in the supply of certain products,


----------



## Julia9054 (29 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> Same here.
> 
> Not related to Covid, but, had my annual medication review today, Nurse told me, my GP Surgery is not doing the Jabs (not sure why, lack of available space I would guess), so, presumably we will be sent to a vaccine centre somewhere. The Sunderland Nightingale Hospital is almost within walking distance, so, presumably, we will be sent elsewhere.


I know 3 people in their 70s in Harrogate who have appointments for their vaccinations and are being sent to York (22 miles away) despite there being a vaccination centre at the Great Yorkshire Showground in Harrogate. 2 of them literally live just over the fence!


----------



## Adam4868 (29 Jan 2021)

I've noticed a few vaccination centres popping up around me.Saw one being set up in a church on my work/travels in St Anne's today.Took my mum for her first jab last night.


----------



## mjr (29 Jan 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> That's odd. I thought I heard a lot about an Article 50 the last few years.


That was Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (aka the Maastricht Treaty). Most of the stuff I've seen about various non-existent articles of the Lisbon Treaty the last few years has been scams about nonsense like how we will be conscripted into an EU Army and forced to invade Poland Russia or whatever.


----------



## lane (29 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> It doesn't. That's precisely my point. "Normal" life can't resume until most of the world is protected. We can have a semblance of normal life as the Australians and New Zealanders are experiencing it, in which no-one can enter the UK. But that's not normality. And it's why this:
> 
> is fatuous. It's not "our party". It's the world's party. And like it or not, our world starts in Europe. It's in our national interest to get the rest of Europe vaccinated as quickly as is humanly possible, because a semi-normality in which we can travel freely around Europe and other Europeans can come and visit is a damn sight more normal than a semi-normality in which we're stuck in the UK.



The national interest is surely to get ourselves vaccinated first and others later.

If not tell me this: how is it better for me that a German or Frenchman I'd vaccinated in March rather than me?


----------



## lane (29 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> It doesn't. That's precisely my point. "Normal" life can't resume until most of the world is protected. We can have a semblance of normal life as the Australians and New Zealanders are experiencing it, in which no-one can enter the UK. But that's not normality. And it's why this:
> 
> is fatuous. It's not "our party". It's the world's party. And like it or not, our world starts in Europe. It's in our national interest to get the rest of Europe vaccinated as quickly as is humanly possible, because a semi-normality in which we can travel freely around Europe and other Europeans can come and visit is a damn sight more normal than a semi-normality in which we're stuck in the UK.



Would you t


srw said:


> Straw man alert!
> 
> I am saying that whatever we do to vaccinate our own vulnerable population (and it's really good that we're doing well) is meaningless for long-term protection while there are still unvaccinated vulnerable out there in whom the virus can mutate.



I don't think it was a straw man alert; that is exactly how I read your comments. What you day now makes complete sense.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> The national interest is surely to get ourselves vaccinated first and others later.



As always, more nuance helps. 

If tens, or hundreds of thousands are dying on the continent while we vaccinate 20 year olds at near zero risk, is that in the national interest? And is it ethical?

Would showing zero compassion in a crisis to a near neighbour who we desperately need to build trust with be in the national interest? Or pragmatic?

Where the border between ethics, morals, the national interest, callous disregard and criminal self- interest lies is a continuum, not a hard divide, in my opinion at least. 

And I think while so many people are suffering and dying, jumping to judgment doesn't help. 

[edit: on reading again I realise this might come across as if aimed at you personally - that's not how it is intended, it's just thinking aloud]


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

Oh great. Now it's kicked off over the Irish border too.

Situation desperately requires imaginative and powerful international leadership. Think Gordon Brown in the financial crisis.

EU is failing badly and publicly on this front, and UK just keeping our metaphorical head down. Who will step up?


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (29 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> Needless to say, in yesterday's press round-up on the radio there was a lot of criticism of the delay in getting vaccination going, and the government's and the EU's role in this. In particular, the EU worrying about costs.
> 
> Today it has changed somewhat. It is true that the UK ordered AZ first. The EU also later ordered with a contract for 80 million doses. This was suddenly reduced a few days ago to 31 million doses, and don't forget Pfizer last week announced a temporary cut back in the amount it had agreed to provide at 24 hours notice. This has hardly helped accelerate vaccination, worse with the British mutation threatening.
> 
> The EU's complaint it seems to me is that the supplies to the continent have been drastically reduced, whilst maintaining those to the UK. The fact the UK ordered first isn't relevant to this. Nor is where the product is produced. It seems reasonable that reductions in the supply should be spread equally to all customers with a contract with AZ.


Why should AZ dissappoint 2 costumers (UK and EU) when they don't have to? It's just silly blame game here, they EU does not have his shoot in order, to give you an example the Netherlands has 500.000 vaccines in stock, they went to sleep and then one day woke op and decided they needed to distribute a vaccine. The uk has the same issue more than a month ago. I'm very sure that even if the EU would get all of those 80 million vaccines right now they would'nt be able to distribute them so let them focus on getting their systems ready first, instead of starting vaccine wars when the arms are not ready to receive these vaccines.


Unkraut said:


> Brexit isn't relevant to this issue. I found Gove, quoted in the _Frankfurter Allgemeine_, as wanting to help European friends and partners patronising.


I find Gove quite patronising most times i see him talking, why does the frankfurter zeitung thinks it an good idea to talk to him? i mean the EU makes it and EU vs UK thing but it is really EU vs AZ and according to the contract they published AZ is doing everything the reasonably can to fullfill the contract.


Unkraut said:


> Some of the delay in EU approval was caused by dealing with the concerns of all 27 members. Some of them don't have unlimited money to throw at the problem, and 'rich first' needs to be avoided. An emergency licence might have damaged take up rates.


So the EU with it countless bail-out by proxy schemes has issues with smaller countries not having the money? Just keep the money printer rolling it's not like it has never stopped anyway. (yes yes i know on paper it did and then not but it did if you only read the old name of the scheme and so further and so forth.)

.


----------



## slowmotion (29 Jan 2021)

I think that this article from Politico is quite good. It's a level-headed description of the EU/UK vaccine procurement saga.

https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-coronavirus-vaccine-struggle-pfizer-biontech-astrazeneca/


----------



## mjr (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> The national interest is surely to get ourselves vaccinated first and others later.
> 
> If not tell me this: how is it better for me that a German or Frenchman I'd vaccinated in March rather than me?


Maybe the virus in that Frenchman will be the one that mutates to resist current vaccines and they themselves are a superspreader due to their job? Or maybe that German is a fiftysomething biochemist who develops the vaccine it won't resist? Too many variables to be sure, but if you want to play the odds, it seems easy to see why vaccinating high-risk foreigners soonest is a better bet than waiting for all low-risk Brits to be done.

The national interest is trouncing this virus, not protecting Brits temporarily and letting it run riot abroad - unless you've got some great product idea that we can export to corpses?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

slowmotion said:


> I think that this article from Politico is quite good. It's a level-headed description of the EU/UK vaccine procurement saga.
> 
> https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-coronavirus-vaccine-struggle-pfizer-biontech-astrazeneca/



Thanks, interesting. 

A couple of things I'd add:

1. Whilst the EU rightly takes a lot of flak, a fragmented approach by all member states may well have been worse still. 

2. There's a bit of a naive assumption that throwing more money at it earlier would have made a huge difference. The problems encountered now are at least partly technical, across all the suppliers. No amount of purchasing can magic more supply where it just doesn't exist.


----------



## slowmotion (29 Jan 2021)

I was interested in the suggestion that the prices of the vaccines were completely irrelevant compared to the cost of lockdowns, deaths etc. so haggling was a waste of valuable time.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (29 Jan 2021)

slowmotion said:


> I was interested in the suggestion that the prices of the vaccines were completely irrelevant compared to the cost of lockdowns, deaths etc. so haggling was a waste of valuable time.



Absolutely agree. Particularly the AZ one, which is done at cost for the common good, and is a tiny fraction of the cost of any of the others as a result.


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> how is it better for me that a German or Frenchman [is] vaccinated in March rather than me?


If two continentals are very much more likely to die than you if they catch the virus (them 80, you 40, say), then if they're vaccinated rather than you, one of their lives will be saved, and you'll be 98% likely OK too. I appreciate that it's "not that simple" but you asked the question.


roubaixtuesday said:


> Oh great. Now it's kicked off over the Irish border too.
> Situation desperately requires imaginative and powerful international leadership. Think Gordon Brown in the financial crisis.
> EU is failing badly and publicly on this front, and UK just keeping our metaphorical head down. Who will step up?


Still think my suggestion of sending the Irish a UK days worth of Oxford-AZ vaccines (400k, for first dose only, authorised for use by the EMA today) would allow the Irish to vaccinate a twelth of their population (so all over 70s). Would the Irish refuse such an allowance, in the spirit of EU solidarity? I b****y hope not.


slowmotion said:


> I think that this article from Politico is quite good.


I got whined at for offering 'Politico' as a source. I don't know why. Seems a well informed article making some good points based on fact.


----------



## midlife (29 Jan 2021)

Been told today that our vaccine hub has been vaccinating too quickly and will slow down. Also that there is a plan to move to AZ vaccine and not Pfizer.

Not sure what will happen to those waiting for the second shot of Pfizer. There is either a pile of Pfizer in our ultra low temp storage or second shot will be AZ. Hmmm m..


----------



## lane (29 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Maybe the virus in that Frenchman will be the one that mutates to resist current vaccines and they themselves are a superspreader due to their job? Or maybe that German is a fiftysomething biochemist who develops the vaccine it won't resist? Too many variables to be sure, but if you want to play the odds, it seems easy to see why vaccinating high-risk foreigners soonest is a better bet than waiting for all low-risk Brits to be done.
> 
> The national interest is trouncing this virus, not protecting Brits temporarily and letting it run riot abroad - unless you've got some great product idea that we can export to corpses?



You make some good points. However we are far off vaccinating the vulnerable in the UK and the argument about the who has the vaccine is happening now not in the future when all vulnerable in the UK are vaccinated.

I note the EU are saying Thier priority is the protection and safety of THEIR citizens.


----------



## Joey Shabadoo (29 Jan 2021)

View: https://twitter.com/redouad/status/1355235965074288643


----------



## tom73 (29 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Been told today that our vaccine hub has been vaccinating too quickly and will slow down. Also that there is a plan to move to AZ vaccine and not Pfizer.
> 
> Not sure what will happen to those waiting for the second shot of Pfizer. There is either a pile of Pfizer in our ultra low temp storage or second shot will be AZ. Hmmm m..



mmmm do you know what rate you going ? Think the whole thing is starting to run away with itself. Reports all the place that anyone and every is finding ways to get a jab. No one looks to be in charge of this always going to end badly when you have top down stance. Supply is not clear even more centres open I wonder if your hub has had orders cut given the whole NHS region has? Due to being too good at getting the job done. Gp’s around here are getting orders cut at the last minute. Today was the 5th time for Mrs 73 that an order never came.


----------



## Buck (29 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Been told today that our vaccine hub has been vaccinating too quickly and will slow down. Also that there is a plan to move to AZ vaccine and not Pfizer.
> 
> Not sure what will happen to those waiting for the second shot of Pfizer. There is either a pile of Pfizer in our ultra low temp storage or second shot will be AZ. Hmmm m..



We’re not able to mix the doses so it‘s either Pfizer/Pfizer or AZ/AZ.

By the end of next week we will see the 12th week (second dose) deliveries all confirmed so that will allow planning and getting patients booked Especially as these first groups were all Pfizer.


----------



## midlife (29 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> mmmm do you know what rate you going ? Think the whole thing is starting to run away with itself. Reports all the place that anyone and every is finding ways to get a jab. No one looks to be in charge of this always going to end badly when you have top down stance. Supply is not clear even more centres open I wonder if your hub has had orders cut given the whole NHS region has? Due to being too good at getting the job done. Gp’s around here are getting orders cut at the last minute. Today was the 5th time for Mrs 73 that an order never came.



Not sure, our region has vaccinated more priority groups than others so supplies may have been diverted to areas with lower vaccination rates. The info came to me quite late in the day when the EU had placed export restrictions on vaccines, maybe they are getting twitchy about Pfizer vaccines getting to the UK from the EU?


----------



## Buck (29 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> mmmm do you know what rate you going ? Think the whole thing is starting to run away with itself. Reports all the place that anyone and every is finding ways to get a jab. No one looks to be in charge of this always going to end badly when you have top down stance. Supply is not clear even more centres open I wonder if your hub has had orders cut given the whole NHS region has? Due to being too good at getting the job done. Gp’s around here are getting orders cut at the last minute. Today was the 5th time for Mrs 73 that an order never came.



it’s a lottery on supply. They are still using the push model whereas we were supposed to go to pull from last week.

This is causing real challenges in primary care as we are unable to plan. As a slight aside, we are high performing on cohorts 1-3 yet we have had our order for next week increased.


----------



## Unkraut (29 Jan 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> I'm very sure that even if the EU would get all of those 80 million vaccines right now they would'nt be able to distribute them so let them focus on getting their systems ready first, instead of starting vaccine wars when the arms are not ready to receive these vaccines.


I don't think the EU wants a vaccine war at all. Whilst I still think there is room for criticism, and I remain no fan of von der Leyen, it is not unreasonable for the EU to want AZ to deliver on the amounts in the contract. The reduction announced was enormous.

If any member state isn't ready to start vaccination, this is the fault of the state and not the EU. Some aspects of this have not been German bureaucracy's finest hour, but the main problem since the beginning and for the next few weeks is lack of vaccine, not failing infrastructure. Also hampered by difficulties getting names of elderly people to contact due to data protection provisions.

In last night's TV discussion of this there was some admiration for Britain in getting on with it, qualified by the fact Johnson took calculated risk in not waiting for full authorisation as the EU did, and is under pressure to have some success following a dismal last year, which in turn revealed a healthcare system ailing under years of Tory administration.


----------



## midlife (29 Jan 2021)

Buck said:


> it’s a lottery on supply. They are still using the push model whereas we were supposed to go to pull from last week.
> 
> This is causing real challenges in primary care as we are unable to plan. As a slight aside, we are high performing on cohorts 1-3 yet we have had our order for next week increased.



Yep, Kanban pull model I'm using to restart my services. Push model means we will simply take whatever vaccine lands on the doorstep..


----------



## Unkraut (29 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> The info came to me quite late in the day when the EU had placed export restrictions on vaccines, maybe they are getting twitchy about Pfizer vaccines getting to the UK from the EU?


As I understand it the export restrictions are intended to ensure the production of vaccines in the EU is not diverted to third countries who are willing to pay more for it. There isn't anything particularly sinister in this, it's a sensible precaution.


----------



## Buck (29 Jan 2021)

midlife said:


> Yep, Kanban pull model I'm using to restart my services. Push model means we will simply take whatever vaccine lands on the doorstep..



Same here. It does make it a real challenge when week one you get 400 then the week after 3,000.


----------



## Rusty Nails (29 Jan 2021)

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/polit...rce=upday.samsung.browser&utm_medium=referral

Looks like a quick about-turn from the EU on its terrible idea.


----------



## vickster (29 Jan 2021)

Indeed 
EU vaccine export row: Bloc backtracks on controls for NI https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55865539

Sensible move by U.K. not to react in haste. Worthwhile dithering for once


----------



## Unkraut (29 Jan 2021)

vickster said:


> EU vaccine export row: Bloc backtracks on controls for NI


I'm all for not getting into vaccine wars in the midst of a pandemic, and although I haven't heard any comment on this particular issue, it is important to note that no-one across Europe trusts Boris Johnson, and the export controls envisaged are not unreasonable in the light of this.


----------



## tom73 (30 Jan 2021)

Buck said:


> Same here. It does make it a real challenge when week one you get 400 then the week after 3,000.



That’s the problem it’s set up in a no way to plan anything way. Having to cancel appointments is one thing but ramping it at short notice is a nightmare. Good job we don't run every vaccine program under this set up. Then to top it off they expect day to day work to carry on as if nothing is happening.


----------



## Ajax Bay (30 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> I haven't heard any comment on this particular issue [invoking Article 16 and resiling from that], it is important to note that no-one across Europe trusts Boris Johnson, and the export controls envisaged are not unreasonable in the light of this.


I have found your comments always very measured.
But what do you think the UK's PM trustworthiness has to do with the control of the movement of vaccines from their production in an EU country to one outside the EU? Do you really think/fear/(distrust) that the UK government will seek to control the export of vaccines to other countries? Do you think yesterday's shenanigins has enhanced the 'trustworthiness' of the EU, its Commission and its leader? (My answer: not much change: she is a politician.) This is the 'vaccines' thread. Other EU/UK threads are available > > >.
Although the Commission plan is 'merely' to seek a mechanism for transparency (ie visibility of movements of vaccines) which might simplistically be "not unreasonable", the inference that this might be followed by 'control' (ie preventing the export of vaccines) IS reasonable.
It must be intensely annoying to countries in the EU to be told by AZ (as the contract requires them to do without delay) that AZ can expect to manage only 31M doses (in a timeframe ?end March?) when the plan was to supply 80M, and provide the reason: continental plants that are producing the Oxford-AZ vaccine for EU supply have had production problems. This does point to the merit of having several different vaccines in the procurement portfolio. The EU (COVID-19 EMA pandemic Task Force) and UK (and others) have both/all taken this approach, and the EU seems just to have been unluckier (?self made luck by UK VTF? and self-made 'unluck' by the EMA/Commission?). There are bound to be bumps on all the roads. Normally British roads are the ones with more potholes (ime).

We should divert half a million doses of the Oxford AZ vaccine (from manufacturing plants in England) to Eire as soon as the most vulnerable element of the UK population has been done (15 Feb). This would demonstrate the enduring goodwill between the UK and Eire and take account of the Common Travel Area - there is no control over people (infected or not) travelling between our countries - whether across the Irish Sea or across the land border between the UK and Eire, sfaik. It makes no sense to vaccinate 70% of the UK adult population but leave those across the invisible land border only 20% vaccinated (population of Eire is just under 5M, strategy, 147k vaccinated up to 27 Jan, 3%, one of the best in EU).


----------



## mjr (30 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> I'm all for not getting into vaccine wars in the midst of a pandemic, and although I haven't heard any comment on this particular issue, it is important to note that no-one across Europe trusts Boris Johnson, and the export controls envisaged are not unreasonable in the light of this.


It is all a bit opaque just now. I didn't spot anything about the UK-Ireland border in the announcememnt at https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_307 or the linked speeches, q and a, draft regulations and so on. Most news media seem to be reporting each other except for the solidity of a few politicians commenting. It all seems a bit "The Thick of It" so far.


----------



## classic33 (30 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> It is all a bit opaque just now. I didn't spot anything about the UK-Ireland border in the announcememnt at https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_307 or the linked speeches, q and a, draft regulations and so on. Most news media seem to be reporting each other except for the solidity of a few politicians commenting. It all seems a bit "The Thick of It" so far.


There's been "talks" about it in this last week.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/hea...der-into-north-amid-outcry-1.4471366?mode=amp

They didn't want it entering the UK mainland via the backdoor of northern Ireland.


----------



## Ajax Bay (30 Jan 2021)

The European Commission said (since resiled, thank goodness):
“Exports of goods from Northern Ireland to other parts of the United Kingdom cannot be restricted by Union [EU] law unless this is strictly required by international obligations of the Union.
“Therefore, movements of goods covered by this regulation between the Union and Northern Ireland should be treated as exports.
“Whilst quantitative restrictions on exports are prohibited between the Union and Northern Ireland, in accordance with Article 5 (5) of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, this is justified as a safeguard measure pursuant to Article 16 of that Protocol in order to avert serious societal difficulties due to a lack of supply threatening to disturb the orderly implementation of the vaccination campaigns in the member states.”


----------



## Ajax Bay (30 Jan 2021)

One must assume, in a brainfart moment, the Commission seriously thought that Pfizer would route batches of the vaccine (NB at minus 70) via Eire and then Northern Ireland (population 2M), to get them to Great Britain? And sought to stop it. Desperate scrabbling for scapegoat(s) in an EU vaccine lacuna, not all of its own making.
Perhaps we could set up a vaccination centre in Kent for all truckers (UK and overseas nationals) on the cross-La Manche route to be stabbed, in our mutual interest, from mid February, in conjunction or not with the mandatory virus test administration.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (30 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Your glasses are curiously rose-tinted. Here is the government's own chart of recent weeks.
> View attachment 571123
> 
> Bear in mind that the number of vaccine centres has consistently grown through this period, which should really have resulted in more jabs. This last week we actually gave out _fewer_ doses than the previous week, and not many more than the week before that.
> ...



I can't see why you would say 'curiously rose tinted' when we have managed (to 28th Jan) to administer 8 369 438 doses (inc' first and second) which I think is good going especially when comparing against other nations.

Very definitely seems like a good effort to me.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (30 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> I don't think the EU wants a vaccine war at all. Whilst I still think there is room for criticism, and I remain no fan of von der Leyen, it is not unreasonable for the EU to want AZ to deliver on the amounts in the contract. The reduction announced was enormous.


It sure sounds like it, out of all options they have they choose one of the most heaviest one, and one of the most damaging ones for the EU that is.
Yes it is a very big reduction, but then again, it's not like the eu is prepared or something, i mean even the most pro-eu news outlets say that the whole eu vaccine programme is shambles.. And also because of this export ban they now dragged pfizer into this and the uk, while it was EU vs AZ.. so well done EU.. Guess all those people on the Icu's because of the vaccine shambles are very proud their country is part of the eu.
Ironcally the whole thing was organised as a response to Trump last year trying to buy up all the pfizer vaccine stock for the us. They apperently stop deliveries to the uk now which is quite random, because it's not only AZ but also pfizer and about every other vaccine producer, except for the Russians but the EMA has'nt approved them yet.. 



Unkraut said:


> If any member state isn't ready to start vaccination, this is the fault of the state and not the EU. Some aspects of this have not been German bureaucracy's finest hour, but the main problem since the beginning and for the next few weeks is lack of vaccine, not failing infrastructure. Also hampered by difficulties getting names of elderly people to contact due to data protection provisions.


That's one of the reasons why in my opinion the eu does'nt work, if the eu messes up it's the fault of the slow-responding member states if the member states messes up they just blame the eu. it's a circle 



Unkraut said:


> In last night's TV discussion of this there was some admiration for Britain in getting on with it, qualified by the fact Johnson took calculated risk in not waiting for full authorisation as the EU did, and is under pressure to have some success following a dismal last year, which in turn revealed a healthcare system ailing under years of Tory administration.


To be honest, as far as i have seen in the past year Germany is the only country in Europe with an working healthcare system and the deaths in Belgium in the Netherlands and many other parts of europe where much higher if it weren't for the fact that Germany could take patients in. So yes our wellfare was so good in the past years across europe they we seemed to have forgotten that you need qualified doctors, equipment etc. at the ready for if the unexcepted happens. 

I think the calculated risk started at pre-ordering not one but 5 vaccines but yes bypassing the slow eu did help. But the whole vaccine EU fiasco sounds more like outrage because they failed again then anything else, just like the need for medical ventilators was overhyped last year because the biggest issue is you need trained medical professionals to come along with it.(sure there was a need for those ventilators but it just not thwe whole story)


----------



## tom73 (30 Jan 2021)

Some PCN are seeing people due to getting multiple offers of vaccination apartments. Are starting to shop around to see what vaccine is on offer at different centres. So they can have one they think is best what's wrong with these people they are taking appointments away from others and wasting staff time or worse leading to doses being wasted. What's wrong with these people ? it's not a big game.


----------



## Julia9054 (30 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Some PCN are seeing people due to getting multiple offers of vaccination apartments. Are starting to shop around to see what vaccine is on offer at different centres. So they can have one they think is best what's wrong with these people they are taking appointments away from others and wasting staff time or worse leading to doses being wasted. What's wrong with these people ? it's not a big game.


The question is why are they getting multiple appointments? That’s not their fault. If I got more than one appointment I’d have to make a choice too. I’d consider timing, convenience and look into which vaccine is offered too.


----------



## C R (30 Jan 2021)

I have been wondering since yesterday evening if there's some kind of stupidity conservation law, and as Trump is removed from the political scene someone needed to move to replace the stupidity deficit, with von der Leyen filling the gap,


----------



## midlife (30 Jan 2021)

From another site but the redacted text of the AZ /EU contract is visible in the bookmarks view of the. Pdf. I guess someone is in hot water..


----------



## BoldonLad (30 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Some PCN are seeing people due to getting multiple offers of vaccination apartments. Are starting to shop around to see what vaccine is on offer at different centres. So they can have one they think is best what's wrong with these people they are taking appointments away from others and wasting staff time or worse leading to doses being wasted. What's wrong with these people ? it's not a big game.



Surely the problem is, People getting multiple offers?

If a person gets multiple offers, unless they choose to have multiple jabs, they must, by definition, decline/waste all but one offer. The rationale they choose to make the decision as to which offer to take, (ie distance, time, vaccine choice or whatever), is of no consequence, surely?


----------



## C R (30 Jan 2021)

The register had it yesterday. This kind of problem is well known with pdfs. I suspect the accident may not have been completely accidental.


----------



## tom73 (30 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> The question is why are they getting multiple appointments? That’s not their fault. If I got more than one appointment I’d have to make a choice too. I’d consider timing, convenience and look into which vaccine is offered too.



Because this is what happens when you control it from the top down and set up a new system that bypasses one that is already working and has been for years. It's the new T&T mess all over again. Locally ran bottom up as with all vaccine programs works bypass it and you get into a mess. Neither is it ones still waiting fault either to run full steam ahead when you've not even got though the ones at the start. Or wasting staff time and appointments when others really need them. Note the figures are not broken down into every one in the top 3. The health worker figures won't look good many are still waiting with no idea of how long. Even the % figures trotted out are national average. Not actual national one. 

Until we have buckets load of the stuff and ones who are really at risk are all done and fully covered. We don't have the luxury of shopping round for the ones you fancy. If one vaccine is deemed not suitable for a person that's a clinical matter for them to talk over with a HCP. Equally if someone is unsure about them and what's some advice to allow them to feel ok about it. Then that again is what they can speak to a HCP about, It's not a lifestyle one. Time and location is very much a different thing and not the same.


----------



## lane (30 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Some PCN are seeing people due to getting multiple offers of vaccination apartments. Are starting to shop around to see what vaccine is on offer at different centres. So they can have one they think is best what's wrong with these people they are taking appointments away from others and wasting staff time or worse leading to doses being wasted. What's wrong with these people ? it's not a big game.



My mum HAD to do that because she went for the Pfizer vaccine at Grantham and was told she could not have it. She then got booked into Boston for Oxford one, then for some reason was transferred to Grantham; she took the trouble to check with Grantham and was told that they were only doing Pfizer so was transferred back to Boston. For reasons I don't understand she is back at Grantham in about an hour for the Oxford so hope that works out OK.


----------



## tom73 (30 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> My mum HAD to do that because she went for the Pfizer vaccine at Grantham and was told she could not have it. She then got booked into Boston for Oxford one, then for some reason was transferred to Grantham; she took the trouble to check with Grantham and was told that they were only doing Pfizer so was transferred back to Boston. For reasons I don't understand she is back at Grantham in about an hour for the Oxford so hope that works out OK.



That's a choice based on a clinical matter. Not shopping round for the one you want purely based a personal view. 
I believe the advice has been updated now more is known about them. They are ok unless have a known allergy to the listed ingredients.


----------



## lane (30 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> That's a choice based on a clinical matter. Not shopping round for the one you want purely based a personal view.
> I believe the advice has been updated now more is known about them. They are ok unless have a known allergy to the listed ingredients.



That updated advice was in existence at the time - hence Mum was told to go for the Pfizer vaccine; however for some reason they still refused to let her have it. She has a peanut allergy so was not a reason for her not to have it.


----------



## tom73 (30 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> That updated advice was in existence at the time - hence Mum was told to go for the Pfizer vaccine; however for some reason they still refused to let her have it. She has a peanut allergy so was not a reason for her not to have it.


Right must be more to do with information not feeding down the chain as you say that's not on the list.


----------



## mjr (30 Jan 2021)

In context:

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/Trump_ton/status/1355440057310736385


Who is pushing the story?

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/Trump_ton/status/1355449737550376960


----------



## Julia9054 (30 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Because this is what happens when you control it from the top down and set up a new system that bypasses one that is already working and has been for years. It's the new T&T mess all over again. Locally ran bottom up as with all vaccine programs works bypass it and you get into a mess. Neither is it ones still waiting fault either to run full steam ahead when you've not even got though the ones at the start. Or wasting staff time and appointments when others really need them. Note the figures are not broken down into every one in the top 3. The health worker figures won't look good many are still waiting with no idea of how long. Even the % figures trotted out are national average. Not actual national one.
> 
> Until we have buckets load of the stuff and ones who are really at risk are all done and fully covered. We don't have the luxury of shopping round for the ones you fancy. If one vaccine is deemed not suitable for a person that's a clinical matter for them to talk over with a HCP. Equally if someone is unsure about them and what's some advice to allow them to feel ok about it. Then that again is what they can speak to a HCP about, It's not a lifestyle one. Time and location is very much a different thing and not the same.


I still maintain that if you are sent two appointments a person is going to pick any criteria they want to decide which appointment to keep. If both appointments are equally convenient, why wouldn‘t you use what you have read about the different vaccines to differentiate? As long as they cancel the appointment they are not going to keep, it’s not wasting anything - the spare appointment is just given to the next on the list.
Sorting out an inefficient system that sends out two appointments in the first place is what needs sorting and is not down to the individual.


----------



## Smokin Joe (30 Jan 2021)

From the Guardian -

https://www.theguardian.com/society...ow-the-uk-got-ahead-in-the-covid-vaccine-race

The EU badly screwed up on this and have only themselves to blame.


----------



## srw (30 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I can't see why you would say 'curiously rose tinted' when we have managed (to 28th Jan) to administer 8 369 438 doses (inc' first and second) which I think is good going especially when comparing against other nations.


You were focussing on a single day. Have a look at the total picture. It's good, but it's beginning to fall short of the government's highly ambitious target, it's not improving as it needs to - and single countries having a success is totally pointless.


----------



## srw (30 Jan 2021)

Smokin Joe said:


> From the Guardian -
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/society...ow-the-uk-got-ahead-in-the-covid-vaccine-race
> 
> The EU badly screwed up on this and have only themselves to blame.


Also from the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...m-must-answer-on-his-handling-of-covid-crisis

The UK badly screwed up on every other aspect of dealing with the pandemic and have only themselves to blame.


----------



## Smokin Joe (30 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Also from the Guardian:
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...m-must-answer-on-his-handling-of-covid-crisis
> 
> The UK badly screwed up on every other aspect of dealing with the pandemic and have only themselves to blame.


I wasn't claiming they hadn't, my post was about this specific issue.


----------



## mjr (30 Jan 2021)

Smokin Joe said:


> From the Guardian -
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/society...ow-the-uk-got-ahead-in-the-covid-vaccine-race
> 
> The EU badly screwed up on this and have only themselves to blame.


Not only themselves. AZ do seem to have oversold the UK production by listing it as capacity for the EU too.

The EU seem to have made two big errors though: offering the UK participation terms in the vaccine procurement plan that included no vote which was never going to wash, and investing less in factories than the UK and way way less than the USA.

But how many times has the UK farked up on everything else? So best not to throw stones out of this glass house.

And the real heroes in that story are the Oxford Uni team who realised what was unfolding and started the hard work a good six weeks before gov.uk started taking it seriously. We would be in deeper shoot without them.


----------



## Ajax Bay (30 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Have a look at the total picture. It's good, but it's beginning to fall short of the government's highly ambitious target, it's not improving as it needs to - and single countries having a success is totally pointless.


Target = Offer everyone in Groups 1 - 4 a first vaccination by 15 Feb "the government's highly ambitious target"
Number estimates seem to vary but say total 15M. Reduce that by 20% refusals = 12M. Add a million for 'bias' = 13M
Data below from: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
As at 29 Jan total first doses: 8,378,940 (in arms, not 'offered')
Daily = 365,656 (7-day average) (first doses, in arms, not 'offered')
Number of days till 15 Feb = 15 (say, could be 16 or even 17)
Reasonable estimate of next fortnight capability - 5,484,840
Reasonable estimate of numbers of first doses administered = 13.8M
The vaccination rate doesn't need to "improve" (though that'd be excellent) to actually overstep its target.
Edit: All those involved in procurement, distribution, storage (at the various levels across the nation), management and delivery (into arms) deserve massive plaudits. This is not a short race though; but by the end of spring the UK should be close to herd immunity (which is of course the overarching aim). Internal transmission will diminish and infections brought in from abroad will not gain a foothold and should be much easier to control, with minimal loss of life or serious illness.

Don't know what you mean by 'single countries' - is this Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland? If so they seem to be reasonably on track to play their part in the United Kingdom's effort/programme.
If you're saying that the UK (a "single country") getting its act together (for once) "is totally pointless" then allow me to disagree. The UK efforts to help find/develop, initial manufacture, trial, manufacture at scale, an effective, inexpensive vaccine will save hundreds of thousands of lives across the world, not just in UK.
What do you suggest UK changes in its immediate future plans, or should have done differently with regard to vaccine development, procurement (selection), authorisation and roll out?


----------



## Buck (30 Jan 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> I still maintain that if you are sent two appointments a person is going to pick any criteria they want to decide which appointment to keep. If both appointments are equally convenient, why wouldn‘t you use what you have read about the different vaccines to differentiate? As long as they cancel the appointment they are not going to keep, it’s not wasting anything - the spare appointment is just given to the next on the list.
> Sorting out an inefficient system that sends out two appointments in the first place is what needs sorting and is not down to the individual.



You’re right Julia.

General Practice is asked to contact/book in patients in the defined cohorts (we are now working on the 70-74 and CEV groups as well as chasing those in the earlier cohorts who have no vaccine recorded or have not declined.

The problem is that when we come to book them in, a significant number of patients have now booked via the national booking system (NBS) to which GP land has been excluded which means a lot of patients have accepted these offers, many of which mean travelling some way for their appointment at a mass vaccine centre.

The feedback from patients is that they accepted the invitation from the MVC because they thought that was their only way to get the vaccine. I don’t blame them at all for this as the invites don’t mention that Their local GP will contact them as well!

This doesn’t waste appointments* but does cause a lot of extra work to get the appointments filled and is stretching the limited capacity we have to contact and book in thousands of patients at such short notice. 

* we made the decision to not write out with appointments for this exact eventuality and go with a telephone and on line booking offer.


----------



## Rusty Nails (30 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> You were focussing on a single day. Have a look at the total picture. It's good, but it's beginning to fall short of the government's highly ambitious target, it's not improving as it needs to - and single countries having a success is totally pointless.



Not totally pointless as it will reduce infections and slow the spread down in that country. It will not be pointless at all if other countries also manage to improve their vaccination performance.

The rest of our UK pandemic performance has been piss-poor, but it seems to hurt some people to even acknowledge the occasional belated success without adding a "but".


----------



## lane (31 Jan 2021)

You know what I'm glad I live in a country that's doing well on vacations. Sure we need to help make sure all 6 billion or so in the world are vaccinated. But I have no issue getting a fair proportion of the UKs 60 million don't first.


----------



## Unkraut (31 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> But what do you think the UK's PM trustworthiness has to do with the control of the movement of vaccines from their production in an EU country to one outside the EU?


Assuming I have understood it correctly, the EU is within its rights to prevent vaccines being diverted to third countries who are willing to pay more. The UK is now a third country, but with the unique problem of the Irish border. I don't think with Johnson's record on the border including a willingness to break international law the fear of misusing it to divert vaccines from the EU is unjustified. The border problem is that the EU do no want the UK keeping in the single market by the backdoor. I do think the EU might have been wiser to have kept quiet until and unless there was evidence this was actually occurring.

Some of von der Leyen's jumping up and down about this may be to cover up shortcomings in the EU's procurement policy. On the other hand, it's also wrong to say the EU completely messed up on this. The long-term solidarity might pay off despite a short-term problem in supply at the beginning. Looking at Portugal you can see why it was necessary to make sure bigger countries didn't hog all the supplies.

It's agonising to see here how the infrastructure was set up to vaccinate 400 000 people a day under the authority of the states/Länder, yet just over a month after starting it's only running at just over 25% capacity due a lack of vaccine, which was the responsibility of the central government. 

The country is so close to getting this back under control in the incidence and infection rates, but the mutated versions of the virus that spread quicker are increasingly in evidence and might yet derail this, with far too few of the vulnerable vaccinated. 

With new capacity being built, the situation will eventually correct itself. New BioNTech works in Marburg, Curevac negotiating with Bayer to produce their vaccine once authorised. The government intends everyone who wants vaccination should have received it by 21 September. It might be possible to bring this forward, but they are wise not to promise this.

I hope the EU's actions will be fully investigated once this is over, but now is not the time.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (31 Jan 2021)

Latest news for Friday 29 Jan:

487 756 first doses + 2178 second doses. Second best day so far I think.

8 859 372 total doses to date is a very good result.

And again - a really good effort by all the agencies involved. 

Tbh I'm not concerned whether we hit the stretching target or not - at this rate we will end up (barring more weather issues or batch release issues) with a very creditable figure imo. And if we do it will be something that we all ought to be proud of.


----------



## Unkraut (31 Jan 2021)

A quick look at _Spiegel_ this morning concluded that von der Leyen is probably right from a legal point of view, but so what if the underlying problem is shortages caused by the policy over the summer.

I have some misgivings over the rapidity of the development of the vaccines, but wonder if the authorisation has taken too long - contradictory I know. An inevitable trade off between safety and the need to deploy the stuff.

I fear that von der Leyen is the EU's Boris Johnson. A better and more robust approach minus worrying about costs might have prevented what seems to me to be unnecessary delays in supply. This delay might cost lives.

I really don't like von der Leyen at all - there is something of Thatcher about her at the end of Thatcher's reign. More than capable of triggering a negative reaction! Add to this dodgy goings on with 'advisors' when she was defence minister and oops! her mobile phone data got deleted despite an enquiry that forbade this. Not good.

OK, feel better for that!


----------



## mjr (31 Jan 2021)

Unkraut said:


> Assuming I have understood it correctly, the EU is within its rights to prevent vaccines being diverted to third countries who are willing to pay more.


The UK currently prohibits over 100 drugs being exported to the EU without permission, including many covid treatments. There is a strong stench of hypocrisy coming from gov.uk ministers.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (31 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> As always, more nuance helps.
> 
> If tens, or hundreds of thousands are dying on the continent while we vaccinate *20 year olds at near zero risk*, is that in the national interest? And is it ethical?



'Near zero'. I assume you don't have a 20 year old? I mean you could say that 80 year olds in care homes are at near zero risk if they are all tested, and the negatives all put in together and not allowed to see anyone else. Or all asthmatics are at near zero risk if they simply test negative then have all their food posted through a hatch in their door.

Yes, it is in our national interests to vaccinate everyone first.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (31 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> The UK currently prohibits over 100 drugs being exported to the EU without permission, including many covid treatments. There is a strong stench of hypocrisy coming from gov.uk ministers.



Really, name 20 of them for us.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> The UK currently prohibits over 100 drugs being exported to the EU without permission, including many covid treatments. There is a strong stench of hypocrisy coming from gov.uk ministers.


Source, please?
Glad you still have your sense of smell, although sometimes difficult to narrow down the source, don't you find?


----------



## C R (31 Jan 2021)

Re export control of Covid related pharmaceuticals, here are two links from March last year:

https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/comment/parallel-export-covid-19/

https://www.gponline.com/drug-export-bans-tripled-maintain-stocks-covid-19-outbreak/article/1677947

Not difficult to find.


----------



## Unkraut (31 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> The UK currently prohibits over 100 drugs being exported to the EU without permission, including many covid treatments. There is a strong stench of hypocrisy coming from gov.uk ministers.


I think in all honesty though if the boot were on the other foot and the EU had gone for the short cut route you would have had the mirror image of the complaints being raised.

Germany has just spent €400 million on the drug used to treat Trump that is effective in helping stop the disease progress to very serious. I wonder if this wasn't done via the EU to prevent the chance of further delays. Who knows.

Our minister-president has rightly said not to waste energy trying to apportion blame for the slow start, notwithstanding Baden-Württemberg with a high rate of infection has vaccinated the fewest, and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern with one of the lowest rates has done the most.


----------



## matticus (31 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> Have a look at the total picture. It's good, but it's beginning to fall short of the government's highly ambitious target, it's not improving as it needs to - and single countries having a success is totally pointless.


Tough crowd!

(I shall read this speech out when I get my jab. 👍)


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Jan 2021)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/medicines-that-cannot-be-parallel-exported-from-the-uk
Lists 174 drugs/medicines but does not indicate those which are or may be used to treat COVID-19.
However I note this exclusion:
"Exports that have already been agreed
"If you receive a final agreed purchase order from an importer before the date of restriction then you can still carry out that order. Open, rolling or frame orders placed by importers before the date of restriction can only be fulfilled if the products have been picked and packed, and transport booked."
What Is Parallel Export?
"Parallel exporting is when wholesalers buy medicines already placed on the market in the UK to sell them in another country in the European Economic Area (EEA). The restrictions would prevent wholesalers buying drugs cheaply in the UK and selling them at inflated prices abroad. Parallel exporting and hoarding of medicines can create or worsen medicine shortages."

I assume all countries have this sort of control and licensing mechanism for human medicines/drugs.


----------



## Rusty Nails (31 Jan 2021)

C R said:


> Re export control of Covid related pharmaceuticals, here are two links from March last year:
> 
> https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/comment/parallel-export-covid-19/
> 
> ...



These matters are rarely as simple as people make out to prove a point. This one may be another unfortunate by-product of Brexit rather than some underhand decision by the UK, but I will leave it to experts in international trading laws to give me the true answer.

A little quick trawling on Google can be a dangerous thing 

https://pharmaintelligence.informa....w-rules-will-hit-parallel-trade-from-uk-to-eu


----------



## C R (31 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> These matters are rarely as simple as people make out to prove a point. This one may be another unfortunate by-product of Brexit rather than some underhand decision by the UK, but I will leave it to experts in international trading laws to give me the true answer.
> 
> A little quick trawling on Google can be a dangerous thing
> 
> https://pharmaintelligence.informa....w-rules-will-hit-parallel-trade-from-uk-to-eu


Indeed. The point made by @mjr was that the UK has not been shy to use export controls when needed, though in a less public manner.

I think I made clear what I thought of von der Leyen's actions further up. Had the commission worked in their usual quiet way to get this sorted, we would not be talking about this, we would probably still be talking about de Pfeffel's notpology and the 100000+ dead, instead von der Leyen provided de Pfeffel with a fantastically stinking putrefying cat on the desk.


----------



## mjr (31 Jan 2021)

C R said:


> Indeed. The point made by @mjr was that the UK has not been shy to use export controls when needed, though in a less public manner.


A point from a question put by Marr to Minister Truss on TV this morning (repeated 7pm BBC Parliament IIRC). As usual, she ducked and waffled. (She is the MP for part of my borough. Her support for a campaign has often been not much practical help, shall we say.)


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Jan 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> I assume you don't have a 20 year old?



You assume incorrectly.

You are welcome to your amoral nuance free world.


----------



## tom73 (31 Jan 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Latest news for Friday 29 Jan:
> 
> 487 756 first doses + 2178 second doses. Second best day so far I think.
> 
> ...



I hope that pride we get turns into a real willingness to be willing to pay for a health service that will post covid need a hell of a lot more money to deal with the mess that will follow. Not to mention willing to support and back all the staff who have been have been work flat out. When they campaign for the pay increases they are well over due. Not forgetting fighting for an end to all levels of violence they get day in day out. Or make people stop treating the health service as something to miss use.

Going on how the weekly clip and the support that came with it quickly evaporated I'm not hopefully.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Jan 2021)

A couple of excellent twitter threads on the vaccine supply issue from people involved. 

As someone who's been directly involved in similar work, their take makes perfect sense. 


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/sandyddouglas/status/1355565609434677255


----------



## tom73 (31 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> A couple of excellent twitter threads on the vaccine supply issue from people involved.
> 
> As someone who's been directly involved in similar work, their take makes perfect sense.
> 
> ...




Makes you wonder if ones who are power really know that this is not like making a few aspirin. But a heck of a more complex and mostly being set up for a very cold start.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Jan 2021)

tom73 said:


> Makes you wonder if ones who are power really know that this is not like making a few aspirin. But a heck of a more complex and mostly being set up for a very cold start.



Yes. 

The UK has a head start, but it's by no means beyond the realms of possibility that this could have turned out the other way around, should the worst problems have been here rather than Belgium. 

A little more empathy towards those on the contingent whose hopes have been dashed and whose vulnerable will die as result would not go amiss.


----------



## Rusty Nails (31 Jan 2021)

C R said:


> Indeed. The point made by @mjr was that the UK has not been shy to use export controls when needed, though in a less public manner.
> 
> I think I made clear what I thought of von der Leyen's actions further up. Had the commission worked in their usual quiet way to get this sorted, we would not be talking about this, we would probably still be talking about de Pfeffel's notpology and the 100000+ dead, instead von der Leyen provided de Pfeffel with a fantastically stinking putrefying cat on the desk.



The point I was trying to make was that the UK decision was not so much a refusal to export but possibly more an inability to do so under complicated trade and IP legislation.

The EU decision in this case, swiftly rescinded when they realised the full ramifications of what they planned, was a deliberate refusal as a tactic.

You may well be right in that it gave an opportunity to take some heat off Johnson, but that is conflating two different issues. What von Der Leyen tried to do to deflect blame for the EU vaccine debacle was wrong...full stop.


----------



## lane (31 Jan 2021)

"'The best advert for Brexit': European press reacts to EU Covid vaccine row | Coronavirus | The Guardian" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/31/european-press-reacts-eu-covid-vaccine-row

Seems the EU press are holding the EU accountable and not the UK, which they acknowledge has done a better job on vaccines.


----------



## srw (31 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> "'The best advert for Brexit': European press reacts to EU Covid vaccine row | Coronavirus | The Guardian" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/31/european-press-reacts-eu-covid-vaccine-row
> 
> Seems the EU press are holding the EU accountable and not the UK, which they acknowledge has done a better job on vaccines.


According to Die Welt, “Meanwhile, pro-Europeans on the island will increasingly be wondering whether the departure from Brussels was such a bad thing after all.” Errr..... No. We're not. One thing that the UK seems to be doing better than the EU doesn't overturn all the other terrible things that are happening, and will continue happen. I think Die Welt has been taking dictation from Nigel Farage.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The UK has a head start, but it's by no means beyond the realms of possibility that this could have turned out the other way around, should the worst problems have been here rather than Belgium.
> A little more empathy towards those on the contingent whose hopes have been dashed and whose vulnerable will die as result would not go amiss.


Head start / worse problems
Aiui the UK plants did have similar problems when, in the autumn once it was clear the Phase 3 trails were positive, with £££ of government money already invested in them*, they endeavoured to ramp up production. Aiui they resolved those issues and proceeded with manufacture. And when AZ's European production plants (Halix plant in the Netherlands, and? Novasep's factory (Seneffe, nr Brussels) had similar problems, a UK team went over to Holland/Belgium to share that experience and resolution - ? in late December.
Empathy
I agree with you on encouraging empathy. But expressions of empathy are cheap. Do you think that empathy should result in a change of plan? I wonder whether, when Vaccine Central do their projections, they could look at whether there will be a surplus of UK supply of vaccines (beyond the number we can reasonably deliver (into arms)) in the next months, say, and agree with AZ and/or Pfizer to help improve the Q1 supply profile for the continental "contingent" by taking less of the (expensive) Pfizer - just enough for all the second doses needed for mid-March onwards, say, or by exporting some of the AZ vaccine to, say, Republic of Ireland.
ETA: Or perhaps even better, let's get some of the UK-manufactured Oxford-AZ vaccine to the poorer countries of the Commonwealth (and Ireland).

* The Vaccine Taskforce provided funding for flexible and surge production in several new UK sites for vaccine manufacture to provide the UK population with a new vaccine in less than 9 months.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Head start / worse problems
> Aiui the UK plants did have similar problems when, in the autumn once it was clear the Phase 3 trails were positive, with £££ of government money already invested in them*, they endeavoured to ramp up production. Aiui they resolved those issues and proceeded with manufacture. And when AZ's European production plants (Halix plant in the Netherlands, and? Novasep's factory (Seneffe, nr Brussels) had similar problems, a UK team went over to Holland/Belgium to share that experience and resolution - ? in late December.
> Empathy
> I agree with you on encouraging empathy. But expressions of empathy are cheap. Do you think that empathy should result in a change of plan? I wonder whether, when Vaccine Central do their projections, they could look at whether there will be a surplus of UK supply of vaccines (beyond the number we can reasonably deliver (into arms)) in the next months, say, and agree with AZ and/or Pfizer to help improve the Q1 supply profile for the continental "contingent" by taking less of the (expensive) Pfizer - just enough for all the second doses needed for mid-March onwards, say, or by exporting some of the AZ vaccine to, say, Republic of Ireland.
> ...



AIUI the initial doses to the uk actually came from one of those plants in Holland/ Belgium. That's what was reported in the press, anyway.

I think a change of plan to help out the most exposed and vulnerable on the continent by accepting a slower rollout to the less vulnerable here would be the right thing to do, although politically very difficult. But doing difficult things is what leadership is about, right?

I also would disagree somewhat that empathy alone wouldn't help; a prime minister promising to do everything he can to increase vaccine supply to help our friends over the channel could help our future relationship a lot, even if doing little in the short term.


----------



## lane (31 Jan 2021)

If the UK has more than we can use -which looks like it will happen - it would a no brainer to let someone else have them


----------



## lane (31 Jan 2021)

Mum and Aunt have had quite a reaction to the Oxford vaccine headache and shivering and in bed, at least they know something is happening!


----------



## mjr (31 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> A couple of excellent twitter threads on the vaccine supply issue from people involved.
> 
> As someone who's been directly involved in similar work, their take makes perfect sense.
> 
> ...



As far as I read, it seems to ignore that AZ sold UK production to the EU - production allegedly already committed to the UK. That is the core of the dispute. Did I miss that being addressed?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> As far as I read, it seems to ignore that AZ sold UK production to the EU - production allegedly already committed to the UK. That is the core of the dispute. Did I miss that being addressed?



I'm not sure whether or not that is really core to the dispute, and I think it's impossible to say without further information. 

If, for instance, that was just the first week's 500,000 doses, then it doesn't seem particularly germane to a contract with the EU for 100,000,000.

If those doses were in danger of going beyond shelf life while EMA considered the file...


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Jan 2021)

Expert view of the EU/AZ contract. 

Short version: likely that AZ are in the right. 

https://davidallengreen.com/


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Jan 2021)

And looks like the EU and AZ have kissed and made up. 


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/vonderleyen/status/1355942468001411072


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Expert view of the EU/AZ contract.


Thank you for finding. I have seen a separate analysis - but have closed the link and can't find again . It has similar conclusions as to who would have the best chances in court (AZ). (Edit: Found it: https://ipdraughts.wordpress.com/ )
Agree to provide - no numbers
#5.1 AZ shall use its "best reasonable efforts" to "Manufacture the Initial Europe Doses (IED) [300M] within the EU" Note UK not in EU in Aug 2020. (but qv). Recall this was before efficacy of the Oxford-AZ vaccine was known and before capacity of the plants for the various parts of the vaccine could be assured.
#5.4 (see @roubaixtuesday 's link for text)
Designed to ensure that the AZ vaccine for supply to the EU was manufactured ONLY in the EU and/or UK - Sensibly given USA early behaviour, the EU wanted to ensure this vaccine was manufactured 'locally' ie continent of Europe. I reckon that this 'adding in UK for this aspect only' was asked for by AZ so that they could include the UK plants as options for the supply of the IED without having to get EU 'permission'. Defining the UK as part of the EU in this section, specifying it was only for the purposes of this section,means that where "EU" is used elswhere in the contract (eg in #5.1) it means the EU, as at Aug 2020.
#13.1.e As for this "conflict with obligations to third parties" the article refers clearly to the Initial Europe Doses [300M] which AZ planned to provide from several EU plants (Holland/Belgium/?). AZ never had intent to provide the Initial Europe Doses from UK plants. Some vaccine may have gone (did go) from EU plants to UK early on, to allow the UK to start vaccinating with it (MHRA authority given on 30 Dec and first dose in arm 2 Jan iirc). The supply profile which AZ will have agreed with EU (EMA) was for supplies in late Jan onwards (my guess), hence the laggard approach of the EMA to authorising its use in EU countries (finally given on 29 Jan). AZ expected their continental plants to be up-and-running with sufficient capacity completely to supply the Initial Europe Doses. But (see earlier post).


----------



## Rusty Nails (31 Jan 2021)

I am still waiting for anyone who knows a lot more about this topic and this contract in particular than can be picked up by trawling through Google to give us an authoritative opinion.
Could be here some time, so prejudiced conjecture will have to do for now.


----------



## nickyboy (31 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> According to Die Welt, “Meanwhile, pro-Europeans on the island will increasingly be wondering whether the departure from Brussels was such a bad thing after all.” Errr..... *No. We're not.* One thing that the UK seems to be doing better than the EU doesn't overturn all the other terrible things that are happening, and will continue happen. I think Die Welt has been taking dictation from Nigel Farage.


Err...no _you're_ not. Don't suppose to speak for all those who voted Remain. It might work in this subforum echochamber but that's about it.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> I am still waiting for anyone who knows a lot more about this topic and this contract in particular than can be picked up by trawling through Google to give us an authoritative opinion.
> Could be here some time, so prejudiced conjecture will have to do for now.



The guy I quoted writes for the FT. Wasn't just a trawl thru Google. 

You won't get much more than that, given no one knows what's in the AZ UK contract. 

If you're interested in this, look at his twitter feed for some take from others. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/davidallengreen


----------



## Rocky (31 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Err...no _you're_ not. Don't suppose to speak for all those who voted Remain. It might work in this subforum echochamber but that's about it.


What SRW says concurs with my thoughts, as a Remainer, and those that I interact with in real life. The particular CC subforum may be an echo chamber but most of us spend far more time outside it.


----------



## Rusty Nails (31 Jan 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The guy I quoted writes for the FT. Wasn't just a trawl thru Google.
> 
> You won't get much more than that, given no one knows what's in the AZ UK contract.
> 
> ...



Sorry, not criticising you for giving a source.


----------



## srw (31 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Err...no _you're_ not. Don't suppose to speak for all those who voted Remain. It might work in this subforum echochamber but that's about it.


If Die Welt were right, you'd expect to see some material evidence of it in this opinion poll, coinciding with the period since about Christmas when it became clear that Britain's approach to the vaccine was more successful than the EU's.

Can you see it? I do not pretend to speak for all those who voted Remain, but I'm very confident that there is no vaccine-related regret from former Remainers.

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questio...n-was-right-or-wrong-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu/


----------



## nickyboy (31 Jan 2021)

srw said:


> If Die Welt were right, you'd expect to see some material evidence of it in this opinion poll, coinciding with the period since about Christmas when it became clear that Britain's approach to the vaccine was more successful than the EU's.
> 
> Can you see it? I do not pretend to speak for all those who voted Remain, but I'm very confident that there is no vaccine-related regret from former Remainers.
> 
> ...


Your graph is laughable. The only bit that matters is the last couple of weeks, hell the last couple of days, as the vaccine distribution farrago plays out.

FWIW I agree with you that my personal Brexit views are unchanged by the vaccine situation. However it is a common error to mistake this echo chamber for the real world when it really isn't. It's self selecting, as are the people one speaks to in the real world


----------



## mjr (31 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> I am still waiting for anyone who knows a lot more about this topic and this contract in particular than can be picked up by trawling through Google to give us an authoritative opinion.
> Could be here some time, so prejudiced conjecture will have to do for now.


Isn't the only authoritative opinion on it the ECJ? I don't think they have an account here.


----------



## Rusty Nails (31 Jan 2021)

mjr said:


> Isn't the only authoritative opinion on it the ECJ? I don't think they have an account here.



Quite. Have they ruled on it?

I'm sure somebody on here must have the inside information.


Shaun must have banned them.


----------



## dodgy (31 Jan 2021)

Anyone mentioned it? Don't think so, almost 600,000 vaccines recorded yesterday.


----------



## Rocky (31 Jan 2021)

nickyboy said:


> However it is a common error to mistake this echo chamber for the real world when it really isn't. It's self selecting, as are the people one speaks to in the real world


I don't want to make too much of this and perhaps you are speaking for yourself, but not everyone spends their life in an echo chamber. I suspect plenty of us mix with a whole range of views. I'm a Remainer with a group of like minded friends but I'm also a lifelong member of a rugby club where 90% of the members, also my friends, are far far to the right of my view point and staunch Brexiteers. People do mix with others who have different political views.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Jan 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> so prejudiced conjecture will have to do for now


Is that prejudiced conjecture on prejudiced conjecture?


roubaixtuesday said:


> no one knows what's in the AZ UK contract.


The (Edit: AZ-EU) contract ( Advance Purchase Agreement signed 14 Aug, with redactions) is in the public domain. None of the redactions affect the issues where all the aggravation occurred. Edit: Only a few people know what's in the AZ-UK contract, and I expect it'll stay that way. [Note: Edit after rt pointed out my failure to read what he wrote.]

Here is the latest analysis by IP Draughts - written by IP practitioners, who currently comprise members of the English law firm, Anderson Law LLP, at www.andlaw.eu (This is what I'd read yesterday, referred to in an earlier post.)
"whether AZ is required to divert UK-manufactured vaccine to the EU. now thinks it is clearer that AZ is not required to divert UK vaccine to the EU."
Easy comprehensible, short (but careful) read.


----------



## Kingfisher101 (31 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> Mum and Aunt have had quite a reaction to the Oxford vaccine headache and shivering and in bed, at least they know something is happening!


 One of my neighbours had the vaccine and collapsed and is now in hospital.


----------



## lane (31 Jan 2021)

Kingfisher101 said:


> One of my neighbours had the vaccine and collapsed and is now in hospital.



Which vaccine?


----------



## lane (31 Jan 2021)

Rocky said:


> I don't want to make too much of this and perhaps you are speaking for yourself, but not everyone spends their life in an echo chamber. I suspect plenty of us mix with a whole range of views. I'm a Remainer with a group of like minded friends but I'm also a lifelong member of a rugby club where 90% of the members, also my friends, are far far to the right of my view point and staunch Brexiteers. People do mix with others who have different political views.



A stuanch remainer said to me maybe we were better out of EU as far as the vaccine is concerned. Don't know if it changed their mind overall.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Jan 2021)

Reducing this to statistics (I hope your neighbour recovers, of course, and gets out of hospital asap). Writing this looking at the elderly (rather than a health or social care, or care home worker, in Groups 1-2).
208,681 over 85s died in 2018, and there's an annual peak of deaths in January, so maybe 700 die on an average January day.
The over 85 population is about 1,603,000. Say 50,000 get jabbed each day. Of those 50,000, statistically 20 are likely to die every day. Some will not 'collapse'. Equally some will collapse but thank goodness not die.
I expect the NHS will be extra conscientious with your neighbour to establish or not any causal link between the date of vaccination and reasons for their collapse.


----------



## postman (31 Jan 2021)

I have had the Oxford vaccine today. I was warned about headache and I have taken two paracetamol.It has stopped,arm aches little bit.


----------



## dodgy (31 Jan 2021)

postman said:


> I have had the Oxford vaccine today. I was warned about headache and I have taken two paracetamol.It has stopped,arm aches little bit.


Looking forward to that discomfort


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Jan 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Agreement signed 14 Aug, with redactions) is in the public domain. None of the redactions affect the issues where all the aggravation occurred



That's the EU contract, not the UK one.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Jan 2021)

Apologies - I'll try and pay more attention. I don't think the UK-AZ one will be shared anytime soon. It'd not be in either party's interest. Not sure its contents will add much to the hoo-ha. It was signed in May aiui. Is it going to say "feel free to satisfy other purchase agreements you (AZ) might sign with other nations/entities before us."?


----------



## Unkraut (31 Jan 2021)

lane said:


> 'The best advert for Brexit': European press reacts to EU Covid vaccine row | Coronavirus | The Guardian" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/31/european-press-reacts-eu-covid-vaccine-row
> 
> Seems the EU press are holding the EU accountable and not the UK, which they acknowledge has done a better job on vaccines.


The image of the EU as bureaucratic is of course British standard fayre, _Die Welt_ acknowledged. I think the problem was less this but rather being penny-pinching, and too risk averse leading to being slow to order. The British took a risk by emergency authorisation, the question remains whether the EU or individual member states should have done the same thing in view of the infection rate. I also wonder if the process of authorisation was unnecessarily slow, but there needs to be actual evidence of this, not prejudice.

The _Die Welt_ article the Guardian linked to was rightly critical of von der Leyen. It also referenced Boris Johnson posing as a statesman waxing lyrical about the wonders that can be achieved by international cooperation and working together. I found this beyond irony.

The comments section was absolutely scathing about von der Leyen, and her competence in particular.

The really odd thing is is that she is anglophile.


roubaixtuesday said:


> The UK has a head start, but it's by no means beyond the realms of possibility that this could have turned out the other way around, should the worst problems have been here rather than Belgium.
> 
> A little more empathy towards those on the continent whose hopes have been dashed and whose vulnerable will die as result would not go amiss.


Talking of empathy, I saw some footage on the news from a British hospital, and suddenly and unexpectedly found myself very moved, I found myself thinking it shouldn't be like this. It's not always so different elsewhere, but it's home and the tragedy of the infection rate, the numbers of ill people, the strain on the staff and death toll just hit home.

I'm not sure hopes have been dashed on the continent, more delayed, but I for one feel very narked that all the massive effort to get the infection rate down and try to help the economy has been lightly thrown away by von der Leyen and/or others responsible. I'm not sure how much better the supply situation would have been had the EU acted more quickly, over 3 months 'late' ordering is a long time, but it's galling to think that better progress really could have been made by now.


----------



## rualexander (1 Feb 2021)

postman said:


> I have had the Oxford vaccine today. I was warned about headache and I have taken two paracetamol.It has stopped,arm aches little bit.


Potentially better not to take anything if you can put up with the discomfort, your immune system may respond better to the vaccine without being interfered with by anti-inflammatory/antipyretic medicines.


----------



## IaninSheffield (1 Feb 2021)

rualexander said:


> Potentially better not to take anything if you can put up with the discomfort, your immune system may respond better to the vaccine without being interfered with by anti-inflammatory/antipyretic medicines.


Advice from one medical practice states:
*"Will paracetamol effect the response?*
If you do get troubling symptoms such as fever or pain it is ok to take paracetamol in the usual doses as required. Fever can be seen with the AstraZeneca (Oxford) vaccine but they report that paracetamol use does not affect the subsequent immune response."

However, advice from the CDC:
"Antipyretic or analgesic medications (e.g., acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) may be taken for the treatment of post-vaccination local or systemic symptoms, if medically appropriate. However, routine prophylactic administration of these medications for the purpose of preventing post-vaccination symptoms is not currently recommended, as information on the impact of such use on mRNA COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses is not available at this time."

My reading would be that you are OK to take the medication *if* you're showing symptoms, though not as a preventative measure?


----------



## DaveReading (1 Feb 2021)

Kingfisher101 said:


> One of my neighbours had the vaccine and collapsed and is now in hospital.



Are you suggesting that there's a link between the two events?

How do you know?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (1 Feb 2021)

Nigh on 9 million done by Saturday and a huge c600 000 on the day (Saturday) itself - doesn't look like the rollout is slowing down. Let's hope that this continues at the same pace.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55881092


----------



## lane (1 Feb 2021)

Nearly 1% of the population done in one day.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (1 Feb 2021)

Unkraut said:


> The image of the EU as bureaucratic is of course British standard fayre, _Die Welt_ acknowledged. I think the problem was less this but rather being penny-pinching, and too risk averse leading to being slow to order. The British took a risk by emergency authorisation, the question remains whether the EU or individual member states should have done the same thing in view of the infection rate. I also wonder if the process of authorisation was unnecessarily slow, but there needs to be actual evidence of this, not prejudice.
> 
> The _Die Welt_ article the Guardian linked to was rightly critical of von der Leyen. It also referenced Boris Johnson posing as a statesman waxing lyrical about the wonders that can be achieved by international cooperation and working together. I found this beyond irony.
> 
> ...




I take no heart in the situation on the continent but it does seem to me to be an indicator that this is, and has been, a very difficult situation for the respective parties to deal with that relegates politics to the sidelines. I think it is unfair, and easy, to cast blame on the individuals at the top of the various organisations involved in trying to stem the virus both here and in Europe etc.

Imo every Government, political organisation, medical etc body will probably have made poor judgement calls, as well as getting many right, by the end of the pandemic.

The major post-pandemic outcome will be that, hopefully, we will all be better prepared for if/when a future pandemic hits us. And that's what will really matter then - not the political bile that will have been spilt along the way.


----------



## mjr (1 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Nigh on 9 million done by Saturday and a huge c600 000 on the day (Saturday) itself - doesn't look like the rollout is slowing down. Let's hope that this continues at the same pace.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55881092


Not slowing but also no longer accelerating as necessary to hit the 15 Feb target. Let's hope it picks up?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (1 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Not slowing but also no longer accelerating as necessary to hit the 15 Feb target. Let's hope it picks up?



As I said upthread; I'm not particularly worried about the 15 million being hit or not, my guess is that it will be there or thereabouts.

The upside of stretching targets is that it does spur people on (unless they are ludicrously high) but the downside is that, especially in situations where politics is in play, is that it fuels political capital if they are not met.

To my mind it doesn't matter whether we hit 14, 15 or 16 million - wherever we get to by the 15th will be as a result of a fantastic effort by everyone involved.

And more important than the numbers and politics; will be the fact that so many of our most vulnerable will have a level of protection against the virus beyond our wildest dreams for most of last year.


----------



## Pale Rider (1 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Not slowing but also no longer accelerating as necessary to hit the 15 Feb target. Let's hope it picks up?



I believe an average of about 400,000 a day is needed to hit the target.

Most days I've seen figures for have been above that.

My bet is the target will be exceeded, at least in terms of simple numbers.

Some people getting two jabs may mean not everyone in priority level four is offered a vaccine by mid-February.

What is certain is that all the bold assertions made on here a month ago about the impossibility of the target were well wide of the mark.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (1 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> bold assertions made on here a month ago about the impossibility of the target



I don't recall those, Paley? Could you link a couple? Or is it possible you've misremembered?


----------



## Blue Hills (1 Feb 2021)

Just had to add this thread back to my alerts as it seemed to have dropped off.
What a joy to find a useful thread on "stuff happening at the mo" that doesn't seem to have descended to narkiness/point scoring/personal agendas (unless I've missed something in my absence).
Roll on the jabs - wonderful performance by all concerned.


----------



## Pale Rider (1 Feb 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I don't recall those, Paley? Could you link a couple? Or is it possible you've misremembered?



How about this from @srw:



srw said:


> This stretch is utterly ludicrous. It is ridiculous. It is a figment of the imagination of a few advisors in Whitehall who have never had to deal with the messy reality of actually getting drugs into people's arms.



Looks like a bold assertion to me, and there were plenty of similar ones from others.

A cautionary tale for all those on here who immediately slag off every government policy before it has even started.


----------



## Ajax Bay (1 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Nigh on 9 million done by Saturday and a huge c600 000 on the day (Saturday) itself - doesn't look like the rollout is slowing down. Let's hope that this continues at the same pace.





mjr said:


> Not slowing but also no longer accelerating as necessary to hit the 15 Feb target. Let's hope it picks up?


I can only assume that my Saturday assessment was not sufficiently clear, or that the maths is too difficult (for you).
The daily rate 7-day average (we shouldn't focus on one particular day of the week) is now increasing.
Here's the graph:





But even if the rate was flat, we'd hit the 15 Feb target.
Allow me to quote (from Saturday's sitrep/estimate) and update:
Target = Offer everyone in Groups 1-4 a first vaccination by 15 Feb "the government's highly ambitious target"( @srw phrase quoted)
Number estimates seem to vary but say total 15M. Reduce that by 20% 'offered but refused' = 12M. Add a million for 'bias'/offered = *13M doses*
Data below from: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
"As at 29 Jan total first doses: 8,378,940 (in arms, not 'offered')" - @ 31 Jan = 8,997,329
"Daily = 365,656 (7-day average) (first doses, in arms, not 'offered')" - @ 31 Jan = 374kpd (daily figure will likely drop Mon-Wed)
"Number of days till 15 Feb = 15 (say, could be 16 or even 17)" - @ 31 Jan = 14
"Reasonable estimate of next fortnight capability - 5,484,840" - @ 31 Jan 14 days @ 374kpd = 5.2M
"Reasonable estimate of numbers of first doses administered by 15 Feb = 13.8M" - revised @ 31 Jan = *14.2M doses*
The vaccination rate doesn't need to "improve" as @srw put it, nor "accelerate" as @mjr puts it, to actually overstep its target.

I anticipate that the focus of some grudging appreciators will turn to all the individuals that despite its best efforts, the programme has failed, in care homes, care home workers (a wedge of whom refused first time out, it is reported), NHS staff, over 80s who for some reason have either not been invited for vaccination or there are admin or significant logistic difficulties (and the O/75s and O/70s in the next 12 days).
On this morning's radio the minister said that anyone in care homes who haven't been visited should tell her (by e-mail) and she would personally sort it out (and I believe that is her absolute intent).

BBC Live
Social Care minister Helen Whately says a vaccine has been offered to every care home in England where it was possible for teams to go in. She tells BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "Any care home that hasn't been contacted, just let me know and I will personally follow up. I can be contacted on my ministerial email address." Whately says they are continuing to work through the social care workforce, with the aim of offering a vaccine to all those staff by 15 February.

Reiterate: All those involved in procurement, distribution, storage (at the various levels across the nation), management and delivery (into arms) deserve massive plaudits. This is not a short race though; but by the end of spring the UK should be close to herd immunity (which is of course the overarching aim). Internal transmission will diminish and infections brought in from abroad will not gain a foothold and should be much easier to control, with minimal loss of life or serious illness.
[/QUOTE]


----------



## roubaixtuesday (1 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Looks like a bold assertion to me, and there were plenty of similar ones from others.
> 
> A cautionary tale for all those on here who immediately slag off every government policy before it has even started.



Cheers Paley.

I had a quick click through adjacent pages, and couldn't find a single other poster supporting that position, so I think "plenty of similar ones from others" is off- beam, though I certainly haven't done any exhaustive research, and you might well be able to prove me wrong fairly easily. 

I also think your second paragraph there is a long way off too. This is an example of a policy supported by many on here - myself included- who would be very harshly critical of the current govt across a range of other issues. 

You do give the impression of looking for an argument where there really isn't one to be had, to be honest. 

I hope you get your own jab ASAP, btw.


----------



## Rocky (1 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> How about this from @srw:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would also apportion a huge amount of credit to the NHS staff who have made this happen plus the volunteers at vaccine sites. I have connections with one North London practice which is acting as a centre. The partners and staff are working round the clock. They've repurposed 50% of the surgery to make it fit for purpose and to ensure no one gets infected while attending. Medical and nursing staff from a nearby teaching hospital have given up evenings and weekends to act as vaccinators. 

Plus we must say chapeau to all those scientists who worked round the clock to get these vaccines rolled out in record time. I don't know much about the Pfizer jab but the Oxford Vaccine Group all deserve damehoods and knighthoods for what they've achieved.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (1 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> This is not a short race though; but by the end of spring the UK should be close to herd immunity (which is of course the overarching aim).



I'm not sure this is true. 

The vaccination strategy at the moment, as I understand it, is to prevent serious disease rather than to achieve herd immunity. 

As I understand it, the latter, even if vaccine is 100% effective against transmission, is very unlikely to be achieved for some time, if ever, particularly given that no vaccines are yet approved for children. And there is currently little or no evidence on protecting against transmission, though some protection is expected. 

If there's a published strategy for achieving herd immunity, I'd be very interested to see it.


----------



## mjr (1 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I can only assume that my Saturday assessment was not sufficiently clear, or that the maths is too difficult (for you).


No, you were on ignore, but someone told me about your insulting post. You make snide comments about the maths being too difficult when you probably remember my qualifications, so maybe you were trolling. Where we disagree is not due to the difficulty of the calculation, but the unjustified assumptions:



> Reduce that by 20% 'offered but refused' = 12M. Add a million for 'bias'/offered = *13M doses*


Both of these numbers appear to be pulled out of thin air. Why 20% refusals? That's even below the current UK average vaccine take-up willingness of 81%, and the priority groups are reportedly more willing than average, with some areas actually hitting 100% attendance (although some are then unable to receive it due to clinical reasons).

Without that particular assumption, even the optimistic calculations in the rest of the post (which seem to assume that everything continues at the current high rate, that all the jabs are going to priority groups and that the last few % of priority groups aren't the most difficult to reach) show the target being missed.

I don't know what "for 'bias'" means there. "Bias" is a term with a statistical meaning that does not apply here and its misuse is dashed irritating, bordering on trolling mathematicians IMO.

And let us remember that the target is "vaccinating all residents in a care home for older adults and their carers, everyone over the age of 70, all frontline health and social care workers, and everyone who is clinically extremely vulnerable" not merely "offered".



> I anticipate that [...]
> 
> BBC Live
> Social Care minister Helen Whately says


This sort of Aunt Sally (arguments against points no-one here was making - a sort of "I hit him back first" debating tactic beloved of politicians) and vague links to the top of ephemeral rolling-update pages that no longer appear to contain the claimed quote exemplify the main reason why I was ignoring this poster. The posts seem very misleading but constructed to make checking them very very time-consuming.


----------



## Kingfisher101 (1 Feb 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Are you suggesting that there's a link between the two events?
> 
> How do you know?


The Dr said to his wife, he also had it then collapsed straight away. Also a healthcare assistant friend of another neighbour had it and died in her late 30s as well of a bad reaction. It does happen.


----------



## Ajax Bay (1 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> No, you were on ignore, but someone told me about your insulting post. You make snide comments about the maths being too difficult when you probably remember my qualifications, so maybe you were trolling. Where we disagree is not due to the difficulty of the calculation, but the unjustified assumptions:


Welcome back!
If you had arranged not to read my earlier post, I can understand why you were unaware of the figures. I have absolutely no idea what your "qualifications" are. How do you mean "remember"? Do share your qualifications so we can see your maths credentials. Then I'll know it's not your maths letting you down. You have a low threshold for determining posts are (insulting, snide, trolling) imo.


mjr said:


> Both of these numbers appear to be pulled out of thin air. Why 20% refusals? That's even below the current UK average vaccine take-up willingness of 81%, and the priority groups are reportedly more willing than average, with some areas actually hitting 100% attendance (although some are then unable to receive it due to clinical reasons).


I chose 20% 'refusals' (and that term includes all reasons, valid and less so, for those choosing not to be vaccinated when offered) because it's an easy number for people doing the maths (as opposed to 19% - which I was aware was the reported figure - see your link). See 'bias' below for more on this.


mjr said:


> Without that particular assumption, even the optimistic calculations in the rest of the post (which seem to assume that everything continues at the current high rate, that all the jabs are going to priority groups and that the last few % of priority groups aren't the most difficult to reach) show the target being missed.


I AM assuming that the current 7-day average rate will be maintained: I say so explicitly - and that's a realistic not an optimistic assumption. You are the pessimist outlier here. The number of jabs currently going outside those in Gps 1-4 will be small - that's a reasonable assumption (within 9M jabs). Covered by my 'bias' tolerance qv. The last few % will be difficult. Do you think that if even one person in Groups 1-4 has not been "offered" a first dose the programme will have failed to meet its "exceptionally challenging target"?


mjr said:


> I don't know what "for 'bias'" means there. "Bias" is a term with a statistical meaning that does not apply here and its misuse is dashed irritating, bordering on trolling mathematicians IMO.


In project management (PM) it is standard practice to include an allowance for 'optimism bias' and 8% is often used. That's what I did, adding a million to the calculated number (12M > 13M). This might cater (for example) for a lower percentage of 'refusals' in Groups 1-4, or that 15M was a slight underestimate. Project managers have to cope with the real world: 'trolling mathematicians' is, as you say, merely (and imo unreasonably and without foundation), your perception/opinion.


mjr said:


> And let us remember that the target is "vaccinating all residents in a care home for older adults and their carers, everyone over the age of 70, all frontline health and social care workers, and everyone who is clinically extremely vulnerable" not merely "offered".


Naughty, naughty! You do yourself a disservice. From your link, the PM said "By the middle of February, if things go well and with a fair wind [tailwind on the road] in our sails, we expect to have *offered* the first vaccine dose to everyone in the four top priority groups identified by the JCVI. That means vaccinating all residents in a care home for older adults and their carers, everyone over the age of 70, all frontline health and social care workers, and everyone who is clinically extremely vulnerable."
Thank you for providing the link so that selective quoting can be identified/pointed out without making "checking them very very time-consuming."


mjr said:


> This sort of Aunt Sally (arguments against points no-one here was making - a sort of "I hit him back first" debating tactic beloved of politicians) and vague links to the top of ephemeral rolling-update pages that no longer appear to contain the claimed quote exemplify the main reason why I was ignoring this poster. The posts seem very misleading but constructed to make checking them very very time-consuming.


I think this was the first time I've been rash enough to guess/ anticipate what the next thrust of criticism would be once it had become clear that the headline target was likely to be met - so not a good exemplar - and as for rolling-update pages of the BBC - do you really think I'm making it up?
The BBC quote I shared was a very accurate (almost verbatim iirc) record of what the Minister said on the radio. Sorry checking it was onerous.
Finally "the [my] posts seem very misleading". I've done my best not to mislead: you have just nibbled at the edges: I hope your teeth are still OK. You suggested that the vaccination programme would need to "accelerate" to hit the 15 Feb target. I sought, with figures, to show that your assessment was not, in fact, true.


----------



## Ajax Bay (1 Feb 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The vaccination strategy at the moment, as I understand it, is to prevent serious disease rather than to achieve herd immunity.


I think you're absolutely right. My assertion that "achieving 'herd immunity' is the overarching aim of the strategy" is wrong.
Once Groups 1-9 are vaccinated, that'll be 30M 'done - I've suggested possible dates elsewhere (?mid April). Aiui the programme will continue, presumably at the same pace, for under 50s, with some juggling to the 'top' of sections of the working population whose employment renders them at greater risk, and others eg teachers and the police.
I suspect that our leaders are steering well clear of the 'herd immunity' phrase after the bad press it got in March (and rightly so).
Achieving country-wide herd immunity depends on, inter alia, on the extent to which vaccinated (+ 14 days) but then infected individuals can transmit the infection (qv).
And we don't know this (because the trials didn't have it as an objective to test), but I hope we will by April. I hope that Israel's early experience will help the world, here.
Same for vaccinating under 18s. I assume there's work ongoing to determine the efficacy and safety of the vaccine(s) in the yoof with a target for results by (say) midsummer.
There will be some decision challenges ahead, in particular when it'd be right for UK to reduce the domestic vaccination rate and divert some supply to other countries: eg Eire, Gibraltar and less prosperous Commonwealth Family countries. But such issues will be opportunity challenges, not wicked problems.
JCVI: "JCVI has considered a number of different vaccination strategies, including those targeting transmission and those targeted at providing direct protection to persons most at risk.
"In order to interrupt transmission, mathematical modelling indicates that we would need to vaccinate a large proportion of the population with a vaccine which is highly effective at preventing infection (transmission). At the start of the vaccination programme, good evidence on the effects of vaccination on transmission will not be available . . ."
"Given the current epidemiological situation in the UK, the best option for preventing morbidity and mortality in the initial phase of the programme is to directly protect persons most at risk of morbidity and mortality."


----------



## PK99 (1 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I think you're absolutely right. My assertion that "achieving 'herd immunity' is the overarching aim of the strategy" is wrong.
> Once Groups 1-9 are vaccinated, that'll be 18-20M 'done - I've suggested possible dates elsewhere (?mid April). Aiui the programme will continue, presumably at the same pace, for under 50s, with some juggling to the 'top' of sections of the working population whose employment renders them at greater risk, and others eg teachers and the police.
> I suspect that our leaders are steering well clear of the 'herd immunity' phrase after the bad press it got in March (and rightly so).
> Achieving country-wide herd immunity depends on, inter alia, on the extent to which vaccinated (+ 14 days) but then infected individuals can transmit the infection (qv).
> ...



Surely the long term STRATEGY is herd immunity, the current TACTIC is to focus on the most vulnerable groups to minimize morbidity and mortality before moving on to the rest of the herd.


----------



## mjr (1 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I chose 20% 'refusals' (and that term includes all reasons, valid and less so, for those choosing not to be vaccinated when offered) because it's an easy number for people doing the maths (as opposed to 19% - which I was aware was the reported figure - see your link). See 'bias' below for more on this. [...] In project management (PM) it is standard practice to include an allowance for 'optimism bias' and 8% is often used. That's what I did, adding a million to the calculated number (12M > 13M). This might cater (for example) for a lower percentage of 'refusals' in Groups 1-4, or that 15M was a slight underestimate.


Which project management standard is that?

So, 20% was primarily to make the maths easy, not based on reality. This is why we disagree on the required rate.

Now going back a step to address a bit in between:


> I AM assuming that the current 7-day average rate will be maintained: I say so explicitly - and that's a realistic not an optimistic assumption.


On what basis is that assumption realistic not optimistic? Even Boris reckoned the target was "if things go well", yet those assumptions resulted in calculating that the target will be reached early, which I feel suggests a reality check is probably required.



> You are the pessimist outlier here.


What, just for pointing out that the many optimistic assumptions?  I'm a realist and the current reality is a slight undershoot.



> The number of jabs currently going outside those in Gps 1-4 will be small - that's a reasonable assumption (within 9M jabs). Covered by my 'bias' tolerance qv.


What do you consider "small" there and what reason is the assumption based on? I've not seen any recent data on how many vaccines have gone outside those groups. I think I know seven people in priority groups who have been vaccianted and one non-priority but who knows what the average picture is?



> The last few % will be difficult. Do you think that if even one person in Groups 1-4 has not been "offered" a first dose the programme will have failed to meet its "exceptionally challenging target"?


That's what a target means, isn't it? Boris didn't say "we will vaccinate the vulnerable people who are easy to do and worry about the rest later" did he?

A near-miss may not matter much, but how many would they have to not vaccinate before you'd accept it was a complete miss? A thousand? Ten thousand? A hundred thousand?



> Naughty, naughty! You do yourself a disservice. From your link, the PM said [...]


Nothing naughty there: he said "offered" "means vaccinating" so not only putting offers in the post. It is emphasising the "offered" without its meaning that would be naughty and misleading.



> and as for rolling-update pages of the BBC - do you really think I'm making it up?


I think it more likely to have been quoted selectively to support a different interpretation to what I would have understood from it.



> I sought, with figures, to show that your assessment was not, in fact, true.


And I have now shown where it relies on several optimistic assumptions and some unreasonable-looking figures seemingly chosen to make the maths easy, so my assessment is, indeed, true. If the vaccination rate does not accelerate slightly, that target will probably not be hit — and if there is any supply problem, it'll be missed, which may explain some of the recent so-called "vaccine nationalism".


----------



## roubaixtuesday (1 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> Surely the long term STRATEGY is herd immunity, the current TACTIC is to focus on the most vulnerable groups to minimize morbidity and mortality before moving on to the rest of the herd.



I don't think so.

The tactic is as you suggest.

The strategy, both for the UK and globally, is not clear to me, and may depend on current unknowns, particularly vaccine efficacy, rate of mutation of the virus, and rate of decay of immunity.

Accepting endemic infection but controlling morbidity/mortality, as flu, seems more likely than herd immunity to me.


----------



## lane (1 Feb 2021)

Slower day today with only 319k vaccinations. 2.7 million approximately for whole of last week isn't bad.


----------



## Ajax Bay (1 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I'm a realist and the current reality is a slight undershoot.


Thank you for that reasoned response. Would you care to offer a few figures to help us understand the extent of the 'undershoot' you declare 'reality': not sure how a hitting, exceeding or undershooting a future target can be judged 'reality' btw.
Here's a template to make it easy. You fill in the figures. Please be realistic.
A) Target = Offer everyone in Groups 1-4 a first vaccination by 15 Feb - *Number = ??M*
Percentage assumed 'offered but not taken' = ??%
Data from: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations (I suggest: maybe there's something more authoritative you can find)
1) As at 1 Feb total first doses: 9,???,??? (@ 31 Jan = 8,997,329)
2) Assumed Daily rate = ???,??? per day (first doses, in arms, not 'offered')
3) Number of days till 15 Feb = 14
4) Reasonable estimate of next fortnight capability - ?,???,???
B) Reasonable estimate of numbers of first doses administered by 15 Feb *Number = ??M* 
Result: Difference between (A) and (B). If result is negative: target hit/exceeded, for the avoidance of doubt.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (1 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Slower day today with only 319k vaccinations. 2.7 million approximately for whole of last week isn't bad.



I think you need to look at the preceding Sundays. Yesterday was a big jump in the right direction.

17/1 227 882

24/1 221 067

31/1 322 194

All inc' of first and second doses.

9 790 576 first and seconds to date.


----------



## Ajax Bay (1 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Slower day today with only 319k vaccinations. 2.7 million approximately for whole of last week isn't bad.


Monday released figures have been consistently low (jabs given on Sunday, I assume). See the graph I shared in post #1919.
Note almost none of these are second doses - 7520 in last recorded week.
2.7M is superb and a measurable tribute to all those in the complex delivery chain.
If we achieve only 2.2M per week for the next fortnight we'll achieve the stated target (see maths in an earlier post).


----------



## lane (1 Feb 2021)

No need to slow down on a Sunday.


----------



## PK99 (1 Feb 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I don't think so.
> 
> The tactic is as you suggest.
> 
> ...



You are right of course that herd immunity depends on a number of unknowns, but Whitty's Gresham lecture of 2018(?) argued that the way out of a pandemic is herd immunity. I would guess that that remains the ideal strategic objective, with what you describe being the fallback position.

I think we are saying the same thing?


----------



## mjr (1 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Thank you for that reasoned response. Would you care to offer a few figures to help us understand the extent of the 'undershoot' you declare 'reality': not sure how a hitting, exceeding or undershooting a future target can be judged 'reality' btw.


Whether the current rate would result in hitting or missing the target is what is a reality.



> Here's a template to make it easy. You fill in the figures. Please be realistic.


No. If we keep on using that flawed template, it will result in more flawed conclusions. That is a variation on what's called "Garbage In, Garbage Out".

It should be possible to see if we are roughly on target another way by looking at the % of the priority groups vaccinated so far, but so far I found only statistics on progress vaccinating the over-80s. As you would expect, all willing over-80s could be vaccinated easily by 15 Feb, although surprisingly London still looks a close-run thing. I wonder why the %s of the other groups is not being published currently. I thought I had seen a graph of it a week or two ago.

I'd still be interested in what project management standard refers to "optimism bias" and/or suggests 8% for it.


----------



## vickster (1 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> No need to slow down on a Sunday.


Except maybe the staff working in centres would like a day off...
Are you a volunteer willing to help on Sundays, if so good on you

If not, you can sign up through this link
https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/join-the-nhs-covid-19-vaccine-team/ 
or https://nhsvolunteerresponders.org.uk/i-want-to-volunteer


----------



## Ajax Bay (1 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> No. If we keep on using that flawed template, it will result in more flawed conclusions. That is a variation on what's called "Garbage In, Garbage Out".
> It should be possible to see if we are roughly on target another way by looking at the % of the priority groups vaccinated so far, but so far I found only statistics on progress vaccinating the over-80s. As you would expect, all willing over-80s could be vaccinated easily by 15 Feb, although surprisingly London still looks a close-run thing. I wonder why the %s of the other groups is not being published currently. I thought I had seen a graph of it a week or two ago.
> I'd still be interested in what project management standard refers to "optimism bias" and/or suggests 8% for it.


1) "Flawed template" How many first dose vaccinations have been delivered? What is the rate of vaccination? How many days to go? How many vaccinations are being given to non-Group 1-4 people?
2) If your 'percentage' template can't be filled with data, that's probably not a useful template (aka flawed).
3) Optimism bias.
"In project management (PM) it is standard practice to include an allowance for 'optimism bias'."
It's a fair while since I did my PM training. You can google 'optimism bias'. I used 8% because that's the amount used in the last large project in which I was involved. Note that including this in my calculation made the target MORE difficult to hit, by one million doses! You can call it a pessimistic 'fudge factor' if that's more to your preference.







9M + (350k x 14) = 13.9M (UK)


----------



## mjr (1 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> 1) "Flawed template" How many first dose vaccinations have been delivered? What is the rate of vaccination? How many days to go? How many vaccinations are being given to non-Group 1-4 people?


Some of those are published or facts but does anyone know how many vaccinations are going to non-priority people? 


> 2) If your 'percentage' template can't be filled with data, that's probably not a useful template (aka flawed).


Whether or not you include that percentage in your template, it is still relevant and critical. Omitting it doesn't make your template not flawed!



> It's a fair while since I did my PM training. You can google 'optimism bias'.


I know I can, but oddly enough, that didn't seem to identify which Project Management standards include it or which one you were using!



> I used 8% because that's the amount used in the last large project in which I was involved.


Right, so 8% was pulled out of someone else's arse for a project which I suspect wasn't a mass vaccination effort... so why does it apply here?



> Note that including this in my calculation made the target MORE difficult to hit, by one million doses! You can call it a pessimistic 'fudge factor' if that's more to your preference.


No, I call it an attempt to distract from the previous step having made the target far too easy by lopping off 20% arbitrarily!



> 9M + (350k x 14) = 13.9M (UK)


Which is not 15M so seems to require that refusals/unables exceed the number of non-priority vaccinees by quite a lot.


----------



## Ajax Bay (1 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Which is not 15M so seems to require that refusals/unables exceed the number of non-priority vaccinees by quite a lot.


What percentage do you suggest I use for "refusals/unables"? I used 20% (for easy maths). General pop figure is 19% (your link). For Gps 1-4, just offer me an acceptance percentage, please? 15M x mjr% = ??M What's not "quite a lot" in maths-speak? Your best estimate. Happy to bin the pessimism bias x% as well, if it keeps you happier.
9M + (350k x 14) = 13.9M (UK) is less than 15M. Tick. I was being deliberately conservative with the daily vaccination rate (7 day average).
However the daily 7-day average is currently 388kpd (1 Feb). @ I Feb: 9.3M + (388k x 13) = 14.3M (UK) This is less than 15M too. But the target will be hit, without any 'acceleration':
1) at below 14M
2) Provided the programme gets to all those in Gps 1-4 and offers them a vaccination (first dose), by 15 Feb.
Targets are useful things and has focused the programme. What gets measured gets managed etc. I think there will be merit in setting a target for completing Gps 1-9. I'd set 15 April as an achievable target.


----------



## Buck (1 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Slower day today with only 319k vaccinations. 2.7 million approximately for whole of last week isn't bad.





lane said:


> No need to slow down on a Sunday.





vickster said:


> Except maybe the staff working in centres would like a day off...
> Are you a volunteer willing to help on Sundays, if so good on you
> 
> If not, you can sign up through this link
> ...



I think the reasons are many. The main one being vaccine supply. Some centres are well stocked but the visibility of stock deliveries was/is so limited that the ability to plan is somewhat difficult - indeed like driving blindfolded. Others are asking for more stock but cannot get hold of any due to the mystical way the supply algorithm seems to be working. 

When you get notification of a deliver then this is late in the day and scrabbling around to get additional people into vaccinate and also to manage the rate limiting factor of the 15 minute wait is frustrating.

I am sure supply will settle down but at present it is very difficult to plant and deliver with so many factors out of your control.

building a bank of volunteers is a fantastic way of working with this but again, this is not a simple task. The governance, training etc is not a two minute job but everyone who volunteers is welcomed with open arms (and a few checks!). 

we’ll keep pushing as hard and fast as we possibly can to empty the fridge as quickly as possible.


----------



## Buck (1 Feb 2021)

There was an article on R4 PM with Evan Davis tonight - Prof Anthony Harnden Deputy Chair of the JCVI - 
Where he talks about reactions to the vaccines, second doses, new variants, living with the virus and annual vaccination. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000rtz0

Starts at about 17:30 minutes into the programme.


----------



## Ajax Bay (1 Feb 2021)

Buck said:


> the rate limiting factor of the 15 minute wait


Are you having to include that for the Oxford-AZ vaccine as well?
Yes - Harnden spoke very well.


----------



## lane (1 Feb 2021)

Buck said:


> I think the reasons are many. The main one being vaccine supply. Some centres are well stocked but the visibility of stock deliveries was/is so limited that the ability to plan is somewhat difficult - indeed like driving blindfolded. Others are asking for more stock but cannot get hold of any due to the mystical way the supply algorithm seems to be working.
> 
> When you get notification of a deliver then this is late in the day and scrabbling around to get additional people into vaccinate and also to manage the rate limiting factor of the 15 minute wait is frustrating.
> 
> ...



Reminds me of the poundland documentary. They bought a new manager in and the one change he made was letting the shops order stock they wanted from head office; before that they got sent what HO thought they might need - which didn't work so well.


----------



## Buck (1 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Are you having to include that for the Oxford-AZ vaccine as well?
> Yes - Harnden spoke very well.



No, thankfully the AZ is without the wait, has a long(er) life and doesnt require reconstituting either so better all ’round.


----------



## mjr (1 Feb 2021)

Hancock dribbled out some new progress info today: "We’ve now vaccinated almost 9 in 10 of all over 80s in the UK and now, as of today, we’ve vaccinated over half of all people in their 70s" which probably means there's a bit over 1 in 10 of over 80s to do and a bit under half of 70somethings to do, which is a bit over 1 in 10 of 3.3m and a bit under half of 5.5m, so that's maybe 3.1m left to do... or about 8¼ days of the 14 now left if vaccination continued at last week's rate.

But he didn't tell us anything about the 4.1m health, social care and care home workers or the 1.2m CEV people. There would be time to vaccinate maybe another 2¼m of them. I wonder how many remain?


----------



## Buck (1 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Reminds me of the poundland documentary. They bought a new manager in and the one change he made was letting the shops order stock they wanted from head office; before that they got sent what HO thought they might need - which didn't work so well.


👍🏻 They’ve told us we are going to a pull model ‘soon’. I can’t wait.

Another hidden challenge is the consumables that we are getting. Again, no control on what comes in. 2 pallets worth today - all items we have plenty of stock of and unlikely to need more of!


----------



## PK99 (1 Feb 2021)

Buck said:


> There was an article on R4 PM with Evan Davis tonight - Prof Anthony Harnden Deputy Chair of the JCVI -
> Where he talks about reactions to the vaccines, second doses, new variants, living with the virus and annual vaccination.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000rtz0
> ...



Thank you for the link.

Good to hear from the experts.


----------



## lane (1 Feb 2021)

Buck said:


> 👍🏻 They’ve told us we are going to a pull model ‘soon’. I can’t wait.
> 
> Another hidden challenge is the consumables that we are getting. Again, no control on what comes in. 2 pallets worth today - all items we have plenty of stock of and unlikely to need more of!



Maybe they have the old Poundland manager running it!


----------



## classic33 (1 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Not slowing but also no longer accelerating as necessary to hit the 15 Feb target. Let's hope it picks up?


And let's not forget that it's people that are doing the actual injecting. They've too get as many as possible done, with no mistakes, with people saying they're not going fast enough.

Tiredness can kill.


----------



## mjr (1 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> And let's not forget that it's people that are doing the actual injecting. They've too get as many as possible done, with no mistakes, with people saying they're not going fast enough.
> 
> Tiredness can kill.


I've not read anyone saying the actual people injecting is not going fast enough. More often is that that it seems to be taking so long to set up enough vaccination centres (it is only today that our borough's main council-run exhibition hall has opened as one - what the fark was it doing until now? It wasn't exactly hosting trade fairs!) and some are still reporting supply problems, early closures and so on.


----------



## Buck (1 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Hancock dribbled out some new progress info today: "We’ve now vaccinated almost 9 in 10 of all over 80s in the UK and now, as of today, we’ve vaccinated over half of all people in their 70s" which probably means there's a bit over 1 in 10 of over 80s to do and a bit under half of 70somethings to do, which is a bit over 1 in 10 of 3.3m and a bit under half of 5.5m, so that's maybe 3.1m left to do... or about 8¼ days of the 14 now left if vaccination continued at last week's rate.



Many 70+ Who are yet to be vaccinated in our experience are still on the fence on whether to get the vaccine or not and some in this older age group have been waiting for “the British vaccine!” The target we’ve been given is 85% of this cohort ( was 75% then 80% and now 85%)



mjr said:


> But he didn't tell us anything about the 4.1m health, social care and care home workers or the 1.2m CEV people. There would be time to vaccinate maybe another 2¼m of them. I wonder how many remain?


Many HCWs are now done. In our experience this is higher than the 70+ group. CEV starting with VCEV are underway now and are actually going well but it’s still early days in this marathon as the supplies have been limited and we only got the OK to move to cohort 4 last week.


----------



## lane (1 Feb 2021)

In Nottingham at the weekend people were apparently queueing for 90 minutes outside one centre - which considering how cold it was and people are elderly......


----------



## C R (1 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> In Nottingham at the weekend people were apparently queueing for 90 minutes outside one centre - which considering how cold it was and people are elderly......


Why are people queueing? Are they not asked to go at a particular time?


----------



## lane (1 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> Why are people queueing? Are they not asked to go at a particular time?


No idea


----------



## Julia9054 (1 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> Why are people queueing? Are they not asked to go at a particular time?


It happened on the first day the vaccination centre in York opened. A friend waited with her dad for 4 hours. A mutual friend was due to take her mum the next day so they took a picnic, blankets and a movie! They were in and out in 10 minutes


----------



## DaveReading (1 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> Why are people queueing? Are they not asked to go at a particular time?



Reportedly many people arrive well in advance of their appointment.


----------



## Buck (1 Feb 2021)

Some people are travelling via public transport or are unsure of how long it will take them to get there if driving from another part of town and the older generation do tend to be “always early” rather than the younger ones who are “just in time” or “a touch late”!


----------



## vickster (1 Feb 2021)

My 78 year old father arrived 5 minutes early at Epsom Downs and was told to park close by and return at his allotted time (he does have a blue badge which may have meant he needed for a limited space to free up)


----------



## Unkraut (1 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I take no heart in the situation on the continent but it does seem to me to be an indicator that this is, and has been, a very difficult situation for the respective parties to deal with that relegates politics to the sidelines. I think it is unfair, and easy, to cast blame on the individuals at the top of the various organisations involved in trying to stem the virus both here and in Europe etc.


I take your point but will venture a comment anyway!

I had got the impression that but for von der Leyen and/or those responsible for negotiating with the suppliers Germany, for example, might have had say double the amount of vaccine and therefore vaccinated 5 million instead of half that. I'm now not so sure. 

The big success story in this is America. They have vaccinated the greatest number, and this is largely due to Trump, although few now wish to acknowledge it. The EU ordered nearly _4 months_ after the Americans. The refusal to take the shorter route to authorisation may have added 3 weeks or so.

The Irish border rumpus was a storm in a teacup, initiated by Leyen and not the member states. Taken with the above this more than makes me question von der Leyen's competence, and if a reasonable extra supply of vaccine could have been obtained but for her interference she should go. We are barely at the end of the beginning of the pandemic and cannot afford further mistakes like this. Otherwise you are right, you cannot undo what has been done.

There was a vaccine conference in Berlin today where all the frustration could be aired. The govt has been honest: the first quarter will lag behind expectations. The second quarter looks much more promising, with both restored extra production, and new production. After that it gets better even without new vaccines which in all probability will have been licenced and produced by then. This will carry on into 2022. All depends on no unforeseen circumstances changing this. It should be possible to 'do' everyone who wants a jab by September.

This is good news inasmuch as the extra production could be needed for refresher vaccines, changed to cope with mutations, and the rest of the world also needs to be supplied as well, and there is hardly a surfeit of places capable of producing such vaccines.

The comment that summed it up for me was 'we may be frustrated at the slow progress and wish we had more, but we should be grateful that we have a vaccine at all'.


----------



## shep (1 Feb 2021)

Just remind me why people are so obsessed with hitting this target?

If missed just another opportunity to slate the Government perchance?


----------



## C R (1 Feb 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Reportedly many people arrive well in advance of their appointment.


I've never seen that happening at our doctors surgery during flu vaccine season. In October last year on the day I went everyone seemed to be arriving at their allotted time.


----------



## lane (1 Feb 2021)

At out Doctors in years past flu jab was turn up join the queue, no specific time. They even had a raffle, I won some bubble bath once. This year I was the only one in the surgery.


----------



## Chromatic (2 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> Why are people queueing? Are they not asked to go at a particular time?



When my dad had his first jab a specific time was allocated to him and the confirmation letter stated not to turn up more than 5 minutes before that time.


----------



## lane (2 Feb 2021)

Couple of stories in the press today which don't make great reading.

First, The Kent variant of coronavirus appears to be undergoing new genetic changes which make it more like the South African and Brazilian variant which the vaccine is less effective against.

Second, not specifically vaccine but treatment, the antibody treatments which were a great hope, do not work against the variants which is a big blow.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...pe-in-covid-treatments-fails-against-variants

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55900625


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> the antibody treatments which were a great hope, do not work against the variants which is a big blow.
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...pe-in-covid-treatments-fails-against-variants


Monoclonal antibodies (COVID-19) have not yet been found effective as a therapy in proper (ie Phase 3) trials, aiui, so no 'great hope'.
Reported in December ("Experimental monoclonal antibody not efficacious in Phase 3 trial.") versus 'original' virus version. So failing against variants is to be expected - not really 'news'.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/results-nih-sponsored-activ-3-trial-published


----------



## lane (2 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Monoclonal antibodies (COVID-19) have not yet been found effective as a therapy in proper (ie Phase 3) trials, aiui, so no 'great hope'.
> Reported in December ("Experimental monoclonal antibody not efficacious in Phase 3 trial.") versus 'original' virus version. So failing against variants is to be expected - not really 'news'.
> https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/results-nih-sponsored-activ-3-trial-published



The phrase "great hope"is taken from Nick Cammack who leads the Covid 19 Therapeutic accelerator at Welcome. So personally I wouldn't dismiss the statement as readily as you have. Also there is something specific regarding the spike protean which means they will not work as readily against the variants as against the original.


----------



## Rezillo (2 Feb 2021)

Ursual von der Leyen, as quoted in the Times:

“Some countries started to vaccinate a little before Europe, it is true. But they resorted to emergency, 24-hour marketing authorisation procedures,” she said. “The commission and the member states agreed not to compromise on the safety and efficacy requirements linked to the authorisation of a vaccine.”

“So, yes, Europe left it later, but it was the right decision. I remind you that a vaccine is the injection of an active biological substance into a healthy body. We are talking about mass vaccination here. It is a gigantic responsibility.”

That's just handing stuff on a plate to UK anti-vaxxers, implying our safety is compromised and what some readers may take as her saying that we are using a live vaccine. Appalling misinformation.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Feb 2021)

I read that he had described them as a 'great hope'. And they may be still. But since none have been found efficacious so far, that level of hope is not really affected by the new findings:
"monoclonal antibodies – are failing against variants of the virus, such as those that have emerged in South Africa and Brazil, scientists have found." (Guardian link you shared.)
That's all I was trying to point up.
It would be great if they could be found to be effective. Also points up (if you read the scientific paper pre-print) why the 501Y.V2 E484K variant (as identified in SA) is rightly causing the angst and action in UK.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Feb 2021)

“So, yes, Europe left it later: the Commission had already arranged to go home for 10 days at Christmas, but it was the right decision (to take our time and do it properly)" said von der Leyen.
I wonder how much credibility the public of the United Kingdom (or indeed substantial proportions of the EU) afford the EU Commission President?


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Feb 2021)

Change in Vaccination Strategy?
"one question keeps cropping up: who’s next on the list?"

"The UK's current vaccination priority list was drawn up with a single goal in mind: preventing as many deaths as possible. So the Group 1-9 list goes down incrementally in age to those aged 50 and over, and younger people with underlying conditions. All together, these groups are estimated to make up 99 per cent of preventable deaths from COVID-19."
"The question of who to vaccinate next is not so simple. The JCVI says that the focus for the second phase of the vaccine rollout “could be on further preventing hospitalisation”
Does that mean vaccinating those in certain occupations who are at greater risk of being infected?
Would it be better to target potential super-spreaders is an effective measure of controlling the pandemic?
JCVI is also considering whether a targeted community vaccination policy could prevent transmission. This hinges on whether they can determine which groups are the main ones transmitting the infection to others.
A key factor in the decision will be the extent to which the vaccine actually stops the virus being passed on – something it hasn’t been proven to do yet. (Data from Israel inbound? By the time a decision is needed (?end Feb) we should have some data on the UK experience with 15+M having had one dose by middish-Feb.
Groups 1-4: 15 Feb (say 13.5M)
Another 10M by 15 Mar (Groups 5, 6 and 7 - O/60s)
Then slow to 6M for the next month (because second doses will need to be delivered from 15 Mar).


----------



## mjr (2 Feb 2021)

Rezillo said:


> That's just handing stuff on a plate to UK anti-vaxxers, implying our safety is compromised


Well, it was a short term compromise, wasn't it? Boris &co gambled on using a process which would give earlier vaccine approvals and — as far as we can tell so far, because the EMA seems to have issued the same approvals using the more conservative process and we're not yet seeing December vaccinees grow second heads or whatever — won the gamble, giving the UK three weeks head-start and less competition for early supplies.

Does this hand stuff to anti-vaxxers? Maybe until the EMA agreed, but why would it now?


> and what some readers may take as her saying that we are using a live vaccine. Appalling misinformation.


I don't see how you make the leap to her saying it's live vaccine, so yes, that does seem like appalling misinformation that should not have been posted!


----------



## mjr (2 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Would it be better to target potential super-spreaders is an effective measure of controlling the pandemic?


My recollection of pre-covid flu pandemic models is that targetting super-spreaders is key to ending the outbreak: either vaccinating them or modifying their behaviour to reduce transmission. It might not be sufficient to get things under control, but it is necessary.


----------



## lane (2 Feb 2021)

[


Ajax Bay said:


> Change in Vaccination Strategy?
> "one question keeps cropping up: who’s next on the list?"
> 
> "The UK's current vaccination priority list was drawn up with a single goal in mind: preventing as many deaths as possible. So the Group 1-9 list goes down incrementally in age to those aged 50 and over, and younger people with underlying conditions. All together, these groups are estimated to make up 99 per cent of preventable deaths from COVID-19."
> ...



So the total of 29.5 million by the 15 April (approximately) covers groups 1 to 9?


----------



## lane (2 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> My recollection of pre-covid flu pandemic models is that targetting super-spreaders is key to ending the outbreak: either vaccinating them or modifying their behaviour to reduce transmission. It might not be sufficient to get things under control, but it is necessary.



How do you identify them?


----------



## mjr (2 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> How do you identify them?


Well, if we had contact tracing that worked, either human or app, then the jobs or features of the most-frequently-contacted/pinged people would be one way to get some idea... but at the moment, that would probably over-emphasise politicians and especially Health Minister and Leader of the Opposition! 

Modelling might also give some suggestions but I don't know the detailed models for this as it's not something I've ever worked on.


----------



## johnblack (2 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Well, if we had contact tracing that worked, either human or app, then the jobs or features of the most-frequently-contacted/pinged people would be one way to get some idea... but at the moment, that would probably over-emphasise politicians and especially Health Minister and Leader of the Opposition!
> 
> Modelling might also give some suggestions but I don't know the detailed models for this as it's not something I've ever worked on.


I tried looking at this, but can't find much information, how many countries have a fully functioning and successful contract tracing system? I've heard that some in SE Asia have been effective and that may be because they are working with far fewer cases so don't get completely overloaded?? But I have no idea about other European countries, who's doing it well that we can learn from?


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> So the total of 29.5 million by the 15 April (approximately) covers groups 1 to 9?


Not quite. I said (on current jab rate and resumption of second dose delivery at 12 weeks):
by 15 Mar (Groups 5, 6 and 7 - O/60s).
Then 6M (first jabs) for the next 28 days will do about 2/3rds of Groups 8 (4.4M) and 9 (4.7M)
After mid April, first dose rate estimate might be 1.25Mpw, so we might hope that Group 9 (the last on the JCVI list) might be complete by 30 Apr.
Note: The figures for Groups 5, 7, 8 and 9 will be over-estimates as the actual size of each group will be reduced by the numbers already vaccinated in Groups 4 and 6 - which means these dates are conservative rather than optimistic estimates.
I have not included any 'pessimism bias'.
HTH


----------



## Kingfisher101 (2 Feb 2021)

TBH, I dont give a fig about any of it, I just want the barber and the shops to re open.


----------



## PK99 (2 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> I tried looking at this, but can't find much information, how many countries have a fully functioning and successful contract tracing system? I've heard that some in SE Asia have been effective and that may be because they are working with far fewer cases so don't get completely overloaded?? But I have no idea about other European countries, who's doing it well that we can learn from?



Don't know current info but Germany started well then lost the plot:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...e-lost-control-of-tracing-as-infections-surge


----------



## Pale Rider (2 Feb 2021)

On a personal level, vaccine excitement is approaching fever pitch at Pale Rider Towers.

I've been sent a link to book an appointment (is that the push model @midlife?) at a local health centre.

I could have had tomorrow at 9am-9.10am, but have opted for 3pm-3.10pm.

My aim will be to arrive as close to 3pm as possible, wearing only a short sleeve t-shirt - and a pair of trousers, but I'm sure you know what I mean.

I'm a bit wary of stories on here and locally of a handful of adverse reactions, but I'm having it, so we shall see what we shall see.

From a national perspective, the appointment means I will reach my cohort 4 target of Feb 15 with a couple of weeks to spare.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Feb 2021)

Hope you're going to ride over 
Your favourite cycle top, for the win.


----------



## Pale Rider (2 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Hope you're going to ride over
> Your favourite cycle top, for the win.



Wot - in this weather?

Regrettably, one of the impacts of my cohort four membership is cycling is currently off the menu.

But in the words of Arnie: "I'll be back."


----------



## PK99 (2 Feb 2021)

Texted an hour ago.

Saw it and booked 30 minutes ago 

Health Centre 10min walk away 10.30 tomorrow.


----------



## johnblack (2 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> Don't know current info but Germany started well then lost the plot:
> 
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...e-lost-control-of-tracing-as-infections-surge


Yeah I did see that Germany’s wasn’t going well and I’m aware that France were in an even worse position. There must be some successful track and trace examples for us to follow?


----------



## Rezillo (2 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I don't see how you make the leap to her saying it's live vaccine, so yes, that does seem like appalling misinformation that should not have been posted!



I haven't made any leap to her saying it's live vaccine. 

My words on interpretation of what she said were " what some readers may take as her saying that we are using a live vaccine" which was a response to her describing the vaccine as an "active biological substance". The "active" is capable of wilful misinterpretation and could have been left out. It's just a very poor choice of words on her part, given the nutjobs out there, a step too far in emphasizing the seriousness of any vaccination project.

By "some readers" I don't mean Cyclechat, I hasten to add, just anyone reading her words as reported. Btw, I can't believe I'm defending the blond oaf but I don't see what the UK did in its approval was a gamble.


----------



## matticus (2 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> But in the words of Arnie: "I'll be back."


as he was filmed getting his jab, he also said
"_follow me if you want to live_."


----------



## matticus (2 Feb 2021)

Is anyone else struggling to be scared of 
_The Kent Variant_
?


----------



## MrGrumpy (2 Feb 2021)

concerned in that this virus appears to be mutating not into anything milder !!


----------



## Domus (2 Feb 2021)

Senior management and I are having the vaccine on Friday morning, expecting a sore arm and a headache. Number 3 daughter is a frontline social worker and had her jab last week. It seems the after effects are much worse on the younger ones. She is a very fit 37 year old fell runner and it laid her out for 36 hours, a crushing headache and VERY sore limbs


----------



## SpokeyDokey (2 Feb 2021)

The best article I can find for NOT prioritising sections of the community eg teachers over the current JCVI list is from the Guardian here:

https://www.theguardian.com/society...riority-for-vaccines-warn-government-advisers

On a political note is Starmer by supporting a move to move teachers up the pecking order ignoring the expert medical advice simply to pander to one of Labour's power bases?


----------



## mjr (2 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> Just remind me why people are so obsessed with hitting this target?
> 
> If missed just another opportunity to slate the Government perchance?


I had a think while cycling and I think the interest in this target is because it will tell us more about the current state of the government on two vital aspects:
1. have they learned from the testing target farce about actually delivering? And if this pledge is also looking like it will be broken, will they attempt a repeat?
2. how much trust can we have in what they say, about vaccine deployment? Or anything much?

It's also the most dynamic target currently on show. Cases are falling and it's mainly a case of waiting for them to fall far enough to unlock and hoping it is before a new even nastier variant arises which stymies unlocking.

I've no interest in "just another opportunity to slate the Government". We're probably stuck with them for the best part of four years now, so it serves little purpose for its own sake. I'll happily praise them when they do something good like set up Active Travel England, but apart from finally getting active about active travel, the last year of covid response has been littered with clangers dropped which have probably increased the toll. Those are worth criticising.

Happily, the vaccination rate has accelerated to nearly 400k/day now, so it's looking on course to hit the target.


----------



## shep (2 Feb 2021)

So if they hit the target they're good and if not they're bad?

Very scientific.


----------



## mjr (2 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> So if they hit the target they're good and if not they're bad?
> 
> Very scientific.


Would you regard missing the target as good, then?


----------



## shep (2 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Would you regard missing the target as good, then?


I would see it as doing their very best in an impossible situation, but as you mention, looks like they will so irrelevant.


----------



## Rusty Nails (2 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Would you regard missing the target as good, then?


Is the problem failing to achieve a target, or poor target setting?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (2 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I had a think while cycling and I think the interest in this target is because it will tell us more about the current state of the government on two vital aspects:
> 1. have they learned from the testing target farce about actually delivering? And if this pledge is also looking like it will be broken, will they attempt a repeat?
> 2. how much trust can we have in what they say, about vaccine deployment? Or anything much?
> 
> ...



I admire your Left Wing optimism. 

Latest polls have Boris back in front of Starmer and Conservatives to win next election. (Source: Guardian/Spectator/Gov.uk etc).

I think many Gov's will have dropped 'clangers' before this is over - even the much hallowed Germany is coming unglued on the vaccination front and their T&T is falling over by all accounts. Nature of the beast I'm afraid - new territory etc.


----------



## mjr (2 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I admire your Left Wing optimism.


I don't expect such insults from a moderator! 

I didn't say they wouldn't win next time or that I wanted them to lose. I just said we don't have a choice in the matter for years.


----------



## shep (2 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I don't expect such insults from a moderator!
> 
> I didn't say they wouldn't win next time or that I wanted them to lose. I just said we don't have a choice in the matter for years.


You see that as an insult?
Jeeez.


----------



## Unkraut (2 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> Don't know current info but Germany started well then lost the plot:


I'm not sure the tracing was really the problem. Over 50 per 100 000 infections and it gets harder to then impossible to track people. The infection rate is now within sight of returning to this figure, with calls for relaxation of restrictions which thankfully will go unheeded. It needs to be considerably less than that. Merkel is not going to make the mistake other countries have by relaxing too early.

The S E Asia countries have done better on this than anybody in the West.

The mistake Germany made was to delay in implementing a lockdown in October, and to make it a 'light' lockdown. It did stop the exponential rise, but did not reduce the rate. This is now generally acknowledged. At least this wasn't compounded by a Christmas free for all.

The other problem is an obsession with personal privacy, data protection. This has greatly reduced the value of the app, for example. One doctor in a covid ICU has never received a warning from the app! When it comes to the vaccine, all the data for name address and data of birth is held by the voting registrar, but may not be passed to the health authority due to ... data protection. These are not normal times and this needs changing quickly.

The other mistake might have been that Germany didn't single-handedly finance the ordering of vaccines - it would have cost the equivalent of a couple of days lockdown and peanuts compared with the EU stimulation package. Overridden the EU commission which was hampered by poorer countries worried about financing vaccines. That was part of the delay. 

The comparison of EU and USA shows up what I still suspect was a catastrophic misjudgment by the EU in ordering vaccines despite the fact we have hindsight. I wasn't surprised to see on the news tonight that Hungary has opted to import the Russian Sputnik vaccine under the emergency authorisation provision. A million people have had it without statistically significant bad reactions.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (3 Feb 2021)

O-AZ vaccine* may* have significant impact on transmission rates - let's hope that this is verified sooner rather than later:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55910964


----------



## Pale Rider (3 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Latest polls have Boris back in front of Starmer and Conservatives to win next election. (Source: Guardian/Spectator/Gov.uk etc).



Even if the vaccine programme hit the buffers now, which is looking unlikely, 10 million in such a short space of time is a magnificent effort.

Plenty of people deserve credit for that, but in the public mind Boris and the government will get a lot of it.

It's no surprise to me the Tories have edged ahead in the polls, however people have short memories so whether the stellar vaccine performance will help them in an election in three or four years is more doubtful.


----------



## matticus (3 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> It's no surprise to me the Tories have edged ahead in the polls,


What, despite all the criticism from the Cyclechat pundits?? Are we losing our influence with the electorate? 😠


----------



## Pale Rider (3 Feb 2021)

matticus said:


> What, despite all the criticism from the Cyclechat pundits?? Are we losing our influence with the electorate? 😠



You can't lose what you never had.


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> If we keep on using that flawed template, it will result in more flawed conclusions. That is a variation on what's called "Garbage In, Garbage Out". It should be possible to see if we are roughly on target another way by looking at the % of the priority groups vaccinated so far, but so far I found only statistics on progress vaccinating the over-80s.





mjr said:


> the vaccination rate has accelerated to nearly 400k/day now, so it's looking on course to hit the target.


I had the distinct idea you didn't like the flawed (too simple?) template of adding (rate of vaccination (eg 400kpd) times 11*) to the number already given to predict whether the UK was on course to hit the government's stated target. Is this a revised approach?
*the number of days to 15 Feb
However I have gleaned (source not shareable) some data (England) which will help your preferred model of 'what percentage of each JCVI group have been vaccinated so far'.
Group 1 (1.1M) - care home: all (who are clinically eligible) except those homes where there has been a recent outbreak. They will completed in the next 10 days, once it's safe to visit. Some of the workers have not been vaccinated: a proportion have refused or are 'unable'.
Group 2 (5M) - over 90% (with an undisclosed percentage of refusers/unable).
Group 3 (O/75s, 2.3M) - 90%
Group 4 (O/70s, 3.3M) - 40%
So (rough maths) Gp1=1M, Gp2=4.5M, Gp3=2M, Gp4=1.3M. Total = 8.8M. And about a million not in these groups, or my figures for the size of the groups are lower than 'actual'.
@Rusty Nails has pinged the obvious failure in this 15 Feb vaccination programme target: it was an easy target and chosen as one the government must have known on 4 Jan was easily achievable.


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> In Nottingham at the weekend people were apparently queueing for 90 minutes outside one centre - which considering how cold it was and people are elderly......


and


Julia9054 said:


> It happened on the first day the vaccination centre in York opened.


The over 75 generation were brought up during the war or at least during rationing. They are a disciplined cohort with experience of shortages and queues. So when a vaccine which will reduce their chances of serious illness or death is offered (and will in due course mean they can see family again), it is little surprise if they react thus.
By exposing themselves to these conditions, however, a typical 80 year old will actually be increasing their chances of illness (or even death), but I doubt they see it that way (or maybe they thought the queue would move faster). As @Buck has shared, the 15 minute post vaccination observation 'wait' (in shelter?) slows down the process. With the Oxford-AZ vaccine it's 'in-and'out' like the flu vaccine.


----------



## mjr (3 Feb 2021)

Unkraut said:


> I wasn't surprised to see on the news tonight that Hungary has opted to import the Russian Sputnik vaccine under the emergency authorisation provision. A million people have had it without statistically significant bad reactions.


News on tv today says it is now working towards EMA approval and Germany interested in using it because of the high effectiveness.

Belgium to limit AZ vaccine to under-55s. They also seem to be lining up "front line public services" as next vaccine group but not yet defined who that is beyond emergency services.


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Feb 2021)

Another Sputnik vaccine link: https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/vaccine-mankind-sputnik-vs-efficacy-123700136.html
and the actual Lancet link to the report is here: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00191-4/fulltext
Lancet covering article concludes: "The development of the Sputnik V vaccine has been criticised for unseemly haste, corner cutting, and an absence of transparency. But the outcome reported here is clear and the scientific principle of vaccination is demonstrated, which means another vaccine can now join the fight to reduce the incidence of COVID-19."


----------



## vickster (3 Feb 2021)

Any news on the Chinese Sinovax. Apparently being used very widely in the Middle East despite there being no published data (from a colleague from the region and client based in UAE), with relatively little use of the Pfizer one (vaccinees unable to choose which they get)


----------



## Unkraut (3 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> News on tv today says it is now working towards EMA approval and Germany interested in using it because of the high effectiveness.
> 
> Belgium to limit AZ vaccine to under-55s. They also seem to be lining up "front line public services" as next vaccine group but not yet defined who that is beyond emergency services.


Announcement today that Curevac are going to develop variants of the vaccine with GlaxoSmithKline in the UK in order to deal with mutations. This pleased me as it is good to see international cooperation at work again. 

I also see Boris Palmer the Bürgermeister of Tübingen where Curevac are based wants their version of the vaccine authorised under the emergency provisions rather than the slower route through the agency. Save several weeks. It's a variation on a theme that has been shown to be safe and effective. Time will tell if this occurs, but it is clear our little friend in Brussels has caused quite a stir on vaccine supply and no-one wants it repeated.


----------



## lane (3 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> Any news on the Chinese Sinovax. Apparently being used very widely in the Middle East despite there being no published data (from a colleague from the region and client based in UAE), with relatively little use of the Pfizer one (vaccinees unable to choose which they get)



Vaccination rate in China is very low surprisingly. Although covid rates are also very low.


----------



## mjr (3 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The over 75 generation were brought up during the war or at least during rationing. They are a disciplined cohort with experience of shortages and queues.


Rationing ended 1954. A 75-year-old would have been 8 then and few 8-year-olds would have been planning the household shopping.

That sort of generalisation is just ageism. There are various reasons why over-75s tend to be keener for the vaccines, reported in the various surveys, but it ain't all about the war, despite what populists may pretend.


----------



## vickster (3 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Vaccination rate in China is very low surprisingly. Although covid rates are also very low.


Maybe but the Chinese vaccine is being used widely in the ME...I wondered if they had published any data yet

This on the BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/health-55907903

There is something in The Lancet...but I've no time to read
https://www.thelancet.com/article/S1473-3099(20)30843-4/fulltext

Ref Covid rates being low...depends if the data are comprehensive


----------



## shep (3 Feb 2021)

10 Million done now, not bad I don't think.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (3 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> the Chinese vaccine



I think there are (at least) two, with different technologies. No idea which is being used in ME. I don't think phase 3 results have been published or submitted to a western agency.


----------



## vickster (3 Feb 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I think there are (at least) two, with different technologies. No idea which is being used in ME. I don't think phase 3 results have been published or submitted to a western agency.


The client mentioned Sinovac / vax (?) as I did upthread (the other main one is Sinopharm according to the BBC video)


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> There is something in The Lancet...but I've no time to read
> https://www.thelancet.com/article/S1473-3099(20)30843-4/fulltext
> Ref Covid rates being low...depends if the data are comprehensive


The Lancet piece is a November insight to the Sinovax Phase 1/2 trial. Phase 3 trial data - not seen.
Spot on with the data 'dependency'. Also depends on the sensitivity of the testing - we use a high sensitivity PCR analysis to determine positive/negative aiui, which generates many more positives, even among those with no symptoms, or recovered testees.
As the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci said (in June) "If you get a *cycle* *threshold* of 35 or more, the chances of it being replication-competent are minuscule." [NB Such a result <35 Ct, doesn't mean the person tested hasn't got (or had) COVID-19 but it does mean they're not contagious, aiui.]
We (and others eg USA) have been using a high cycle threshold (Ct) level (?>40) iaw the WHO guidance.
This is going to be a greater 'issue' down the line.


----------



## PK99 (3 Feb 2021)

From Telegraph Report
>>>>
_Teachers are abusing the vaccine booking system and skipping the queue ahead of the elderly, a council warned as it introduced tighter rules.

Headteachers in Rochdale were contacted after the NHS alerted council chiefs in Greater Manchester that teachers had got hold of the booking link for vaccines and were turning up to be inoculated.


"It has come to our attention that a booking link sent to NHS employees to book a vaccination slot at one of the identified hospital sites has been inappropriately shared," said Gail Hopper, the director of children's services at Rochdale Borough Council.

"This was not the intention when the non-transferable link was provided, and should not have happened. Not surprisingly, it is now spreading widely."

Ms Hopper said school staff had been booking appointments and turning up at vaccination centres and to get jabs, adding: "Others are now planning to do the same."_
>>>>

Ummm, Would such behaviour be in breach of Teachers' Professional Standards and leave them open to disciplinary action?


----------



## dodgy (3 Feb 2021)

Teachers have become heroes. Shame for a minority to throw that away if the report is true.


----------



## mjr (3 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> Ummm, Would such behaviour be in breach of Teachers' Professional Standards and leave them open to disciplinary action?


Dunno, but doing no authentication beyond "has got hold of the booking link" should be a breach of the Web Developers' Professional Standards!

I wonder if the page even had anything on it to say it was for NHS employees only...?


----------



## lane (3 Feb 2021)

I reported a similar thing sometime ago with Local Authority employees


----------



## Buck (4 Feb 2021)

There was a loophole on the National Immunisation Booking System whereby anybody without a letter could bypass the checks and originate the booking.
This loophole was apparently spread on FB and was picked up and is now closed (not checked it myself!)

it’s been reported that anybody turning up who doesnt appear to be in cohorts 1-4 will be challenged and turned away.


----------



## Buck (4 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Dunno, but doing no authentication beyond "has got hold of the booking link" should be a breach of the Web Developers' Professional Standards!
> 
> I wonder if the page even had anything on it to say it was for NHS employees only...?



if it’s like the ones I’ve seen, they are not for NHS employees only but The procedure is not to share the link externally and book on behalf of a HSCW (It sounds like somebody passed it on either in error, or willingly) These hospital appointments were initially used for 80+ patients and now are also being used CEV patients under 18 as only Pfizer is licensed for these patients and again, the booking should be made on behalf of the patient and the link not forwarded.


----------



## lane (4 Feb 2021)

Government seem to be suggesting they need to do 500,000 a day from now on to meet the 15th February target. Limiting factor is vaccine supply.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/04/about-4000-covid-variants-across-world-uk-minister


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Government seem to be suggesting they need to do 500,000 a day from now on to meet the 15th February target. Limiting factor is vaccine supply.


Zahawi “You can see that in the next 10 or so days, we’ve got to do another almost touching 5 million"
Hasn't done the maths. Less than 4M to be done in 10 days. Done as at 3 Feb: Gp 1 = 99%, Gp 2 = 90+%, Gp 3 = 90%, Gp 4 (3.3M) = 40%. Fails to acknowledge refusal/unable numbers. Target is to offer vaccine (first dose) to all those in Gps 1-4, not to give 15M first doses. Let's not shift goalposts.
I too understand that vaccine supply (as opposed to other elements of 'delivery' system) is the limiter. That's why, in my estimates, I have been prudent - using 2.5M doses delivered a week (well below the average achieved in the last fortnight).
From your link
Zahawi “We will set out our target (for vaccinating groups 5-9) after we have hit our February 15 target. But you can do the maths."
Asked whether that meant it would take another 35 days from 15 February to have jabbed all 31 million people in the first nine cohorts, replied: “That assumes the supply"
The interviewer has not done their maths or are just fishing. They've (completely) failed to take into account the requirement for second doses which will kick in from 14 Mar, effectively halving the rate of first dose delivery from then on. As I've previously shared (NB assumptions) a reasonable estimate for giving (at least) the first dose to all the JCVI priority groups (1-9) is 30 Apr (1-4 by 15 Feb, then 10M by 15 Mar, then 5M by 12 Apr, then rest by 30 Apr).


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Feb 2021)

How did it go, @PK99 ? You must be back home by now.


----------



## PK99 (4 Feb 2021)

Went well ('twas yesterday) arrived 10 mins before booked time, 5 minute queue to get in.
Minimal wait time inside building. 
Very well organised waiting system inside.
Local volunteers guiding folks through system
Jabbed on time +/- 10 mins by GP from my practice.
Pfizer vaccine
Comprehensive explanation and data sheets
Nice warm seating area for 15 min wait.
Back home 45 mins after booked time.
No after effects at all not even at jab site.

Exceptionally well organised and delivered service.

Post jab noticed volunteers being very helpful to frail elderlies needing short cut trough building to meet taxi.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Feb 2021)

https://www.ndmrb.ox.ac.uk/about/ne...ng-the-3-month-interval-until-the-second-dose
Summary (Oxford-AZ vaccine) (minor editing) wrt 12 week gap assurance and beneficial effect on transmission: 
Analyses reveal single dose efficacy from day 22 to day 90 of 76% and maintained for that time. Post second dose (12 week gap), efficacy is 82.4%, with a 95% CI of 62.7% - 91.7% at 12+ weeks. Analyses of PCR positive swabs in UK population suggests vaccine may have substantial effect on transmission of the virus with 67% reduction in positive swabs among those vaccinated. 
Lancet pre-print
"Interpretation: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination programmes aimed at vaccinating a large proportion of the population with a single dose, with a second dose given after a 3 month period is an effective strategy for reducing disease, and may be the optimal for rollout of a pandemic vaccine when supplies are limited in the short term."
I hope other nations will take note and save lives.


----------



## mjr (4 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Target is to offer vaccine (first dose) to all those in Gps 1-4, not to give 15M first doses. Let's not shift goalposts.


You just moved the goalposts! Boris was clear at the start of the year: offered a vaccine means given, not just sent a letter out possibly to an old address!


----------



## nickyboy (4 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> You just moved the goalposts! Boris was clear at the start of the year: offered a vaccine means given, not just sent a letter out possibly to an old address!


No it doesn't. "Offered" doesn't mean "given" (ie administered). You have to add back to the "given" number those who were "offered" and chose to not take up the offer. 
There may be some whose offer has gone astray (given the millions involved that wouldn't be surprising at all). But equally there are those who just decide not to take up the offer of vaccine, for whatever reason


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> You just moved the goalposts! Boris was clear at the start of the year: offered a vaccine means given, not just sent a letter out possibly to an old address!


Please add value. You shared a gov.uk link a few days ago - Prime Minister Johnson's address to the nation on coronavirus on 4 January - which said:
the PM said "By the middle of February, if things go well and with a fair wind in our sails, we expect to have *offered* the first vaccine dose to everyone in the four top priority groups identified by the JCVI. That means vaccinating all residents in a care home for older adults and their carers, everyone over the age of 70, all frontline health and social care workers, and everyone who is clinically extremely vulnerable."
"Giving" a vaccine to everyone in Groups 1-4 is impossible: a significant proportion (you can suggest a percentage) will refuse to have a vaccine or are unable to for various clinical reasons (@classic33 can fill you in). That's why "offered" is a sensible verb, and I'd articulate 'offered' as 'offered a vaccination with an appointment before the target date' - to address a repeat of the end of April testing target imbroglio.
Other people eg vvvv think that the target is 'offered', but I appreciate that you may prefer your interpretation.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...ifting-many-coronavirus-restrictions-12179452


----------



## classic33 (4 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Please add value. You shared a gov.uk link a few days ago - Prime Minister Johnson's address to the nation on coronavirus on 4 January - which said:
> the PM said "By the middle of February, if things go well and with a fair wind in our sails, we expect to have *offered* the first vaccine dose to everyone in the four top priority groups identified by the JCVI. That means vaccinating all residents in a care home for older adults and their carers, everyone over the age of 70, all frontline health and social care workers, and everyone who is clinically extremely vulnerable."
> "Giving" a vaccine to everyone in Groups 1-4 is impossible: a significant proportion (you can suggest a percentage) will refuse to have a vaccine or are unable to for various clinical reasons (@classic33 can fill you in). That's why "offered" is a sensible verb, and I'd articulate 'offered' as 'offered a vaccination with an appointment before the target date' - to address a repeat of the end of April testing target imbroglio.
> Other people eg vvvv think that the target is 'offered', but I appreciate that you may prefer your interpretation.
> https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...ifting-many-coronavirus-restrictions-12179452


I'll be of no help on this. 
I'm only aware of what I can't be given, and the reason why. Not why someone else can't be given it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Feb 2021)

https://www.research.ox.ac.uk/Artic...nvestigating-dosing-with-alternating-vaccines
The COVID-19 Heterologous Prime Boost study or ‘Com-Cov’ study, run by the National Immunisation Schedule Evaluation Consortium (NISEC) and backed by £7 million of government funding from the Vaccines Taskforce, will evaluate the feasibility of using a different vaccine for the initial ‘prime’ vaccination to the follow-up ‘booster’ vaccination. This will help policy-makers explore whether this could be a viable route to increase the flexibility of vaccination programmes.

Using a different vaccine for the second dose - currently advised as to be avoided (qv).
The NHS Green Book Ch 14a says (wrt the second dose not the same as the first): 
"There is no evidence on the interchangeability of the COVID-19 vaccines although studies are underway. Therefore, every effort should be made to determine which vaccine the individual received and to complete with the same vaccine. For individuals who started the schedule and who attend for vaccination at a site where the same vaccine is not available, or if the first product received is unknown, it is reasonable to offer one dose of the locally available product to complete the schedule."


----------



## lane (4 Feb 2021)

More queue jumping - PHE staff this time

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ue-jumping-as-phe-workers-given-covid-vaccine


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Feb 2021)

Seems more like 'free ice creams' at the end of the day, which couldn't be put back in the freezer, and someone didn't want to waste.
The problem with that is that it fails to give sufficient encouragement to having a cunning plan for calling in eligible (ie in the current JCVI group being vaccinated) people for their first jab, at the end of a long day. Pretty sure that 10 days ago, a clear edict went out saying 'have a stand-by list of people in the priority categories' - and make it work.
Not easy to get this right, but we can endeavour so to do.


----------



## PK99 (4 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> More queue jumping - PHE staff this time
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ue-jumping-as-phe-workers-given-covid-vaccine



Fundamentally different from the queue jumping by individual teachers deliberately subverting the system, that I highlighted yesterday.

Using leftover doses at the end of the day is sensible - but there should be a better protocol for allocation.

An individual deliberately inserting themselves in the queue for vaccines is morally repugnant.


----------



## Rusty Nails (4 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> Fundamentally different from the queue jumping by individual teachers deliberately subverting the system, that I highlighted yesterday.
> Using leftover doses at the end of the day is sensible - but there should be a better protocol for allocation.
> An individual deliberately inserting themselves in the queue for vaccines is morally repugnant.



If, as is often said, the British are good at queuing, stands to reason they will also be good at queue jumping.


Sh*t happens. There was something in the papers today about football players at Chesterfield being invited in to avoid end of day waste.


----------



## Blue Hills (4 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Rationing ended 1954.


Point of order. Malt rationing didn't end until the late 50s. I owe this knowledge to my favoured historical research reading matter, beer bottle labels. Bishop's Finger in this case.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Feb 2021)

I think it's fair to say that the effects on people's behaviour of _inter alia_ rationing lasted a fair few years after '54. I'm sure my mother's approach to feeding us was influenced in such a way, and that affected us years on. Perhaps later 'baby boomers' less so.


----------



## Pale Rider (4 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I think it's fair to say that the effects on people's behaviour of _inter alia_ rationing lasted a fair few years after '54.



That is so.

Rationing didn't end one day and there were supermarkets bursting with food the next.

The impact of rationing in people's minds was often permanent - they never forgot about it and it continued to influence their attitudes to food.

A small example: my grandmother didn't like me helping to peel potatoes because I 'took too much off'.

Her attitude was based purely on her memories of rationing when potatoes - and lots of other foods - were in short supply.


----------



## mjr (4 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> A small example: my grandmother didn't like me helping to peel potatoes because I 'took too much off'.
> 
> Her attitude was based purely on her memories of rationing when potatoes - and lots of other foods - were in short supply.


Maybe it was purely that or maybe you did indeed take too much off... I'm guessing she's not a cyclechat poster.


----------



## Pale Rider (4 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Maybe it was purely that or maybe you did indeed take too much off... I'm guessing she's not a cyclechat poster.



Few alive today will realise the lengths people went to in order to stretch their food under rationing.


----------



## matticus (4 Feb 2021)

I hope you kept some of the peelings as evidence for this court.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Feb 2021)

Yes. Peelings or it didn't happen.


----------



## lane (4 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> Fundamentally different from the queue jumping by individual teachers deliberately subverting the system, that I highlighted yesterday.
> 
> Using leftover doses at the end of the day is sensible - but there should be a better protocol for allocation.
> 
> An individual deliberately inserting themselves in the queue for vaccines is morally repugnant.



I didn't think it was entirely clear from the story and the various conflicting accounts that it was using up stuff left over at the end of the day. It was quite a few people and they had all had to travel some distance for the vaccine.


----------



## lane (4 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Maybe it was purely that or maybe you did indeed take too much off... I'm guessing she's not a cyclechat poster.



Mrs Lane does tend to take quite a lot off when she peels. She helped my mum with the peeling and it was definitely not appreciated. Mind you they didn't exactly get on like a house on fire prior to that.


----------



## PK99 (4 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> I didn't think it was entirely clear from the story and the various conflicting accounts that it was using up stuff left over at the end of the day. It was quite a few people and they had all had to travel some distance for the vaccine.



but is was not the case of individuals inserting themselves in the queue


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Feb 2021)

Around 11 million now inc' very roughly 0.5m 2nd doses

New case numbers and occupied NHS beds also falling - the latter being approx 7000 down on peak.

(Source Gov.UK)

***

Making my blood boil time: one family member (60) invited for vaccine re chronic health condition ie ahead of her age related priority ranking. Going tomorrow at 4.25pm and taking partner along in case there are any spares. Both were serial rule offenders at Xmas, both still are - and this is the person who said "***k Tier 4 (London) no one is stopping her seeing her daughters when she wants to".

No justice in the world - they ought to be at the back of the queue along with the rest of people who won't obey the rules. 

Sorry re mildly ranting.


----------



## lane (4 Feb 2021)

People who obey the lock-down rules are likely people who want to properly wait their turn in the vaccine queue and vice versa unfortunately. On the plus side they sound like potential super spreaders so probably good to give them the vaccine.


----------



## Blue Hills (4 Feb 2021)

Ranting perfectly understandable i think spokey.
I too know of a bunch of londoners of a certain age who were popping round each others houses in groups on a merrygoround , their dodgy logic/justication being that many of them lived alone. 
On a point of fact, someone who had just tagged along wouldn't be able to get a jab would they?


----------



## lane (4 Feb 2021)

Seems from our local Facebook page that we are down to 65 year olds here.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Ranting perfectly understandable i think spokey.
> I too know of a bunch of londoners of a certain age who were popping round each others houses in groups on a merrygoround , their dodgy logic/justication being that many of them lived alone.
> On a point of fact, someone who had just tagged along wouldn't be able to get a jab would they?



I would hope not but there seems to be some issue over how left over vaccines are distributed.

I think they are being optimistic tbh but the principle is annoying - how can anyone be that selfish?


----------



## johnblack (4 Feb 2021)

Mate of mine going next week to get his jab, early 30's but shielding due to Crohn's.


----------



## rualexander (4 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> A small example: my grandmother didn't like me helping to peel potatoes because I 'took too much off'.
> 
> Her attitude was based purely on her memories of rationing when potatoes - and lots of other foods - were in short supply.


If she was that bothered, why did she peel them at all?
Just a wash would suffice.
Plenty nutrition in the skin and I've never peeled a potato in my adult life, whole spud gets eaten.


----------



## biggs682 (4 Feb 2021)

Tonight is the night


----------



## johnblack (4 Feb 2021)

biggs682 said:


> Tonight is the night


....and you're getting the vaccine.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Feb 2021)

Zadawi has said that overall acceptance is 85% (hesitancy - refusals, unables and others therefore 15%).
Offered in the context of trying to increase the BAME uptake.


----------



## PK99 (4 Feb 2021)

nnn


rualexander said:


> If she was that bothered, why did she peel them at all?
> Just a wash would suffice.
> Plenty nutrition in the skin and I've never peeled a potato in my adult life, whole spud gets eaten.



quite, we rarely peel ours - though for nice fluffy/crispy roasties or smooth mash, peeling is a must


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Feb 2021)

biggs682 said:


> Tonight is the night


Candles lit, bath run . Champagne on ice  ?? Barry White playing in the background


----------



## biggs682 (4 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> ....and you're getting the vaccine.


Yes and I got the sticker for proof


----------



## vickster (4 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I would hope not but there seems to be some issue over how left over vaccines are distributed.
> 
> I think they are being optimistic tbh but the principle is annoying - how can anyone be that selfish?


It’s unlikely they’ll even be allowed near the building


----------



## biggs682 (4 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Candles lit, bath run . Champagne on ice  ?? Barry White playing in the background


Hey you should know me better than that


----------



## Buck (4 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Ranting perfectly understandable i think spokey.
> I too know of a bunch of londoners of a certain age who were popping round each others houses in groups on a merrygoround , their dodgy logic/justication being that many of them lived alone.
> On a point of fact, someone who had just tagged along wouldn't be able to get a jab would they?



only if they were in one of the eligible cohorts. We’ve had a few try such as the 54 year old son who was a career for his parents in their 80s that he’d brought for their vaccines. Sorry not at this time.

Another was a HCW who came in Sunday in person to cancel their appointment (no ulterior motive there then!) and then said “oh can my mum have it instead of me?” How olds mum? “60”. Is she deemed CEV? ”no”. That’ll be a No then. “Right I’m going to take this further” she said. Daffodil.


----------



## Beebo (4 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Seems more like 'free ice creams' at the end of the day, which couldn't be put back in the freezer, and someone didn't want to waste.
> The problem with that is that it fails to give sufficient encouragement to having a cunning plan for calling in eligible (ie in the current JCVI group being vaccinated) people for their first jab, at the end of a long day. Pretty sure that 10 days ago, a clear edict went out saying 'have a stand-by list of people in the priority categories' - and make it work.
> Not easy to get this right, but we can endeavour so to do.


Check out this scandal!😁
6 Chesterfield footballers were vaccinated at the Chesterfield football ground which is being used as a centre.
It was the end of the day, they had 15 minutes to find someone to inject or put it in the bin and people are issuing threats of violence against the nurses.

If they had poured it down the sink there would have been complaining too. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-55936490


----------



## mjr (4 Feb 2021)

Just mentioned on BBC News channel: another case of teachers being sent a booking link and this time it seems to have been an official mistake, not inappropriate sharing: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55943120


----------



## mjr (4 Feb 2021)

Switzerland declines to approve OxAZ due to lack of data. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/worl...xfordastrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine/ar-BB1doHXq


----------



## Unkraut (5 Feb 2021)

As an epilogue to the EU AZ vaccine procurement, I have just watched a senior Germany Liberal MP who is a lawyer say he has read the contract with AZ and it explicitly states that liability for using the vaccine is with the user and not the company. This is hardly surprising as they are not making profit on it.

Methinks there needs to be some explanation of why refusing to take the liability was given as one of the reasons why the EU was late ordering.


----------



## Pale Rider (5 Feb 2021)

My jab went to plan.

I arrived bang on time and was walked straight away to the vaccinating room.

A couple of minutes later and I'd been Pfizered.

I have a little card to that effect, and was told I will get another text message in about 12 weeks inviting me to book for the second dose.

No adverse reaction, apart from a tiny bit of soreness at the needle site.

I've heard of several people locally who've had unpleasant flu-like symptoms for a couple of days after having the AZ vaccine.

The nurse who did me said taking two paracetamol before and after may reduce side effects.

She also said the job was proving satisfying because nearly every patient was turning up on time, and was suitably grateful.


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Switzerland declines to approve OxAZ due to lack of data. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/worl...xfordastrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine/ar-BB1doHXq


Since the supply of Oxford-AZ vaccine for Switzerland is “unlikely” to be available until the middle of 2021 (they have pre-bought 15M - why not at $3 a dose?), delay in regulatory approval is a perfectly reasonable approach. They have said that "des études supplémentaires étaient nécessaires avant d'autoriser le vaccin anti-Covid d'AstraZeneca."
Of course there'll be an avalanche of Oxford-AZ use data available later this month (UK first dose, and more from the 2 dose trial in USA) to provide the evidence to take a decision with assurance.
SwissMedic authorised use of the Pfizer vaccine back on 19 Dec and 3M doses are being rolled out since then.
They also authorised use of the Moderna vaccine back on 12 Jan (they expect 7.5M in the first half of this year, paying ?$29 a dose) - for its population of <9M. They have also 'bought' 5M Curevac and 6M Novatec.
Unsurprisingly, Switzerland seem to have got their vaccine procurement act together.


----------



## tom73 (5 Feb 2021)

Think today is the day for Mrs 73 the round about way she's had to go to get this is totally stupid. Still on official word on when she can expect it.


----------



## Blue Hills (5 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> Think today is the day for Mrs 73 the round about way she's had to go to get this is totally stupid.


??


----------



## PK99 (5 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Since the supply of Oxford-AZ vaccine for Switzerland is “unlikely” to be available until the middle of 2021 (they have pre-bought 15M - why not at $3 a dose?), delay in regulatory approval is a perfectly reasonable approach. They have said that "des études supplémentaires étaient nécessaires avant d'autoriser le vaccin anti-Covid d'AstraZeneca."
> Of course there'll be an avalanche of Oxford-AZ use data available later this month (UK first dose, and more from the 2 dose trial in USA) to provide the evidence to take a decision with assurance.
> SwissMedic authorised use of the Pfizer vaccine back on 19 Dec and 3M doses are being rolled out since then.
> They also authorised use of the Moderna vaccine back on 12 Jan (they expect 7.5M in the first half of this year, paying ?$29 a dose) - for its population of <9M. They have also 'bought' 5M Curevac and 6M Novatec.
> Unsurprisingly, Switzerland seem to have got their vaccine procurement act together.



Like clockwork?


----------



## tom73 (5 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> ??


Vaccine day she's hopefully going this morning for one. The way she's had to go about it to get has been stupid she shouldn't have to find a way herself.


----------



## Blue Hills (5 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> The way she's had to go about it to get has been stupid


That's what I was asking about.
No need to answer if it's personal/you think my question intrusive.


----------



## Domus (5 Feb 2021)

AZ vaccine this morning. 
Disappointed that the the 5G chip inserted has not improved my phone signal yet.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (5 Feb 2021)

Domus said:


> AZ vaccine this morning.
> Disappointed that the the 5G chip inserted has not improved my phone signal yet.



Now this is the sort of thing that shows a fundamental lack of knowledge about the vaccine actually works. 

The 5G chips are actually micro-little-nano chips, and until enough of them join together in your rear-upper brain cortex bit then the signal it transmits is not great enough. The second dose you will receive will contain special micro-nano glue which binds all the first dose chips together inside the rear-upper cortex. So the signal you transmit to the masts will not significantly improve until about a week after the second dose.

So please stop peddling this dreadful misinformation about how the first dose is all you need to improve your internal head transmission capability


----------



## Blue Hills (5 Feb 2021)

Hopeful news.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55941234
stick in there folks.


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Hopeful news.


Good overview. The emerging evidence that vaccination will reduce the transmission rate is very welcome (Edit: from the clinical trials last year: we didn't have evidence it wouldn't, but we didn't have evidence that it would).
On detail (in the BBC article), we can expect that all over 60s will have received their first dose by mid-March - earlier if the current (7-day average) rate is maintained - rather better than the article suggested. To rephrase that bit:
"By early March . . . . most people in their 60s, who account for [edit] less than 10% of hospitalisations, will have been vaccinated" [edit] as well as all those (in Gps 1-4) more vulnerable - ?75+%.


----------



## Domus (5 Feb 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Now this is the sort of thing that shows a fundamental lack of knowledge about the vaccine actually works.
> 
> The 5G chips are actually micro-little-nano chips, and until enough of them join together in your rear-upper brain cortex bit then the signal it transmits is not great enough. The second dose you will receive will contain special micro-nano glue which binds all the first dose chips together inside the rear-upper cortex. So the signal you transmit to the masts will not significantly improve until about a week after the second dose.
> 
> So please stop peddling this dreadful misinformation about how the first dose is all you need to improve your internal head transmission capability



This is fake news, Bill Gates told me so in a telepathic message just after my vaccine was administered .


----------



## cougie uk (5 Feb 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> As always, more nuance helps.
> 
> If tens, or hundreds of thousands are dying on the continent while we vaccinate 20 year olds at near zero risk, is that in the national interest? And is it ethical?



What 20 year olds ? Front line workers maybe? Well you'd want them vaccinated in case they get Covid and pass it on to their clients/community.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (5 Feb 2021)

cougie uk said:


> What 20 year olds ? Front line workers maybe? Well you'd want them vaccinated in case they get Covid and pass it on to their clients/community.



Perhaps. As I remarked, nuance helps, I think.


----------



## vickster (5 Feb 2021)

cougie uk said:


> What 20 year olds ? Front line workers maybe? Well you'd want them vaccinated in case they get Covid and pass it on to their clients/community.


Or extremely clinically vulnerable?


----------



## tom73 (5 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> That's what I was asking about.
> No need to answer if it's personal/you think my question intrusive.


Right sorry thought it was way I'd posted the full thing. Sorry all round Blue Hills as for how right it's a long story. Not in anyway personal but complex. It's a way that she ask about weeks ago and told you can't.


----------



## tom73 (5 Feb 2021)

Domus said:


> This is fake news, Bill Gates told me so in a telepathic message just after my vaccine was administered .


Have you also had a one from Greg and his lizards


----------



## nickyboy (5 Feb 2021)

The only question that really matter is will I be able to do my May LEJOG having postponed it twice last year? It looks like it is finely balanced at the moment. I and the others should be vaccinated by then but, most importantly, will the pubs be open?


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 Feb 2021)

Hancock (pm 5 Feb): Target: To have offered vaccine to all over 50s (plus Gp 4 CEV element and Gp 6) by end of May.
This is not a 'stretch target' - not sure why this date has been selected.
15M ish by 15 Feb. 2.5Mpw for 4 weeks. 1.25Mpw from 12 Mar (and 1.25M second doses concurrently - the 12 week point from 20 Dec)
32M in Groups 1-9 so (assumes continuity of supply) hopefully the 50-54 final (of Phase 1) group might be complete by late Apr.


----------



## Domus (5 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> Have you also had a one from Greg and his lizards



Of course, that one arrived as the vaccine was going in.


----------



## dodgy (5 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> The only question that really matter is will I be able to do my May LEJOG having postponed it twice last year? It looks like it is finely balanced at the moment. I and the others should be vaccinated by then but, most importantly, will the pubs be open?



For what it's worth, we have cancelled our trip to the Alps (second year running) in July. May seems extremely optimistic.


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 Feb 2021)

Go for it @nickyboy! Well at least push on with preparing and planning for your LEJOG. At this early stage, get the long miles in, in one exercise ride per day, and stay local (see other thread for lack of definition). Bear in mind that, in May, the wind is just as likely to be a headwind as a tailwind.
Going 'forin' this summer might be a bit @dodgy , I agree.
The country will be mostly opened up by then. There will be restrictions, but cycling LEJOG will be doable.


----------



## tom73 (6 Feb 2021)

Right well post vaccine day one and Mrs 73 is fine not sure she will be after her 12 shift today though.


----------



## Domus (6 Feb 2021)

Not too chipper here, I was fine all day, went to bed at 23.00 and woke up at 01.00 with uncontrollable shivers.  Had some water and two paracetamol but could not get warm, put on a thermal base layer and shivered under the duvet for a couple of hours. Finally warmed up at 03.00 but by then my brain was running at 100 mph. Dozed off around 05.00 and woke up ravenous at 06.30. Been tired and lethargic all day now. 

Speaking to friends of my age group (66) this is fairly common with the AZ vaccine, mostly men. Mrs Domus has had no reaction at all and is fighting fit.


----------



## Buck (6 Feb 2021)

Everybody reacts differently to vaccines and they can cause many side effects. The majority of side effects that do occur are mild and short-term. Common ones include discomfort at the injection site, or just feeling generally unwell, tired, or feverish, or a headache, feeling sick or having joint or muscle pain.

Often side effects are a sign that the vaccine is doing its job as your immune system is responding to the protein, but even if you don’t feel any side effects, the vaccine will still be doing it’s job!

The advice is that if your symptoms persist for more than 48 hours then you should go on line to arrange a rapid/lateral flow test to make sure you haven’t got Coronavirus. If the LFT is positive then you need the full PCR test to confirm.

Many I have spoken to feel much much better after another 24 hours/ night‘s sleep


----------



## biggs682 (6 Feb 2021)

Mrs B just booked for hers


----------



## lane (6 Feb 2021)

Domus said:


> AZ vaccine this morning.
> Disappointed that the the 5G chip inserted has not improved my phone signal yet.



I heard the chip would automatically upload to Strava - is that not the case?


----------



## lane (6 Feb 2021)

Domus said:


> Not too chipper here, I was fine all day, went to bed at 23.00 and woke up at 01.00 with uncontrollable shivers.  Had some water and two paracetamol but could not get warm, put on a thermal base layer and shivered under the duvet for a couple of hours. Finally warmed up at 03.00 but by then my brain was running at 100 mph. Dozed off around 05.00 and woke up ravenous at 06.30. Been tired and lethargic all day now.
> 
> Speaking to friends of my age group (66) this is fairly common with the AZ vaccine, mostly men. Mrs Domus has had no reaction at all and is fighting fit.



My Aunt had same with AZ and my mum similar but less severe


----------



## vickster (6 Feb 2021)

My 78 year old ECV father had no ill effects from the AZ vaccine. My 75 year old mum gets her first jab this week 

Following up from previous posts about a friend’s 80+ parents in Wales, they have now each had their first doses


----------



## dodgy (6 Feb 2021)

2 neighbours aged 72 (husband and wife) just got their vaccine, they even accommodated them on the same day and appointment time. They've also been given their booster appointment in April. Things seem to be going very well.


----------



## cougie uk (6 Feb 2021)

Wife had hers yesterday and got a bit of a numb tongue so had to go in for observation. I'm not exactly sure it wasn't psychosomatic. 

That's the only adverse reaction I've heard about.


----------



## Milzy (6 Feb 2021)

I know anti Vaxers who have already caved in & had the jab. I expect this will keep happening. Idiots will see sense in the end.


----------



## Landsurfer (6 Feb 2021)

Milzy said:


> I know anti Vaxers who have already caved in & had the jab. I expect this will keep happening. Idiots will see sense in the end.


So i expect they weren’t “anti-vaxers” .... they just had reasonable concerns about a rushed vaccine and had the courage to to raise their concerns ....


----------



## Mo1959 (6 Feb 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> So i expect they weren’t “anti-vaxers” .... they just had reasonable concerns about a rushed vaccine and had the courage to to raise their concerns ....


...bit like myself. Still not 100% sure if I want it or not, but no doubt I will cave in too. I would rather have had a couple of years to ensure there’s no unexpected long term side effects.


----------



## Ajax Bay (6 Feb 2021)

@Milzy Do you know what changed their mind? Are they from a community which has a higher hesitancy rate?
@Landsurfer - I think it's perfectly reasonable to take that hesitant/sceptical approach, noting that the 'rushed' description is their view (not mine), and to adopt an "Let's see how it goes for the first few million people vaccinated" tactic. Of course that does rely on over a million of UK's over 80s to lead the way. I think to earn the status of 'anti-vaxxer' one has to not only say you're not sure about accepting a new vaccine but advocate that others should adopt your view.
Personally I trust the scientists and the reported results of clinical trials, and regulatory authorities around the world.
Edit: Hesitancy study (Dec 2020): https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/science-blog/covid-19-vaccine-hesitancy-uk
Survey suggests that what matters most is the way people think about a number of key issues relating to a COVID-19 vaccine, specifically:
• the potential collective benefit
• the likelihood of COVID-19 infection
• the effectiveness of a vaccine
• its side-effects
• the speed of vaccine development


----------



## MrGrumpy (6 Feb 2021)

Everything you put in your body has a consequence good or bad. What I I’ve noticed is that the older generation cannot get this vaccine quick enough . The younger generation more doubtful .


----------



## Buck (6 Feb 2021)

The uptake in the first cohorts is very good with c85% vaccinated (for us) in the first three and interestingly we have had less than 1% of patients fail to attend which is excellent compared to normal Did Not Attends.
As @Ajax Bay says, the younger cohorts will be lower uptake for a number of reasons but demand is still strong and certainly in excess of vaccine supply.


----------



## slowmotion (6 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> I heard the chip would automatically upload to Strava - is that not the case?


If you're still having a problem, I've heard the bloke at Elvis's chip shop knows how to fix it.


----------



## Buck (6 Feb 2021)

I don’t have an issue with anyone who is hesitant about having the vaccine as long as that is rational and not influenced by untruths which sadly are rife in the BAME communities - exactly those who are at greatest risk. 

it is a personal choice and we should respect that. 

I do have an issue with those pedalling lies and conspiracy theories.


----------



## slowmotion (6 Feb 2021)

Buck said:


> The uptake in the first cohorts is very good with c85% vaccinated (for us) in the first three and interestingly we have had less than 1% of patients fail to attend which is excellent compared to normal Did Not Attends.
> As @Ajax Bay says, the younger cohorts will be lower uptake for a number of reasons but demand is still strong and certainly in excess of vaccine supply.


St George's Hospital, Tooting, reported a 10% no-show rate for vaccinations on pre-booked appointments.


----------



## Buck (6 Feb 2021)

slowmotion said:


> St George's Hospital, Tooting, reported a 10% no-show rate for vaccinations on pre-booked appointments.



That is high. It does depend on how they were booked. We have made the decision to phone the first two cohorts and have now opened it to on line bookings for the latest cohorts which is proving very popular and effective as it means we can direct our resources to those without on line access and those who need additional support.


----------



## PK99 (6 Feb 2021)

slowmotion said:


> St George's Hospital, Tooting, reported a 10% no-show rate for vaccinations on pre-booked appointments.



They may well have a double booking issue.

I had my jab at the local hub at my GP surgery on Wednesday, yesterday (friday) I got a text invitation to book for a first jab at George's


----------



## slowmotion (6 Feb 2021)

Buck said:


> That is high. It does depend on how they were booked. We have made the decision to phone the first two cohorts and have now opened it to on line bookings for the latest cohorts which is proving very popular and effective as it means we can direct our resources to those without on line access and those who need additional support.


The deal here (W14, west London) seems to be that you are notified by email from your GP, simultaneously notified by post, and are invited to book a slot for a local vaccination centre via a website. If you can't be arsed to turn up after going through all those stages, I despair.


----------



## Buck (6 Feb 2021)

slowmotion said:


> ...... If you can't be arsed to turn up after going through all those stages, I despair.



I totally agree and the risk is a wasted vaccine if they don’t have people on standby who can get there before the vaccine expires.


----------



## lane (6 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Hancock (pm 5 Feb): Target: To have offered vaccine to all over 50s (plus Gp 4 CEV element and Gp 6) by end of May.
> This is not a 'stretch target' - not sure why this date has been selected.
> 15M ish by 15 Feb. 2.5Mpw for 4 weeks. 1.25Mpw from 12 Mar (and 1.25M second doses concurrently - the 12 week point from 20 Dec)
> 32M in Groups 1-9 so (assumes continuity of supply) hopefully the 50-54 final (of Phase 1) group might be complete by late Apr.



Are you a Government source @Ajax Bay?

I see it is reported in tomorrow's Times that Government sources say target might be met by end of April?


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Are you a Government source @Ajax Bay?
> I see it is reported in tomorrow's Times that Government sources say target might be met by end of April?



I reported what Hancock said pm Friday (5 Feb) - BBC radio. Having previously done the maths and shared on here an estimated date for vaccinating (offered) all of the first phase (Gps 1-9) them on here, the disparity between the 'end of May' target and my figures seemed stark. Since the Prime Minister's announcement on 4 Jan of the target to offer Gps 1-4 a jab by 15 Mar was (well seemed to be then) a 'stretch target' (as inter alia @srw and @mjr implicitly assessed), I'm surprised that the Secretary of State and DHSC decided to broadcast such a conservative target.
I suppose it was chosen as part of a wider message to:
* the public to hang on in there (adhere to current restrictions, please),
* to offer an achievement (of sorts) to which the nation and those in the huge vaccination set-up (of which we can be increasingly proud) could look forward, and
* to manage expectations.
Maybe it was just putting the name of a month to 'in the spring' which has been mooted for some time as the expectation. But a target which prima facie seems 'too easy' lacks credibility. The VTF - good interview with Dix yesterday, I thought - are unsurprisingly extremely confident the end of May 'target' would be hit - and he mentioned that *32M were estimated to be in the first phase cohort*. Or maybe the NHS are wary that there will be foreseen or unforeseen bumps on the road: will the rate of supply remain robust?
Perhaps the Times uses CycleChat as a source and has a journalist capable of doing primary school arithmetic, 'More or Less'.
I note that CEO AZ had suggested (27 Jan) that Britain will hit 30 million vaccinations by the end of March, as he accused EU countries of being “emotional” about delays in their immunisation programmes. (The Times). I reckon he'd done the math as well.
6 Feb: 11.4M
Rate (conservative): 2.5Mpw, so in 5 weeks:
13 Mar: 23.9M (+ 0.6M second doses already given)
Then half to second doses so first dose rate drops to 1.25M
10 Apr: 28.9M (after 4 weeks) (+ >5M second doses)
*28 Apr: 32.1M* (another 18 days)
Looking further forward still:
Adult population of UK estimated at 54M. 85% herd immunity - 46M - about 11 weeks to get to that - 17 July. This doesn't take into account the 9M 4-16 year olds (ONS figures), nor the number in the by then unvaccinated cohort who still retain residual immunity having had the disease already - maybe 1M (confidence level low). And the 85% figure depends on transmissibility of whichever variant is prevalent by then, and the extent to which the various vaccines prevent (or reduce) transmission as well as serious infection (emerging data).


----------



## Landsurfer (7 Feb 2021)

Tremendous ... all those protected and safe people .... with no jobs to go to and the prospect of benefit living for the future.
As posted there is much to be proud of with the roll out of the vaccines .. but do not let those who’s terrible management, lack of leadership and criminal falsification of figures, which has led to the collapse of our economy, hide behind this great success .....
Do not forget .....
Do not let them escape the scrutiny they deserve ....
The non covid deaths will now become our focus, those dying because of neglect will now be on all our radars ...... I hope.


----------



## newfhouse (7 Feb 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> criminal falsification of figures


Genuinely interesting. Which figures do you have in mind?


----------



## Landsurfer (7 Feb 2021)

newfhouse said:


> Genuinely interesting. Which figures do you have in mind?


Your not interested, pick any figures which suit your stance... There should be a name for this type of response on forums ... sort of “Nuremberg Defence” for posters ....


----------



## newfhouse (7 Feb 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Your not interested, pick any figures which suit your stance... There should be a name for this type of response on forums ... sort of “Nuremberg Defence” for posters ....


Whose orders do you think I’m following?

(Still wondering which figures you think have been criminally falsified.)


----------



## oldwheels (7 Feb 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> ...bit like myself. Still not 100% sure if I want it or not, but no doubt I will cave in too. I would rather have had a couple of years to ensure there’s no unexpected long term side effects.


A rock and a hard place really. I took the vaccine but at my advanced age long term effects don't bother me too much. While the existing vaccines don't seem to give 100% protection at least it lessens my chances of being infected in what is left of my lifetime.


----------



## Domus (7 Feb 2021)

My own simple way of thinking is, the more people get the vaccine, the smaller the pool who will catch it and put the NHS and economy under stress. Every day the pool is getting smaller which is a good thing.


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 Feb 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> do not let those who’s terrible management, lack of leadership and criminal falsification of figures, which has led to the collapse of our economy, hide behind this great success ..... Do not forget ..... Do not let them escape the scrutiny they deserve ....


Hope you don't mind me saying so, but this is the 'vaccine' thread. Might you have confused this thread with another one?
Perhaps this one: https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/coronavirus-outbreak.256913/page-1125 ?
The country needs to get out of this pandemic and prosper. The UK's early, fast vaccination programme will allow productivity to recover and an improving economy will generate more jobs, and, and.


----------



## pawl (7 Feb 2021)

Domus said:


> Not too chipper here, I was fine all day, went to bed at 23.00 and woke up at 01.00 with uncontrollable shivers.  Had some water and two paracetamol but could not get warm, put on a thermal base layer and shivered under the duvet for a couple of hours. Finally warmed up at 03.00 but by then my brain was running at 100 mph. Dozed off around 05.00 and woke up ravenous at 06.30. Been tired and lethargic all day now.
> 
> Speaking to friends of my age group (66) this is fairly common with the AZ vaccine, mostly men. Mrs Domus has had no reaction at all and is fighting fit.





I had my jab 9 days ago.and had similar reactions.Larthargic and no energy day after jab.Next day cold and shivery Arm was a bit painful. No problems after that Mine was Pfizer vaccine.


----------



## Domus (7 Feb 2021)

Feeling back to normal today, had a good sleep last night. Still got a sore arm though.


----------



## tom73 (7 Feb 2021)

See the government has given Gp's an extra 10 quid to help with house calls to get the vaccine to ones who can't leave home. 
Due the extra cost it has inc staffing say's Hancock boy the man is a clown it won't even cover the staff costs.


----------



## nickyboy (7 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> See the government has given Gp's an extra 10 quid to help with house calls to get the vaccine to ones who can't leave home.
> Due the extra cost it has inc staffing say's Hancock boy the man is a clown it won't even cover the staff costs.



It is an extra £10 per vaccination given. This is on top of the normal payment for a vaccination (£10.06) and the additional payment given for Covid vaccinations (£2.52). So the total per vaccination is £25.68. This equally applies when a GP visits a care home and multiple vaccinations (at £25.68 per vaccination) can be given. Sounds like quite a nice situation for a GP if he has to handle the vaccination of a care home, balanced by the situation of a single vaccination home visit.

Explain why this payment system doesn't cover the GP's costs


----------



## srw (7 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Explain why this payment system doesn't cover the GP's costs


https://jobs.rcgp.org.uk/jobs/locum-sessional-gp/

A locum GP gets between £60 and £100 per hour. Which means the cost to the hiring GP is higher, because there will be agency fees and other on-costs. Whether the hiring GP sends the locum to vaccinate or does it themselves and hires a locum for regular surgery work, or simply absorbs the extra work that's the economic cost of the vaccination work. 

At the very bottom end of £60 an hour ignoring on-costs, £25 is 25 minutes. Even in a town, good luck doing a vaccination via a home visit every 25 minutes allowing for travel. 

Taking a more realistic approach to true economic cost, £25 is about 10 minutes of GP time.


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> See the government has given Gp's an extra 10 quid to help with house calls to get the vaccine to ones who can't leave home.
> Due the extra cost it has inc staffing say's Hancock boy the man is a clown it won't even cover the staff costs.


NHS England said (9 Nov) (agreed with the BMA) that the “Item of Service fee” for a COVID-19 vaccine would be £12.58 per dose.
On 30 Dec the NHS set out the arrangements for an additional supplement of £10 per dose on top of the item of service fee for all vaccines delivered in a care home setting (ending 31 Jan). I presume (can't find) that this has now been (perfectly reasonably) extended to individual house visits (far less generous). Visit a care home and give 50 jabs (3 staff, 2 hours) means a combined fee of £1129.
Do you think that GPs will make or lose money providing jabs, @tom73 (I have no idea)? I can see that an extra tenner for each house call will be a close call: what amount do you suggest would be 'cost neutral'? Perhaps the £12.58 per dose fee already included an element to recognise that some house calls would be needed.
Perhaps a separate (yet local) arrangement (not through GPs) could address these many elderly/immobile/housebound people? But I thought you were an advocate of keeping this under local/primary care control (I broadly think that should be the cornerstone of the whole effort, as well).


----------



## nickyboy (7 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> https://jobs.rcgp.org.uk/jobs/locum-sessional-gp/
> 
> A locum GP gets between £60 and £100 per hour. Which means the cost to the hiring GP is higher, because there will be agency fees and other on-costs. Whether the hiring GP sends the locum to vaccinate or does it themselves and hires a locum for regular surgery work, or simply absorbs the extra work that's the economic cost of the vaccination work.
> 
> ...


A couple of things

1) Is it the GPs or locums actually doing the care home/home visit vaccinations? When I had a flu jab at the surgery it wasn't a GP. If it isn't a GP doing it then your numbers are irrelevant; it would be someone cheaper

2) You've conveniently ignored the fact that Care Home vaccinations are multiples of £25.68. As I said in my earlier post, these visits (which look to be very profitable for GPs) balance the single home visits (which don't look very profitable). For GPs the care home visits are the meat to go with the home visit bone


----------



## Mo1959 (7 Feb 2021)

I thought there might already be some promising figures in care homes up here given that’s where they started vaccinating but it’s sadly not looking great so far.


----------



## srw (7 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> conveniently


You know what people are saying about snark?

I've also forgotten that vaccinated patients need to be monitored for 15 minutes.


----------



## MrGrumpy (7 Feb 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I thought there might already be some promising figures in care homes up here given that’s where they started vaccinating but it’s sadly not looking great so far.
> 
> View attachment 572585



Plenty news around the care homes in Fife and the deaths recently after vaccination. However I was of the understanding that you had to wait 2-3 weeks for the effects to work ?!


----------



## Mo1959 (7 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Plenty news around the care homes in Fife and the deaths recently after vaccination. However I was of the understanding that you had to wait 2-3 weeks for the effects to work ?!


The graph seems to shoot up 2 weeks from vaccinating starting! Maybe the elderly aren’t coping with the side effects? Who knows. I’m sure it will be getting monitored. Hope it’s just a sad blip.


----------



## Pale Rider (7 Feb 2021)

pawl said:


> Larthargic and no energy day after jab



On reflection, I may have felt that way the day after I was Pfizered.

However, the reason I'm clinically extremely vulnerable does make me feel that way on some days anyway, so it's hard to assess what's causing what.

One thing's for sure, I am now back to normal, so if the jab had any side effects, they only lasted a day.


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 Feb 2021)

Mo
Vaccines typically will not prevent infection (the serious illness or worse sort) until 14 days after vaccination. So using the 14 Dec line (in graph) protection would only kick in on (say) 28 Dec. Maybe the first quintile was done in the first week. Care homes which had outbreaks before the vaccination 'teams' could visit were left till it was safe to visit - hence there were still some not visited late in January.
Given the mean time (?14 days) between infection and, in care home cases, a substantial death rate (tragic and maybe avoidable), the timeline offered by the graph is as you'd expect. It would be great were it better.
I'd also note that that the sole criterion for every death recorded as a 'COVID-19 death', including in care homes, is that the individual tested positive in that last 28 days, whether the primary (or even contributory) cause of death was COVID-19 or not.


----------



## Julia9054 (7 Feb 2021)

If you have recently had covid, is there a length of time you have to leave it before being vaccinated?


----------



## Pale Rider (7 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> If you have recently had covid, is there a length of time you have to leave it before being vaccinated?



Not heard of one being specified.

When I was jabbed, the only medical question was had I had any recent injections.


----------



## mjr (7 Feb 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Tremendous ... all those protected and safe people .... with no jobs to go to and the prospect of benefit living for the future.


Aren't most of the vaccinees so far retired?

I'm just wondering at what point of vaccination the old fart MPs will throw the under-50s under the big red bus and unlock too far, because the u50s won't die and "only" risk being crippled by long covid.


----------



## midlife (7 Feb 2021)

Our hospital advice for staff is to be vaccinated 28 days after symptoms started if you test covid 19 positive on PCR


----------



## tom73 (7 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> If you have recently had covid, is there a length of time you have to leave it before being vaccinated?


28 days post infection


----------



## tom73 (7 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> https://jobs.rcgp.org.uk/jobs/locum-sessional-gp/
> 
> A locum GP gets between £60 and £100 per hour. Which means the cost to the hiring GP is higher, because there will be agency fees and other on-costs. Whether the hiring GP sends the locum to vaccinate or does it themselves and hires a locum for regular surgery work, or simply absorbs the extra work that's the economic cost of the vaccination work.
> 
> ...



Wont even cover the Nurse cost either of course this is on top of providing the normal day to day care. 
Sadly it show just how much ones in power and man of public just don't both value them or are willing to fund the true cost of care.


----------



## srw (7 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Aren't most of the vaccinees so far retired?


Barely. According to the latest stats (from https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/) there have been 5 million vaccines in the 70+ agegroups and 3 million in the under-70s. I'd expect the vast majority of the under-70s who've been done to be of working age.


----------



## tom73 (7 Feb 2021)

You can't assume everyone in care home or even a home visit is at the time of the visit medically fit to have the vaccine.
You can't assume every thing will go as planned it's not jab and go service. Number of jabs my look great on spread sheet but real people are not like that. They have care needs dedicated HCP's are not interested in in out and off to the next job. Many of the ones they are visiting for vaccinations. Have not seen anyone for months or seen the GP or Nurse face to face. Do you think they are not going to see and talk about how they've been going.

You can't assume either that any of the extra cost inc this and the current payment have to date covered the cost of this.

Save ££ and numbers for spread sheets and leave HCP'S to do the job of caring for ones in need.


----------



## srw (7 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> Wont even cover the Nurse cost either of course this is on top of providing the normal day to day care.
> Sadly it show just how much ones in power and man of public just don't both value them or are willing to fund the true cost of care.


You're right. Nurse bank rates are around £20 an hour (in the daytime), which means a total cost of employment around £40 allowing for agency fees and other on-costs - pensions, insurance, back-office staff etc. So £25 buys about 35 minutes of a nurse's time for a GP practice. Of that, 15 minutes is taken up by waiting afterwards and maybe 2 for actually delivering the vaccine. That leaves about 8 minutes each way for travel. That might be feasible in a small market town like the one I live in, but not in a city or rural area.

Discussion of care homes is a red herring - most care home residents have already been done. From here on in it's immobile vulnerable people living in their own homes.


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> If you have recently had covid, is there a length of time you have to leave it before being vaccinated?


From the NHS Green Book Ch 14a 
Precautions
Minor illnesses without fever or systemic upset are not valid reasons to postpone immunisation. If an individual is acutely unwell, immunisation may be postponed until they have fully recovered. This is to avoid confusing the differential diagnosis of any acute illness (including COVID-19) by wrongly attributing any signs or symptoms to the adverse effects of the vaccine.
There is no evidence of any safety concerns from vaccinating individuals with a past history of COVID-19 infection, or with detectable COVID-19 antibody.
Vaccination of individuals who may be infected or asymptomatic or incubating COVID-19 infection is unlikely to have a detrimental effect on the illness.
Vaccination should be deferred in those with confirmed infection to avoid confusing the differential diagnosis. As clinical deterioration can occur up to two weeks after infection, ideally *vaccination should be deferred until clinical recovery to around four weeks after onset of symptoms or four weeks from the first confirmed positive specimen in those who are asymptomatic*. 

(Re-)Reading that its thrust seems to be that 'they' would rather avoid vaccinating and then having diagnoses/outcomes attributed to the vaccine in error; rather than because vaccination is any less effective if the person has C19. This avoidance also mitigates the risk of the vaccination team being at increased proximity hazard - even with mandated PPE.
But the commenters above are the professionals: '28 days'.


----------



## tom73 (7 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> You're right. Nurse bank rates are around £20 an hour (in the daytime), which means a total cost of employment around £40 allowing for agency fees and other on-costs - pensions, insurance, back-office staff etc. So £25 buys about 35 minutes of a nurse's time for a GP practice. Of that, 15 minutes is taken up by waiting afterwards and maybe 2 for actually delivering the vaccine. That leaves about 8 minutes each way for travel. That might be feasible in a small market town like the one I live in, but not in a city or rural area.
> 
> Discussion of care homes is a red herring - most care home residents have already been done. From here on in it's immobile vulnerable people living in their own homes.


That's at the cheeper end can be more 
It may take the 8 mins to do the pre checks and talk though any worries they have or questions about it. 
Then you have travel cost , the extra PPE cost and clinical waste bill. So it's not as great as many think but as long as the number of jabs go's up every day as it looks good and that's what matter. Sod any idea of care jab and go and coin it in.


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> You can't assume either that any of the extra cost inc this and the current payment have to date covered the cost of this.


Will GP surgeries being covering their costs (at least) on the tens of millions of younger (under 65) adults who will need two jabs (£25) and probably a booster (?£10+) annually?
Do GP surgeries incur a loss giving the flu jabs annually (including QOF stuff)?


tom73 said:


> Sod any idea of care [home] jab and go and coin it in.


Who has suggested this?


----------



## PK99 (7 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Will GP surgeries being covering their costs (at least) on the tens of millions of younger (under 65) adults who will need two jabs (£25) and probably a booster (?£10+) annually?
> Do GP surgeries incur a loss giving the flu jabs annually (including QOF stuff)?
> 
> Who has suggested this?



A pharmacist is paid £10.08 for each flu jab 

https://www.pharmaceutical-journal....in-2020/2021/20208362.article?firstPass=false

From my observation when receiving jabs over a number of years, the marginal labour cost of giving a flu jab is zero, as one of the team on duty simply pops into the side room with me and 5 minutes later is back on normal duties.


----------



## srw (7 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> From my observation when receiving jabs over a number of years, the marginal labour cost of giving a flu jab is zero, as one of the team on duty simply pops into the side room with me and 5 minutes later is back on normal duties.


That might be true for sporadic visitors and for flu - although any decent business will know the opportunity cost of doing it. But this is one of those cases where there are diseconomies of scale. You can't simply expect one of the team on duty to slip into a back room if you've got a constant stream of vaccinees throughout the day and have to observe them for 15 minutes afterwards.


----------



## nickyboy (7 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> Discussion of care homes is a red herring - most care home residents have already been done. From here on in it's immobile vulnerable people living in their own homes.


 Not correct. The £10 mentioned today has been paid since the beginning of January for every care home resident vaccinated. So GP practices have done pretty well financially in that period as a result. 

Have no idea of the numbers but imagine 20 vaccinations in a care home. That's £500 income. You can monitor those who have had the jab while you do others. Can't be more than a couple of hours on site

Now comes for the quid pro quo. They've made good money on care homes but they're going to have to accept the same payment regime for home visits


----------



## Pale Rider (7 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> home visits



If you suggested a home visit to my GP he would probably report you for patient/doctor abuse.


----------



## Landsurfer (7 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> If you suggested a home visit to my GP he would probably report you for patient/doctor abuse.


My dentist .... “Why has Boris closed the Golf courses ?” ...... "To get the Dentists back to work” ..... Really ....


----------



## tom73 (7 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Not correct. The £10 mentioned today has been paid since the beginning of January for every care home resident vaccinated. So GP practices have done pretty well financially in that period as a result.
> 
> Have no idea of the numbers but imagine 20 vaccinations in a care home. That's £500 income. You can monitor those who have had the jab while you do others. Can't be more than a couple of hours on site
> 
> Now comes for the quid pro quo. They've made good money on care homes but they're going to have to accept the same payment regime for home visits



How ? If you think they have been coining it in going vaccinations. Tell you what let's get Dido and her mates in to do it. Then see who coins it in. Or better still bring in some of the T&T consultants currently on a £1000 a day to improve efficiency of the vaccine roll out. 
You can't carry on and monitor at the same time that assumes they are all in the same room. 
Why stop at that get them to go round with tea trolly at the same time seeng it's it so simple. 
You just don't get how much extra time and work this involves to do it in safe and Clinical effective way. 
It's clear also just how worthless you see highly trained clinicians.


----------



## midlife (7 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> That might be true for sporadic visitors and for flu - although any decent business will know the opportunity cost of doing it. But this is one of those cases where there are diseconomies of scale. You can't simply expect one of the team on duty to slip into a back room if you've got a constant stream of vaccinees throughout the day and have to observe them for 15 minutes afterwards.




Don't think the AZ vaccine needs any observation time afterwards if that's what they have been given.


----------



## nickyboy (7 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> How ? If you think they have been coining it in going vaccinations. Tell you what let's get Dido and her mates in to do it. Then see who coins it in. Or better still bring in some of the T&T consultants currently on a £1000 a day to improve efficiency of the vaccine roll out.
> You can't carry on and monitor at the same time that assumes they are all in the same room.
> Why stop at that get them to go round with tea trolly at the same time seeng it's it so simple.
> You just don't get how much extra time and work this involves to do it in safe and Clinical effective way.
> It's clear also just how worthless you see highly trained clinicians.


Well after that rather bizarre rant I should make it clear that I value highly trained clinicians. It was you that said they're being paid £10 to do home visits and that doesn't cover the costs. 

But you failed to mentuon that it isn't £10, it is £25 per vaccine administered. And it's been running since beginning of Jan during which time they've been doing the care homes which is where the jam is.


----------



## Pale Rider (7 Feb 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> My dentist .... “Why has Boris closed the Golf courses ?” ...... "To get the Dentists back to work” ..... Really ....



Another point is I reckon it most unlikely the GP will do any of the home visits himself.

Regrettably, I've had recent experience of home service - every visit was done by a district nurse.

Throughout Covid, my GP has remained behind literally locked surgery doors.

He's all but declined to see any patients in the surgery, let alone do any home visits.


----------



## rualexander (7 Feb 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I would rather have had a couple of years to ensure there’s no unexpected long term side effects.


On that basis, no-one would ever have been vaccinated against anything.
There's nothing stopping you from leaving it a couple of years before you take the plunge though.
I'm not aware of any previous vaccines which have resulted in unexpected long term side effects?
There's a reason for the length of the clinical trial safety assessment phase, that's the time scale that they would expect to find any significant safety issues.


----------



## midlife (7 Feb 2021)

rualexander said:


> On that basis, no-one would ever have been vaccinated against anything.
> There's nothing stopping you from leaving it a couple of years before you take the plunge though.
> I'm not aware of any previous vaccines which have resulted in unexpected long term side effects?
> There's a reason for the length of the clinical trial safety assessment phase, that's the time scale that they would expect to find any significant safety issues.



This is the only vaccine disaster I can think of being taught about

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-55050012

Aside from rare Guillain-Barré syndrome.


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> you failed to mention that it isn't £10, it is £25 per vaccine administered.


Let's keep it close to the facts (and you have earlier). @tom73's approach is more qualitative than quantitative - it would good to have a view of whether GPs have carried out vaccinations sessions at care homes at a loss these last 6 weeks. I hope the fee recompenses them and the surgery properly.
Each fee for every care home resident (and care home staff) vaccinated on site has been remunerated by a fee of £22.58 (not £25) per head. The economies of scale hopefully mean that that fee more than covers the various additional costs.
Now that same amount per head is the fee to deliver a single dose by home visit. I can quite see that that will be revenue negative - as @tom73 said in his initial two-liner (which highlighted the £10 without mentioning the normal issue of service fee).
I guess that there has been a tremendous bonus for GPs to be involved in the care home sessions as they will have been able to see their patients (ie those on the surgery's books - less those who have tragically died in the last year) at last. And the same opportunity for home visits to immobile/housebound this month.

.


----------



## tom73 (7 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Another point is I reckon it most unlikely the GP will do any of the home visits himself.
> 
> Regrettably, I've had recent experience of home service - every visit was done by a district nurse.
> 
> ...


So you think a DN is any cheeper ? Like a GP it’s a specialised practice. Who ever go’s and do them the extra costs still are not covered.


----------



## tom73 (7 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Well after that rather bizarre rant I should make it clear that I value highly trained clinicians. It was you that said they're being paid £10 to do home visits and that doesn't cover the costs.
> 
> But you failed to mentuon that it isn't £10, it is £25 per vaccine administered. And it's been running since beginning of Jan during which time they've been doing the care homes which is where the jam is.



I failed to mention anything the £10 extra is the only thing being reported this morning. 
As it happens i willl seeing with a number of GP’s tomorrow on patient transport call out’s. So I can check if this is the case
My post still stands yet again you believe they are coining it. To believe any HCP is some how making money out of any of this Covid horror show is not worth anymore of my time on it. Neither is the person making it. The only ones coining it are Dido , Serco and the many others all of which have failed to do even the basics right.


----------



## tom73 (7 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> Don't think the AZ vaccine needs any observation time afterwards if that's what they have been given.


Mrs 73 still had to wait for 15 mins after her’s a few days ago.


----------



## nickyboy (7 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> I failed to mention anything the £10 extra is the only thing being reported this morning.
> As it happens i willl seeing with a number of GP’s tomorrow on patient transport call out’s. So I can check if this is the case
> My post still stands yet again you believe they are coining it. To believe any HCP is some how making money out of any of this Covid horror show is not worth anymore of my time on it. Neither is the person making it. The only ones coining it are Dido , Serco and the many others all of which have failed to do even the basics right.


https://www.england.nhs.uk/2020/12/...boost-to-support-care-home-vaccination-drive/


----------



## midlife (7 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> Mrs 73 still had to wait for 15 mins after her’s a few days ago.



Our mob probably read the pulse lol

https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/c...es-after-oxfordastrazeneca-covid-vaccination/


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 Feb 2021)

Given that the recommendation is not to drive for 15 minutes, some passive delay seems entirely sensible, for the Oxford-AZ vaccine as well as for the Pfizer dose. A little time will be taken with post-vaccination info, second dose appointment arrangements/card stuff and immediate reactions will be during that time. And by the time a self-driver gets to their car it should be 15 minutes.
Are we being extra cautious compared to flu vaccination? Our local (seaside) car park was used and recipients did not need to leave their car. The same car park is set up in a similar fashion, but I am too young to have got a closer look besides riding by.


----------



## Buck (8 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> If you have recently had covid, is there a length of time you have to leave it before being vaccinated?



Julia. 28 days is the suggested timescale If it is a,positive COVID PCR test and not just suspected. We ask this question whenbokking and if “yes” then we note to follow up 28 days after the date of the result.


----------



## Buck (8 Feb 2021)

GP practices receive £12.58 per Covid vaccine administered and for Care Homes as an incentive to hit the government target there was a lot of money thrown around to get this done.
it is not cheap to do this as there has to be a GP on site to provide clinical governance of the vaccinations. With the Pfizer vaccine it is also quite a time consuming exercise as you have to reconstitute the vaccine and draw it up out of multi-dose vials so not as simple as say the single dose flu jabs each year. 

For the housebound we had planned all of ours splitting our practices into two teams and we have over 500 patients who are HB and many are geographically spread I.e. 30 mins between visits. In addition, to get these done over and above the normal acute HVs we did this over the weekend which incurred additional cost (1.5 overtime) for those working. Thankfully there is no post vaccination 15 minute wait for the AZ vaccine which is the only vaccine able to be used for HVs.

Putting specifics to one side, the set up costs and running costs before any one patient is vaccinated are not insignificant and whilst these additional sums are welcome, they are not pure profit but they are a mechanism to incentivise some GP practices who shall we say are slow off the mark!

The above hopefully give some context and I’m not going to justify the costs or income or profit/loss but we believe at best we will be cost neutral on all of this. We decided we would support the vaccination programme (yes, it was optional) as this is our moral duty and if we lose some money as a result then so be it but current projections are that we will be neutral. As @nickyboy says It’s the meat with the bone. Taking either in isolation is a mistake.


----------



## Pale Rider (8 Feb 2021)

tom73 said:


> So you think a DN is any cheaper ?



I have no view on costs, which is why I didn't mention it.

Given that my details were passed on by the GP to a vaccination centre, it seems to me my GP practice might be doing very little with regards to administering vaccines.

The general point being that not everyone in the NHS is under enormous pressure due to the pandemic.

Which in one respect is a good thing, because if everyone was permanently working at 100mph they would blow up within weeks.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Feb 2021)

Very informative thread on the SA variant and vaccine effectiveness against it.


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/DrZoeHyde/status/1358749325610737665


----------



## Ajax Bay (8 Feb 2021)

'Downing Street briefing' this pm offered these figures for vaccine completions (data to inform @mjr's preferred assessment of performance versus 15 Feb target model aiui).
Gp 1 - 'All' care homes visited. 93% of residents vaccinated. Percentage of staff not mentioned so I assume lower, because of hesitancy.
Gp 2a (O/80) - 91% vaccinated
Gp 2b (Health and Care workers 'frontline') - not mentioned - might we assume there's been ample offer/opportunity?
Gp 3 (75-80) - 95%
Gp 4a (70-75) - 73% (actually "just under three quarters" was phrase)
Gp 4b (CEV) - not mentioned
Now a plea for anyone in these priority groups (NB change of routine to get the last few 'done') to phone in if they have not been contacted or to use the communication they've received to book a jab, and if they've got two, to choose one and get on with it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (8 Feb 2021)

A point Van-Tam made in the 'Downing Street briefing' this pm was interesting (enough to share on here), wrt the SA variant (B.1.351) - see @roubaixtuesday 's link above for detail on reduced efficacy, small numbers in trial but likely 'an issue'.
He observed that the numbers of infections and geographic spread of Variant B.1.351 was still limited in UK and the vast majority of virus in the wild was the B.1.1.7 strain (aka UK/Kent discovered by genomics). (Worth pointing up the UK's superb genomics capability, quoted elsewhere as doing more than half the assays in the world, allows a better insight than anywhere to this. Is this effort government funded? (I don't know.)
Van-Tam also assessed that the B.1.351 did not seem to be more transmissible than the B.1.1.7 variant.
It was the substantially higher (Edit: 1.4) transmissibility of the the B.1.1.7 variant compared to the 'basic' (Jan-Sep 2020) which meant it 'out-competed' its predecessor and is now the dominant strain across the country. It also is one which resulted in the surge in cases and consequences from December onwards (along with other factors affecting 'R').
He deduced (on current evidence) that the B.1.351 variant would not out-compete the B.1.1.7 variant in UK so the effectiveness of the UK vaccination programme would be maintained.
Aiui


----------



## roubaixtuesday (8 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> A point Van-Tam made in the 'Downing Street briefing' this pm was interesting (enough to share on here), wrt the SA variant (B.1.351) - see @roubaixtuesday 's link above for detail on reduced efficacy, small numbers in trial but likely 'an issue'.
> He observed that the numbers of infections and geographic spread of Variant B.1.351 was still limited in UK and the vast majority of virus in the wild was the B.1.1.7 strain (aka UK/Kent discovered by genomics). (Worth pointing up the UK's superb genomics capability, quoted elsewhere as doing more than half the assays in the world, allows a better insight than anywhere to this. Is this effort government funded? (I don't know.)
> Van-Tam also assessed that the B.1.351 did not seem to be more transmissible than the B.1.1.7 variant.
> It was the substantially higher (1.5 (CI 1.3 to 1.7)) transmissibility of the the B.1.1.7 variant compared to the 'basic' (Jan-Sep 2020) which meant it 'out-competed' its predecessor and is now the dominant strain across the country. It also is one which resulted in the surge in cases and consequences from December onwards (along with other factors affecting 'R').
> ...



There is what seems to be an obvious fatal flaw in VT's reasoning:

If the SA variant is vaccine resistant, and the other is not, then as soon as many people are vaccinated, it will have a huge advantage, and promptly out- compete the other and become dominant. 

I presume I've missed something here as VT has far more expertise than me, but it seems an obvious conclusion.


----------



## IaninSheffield (9 Feb 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> If the SA variant is vaccine resistant, and the other is not, then as soon as many people are vaccinated, it will have a huge advantage, and promptly out- compete the other and become dominant.
> 
> I presume I've missed something here as VT has far more expertise than me, but it seems an obvious conclusion.


Isn't it the case though, that we don't know yet whether the vaccines reduce transmission, only that they reduce severity of symptoms? So the UK variant will continue to remain dominant as it continues to be transmitted?

But appreciate my reasoning may be flawed?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (9 Feb 2021)

IaninSheffield said:


> Isn't it the case though, that we don't know yet whether the vaccines reduce transmission, only that they reduce severity of symptoms? So the UK variant will continue to remain dominant as it continues to be transmitted?
> 
> But appreciate my reasoning may be flawed?



Maybe that's the logic. But I think there was data published just this week suggesting the AZ vaccine does reduce if not eliminate transmission. And I think everyone expects at least some degree of reduction in transmission for all these vaccines - and it would be very odd if the variant that the vaccine was least effective against was not also the variant whose transmission was affected the least?


----------



## lane (9 Feb 2021)

Makes no sense to me. Having normal or Kent Covid does not protect against SA variant so why can't it spread alongside the other two. The current vaccines appear to offer an increasingly temporary solution.


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Feb 2021)

I guess time will tell. Don't think there's merit in slowing down the vaccination programme, giving it gives evidence-based protection from serious illness and death, and putative reduction in transmission: and therefore overall numbers infected. In South Africa the proportion of variants is substantially different to UK so their decision to pause the use of the Oxford-AZ vaccine because of this small cohort inefficacy result is based on different circumstances. I note that the Pfizer vaccine has not been tested (clinical trial) against the B.1.351 variant, sfaik. Maybe it will do better.
Recommend two snips of media to people: Oxford Uni's Prof Sarah Gilbert's interview on the 'Andrew Marr show' on Sat am (about 0940 - 32:50 - 46:00) and a set of Q&A with two experts (one ex-RCGP Head, one JCVI) on BBC's 'Today' programme this Tue am (0842-0855 2:41:50 - 2:55:00). One of the questions in the latter makes exactly @roubaixtuesday 's point (above, about the effect of the vaccine suppressing the B.1.1.7 variant and therefore giving benefit to the B.1.351 variant). Answer (my best): "There'll be lots of variants; think the focus is too much on the SA variant; yes, vaccination will have effect on relative variant success but it's still the way out of high levels of serious illness and deaths; it's a paradox."


----------



## mjr (9 Feb 2021)

The UK signed a deal with CureVac last week. The EU signed theirs months ago. How different things could have been if the vaccines had developed at different rates.


----------



## lane (9 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I guess time will tell. Don't think there's merit in slowing down the vaccination programme, giving it gives evidence-based protection from serious illness and death, and putative reduction in transmission: and therefore overall numbers infected. In South Africa the proportion of variants is substantially different to UK so their decision to pause the use of the Oxford-AZ vaccine because of this small cohort inefficacy result is based on different circumstances. I note that the Pfizer vaccine has not been tested (clinical trial) against the B.1.351 variant, sfaik. Maybe it will do better.
> Recommend two snips of media to people: Oxford Uni's Prof Sarah Gilbert's interview on the 'Andrew Marr show' on Sat am (about 0940 - 32:50 - 46:00) and a set of Q&A with two experts (one ex-RCGP Head, one JCVI) on BBC's 'Today' programme this Tue am (0842-0855 2:41:50 - 2:55:00). One of the questions in the latter makes exactly @roubaixtuesday 's point (above, about the effect of the vaccine suppressing the B.1.1.7 variant and therefore giving benefit to the B.1.351 variant). Answer (my best): "There'll be lots of variants; think the focus is too much on the SA variant; yes, vaccination will have effect on relative variant success but it's still the way out of high levels of serious illness and deaths; it's a paradox."



I agree there is no merit in slowing down the programme. However where is the evidence based protection from serious illness and death, from what I gather it is at best inferred for the AZ vaccine. 

Flu of course changes every year but the world has a well established approach for dealing with that. Covid still seems very much an unknown in terms of how it will mutate and how often.


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> The UK signed a deal with CureVac last week. The EU signed theirs months ago. How different things could have been if the vaccines had developed at different rates.


When will the first CureVac vaccines be delivered - not for a fair while aiui? You're right: things could have been different. But by June the UK had already secured far more than needed (to allow for some failure) and had no need of CureVac: its vaccine had not shown promise at that stage - in the short term. The "different rate" was already clear to the UK VTF.
Maybe the UK VTF were looking to procure vaccines which had the best prospects of being trialed with successful outcome, manufactured at scale and supplied before the end of 2020 or in very early 2021. The VTF early procurement deliberately backed three different vaccine technologies: mRNA (Pfizer 40M), adenoviral-delivered (Oxford-AZ 100M) and inactivated whole virus (Valneva 100M). And the UK government threw money at UK-based effort early on - manufacture in UK was a consideration (I wonder why?). CureVac got tens of millions Euro from Germany, eventually.
The CureVac Phase 3 clinical trial only started on 21 Dec. They hope for results in Q1 2021.
Aiui the CureVac-UK advance purchase agreement is to secure supplies, for later this year (?booster?), of a vaccine which will have been tested for efficacy against newer variants (as opposed to the leader trials in July-November versus V0). Also linked to GSK agreement with CureVac and (assumed manufacture in UK at GSK site ?Barnard Castle ) after GSK pulled out of the (French) Sanofi failure.


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> where is the evidence based protection from serious illness and death, from what I gather it is at best inferred for the AZ vaccine.


I assume you mean the effectiveness of the Oxfiord-AZ vaccine against the B.1.351 variant (SA). That's my understanding too: inferred. Given the low prevalence of the B.1.351 variant around the world, aiui no clinical trials against it have been concluded, for any vaccines. The emerging press reported inferences are from a cohort of (?) 2064 in a trial (about 2/3rds vaccinated and one third control not (control)) of young cohort exposed to mostly the SA variant, within a larger trial (?). The deductions being made seem reasonable (vaccine reduced efficacy against B.1.351) which is, I suspect why the big 'jumping-up-and-down' last week to endeavour to limit the spread in UK and reduce the amount of more being imported.
As an aside, why are people flying round the world eg from South Africa? What exactly are the purposes of these trips? Did they need to go out there for a Christmas break?


----------



## nickyboy (9 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> The UK signed a deal with CureVac last week. The EU signed theirs months ago. How different things could have been if the vaccines had developed at different rates.


Sometimes it sounds like you wish the UK's vaccination program wasn't as successful as it is


----------



## Craig the cyclist (9 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> The UK signed a deal with CureVac last week. The EU signed theirs months ago. How different things could have been if the vaccines had developed at different rates.



But they weren't. 

I am sure you agree that we are lucky as a population that our politicians and scientists were clever enough to back the right horse eh?


----------



## lane (9 Feb 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> But they weren't.
> 
> I am sure you agree that we are lucky as a population that our politicians and scientists were clever enough to back the right horse eh?



Although we are relying on the AZ vaccine a lot which the Guardian said yesterday the evidence is growing its not quite as potent as the others. As a minimum you would have to say there are more questions about it. I would be very happy to have it but would prefer one of the others.


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Feb 2021)

Bingham and Dix


----------



## midlife (9 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Although we are relying on the AZ vaccine a lot which the Guardian said yesterday the evidence is growing its not quite as potent as the others. As a minimum you would have to say there are more questions about it. I would be very happy to have it but would prefer one of the others.



Starting to look like my first vaccination was Pfizer but something else for the second.....


----------



## lane (9 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> Starting to look like my first vaccination was Pfizer but something else for the second.....



Why do you think that? I thought current advice was not to mix?


----------



## lane (9 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Bingham and Dix



Care to expand?


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Feb 2021)

From the Guardian (edited): (wrt 15 Feb target - JCVI Gps 1-4)
A Royal College of Nursing (RCN) survey found that 15% of nurses remained unvaccinated.
The government is in danger of failing to deliver on its pledge: all health and social care staff – to have been offered a first shot by next Monday. Every effort must be made to reach all nursing staff to ensure their protection and that of the patients and vulnerable people they care for.
15% scaled up suggests an estimated 75,000 nurses had still not had their initial jab.
91% of nurses directly employed by the NHS have had at least one jab, but just 71% working for other organisations – such as district nurses, health visitors or those in care homes – have received theirs.
In the survey, nearly all NHS nurses have been offered a vaccine but the proportions of 'agency' nurses that had not been offered one was (35%) and temporary staff (19%).
"The RCN asked the 1,624 nurses who had not taken up an offer of a jab why they had refused. Of those, 38% said they did not want to have the vaccine at the moment or were undecided, and 12% did not want to have a vaccine at all. A third (33%), however, had an appointment booked and planned to attend."

I presume that those who been 'missed', especially those working outside NHS settings can (now) call 119, and hope they do.
Credit to VTF Kate Bingham and Clive Dix @lane , for effective UK vaccine procurement.


----------



## srw (9 Feb 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> clever


Lucky


----------



## Rusty Nails (9 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> The UK signed a deal with CureVac last week. The EU signed theirs months ago. How different things could have been if the vaccines had developed at different rates.



If my aunt had had a penis s/he'd have been my uncle.

(Or should this post be in one of the transgender threads?)


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Feb 2021)

Make-Your-Own-Luck
VTF reads as if both clever and lucky: see this Lancet article (author Bingham): _The UK Government’s Vaccine Taskforce: strategy for protecting the UK and the world_.
Has the EU EMA written something similar that we can use to inform ourselves whether they were clever and unlucky, and what lessons can be identified (and ideally learned)?


----------



## mjr (9 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Sometimes it sounds like you wish the UK's vaccination program wasn't as successful as it is


That says more about your prejudices than my posts. Firstly, this is about vaccine procurement not vaccination (where sensibly gov.uk seems to have mostly got out of the road and let the excellent NHS crack on).

And secondly, I think it's a bit early to be declaring success. Thankfully, our politicians are not usually so crass to stand atop a hospital with a "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner mid-crisis.



Craig the cyclist said:


> I am sure you agree that we are lucky as a population that our politicians and scientists were clever enough to back the right horse eh?


Lucky? Clever? Let's reserve judgment until the enquiry and for now be thankful that so far so good and hope it continues, whatever it is. Even the most dedicated supporter of the current political elite can only say "maybe", "AIUI" and lots of "?"s because most of the deals are still shrouded in (understandable due to the rules on commercial sensitivities) secrecy.


----------



## nickyboy (9 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> Lucky


By the same token, perhaps the government can be considered "unlucky" regarding the decisions it has taken regarding timing and strength of lockdowns?

That was another complex situation that the government got wrong and was rightly castigated for getting it wrong. Would it not be unreasonable to give the government credit for, when faced with another complex situation, it got it right?


----------



## srw (9 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> By the same token, perhaps the government can be considered "unlucky" regarding the decisions it has taken regarding


No.

There was plenty of evidence about lockdown when the decisions failed to be taken. 

When the vaccine contracts were signed there was zero evidence whether they would work.


----------



## midlife (9 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Why do you think that? I thought current advice was not to mix?



Beggars and choosers springs to mind. There are ongoing studies about mixing and matching but not heard of any results.


----------



## nickyboy (9 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> No.
> 
> There was plenty of evidence about lockdown when the decisions failed to be taken.
> 
> When the vaccine contracts were signed there was zero evidence whether they would work.


OK, so you regard the UK vaccination procurement policy success thus far to be a matter of luck. I do not

I'm willing to assess the government's performance objectively - hence my criticism of their lockdown decisions (or lack of them) and my recognition of good performance thus far on vaccinations. It is a pity that others can only assess the government's performance through the myopia of their own political persuasions.


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Feb 2021)

As @midlife knows:
Green Book Ch 14a
"There is no evidence on the interchangeability of the COVID-19 vaccines although studies are underway. Therefore, every effort should be made to determine which vaccine the individual received and to complete with the same vaccine. For individuals who started the schedule and who attend for vaccination at a site where the same vaccine is not available, or if the first product received is unknown, it is reasonable to offer one dose of the locally available product to complete the schedule. This option is preferred if the individual is likely to be at immediate high risk or is considered unlikely to attend again. In these circumstances, as both the vaccines are based on the spike protein, it is likely the second dose will help to boost the response to the first dose."

DHSC announced on 4 Feb that it has launched a clinical trial on ‘alternating’ vaccine doses, but was said to be a "13 month" trial.
JvT said last week: "Given the inevitable challenges of immunising large numbers of the population against Covid-19 and potential global supply constraints, there are definite advantages to having data that could support a more flexible immunisation programme . . . It is also even possible that by combining vaccines, the immune response could be enhanced . . . unless this is evaluated in a clinical trial we just won’t know."


----------



## Pale Rider (10 Feb 2021)

Does anyone know why Israel's and the Emirates' vaccine rollout puts even the UK in the slow lane?

Table in this story.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56009251


----------



## Craig the cyclist (10 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> Lucky



When something goes awry, even if it's not their fault, they are a shambles. When something goes well they are lucky.

I guess you didn't vote conservative?


----------



## AuroraSaab (10 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Does anyone know why Israel's and the Emirates' vaccine rollout puts even the UK in the slow lane?
> 
> Table in this story.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56009251



Not sure about UAE but I understand Israel already have the infrastructure and systems in place to do mass vaccinations. I suppose our health service is set up to do individual jabs through school and GP's, records kept locally etc., whereas they are already set up for the centralised 'come to the carpark on Saturday' mass inoculation model.

They ordered early too (June), paying top dollar. Small population helps too I guess, plus lots of multi generational households mean you won't miss out people.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.me...llout-in-israel-successes-lessons-and-caveats


----------



## lane (10 Feb 2021)

AuroraSaab said:


> Not sure about UAE but I understand Israel already have the infrastructure and systems in place to do mass vaccinations. I suppose our health service is set up to do individual jabs through school and GP's, whereas they are already set up for the 'come to the carpark on Saturday' mass inoculation model.



Yes but we are told it is the vaccine supply that is the limiting factor not infrastructure. Some how these other countries have sufficient to vaccinate their populations more quickly


----------



## srw (10 Feb 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> When something goes awry, even if it's not their fault, they are a shambles. When something goes well they are lucky.
> 
> I guess you didn't vote conservative?


See above.


srw said:


> No.
> 
> There was plenty of evidence about lockdown when the decisions failed to be taken.
> 
> When the vaccine contracts were signed there was zero evidence whether they would work.


There is an awful lot of good luck in the fact that the vaccine strategy Britain has followed has worked. That's not to denigrate the skill of those involved - bit the risks they took have paid off. That doesn't always happen.

On the other hand just about everything else about the government's response to the virus has been a complete shambles.


----------



## johnblack (10 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Does anyone know why Israel's and the Emirates' vaccine rollout puts even the UK in the slow lane?
> 
> Table in this story.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56009251


I thought Israel were also supply Pfizer with an amount of patient data, plus paying extra, to get to the head of the queue.


----------



## srw (10 Feb 2021)

Both Israel and UAE are quite small countries, and both have quite authoritarian cultures. You wouldn't know it from the reporting here, but the EU has now collectively given more doses than the UK and more than any other vaccine dosing regime except for China and the US.

https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-vacci...a&areas=eue&cumulative=1&populationAdjusted=1


----------



## midlife (10 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> Both Israel and UAE are quite small countries, and both have quite authoritarian cultures. You wouldn't know it from the reporting here, but the EU has now collectively given more doses than the UK and more than any other vaccine dosing regime except for China and the US.
> 
> https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-vacci...a&areas=eue&cumulative=1&populationAdjusted=1



But that has to be divvied up between 440 odd million people in the EU. Vaccinations per 100,000 is a better measure?


----------



## Pale Rider (10 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> Both Israel and UAE are quite small countries, and both have quite authoritarian cultures. You wouldn't know it from the reporting here, but the EU has now collectively given more doses than the UK and more than any other vaccine dosing regime except for China and the US.
> 
> https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-vacci...a&areas=eue&cumulative=1&populationAdjusted=1



All the EU countries are still miles behind the UK.

That 27 nations have a higher aggregate than our four nations will no doubt be a great comfort to all those unvaccinated Europhiles.


----------



## srw (10 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> But that has to be divvied up between 440 odd million people in the EU. Vaccinations per 100,000 is a better measure?


It's a different measure. The rhetoric in the UK is that the EU has completely failed to get people vaccinated - so I was surprised to discover that it has actually done more than the UK. As I've said before, it's not a sprint, it's a marathon, and nobody will be safe until everyone is safe.


----------



## lane (10 Feb 2021)

I see Boris is talking about another Jab in the autumn. This is going to be a real marathon if it takes several months to vaccinate everybody and two doses it may never stop but carry on all year and all next year. I can see my getting the vaccine in April, top up June, another jab maybe Dec and then another Feb. Will it be once a year jab like flu or will we need two a year?


----------



## mjr (10 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> But that has to be divvied up between 440 odd million people in the EU. Vaccinations per 100,000 is a better measure?


As with case and death measures, whether to scale and what against is very debatable. After all, the vulnerable and potential superspreaders are most important to get vaccinated and there are not fixed numbers per thousand.


----------



## johnblack (10 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> I see Boris is talking about another Jab in the autumn. This is going to be a real marathon if it takes several months to vaccinate everybody and two doses it may never stop but carry on all year and all next year. I can see my getting the vaccine in April, top up June, another jab maybe Dec and then another Feb. Will it be once a year jab like flu or will we need two a year?


I suppose it will depend on how the virus develops and more importantly until we know how good the vaccines have been in preventing hospitalisations, that kind of data isn't really going to be available until the gen. pub. are allowed back out.


----------



## lane (10 Feb 2021)

WHO recommend AZ is used for over 65s


----------



## PK99 (10 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> WHO recommend AZ is used for over 65s



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56011981


----------



## mjr (10 Feb 2021)

Only over 65s? Or is that BBC report misleading?


----------



## IaninSheffield (10 Feb 2021)

I guess folks have prolly seen this already, but if not ...
mademechuckle

View: https://youtu.be/CjzZOM6kGZg


----------



## SpokeyDokey (10 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Only over 65s? Or is that BBC report misleading?



WHO's over 65's comment is as follows:

_"The WHO *also* says the vaccine can be used in people aged over 65, which some countries have advised against."_

Quote from the BBC link.


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> It's a different measure. The rhetoric in the UK is that the EU has completely failed to get people vaccinated - so I was surprised to discover that it has actually done more than the UK. As I've said before, it's not a sprint, it's a marathon, and nobody will be safe until everyone is safe.


UK = >19%. Average of the 27 nations comprising the EU = <4% (percentage of population). Great that those nations are cracking on (noone safe till all safe).
WHO "covid-19-vaccine-race-we-either-win-together-or-lose-together" statement


lane said:


> I see Boris is talking about another Jab in the autumn.


We don't have evidence of the level of protection several months after the second dose, even if variants of virus don't make a difference (intuition suggests they will). Our experience of vaccinating against flu is that an annual dose is required. And an autumn jab is worth planning for - which is what the government is doing. The CureVac mRNA vaccine will be ready by then and will be manufactured here and a lot cheaper than the Pfizer one. Aiui, mRNA vaccines can be adapted quicker to the 'latest' variant, but there are experts around who can confirm that or otherwise.


mjr said:


> Only over 65s? Or is that BBC report misleading?


This is the WHO saying 'over 65s as well' (subliminally (and rightly) dissing Macron's "quasi-inefficacie" message. The WHO draws on the same scientific rationale if not trial evidence support: "The WHO said even though there was a small number of over 65s in the trials, other studies showed older people had a nearly identical immune response to younger adults so the vaccine should be used."
I though the most interesting element from the BBC report was the support offered by the WHO to the UK's decision to extend the gap between first and second doses.
"Based on the current evidence, WHO SAGE recommends that the vaccine should be administered in two doses with an interval of between four and 12 weeks." [the WHO] advises, saying a longer gap was "associated with greater vaccine efficacy" and mean it would reach more people.
I hope this advice will mean that 10 weeks worth more people around the world get an interim level of protection earlier than otherwise.


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 Feb 2021)

PM at Wed 10 Feb briefing:
"I have no doubts that the vaccines will get better and better at being able to cover every variant. But the plan at the moment is to continue to accelerate the roll-out of the present vaccine for all groups. And we're aiming for all JCVI groups 1-9 by the end of April."
Note this is not the same as previous aspirations, which were Hancock's 'the end of May' - which I criticised as unduly pessimistic and unchallenging.
Some may recall that a while ago I shared an estimated date to complete enough first vaccinations to give all JCVI Gps 1-9 their first dose: 30 April.


Ajax Bay said:


> I said (on current jab rate and resumption of second dose delivery at 12 weeks):
> by 15 Mar (Groups 5, 6 and 7 - O/60s).
> Then 6M (first jabs) for the next 28 days will do about 2/3rds of Groups 8 (4.4M) and 9 (4.7M)
> After mid April, first dose rate estimate might be 1.25Mpw, so we might hope that Group 9 (the last on the JCVI list) might be complete by 30 Apr.
> ...


----------



## srw (11 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> UK = >19%. Average of the 27 nations comprising the EU = <4% (percentage of population).


UK 13 million. EU 17 million. It's a different measure that tells you something different - that the EU is better in absolute terms at giving vaccines than the UK government will admit. 

Rule number 1 of statistics - always compare. 

Rule number 2 - the best measure is usually a relative one. Percentage of population is the best measure. 

Rule number 3 - other measures may well tell you other things of interest.


----------



## lane (11 Feb 2021)

Group six, which the government has now confirmed will include all those who need a steroid inhaler or tablets for asthma, will be vaccinated after healthy over-65s but before anyone younger than that without health conditions.

Previously, as discussed on here this was not confirmed or clear.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56012530

I know @Julia9054 was interested in this


----------



## Julia9054 (11 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Group six, which the government has now confirmed will include all those who need a steroid inhaler or tablets for asthma, will be vaccinated after healthy over-65s but before anyone younger than that without health conditions.
> 
> Previously, as discussed on here this was not confirmed or clear.
> 
> ...


Thank you!


----------



## lane (11 Feb 2021)

Perhaps @Ajax Bay will come along and tell us when group 6 can expect ro be vaccinated I am assuming sometime in March maybe?


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Feb 2021)

BLUF @lane : JCVI Gp 6 start properly no later than 26 Feb.
The major effort this week is going into sweeping up the hesitancy and other availability issues in the care homes, the non-NHS health workers (poor take-up) and the less mobile Gp 4 CEV cohort. Local primary care is turning itself out (as in 'inside out') to get these elements done (or at least offered) by 14 Feb (so it can be reported on 15 Feb). Since primary care have the best contacts and insight of all the Gp 6 individuals (adults aged 16 to 65 years in an at-risk group), once the Gp 4 CEV cohort is 'done', their focus can turn to Gp 6.
Finishing off the Gp 4 over 70s is just rolling on: the 'father of the house' of our pub ride group received his last week. Sensibly the programme is seamlessly moving on to Gp 5 (over 65s): our audax grandee in Gp 5 had theirs on Monday (Devon) - arm still a bit sore (Pfizer). That will take max 10 days so Gp 6 should start in earnest no later than 26 Feb. I suspect that primary care, drawing on their experience of the Gp 4 CEV challenge, will actually adopt a concurrent approach to Gps 5 (3.4M) and 6 (2.2M).
HTH


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> UK 13 million. EU 17 million. It's a different measure that tells you something different - that the EU is better in absolute terms at giving vaccines than the UK government will admit.
> Rule number 1 of statistics - always compare.
> Rule number 2 - the best measure is usually a relative one. Percentage of population is the best measure.
> Rule number 3 - other measures may well tell you other things of interest.


Spot on. Have "the UK Government admitted" (shared their assessment of) how good the 27 nations have individually or collectively been at giving their populations vaccine in absolute terms? I haven't noticed.
Don't you think the USA are doing well? Well, in absolute terms better than anywhere in the world (maybe China has vaccinated more, but we don't know).


----------



## Pale Rider (11 Feb 2021)

That 27 nations have vaccinated more people than four nations doesn't tell me anything.

Other than someone is desperately trying to twist the numbers in favour of the 27.


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> That 27 nations have vaccinated more people than four nations doesn't tell me anything.


Come on, Paley. As @srw has explicitly said, it does say something. I suspect the rate of vaccination (doses per day) is higher too. But the rate of first doses is lower, because they're are prudently sticking to 3 weeks as the gap, because there is no trial evidence of efficacy of the first dose after 21 days. (NB the WHO said yesterday that they'd recommend the longer gap.)
"It's a different measure that tells you something different . . . . (3) may well tell you other things of interest."
Don't think 'interesting' is applicable, though, for this absolute measure when used in comparative context.


----------



## lane (11 Feb 2021)

Will anticipate my and also my 17 year old son will be vaccinated next month as part pf group 6. This is about a month earlier than expected for me bur many months earlier for my son.


----------



## matticus (11 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Don't you think the USA are doing well? Well, in absolute terms better than anywhere in the world (maybe China has vaccinated more, but we don't know).


Well I for one am immensely proud of the First World numbers: we're really kicking everyone else's arses, and I thank Team USA for their contribution.


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Feb 2021)

For the world, think the UK is doing 'more than' its bit with COVAX and GAVI - I think we can be proud of that, but I don't know the ins and outs. Without the huge and early funding/investment made by UK and USA (Warp Speed) in particular (China and Russia investment less broadcast/visible) there would be no vaccines for anyone, would there? The low cost of the Oxford-AZ vaccine (was UK government an influence there?) means that countries around the world will, with help, be able to afford the doses needed. It is of course in everyone's interest that vaccination is worldwide.


----------



## mjr (11 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Without the huge and early funding/investment made by UK and USA (Warp Speed) in particular (China and Russia investment less broadcast/visible) there would be no vaccines for anyone, would there?


I'm not sure that's accurate. I thought Pfizer-BioNTech was developed without government funding, although it was used to increase production. So we'd probably have fewer doses of fewer vaccines.



> The low cost of the Oxford-AZ vaccine (was UK government an influence there?)


I'm sure I read that it was an early condition added by Oxford Uni, before gov.uk were even taking covid seriously. I can't remember if that's what broke the first attempted deal with Merck.



> means that countries around the world will, with help, be able to afford the doses needed. It is of course in everyone's interest that vaccination is worldwide.


Cool. So how does the gov.uk "us first" rhetoric fit in with helping vaccination worldwide?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (11 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> It's a different measure. The rhetoric in the UK is that the EU has completely failed to get people vaccinated - so I was surprised to discover that it has actually done more than the UK. As I've said before, it's not a sprint, it's a marathon, and nobody will be safe until everyone is safe.



Agree with your last line.

But, just under 18 million vaccinated out of what(?) 450 million people is hardly a stellar performance - whilst nearly 18 million have been vaccinated by no stretch of the imagination has Europe grasped the mettle as the UK have.


----------



## srw (11 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Agree with your last line.
> 
> But, just under 18 million vaccinated out of what(?) 450 million people is hardly a stellar performance - whilst nearly 18 million have been vaccinated by no stretch of the imagination has Europe grasped the mettle as the UK have.


See posts passim ad nauseam. As so often happens online, you are imposing your own interpretation on what I actually wrote and trying to pick a fight which isn't there. I thought it was interesting to discover that the EU has done more vaccinations than the UK. If, like me, you read the newspapers and listen to UK politicians you would probably assume the opposite was the case.

Oh, and it's "grasp the nettle".


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (11 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I'm not sure that's accurate. I thought Pfizer-BioNTech was developed without government funding, although it was used to increase production. So we'd probably have fewer doses of fewer vaccines.


that's correct https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti... is that Pfizer,-- from the German government. germany supplied money for infrastructure the us just placed an huge order.



mjr said:


> I'm sure I read that it was an early condition added by Oxford Uni, before gov.uk were even taking covid seriously. I can't remember if that's what broke the first attempted deal with Merck.


They correctly established they the lines needed to be as short as possible, so having Merch produce it's vaccine in the us was'nt viable that's why they choose AZ also because off it's european network.
offcrouse Trumps i buy all vaccine mantra did'nt help either


mjr said:


> Cool. So how does the gov.uk "us first" rhetoric fit in with helping vaccination worldwide?


That the eu before von der Leyen's credit to her groveling apology blamed the uk for there failures does not make the uk suddenly responsible for their mess. Just as the eu isn't responible for the failures that led to the uk death toll. The facts are quite simple the uk invested much more to help AZ to setup their infrastructure and that why the uk production is so much better. if you scroll 20-30 pages down you can find the link where you can read that information. Stop spreading the false premise of an vaccine war..


----------



## PK99 (11 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> See posts passim ad nauseam. As so often happens online, you are imposing your own interpretation on what I actually wrote and trying to pick a fight which isn't there. I thought it was interesting to discover that the EU has done more vaccinations than the UK. If, like me, you read the newspapers and listen to UK politicians you would probably assume the opposite was the case.
> 
> Oh, and it's "grasp the nettle".



By your measure of number of vaccines delivered Israel is performing poorly only 5.7 Million against the EU's 17.6 million


----------



## mjr (11 Feb 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> That the eu before von der Leyen's credit to her groveling apology blamed the uk for there failures does not make the uk suddenly responsible for their mess. [...] Stop spreading the false premise of an vaccine war..


As far as I saw, the EU blamed AZ not the UK, except for some unnamed sources claimed by UK tabloids with reputations for creativity. So, as for "spreading the false premise of an vaccine war" the old saying applies to the above post: physician, heal thyself!


----------



## srw (11 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> By your measure of number of vaccines delivered Israel is performing poorly only 5.7 Million against the EU's 17.6 million


Once again - I am comparing absolute numbers of people vaccinated, not how well or poorly different countries are doing. Yes, Israel has injected fewer people than the EU or the UK. The word "poorly" is your own interpretation.

What Israel has done poorly at is helping its neighbours, particularly in Palestine. Which isn't terribly smart.


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I'm sure I read that it was an early condition added by Oxford Uni, before gov.uk were even taking covid seriously. I can't remember if that's what broke the first attempted deal with Merck.


AZ’s profits rise to $7.4bn as main business ‘remains strong’ Feb 21).
AZ (and partners worldwide) will be producing three billion doses worldwide in 2021 (@ $3(?) per dose).
This Cherwell article gives an insight into the Oxford Uni to Merck > AZ considerations. Once the pandemic is over, there will be money to be made by AZ and a significant funding stream (6% of profits) coming back into the university (aiui) to go into medical research. Besides manufacturing location issues the stumbling blocks for link up with Merck were these:
1) Oxford closed talks with the pharmaceutical company Merck after concerns that it could not provide the vaccine to poorer countries.
2) Merck offered Oxford only 1% in royalties. (_Wall Street Journal_)

The article notes that that Oxford could have funded an awful lot of medical research if it had kept the rights to penicillin last century.
Edited extract:
Sir John Bell, Regius professor of medicine at Oxford, said that if Oxford did not have a stake in the vaccine, “people are going to come back and say, ‘Oh my God, another British university inventing something worth a ton of money, and guess what, they gave it away for free’.”
“The University didn’t enter this discussion with the idea of making a ton of money. Let’s say [the vaccine] becomes a seasonal coronavirus vaccine, and it sells a billion dollars a year. For us to be sitting there and making no money looks pretty dumb.”
Oxford University said in April (once AZ agreement signed): “As well as providing UK access as early as possible if the vaccine candidate is successful, Astra Zeneca will work with global partners on the international distribution of the vaccine, particularly working to make it available and accessible for low and medium income countries.”


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Feb 2021)

Interesting article on Chile's success with procurement of a portfolio of vaccines (and state-encouraged involvement with vaccine trials):
https://theconversation.com/how-chile-became-an-unlikely-winner-in-the-covid-19-vaccine-race-154614?


----------



## Julia9054 (11 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Group six, which the government has now confirmed will include all those who need a steroid inhaler or tablets for asthma, will be vaccinated after healthy over-65s but before anyone younger than that without health conditions.
> 
> Previously, as discussed on here this was not confirmed or clear.
> 
> ...


Turns out this has now been amended to remove inhaled corticosteroid users from group 6 and include only those on oral steroids. Great.


----------



## lane (11 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Turns out this has now been amended to remove inhaled corticosteroid users from group 6 and include only those on oral steroids. Great.



Oh. Well that didn't last long. To be honest I was surprised to see it because I saw a report yesterday that asthma sufferers are under represented amoung serious covid cases. The thinking is that the steroid inhaler provided some protection from covid and they might be used as a wider community treatment. I think most oral steroid users would be CEV group 4 anyway which brings us back to the original argument.

My original link to the BBC article this morning also said broadly people who get the flu jab in group 6 which includes asthma sufferers. As well as explicitly saying inhailed steroid users.strange.


----------



## Julia9054 (11 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Oh. Well that didn't last long. To be honest I was surprised to see it because I saw a report yesterday that asthma sufferers are under represented amoung serious covid cases. The thinking is that the steroid inhaler provided some protection from covid and they might be used as a wider community treatment. I think most oral steroid users would be CEV group 4 anyway which brings us back to the original argument.
> 
> My original link to the BBC article this morning also said broadly people who get the flu jab in group 6 which includes asthma sufferers. As well as explicitly saying inhailed steroid users.strange.


Nice to know one’s inhaler gives one superpowers! (Caveat, small scale study not yet peer reviewed)


----------



## Julia9054 (11 Feb 2021)

I was rather hoping that if I was in group 6 there would be a chance I’d be vaccinated before being deposited back in the plague pit that is a large secondary school. It seems not though.


----------



## lane (11 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> I was rather hoping that if I was in group 6 there would be a chance I’d be vaccinated before being deposited back in the plague pit that is a large secondary school. It seems not though.



Yes I thought that was the case. Can only hope that the new testing regime helps at schools but there are a lot of question marks over that. I am leaving my job at the end of this month so won't be going back into a school myself. Various reasons but covid was one consideration. Not classroom based but not sure that makes much difference in a school. Good luck.


----------



## Rusty Nails (11 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Nice to know one’s inhaler gives one superpowers! (Caveat, small scale study not yet peer reviewed)



I shall be increasing my dosage from here on in


----------



## C R (11 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> I was rather hoping that if I was in group 6 there would be a chance I’d be vaccinated before being deposited back in the plague pit that is a large secondary school. It seems not though.


Is there much data on transmission within school settings? Between September and Christmas there were 5 confirmed cases at our girls high school, but none of them caught at the school, and none of them seemed to pass it on to anyone in the school. Similar situation in our sons primary, with no evidence of transmission within the school.

This was rather surprising to us, specially as the bubbles at the high school are enormous, round about 100 pupils in each. How has it been in other schools?


----------



## Julia9054 (11 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> Is there much data on transmission within school settings? Between September and Christmas there were 5 confirmed cases at our girls high school, but none of them caught at the school, and none of them seemed to pass it on to anyone in the school. Similar situation in our sons primary, with no evidence of transmission within the school.
> 
> This was rather surprising to us, specially as the bubbles at the high school are enormous, round about 100 pupils in each. How has it been in other schools?


70 cases in my secondary school (2000 pupils) between September and December. In an area where cases in the community have been on the low side. PHE told us this was expected numbers 
This is a good thread on Twitter which pulls together the evidence 

View: https://twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1346362159446577154?s=19


----------



## lane (11 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> Is there much data on transmission within school settings? Between September and Christmas there were 5 confirmed cases at our girls high school, but none of them caught at the school, and none of them seemed to pass it on to anyone in the school. Similar situation in our sons primary, with no evidence of transmission within the school.
> 
> This was rather surprising to us, specially as the bubbles at the high school are enormous, round about 100 pupils in each. How has it been in other schools?



The Government have various studies they quote which suggest that transmission in schools is not an issue. The studies I have seen appear flawed to me. Some for example were conducted during lockdown when schools were largely empty! Others in September when community rates were low and schools had not long opened. Others ignored children and staff who were absent from school with Covid and only looked at cases in school at the time. Sorry I don't have links this is from memory but I did not see one study that made sense to me anyway.

What I will say is I have two children one in a secondary school and one in a 6th form college. Now the one in the secondary school the measures were typical of those applied in most schools; there were quite a number of reported cases and also among staff. Another schools I know of locally had 11 teachers with covid at one time - which is about 15% to 20% of the workforce at one time (that was in addition to support staff).

Where my son goes 6th form college - they were a lot more serious about controlling covid. For a start masks worn all the time in the college including in class and teachers had to wear them as well; they were a lot more stringent on ventilation, also could only mix in small groups in break. They had noticeably fewer cases and hardly any among the staff. 

Sorry a bit off topic but just answering the question that has been asked.


----------



## MrGrumpy (11 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> The Government have various studies they quote which suggest that transmission in schools is not an issue. The studies I have seen appear flawed to me. Some for example were conducted during lockdown when schools were largely empty! Others in September when community rates were low and schools had not long opened. Others ignored children and staff who were absent from school with Covid and only looked at cases in school at the time. Sorry I don't have links this is from memory but I did not see one study that made sense to me anyway.
> 
> What I will say is I have two children one in a secondary school and one in a 6th form college. Now the one in the secondary school the measures were typical of those applied in most schools; there were quite a number of reported cases and also among staff. Another schools I know of locally had 11 teachers with covid at one time - which is about 15% to 20% of the workforce at one time (that was in addition to support staff).
> 
> ...





lane said:


> The Government have various studies they quote which suggest that transmission in schools is not an issue. The studies I have seen appear flawed to me. Some for example were conducted during lockdown when schools were largely empty! Others in September when community rates were low and schools had not long opened. Others ignored children and staff who were absent from school with Covid and only looked at cases in school at the time. Sorry I don't have links this is from memory but I did not see one study that made sense to me anyway.
> 
> What I will say is I have two children one in a secondary school and one in a 6th form college. Now the one in the secondary school the measures were typical of those applied in most schools; there were quite a number of reported cases and also among staff. Another schools I know of locally had 11 teachers with covid at one time - which is about 15% to 20% of the workforce at one time (that was in addition to support staff).
> 
> ...



I’m mixed on schools, I thought our local secondary handled things better , where as others were clearly in bother. In fact one headmaster pleaded with the local community to stop having over night stays at friends houses !


----------



## Unkraut (12 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I thought Pfizer-BioNTech was developed without government funding, although it was used to increase production.


I know BioNTech have said the development was never impeded by a lack of money. The technique was discovered by what turned into Curevac in Tübingen. The company was financed by Dietmar Hopp extremely rich founder of SAP, together with money from Bill Gates' Foundation, which no doubt will get conspiracy theorists going. Basically private enterprise has been at the back of it. Over the pandemic both German government and EU money has been made available.

It was Hopp incidentally who would not have allowed Trump to buy up Curevac and take the expertise to America on an 'America First' basis.


SpokeyDokey said:


> But, just under 18 million vaccinated out of what(?) 450 million people is hardly a stellar performance - whilst nearly 18 million have been vaccinated by no stretch of the imagination has Europe grasped the mettle as the UK have.


What von der Leyen got wrong was ordering too late and too little. To what extent that has held back the vaccination programme overall I don't know, but in theory it could be three months were lost. It really ought to be investigated, and her admission of mistakes was likewise too little and too late.

If comparisons have to be made, they should be between the EU and USA, as the difference there more accurately reflects the procurement policy. Trump deserves some credit for the US achievement.

What she cannot be blamed for is the enormous shortfall in the amounts promised but not delivered, both by Pfizer and AZ. The vaccine simply isn't yet being produced in sufficient quantities for a significant proportion of the EU population to be vaccinated.

There are countries from the poorer parts of the EU who are grateful for receiving any vaccine at all, they wouldn't have but for the joint approach to purchasing.

Also something that is in real danger of being forgotten is the situation in the developing countries. I was reading of an African country (I've forgotten which) with a population of millions which to date has receive _25 doses_ of vaccine. In all the interminable discussion programmes on this I have seen only a couple of people have brought this up. Desirable as it is to vaccinate the population of the richer West, there is a very real danger of others being left behind, and the virus and its mutations running riot across the African continent until the end of the year when the richer countries have done their populations.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (12 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> As far as I saw, the EU blamed AZ not the UK, except for some unnamed sources claimed by UK tabloids with reputations for creativity. So, as for "spreading the false premise of an vaccine war" the old saying applies to the above post: physician, heal thyself!


Well if you go by the tabloids we would have an all out war right now, but what i meant was the eu's very quickly withdrawn blockage of the pfizer vaccine or attempts to do so. You see if you block certain countries in this case mainly the uk because your not satified with your supplier you make it political, you directly or indirectly blame the country since the blockage was mainly aimed at the uk(Canada received assurances their supply would not be blocked) So from the eu it was the first steps of a vaccine war, ironcally they started the whole vaccine program to prevent just that. Thankfully in the meantime they came to their senses and admitted their mistake.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (12 Feb 2021)

Odd situation:

Me 64, wife 57 - both with no UHC's. Wife gets invite today (booked for tomorrow) and I haven't despite being in a higher priority group.

How strange, although I am chuffed she is getting hers done.


----------



## Julia9054 (12 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Odd situation:
> 
> Me 64, wife 57 - both with no UHC's. Wife gets invite today (booked for tomorrow) and I haven't despite being in a higher priority group.
> 
> How strange, although I am chuffed she is getting hers done.


Wow - 57! Your area is doing well. Very odd they haven’t invited you though. Where does the invitation come from? Is it from your GP or from somewhere central?


----------



## lane (12 Feb 2021)

On our local facebook group seems that 65 year olds are now being vaccinated


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Feb 2021)

Well at 64 you are Gp 7, and in theory if not practice there are over 5M in Gps 5 and 6 'before you'. Maybe your 57 year old has a UHC she's not shared. Or she's fooled you about her age all these years. Edit: scrabbling for possible explanations here.
Calling up someone in Gp 8 does sound 'ahead of the game'.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (12 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Wow - 57! Your area is doing well. Very odd they haven’t invited you though. Where does the invitation come from? Is it from your GP or from somewhere central?



From the GP's practice - we share the same practice and the same GP too.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (12 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Well at 64 you are Gp 7, and in theory if not practice there are over 5M in Gps 5 and 6 'before you'. Maybe your 57 year old has a UHC she's not shared. Or she's fooled you about her age all these years. Calling up someone in Gp 8 does sound 'ahead of the game'.



 

No, she's got no unshared UHC's (we have each other's NHS online medical history logins) - and whilst she is still a v.good looking/looks younger than her age woman at 57, she would be amazingly good/young looking if she was into her 60's.


----------



## Julia9054 (12 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> From the GP's practice - we share the same practice and the same GP too.


Hmmm - do you phone them and ask where’s mine or would that risk them cancelling hers if they have made the appointment in error and you bring it to their attention!


----------



## Julia9054 (12 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> On our local facebook group seems that 65 year olds are now being vaccinated


Would be a lot easier if you could vaccinate people via Facebook!


----------



## Oldhippy (12 Feb 2021)

I'd be buggered I've never used it.


----------



## mjr (12 Feb 2021)

Oldhippy said:


> I'd be buggered I've never used it.


If you won't use fakebook then you have no value to Vlad and are expendable!


----------



## Oldhippy (12 Feb 2021)

Damn, not again!


----------



## SpokeyDokey (12 Feb 2021)

Over 14.5 million jabs now completed inc' 0.5 million second jabs. 

What a fantastic achievement by all involved - especially with the snow and ice affecting so many parts of the country.


----------



## slowmotion (12 Feb 2021)

Having the good fortune to be in the "clinically extremely vulnerable" group, I had mine at a large medical centre last Monday evening. I booked one of the last slots of the evening figuring that it would be quiet then. When I turned up there were 40 people queueing quietly and patiently in the car park as snow fell on their heads. It took about twenty minutes to actually get inside the building but nobody complained. We all seemed pretty grateful (and a little excited) to be there. It was a very slick, efficient operation with loads of volunteers telling you exactly what to do and the system was designed to absolutely maximise the number of jabs that could be given. I was extremely impressed. We all thanked the staff profusely.
I had absolutely no side-effects at all, not even a trace of tenderness in my upper arm. Just do it.


----------



## lane (12 Feb 2021)

Further to the Asthma debate. Guardian report:

Many people with asthma are confused about when they will get the vaccine and what priority group they fall into. Sarah Woolnough, the chief executive of Asthma UK and the British Lung Foundation, said: “We’ve been urging the government for some months to provide clarity on this as we know it’s a worrying time for lots of people and we now have more information.”

She said there was evidence that people with well-controlled asthma that is not severe are not at higher risk of dying from Covid-19, which means some people will not be included in category six.

“There is an ongoing discussion about who with asthma will be included in category six, and our understanding is that those with asthma that is difficult to control might be included. As it may be hard to accurately identify everyone in this group, the government should err on the side of caution in decision-making and cast its net wide when making decisions about definitions to ensure that people with asthma who are at risk won’t be missed,” she said.

https://www.theguardian.com/society...y-over-who-qualifies-for-next-uk-vaccine-wave


----------



## Venod (12 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> On our local facebook group seems that 65 year olds are now being vaccinated


Wife 68 got text message Tuesday to arrange appointment, I 68 got phone call latter that day to arrange mine, we both had Pfizer jabs today, both got letters from NHS today to arrange jabs if we haven't done so already.


----------



## Unkraut (12 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Odd situation:
> 
> Me 64, wife 57 ...


There is nothing odd about this. If you go back all the generations to Adam, the combination of him = 64 and her = 57 is only found in the highest, top-notch quality people.


----------



## mjr (12 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Over 14.5 million jabs now completed inc' 0.5 million second jabs.
> 
> What a fantastic achievement by all involved - especially with the snow and ice affecting so many parts of the country.


which is brilliant but how many in groups 1 to 4 are left to do?


----------



## Buck (12 Feb 2021)

National guidance to GP practices Published last night to now invite group 6 - 16 to 64 with underlying health conditions. (Subject to vaccine availability).


----------



## Unkraut (12 Feb 2021)

Interesting piece on the news tonight, a study in Brasil has shown that by having the flu jab you can reduce the chances of dying from Covid by about 20%. Apparently the flu jab is 'practice' for the immune system,

Glad I finally had my flu jab a couple of weeks ago!


----------



## Kajjal (12 Feb 2021)

Reporting from France suggests if you have already had COVID one dose of vaccine will produce the desired result. The practical value of this if accurate would be seen at country level after the first doses even if some people don’t know they have had COVID.


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Feb 2021)

Kajjal said:


> Reporting from France


Giving more info and a source for @Kajjal's spot:
France24 - France-recommends-single-vaccine-shot-for-people-who-have-had-covid-19 But NB this is an opinion, and not yet government policy.
Haute Autorité de Santé France said that people who had already been infected with Covid-19 develop an immune response similar to that bestowed by a vaccine dose, and that a single dose after infection would likely suffice.
They recommended a gap of between three and six months after infection before individuals who had recovered from Covid-19 receive a jab.
Quasi-efficasie?
Will be interesting to see how they administer that. Or maybe it's trying to cut into the vaccine hesitancy element whose rationale is 'I've had it so why would I need a vaccine?'.


----------



## Rusty Nails (12 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> which is brilliant but how many in groups 1 to 4 are left to do?


A lot less than there were a month ago, and more than there will be this time next week.


----------



## PK99 (12 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Would be a lot easier if you could vaccinate people via Facebook!



...Facebook manages to poison peoples' minds..


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> which is brilliant but how many in groups 1 to 4 are left to do?


If you find out, do share. I know you're dying to.
Could you also find out what percentage have been offered one and the unable/refuse rate, please?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that even if 100% have been offered a jab, a percentage (?<10%) of Gps 1-4 will not have been vaccinated by 15 Feb so, by that assessment the government sponsored vaccination programme will have failed.
In addition to Gps 1-4, wouldn't be surprised if getting on for a million from Gps 5/6 have been vaccinated (CoP Fri 12 Feb).


----------



## PaulSB (13 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> On our local facebook group seems that 65 year olds are now being vaccinated


This is certainly the situation in the northwest. Myself and many friends**, all over 65, booked our first and second jabs yesterday. The majority of us are covered by the same health authority but I know a few outside the area who booked on Friday.

NHS Covid Booking shows over 65s, vulnerable with letter and frontline workers can now book without an invitation.

My nearest centre is Blackburn Cathedral and time slots showed as available from this afternoon through to February 21st. I'm booked for February 18th and May 6th. I was waiting for a Covid 19 test result so decided to put off my vaccination until I got this - I'm negative, found out this morning!!

The process of booking and receiving a Covid test was very, very simple. As part of the C-19 study I reported symptoms on Wednesday and Thursday. Got an email overnight Thursday offering a test. On Friday morning I went online at 09.15 to book a test and was offered a slot at 10.30 five miles from home. I received my, negative, result at 06.15 this morning.

Booking the vaccination was very simple and efficient. Both systems worked extremely well. I can't fault this.

** Word spread in our little village like wildfire. Everyone over 65 has booked in the space of a few hours.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Feb 2021)

PaulSB said:


> NHS Covid Booking shows over 65s, vulnerable with letter and frontline workers can now book.
> Booking the vaccination was very simple and efficient. Both systems worked extremely well. I can't fault this.
> ** Word spread in our little village like wildfire. Everyone over 65 has booked in the space of a few hours.


Edit: Sounds like they're trying to get 'pull', at least on-line. Although this may discriminate against those who are not IT literate(ish) or aware. Since someone needs to be registered with a GP, that may encourage those who aren't to get on and register. @SpokeyDokey needs to shift his birthday, pronto.
The link will sweep up Over 65s but not those in Gp 6.
I think there's going to be some angst later this month on the ins and outs of qualification / eligibility for inclusion in JCVI Gp 6:
"all individuals aged 16 years[footnote 2] to 64 years with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality[footnote 3]"
Laugh  was for last sentence, @PaulSB


----------



## PaulSB (13 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Laugh  was for last sentence, @PaulSB


All my friends are banging the doors down for a vaccination. I only know one person who won't have it. She also refused pain relief when she broke both wrists! 

To be serious though the uptake in my social circle is 100% bar one person. We are all retired, the vast majority over 60 and everyone is totally on board with being vaccinated. We literally are excited........gives us a day out you see!


----------



## Venod (13 Feb 2021)

One observation from yesterday's jab was how efficient and smooth the whole process was, and it will get slicker as they get down the age groups, there were still one or two people with age related mobility issues which slows them down.


----------



## Pale Rider (13 Feb 2021)

Venod said:


> and it will get slicker as they get down the age groups,



I fear the reverse may happen.

Much of the success depends not on the infrastructure, but on patients' willingness to comply.

As has been observed by others, those of us who are too ill or too old to work have nothing better to do than sort our vaccines.

Hence there's been a high booking rate and no complaints about queuing, even in bad weather, not that I had to.

Younger people tend to be less compliant, not least because they have other things on their plates in terms of careers and families.

Thus there will be more who don't turn up, or complain about having to wait, all of which hampers the process.

The priority list could also be seen as a reverse ski slope of vaccine take up - it's the younger people who tend to be more resistant to being vaccinated.

All of which makes achieving a fast and high percentage take up of the lower priority groups harder to do.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Feb 2021)

I suspect there's been a surge this last week to get 'over the line' for the 15 Feb 'offer' target.
I think there's a possibility that supply profiles UK-wide have been designed for that with the corollary that supplies for the next week or so will mean the vaccination rate (per day) will be lower for the second half of February (but picks up again in March).
If we look at the supply revealed last month 'in error' by the SNP, that gives an idea (previously shared 4 weeks ago):





They're going to need more Pfizer (than shown) in mid-late March to give the 20 Dec - 10 Jan cohort their second jab.


----------



## PaulSB (13 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Edit: Sounds like they're trying to get 'pull', at least on-line. Although this may discriminate against those who are not IT literate(ish) or aware. Since someone needs to be registered with a GP, that may encourage those who aren't to get on and register. @SpokeyDokey needs to shift his birthday, pronto.
> The link will sweep up Over 65s but not those in Gp 6.
> I think there's going to be some angst later this month on the ins and outs of qualification / eligibility for inclusion in JCVI Gp 6:
> "all individuals aged 16 years[footnote 2] to 64 years with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality[footnote 3]"
> Laugh  was for last sentence, @PaulSB


You are absolutely correct about the need to be IT literate and of course able to access IT. This has long been a hobby horse of mine in many diverse areas of life "oh you just need to go online at" isn't true for some

There are reports some at risk groups have currently been omitted from the current round of vaccination. This includes some forms of asthma, my wife in our case, but GPs have the discretion to add individual patients to the group.


----------



## Julia9054 (13 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I fear the reverse may happen.
> 
> Much of the success depends not on the infrastructure, but on patients' willingness to comply.
> 
> ...


Add into that the willingness of employers to allow workers to miss work time and especially those who don't get paid if they are not at work. Those with precarious contracts tend to be poorer and therefore more at risk and exactly the groups we need to reach.


----------



## midlife (13 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I fear the reverse may happen.
> 
> Much of the success depends not on the infrastructure, but on patients' willingness to comply.
> 
> ...



You may be right, I wonder what levers the government have in store to drive vaccinations. No vaccine no haircut / pub visit / Hotel reservation etc ? Back to some sort of vaccine passport again.....


----------



## Pale Rider (13 Feb 2021)

PaulSB said:


> This has long been a hobby horse of mine in many diverse areas of life "oh you just need to go online at" isn't true for some



I will join you on that hobby horse if, in the words of Rolf Harris, there's room for two.

My vaccine invitation was sent via a text with a specific to me hyperlink to the booking site.

Fine if you can touch on it and enter text on a relatively small smartphone, but my phone doesn't do hyperlinks, so I had to transcribe the long link into my web browser. 

I coped, manfully, but the majority of elderly people I know wouldn't get past first base without help.


----------



## lane (13 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Add into that the willingness of employers to allow workers to miss work time and especially those who don't get paid if they are not at work. Those with precarious contracts tend to be poorer and therefore more at risk and exactly the groups we need to reach.



I have seen some talk that when we get to younger groups they may visit work premises to do on site.


----------



## lane (13 Feb 2021)

I know some elderly where I live had had problems and that is people with enough IT savy to be on the local Facebook group.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (13 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> The priority list could also be seen as a reverse ski slope of vaccine take up - it's the younger people who tend to be more resistant to being vaccinated.
> 
> All of which makes achieving a fast and high percentage take up of the lower priority groups harder to do.



I won't be bothering to have it, once they start offering it to the lower age groups. I'm just not that concerned about the virus. Half the population will have either had the vaccine or the virus itself, by the end of March anyway. There won't be so much virus circulating around, and a high proportion of the population will have some level of immunity, so there will be less and less benefit going forward in bothering to get the vaccine.


----------



## vickster (13 Feb 2021)

My parents just phoned up when they received their letter having struggled online. Very simple


----------



## Venod (13 Feb 2021)

@Pale Rider 

I was talking about the process of getting people in and out quickly, you may well be right about the take up


----------



## PaulSB (13 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I will join you on that hobby horse if, in the words of Rolf Harris, there's room for two.
> 
> My vaccine invitation was sent via a text with a specific to me hyperlink to the booking site.
> 
> ...


It is a very real problem and one which is often overlooked. I only know one person who cannot/will not access IT but know several who chose not to use certain aspects of the web.

The person who doesn't use IT is phoned to keep her up to date and included in stuff everyone else gets via email. Newsletters are printed out and popped through the door. No one complains but it makes her reliant on others which of course has both positives and negatives.

I also have a whole range of friends who chose not to use one or all of WhatsApp, Facebook, Messenger, Zoom etc. Clearly their choice but it doesn't help communication and organisations need to consider this.


----------



## PK99 (13 Feb 2021)

PaulSB said:


> All my friends are banging the doors down for a vaccination. I only know one person who won't have it. She also refused pain relief when she broke both wrists!
> 
> To be serious though the uptake in my social circle is 100% bar one person. We are all retired, the vast majority over 60 and everyone is totally on board with being vaccinated. We literally are excited........gives us a day out you see!



100% for the folks I know too. Not even any discussion about not having it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Feb 2021)

Edit to add: In the news: Deputy Chairman of the JCVI:"Vaccine uptake among care home staff remains "far too low" (66%)." (NB Gp 1 - my estimate is 700k care home staff; so 230k NOT vaccinated (presumably mostly refusers rather than 'unable' or 'unavailable'). Will impact, obliquely, on the tragic issue of care home residents not being allowed visitors.


Pale Rider said:


> the majority of elderly people I know wouldn't get past first base without help.


But I hope that nearly all those you're calling "elderly" have been 'done' by now. Anyone under 65 is (a) not elderly and (b) vast proportion are IT capable. There is a small element not for luddite or other reasons. I hope they have community support and/or can use a telephone.


lane said:


> they may visit work premises to do on site.


I guess they 'may' but it doesn't seem efficient so I rather doubt it.


SkipdiverJohn said:


> I won't be bothering to have it,


John - please consider that it helps the community as well as the 'individual you' for you to have a high percentage protection. This assumes that vaccination will also reduce viral transmission - emerging evidence. There are some who won't be given vaccination because their doctor recommends them not to, and some who refuse on various religious or other grounds. But if the only rationale for not getting vaccinated is 'I can't be bothered' and 'there won't be much of it around by then' you are not including in your consideration those whom you might infect, if you do catch it.


----------



## PK99 (13 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I will join you on that hobby horse if, in the words of Rolf Harris, there's room for two.
> 
> My vaccine invitation was sent via a text with a specific to me hyperlink to the booking site.
> 
> ...



A friend's brother, 70's, dyslexic, computer illiterate wife lives in Virginia.

With no NHS to call folks in, they have to go online to book a slot. Being dyslexic, it takes him ages to navigate the online forms and enter their details, by which time all the slots are full. Been trying for a couple of weeks.

I had two invitations from two bits of NHS and booking was a simple click through.


----------



## lane (13 Feb 2021)

Visiting workplaces is efficient if it gets the take up rate higher


----------



## lane (13 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> I won't be bothering to have it, once they start offering it to the lower age groups. I'm just not that concerned about the virus. Half the population will have either had the vaccine or the virus itself, by the end of March anyway. There won't be so much virus circulating around, and a high proportion of the population will have some level of immunity, so there will be less and less benefit going forward in bothering to get the vaccine.



Ok but don't come on here complaining
when the restrictions last longer than expected


----------



## dodgy (13 Feb 2021)

Is there a correlation between leavers and anti-vaxers? Seems it.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (13 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Deputy Chairman of the JCVI:"Vaccine uptake among care home staff remains "far too low" (66%)." (NB Gp 1 - my estimate is 700k care home staff; so 230k NOT vaccinated (presumably mostly refusers rather than 'unable' or 'unavailable'). Will impact, obliquely, on the tragic issue of care home residents not being allowed visitors.



Two word explanation for that statistic - Ethnic Minorities. High percentage of care staff are from minorities, and a high proportion are vaccine-sceptic for one reason or another. Not really much you can do about it either - as anyone treated differently to anyone else because they haven't had the vaccine will just play the discrimination card and the lawyers will have a field day.
Same goes for things like customers getting served by a business. They will shy well away from going down a "no jab, no service" route as it leaves them wide open to litigation.
In a year's time, Coronavirus related illness or discrimination claims will be the next ambulance-chasing legal trend, after PPI and pensions and investments mis-selling.


----------



## midlife (13 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Two word explanation for that statistic - Ethnic Minorities. High percentage of care staff are from minorities, and a high proportion are vaccine-sceptic for one reason or another. Not really much you can do about it either - as anyone treated differently to anyone else because they haven't had the vaccine will just play the discrimination card and the lawyers will have a field day.
> Same goes for things like customers getting served by a business. They will shy well away from going down a "no jab, no service" route as it leaves them wide open to litigation.
> In a year's time, Coronavirus related illness or discrimination claims will be the next ambulance-chasing legal trend, after PPI and pensions and investments mis-selling.



There are 9 protected characteristics where you can claim discrimination, "no Covid vaccination" is not on the list.


----------



## PK99 (13 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> There are 9 protected characteristics where you can claim discrimination, "no Covid vaccination" is not on the list.



But, if there are more BAME who opt not to be vaccinated then the lawyers would make a case that "no vaccination, no job" was indirect discrimination.


----------



## Pale Rider (13 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> Is there a correlation between leavers and anti-vaxers? Seems it.



That's a new one to add to the list.

Not only are leavers stupid, gullible, knuckle dragging racists stuck in dreams of the Empire, but, damn them, they are also anti-vaccination.

I can only speak authoritatively for one leaver - me - and I've been Pfizered.


----------



## midlife (13 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> But, if there are more BAME who opt not to be vaccinated then the lawyers would make a case that "no vaccination, no job" was indirect discrimination.



Tricky one. I have to be vaccinated to do my job ( Hep B etc)


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (13 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> There are 9 protected characteristics where you can claim discrimination, "no Covid vaccination" is not on the list.



It doesn't have to be on the list. All you need is to be able to claim discrimination as one of the others. Employers are going to run a mile from this, along with any business providing goods & services. You think this won't happen? The ambulance chasers are always on the lookout for the next tranche of business. They'll lie low for a good few months yet, because in the current climate it would be bad PR, but when it calms down later in the year the lawyers will be out with a vengeance; "were you refused work or service due to your beliefs not to have a vaccine?" and "did your employer endanger your safety by making you come into contact with others who may have had the virus at work"?
Business are treading on eggshells ATM. Loads of people on my job have had way more time off work than they would normally get away with. Most of them would ordinarily be on a warning for excessive absences by now. Any case of a sniffle or possible virus contact (real or made up) and its "don't come in, you better stay at home on full pay" No questions asked. I could have an extra couple of weeks off anytime I fancy it to do some DIY if I tell them I might have been in contact with the virus, and nobody will bat an eyelid. They're all covering their arses. The unproductive wage costs they will happily swallow this year, they don't want a legal claims time bomb going off in future.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (13 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> Is there a correlation between leavers and anti-vaxers? Seems it.


Life is so easy if you throw everything deemed unlikable for you on one pile isn't it?


----------



## MrGrumpy (13 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> I won't be bothering to have it, once they start offering it to the lower age groups. I'm just not that concerned about the virus. Half the population will have either had the vaccine or the virus itself, by the end of March anyway. There won't be so much virus circulating around, and a high proportion of the population will have some level of immunity, so there will be less and less benefit going forward in bothering to get the vaccine.



Nobody is forcing you to have it........ I presume you don’t bother with any vaccinations for anything preventative ? I think this is going to be around for a while a long time indeed and if you want to get back to Wetherspoons for your burger and pint you might need to take the hit !


----------



## midlife (13 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> I won't be bothering to have it, once they start offering it to the lower age groups. I'm just not that concerned about the virus. Half the population will have either had the vaccine or the virus itself, by the end of March anyway. There won't be so much virus circulating around, and a high proportion of the population will have some level of immunity, so there will be less and less benefit going forward in bothering to get the vaccine.



Long term planning for my service is above my pay grade but they are looking at a good level of population (herd) immunity in 4-5 years.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (13 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Nobody is forcing you to have it........ I presume you don’t bother with any vaccinations for anything preventative ?



I haven't had any kind of vaccination since I was still at school. I had a really nasty virus of some sort in the 96/97 New Year that put me out of action for nearly a week, then nothing much until March 2020 when I got a dose of what I strongly suspect was the Coronavirus. It didn't make me as ill as the previous 96/97 episode though. Someone has said to me I might have had the Bird Flu 24 years ago, although it seems a bit far-fetched. It's rare for anything to really knock me out though, but that 96/97 virus did.



midlife said:


> Long term planning for my service is above my pay grade but they are looking at a good level of population (herd) immunity in 4-5 years.



Surely the most important factor in immunity is who is immune not how many? Within a month the vast majority of high risk people with likely bad reactions to the coronavirus will be at least partly if not fully immune. Why would it matter if the low risk population is susceptible, since only a small number of those are ever likely to be hospitalised or die? It's quite conceivable to have a substantial ongoing number of coronavirus cases happening for some time to come without it making very many people seriously ill, in which case the presence of the virus doesn't matter. There are loads of viruses around us all the time. We don't obsess about them.


----------



## Blue Hills (13 Feb 2021)

PaulSB said:


> All my friends are banging the doors down for a vaccination. I only know one person who won't have it. She also refused pain relief when she broke both wrists!
> 
> To be serious though the uptake in my social circle is 100% bar one person. We are all retired, the vast majority over 60 and everyone is totally on board with being vaccinated. We literally are excited........gives us a day out you see!


Surely going seriously stir crazy paul if you're looking forward to a trip to blackburn that much. Especially as the cathedral spoons will be shut.
(Excellent outdoor shop in blackburn though probs shut as well i suppose)


----------



## Blue Hills (13 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I will join you on that hobby horse if, in the words of Rolf Harris, there's room for two.
> 
> My vaccine invitation was sent via a text with a specific to me hyperlink to the booking site.
> 
> ...


My mum's health centre regularly sends texts starting hello followed by nothing much but a hyperlink. Then she has to call me to see what the hell it is about. Makes me wonder if the health centre needs a visit. Fortunately they are sending covid jab info by simple text.


----------



## fossyant (13 Feb 2021)

Having the vaccination has been proven to reduce the transmission - that's what I'm more bothered by - I'd rather not pass the virus onto someone more vulnerable.

I saw something on twitter about freedom of information requests going to local NHS Trusts asking how many folk have actually died of covid, and because it's not that high, these idiots think it's not a thing (covid). No, most folk who have covid, don't die of it, but multiple other issues that are a result of the virus, e.g organ failure, pneumonia, heart attack, stroke.

I just want to get back to normal ASAP.


----------



## AuroraSaab (13 Feb 2021)

This is one thing I don't get either. It's not just about how many died. It's about the ones who spent weeks in the ICU, or a week at home gasping for breath and with heart palpitations, or the ones who had a rough couple of weeks with it last year and still feel awful. I'm pretty sure I would survive it but I might pass it to someone who won't or who will be very ill.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (13 Feb 2021)

fossyant said:


> I saw something on twitter about freedom of information requests going to local NHS Trusts asking how many folk have actually died of covid, and because it's not that high, these idiots think it's not a thing



I'm pretty unfazed about the virus personally, but I've never gone for all the conspiracy theory stuff that says the virus is "fake news", because clearly it is 100% real. All the stuff about it being invented by the government to control people or secretly beamed around by British Telecom using their microwave transmitters, is really bizarre.


----------



## C R (13 Feb 2021)

AuroraSaab said:


> This is one thing I don't get either. It's not just about how many died. It's about the ones who spent weeks in the ICU, or a week at home gasping for breath and with heart palpitations, or the ones who had a rough couple of weeks with it last year and still feel awful. I'm pretty sure I would survive it but I might pass it to someone who won't or who will be very ill.


The point these people miss is that the numbers are "low" because we have been under significant restrictions to curb transmission of the virus. Look at the US to see what happens when restrictions are lifted too soon, or not there in the first place.


----------



## shep (13 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> Is there a correlation between leavers and anti-vaxers? Seems it.


Does there?
I'll have it when it comes my way, just not as bothered as some on getting a date. 

Only 55 so a bit to go I would suspect.


----------



## fossyant (13 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> I'm pretty unfazed about the virus personally, but I've never gone for all the conspiracy theory stuff that says the virus is "fake news", because clearly it is 100% real. All the stuff about it being invented by the government to control people or secretly beamed around by British Telecom using their microwave transmitters, is really bizarre.



I'm hoping to get 5g built in, then no need to carry a phone ! 😄


----------



## Pale Rider (13 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> Does there?
> I'll have it when it comes my way, just not as bothered as some on getting a date.
> 
> Only 55 so a bit to go I would suspect.



At the risk of giving the silly leaver/anti-vax notion more attention than it deserves, it currently seems the reverse may be true.

Older people were more likely to vote for Brexit, so we are told, thereby selfishly ruining the lives of the younger generation, blah, blah.

Take up for the vaccine among older people has been close to universal.

Thus we might conclude Brexiteers are more likely to be pro-vaccine.

Remains (ho-ho) to be seen what the take up of younger people is, but I reckon it will be lower for the reasons I've stated earlier.

Ethnic minorities appear to have more vaccine resisters than other groups, but I've no idea what their view on Brexit was.


----------



## Rusty Nails (13 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> Is there a correlation between leavers and anti-vaxers? Seems it.



What statistical analysis demonstrates that? It's not Bill Gates sending telepathic messages to you is it?


----------



## Julia9054 (13 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> I haven't had any kind of vaccination since I was still at school. I had a really nasty virus of some sort in the 96/97 New Year that put me out of action for nearly a week, then nothing much until March 2020 when I got a dose of what I strongly suspect was the Coronavirus. It didn't make me as ill as the previous 96/97 episode though. Someone has said to me I might have had the Bird Flu 24 years ago, although it seems a bit far-fetched. It's rare for anything to really knock me out though, but that 96/97 virus did.
> 
> 
> 
> Surely the most important factor in immunity is who is immune not how many? Within a month the vast majority of high risk people with likely bad reactions to the coronavirus will be at least partly if not fully immune. Why would it matter if the low risk population is susceptible, since only a small number of those are ever likely to be hospitalised or die? It's quite conceivable to have a substantial ongoing number of coronavirus cases happening for some time to come without it making very many people seriously ill, in which case the presence of the virus doesn't matter. There are loads of viruses around us all the time. We don't obsess about them.


One aspect you haven't considered is the ability of viruses to mutate. The more a virus circulates, the more opportunities for mutation there is. If one of those mutations means that the previously vaccinated vulnerable people are no longer immune we are back to square one. 
Far better that as much of the population are vaccinated as possible, reducing viral circulation and thus mutation. From this perspective "I don't fancy the vaccination because I won't get seriously ill" perspective doesn't really cut it


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> Is there a correlation between leavers and anti-vaxers? Seems it.


What do you think suggests there might be, @dodgy What deduction(s) would you draw if there was? Is there a correlation between minority communities and anti-vaxxers? Share your definitions of an 'anti-vaxxer' please, just so we know how wide you cast that net.


SkipdiverJohn said:


> Surely the most important factor in immunity is who is immune not how many? Within a month the vast majority of high risk people with likely bad reactions to the coronavirus will be at least partly if not fully immune. Why would it matter if the low risk population is susceptible, since only a small number of those are ever likely to be hospitalised or die? It's quite conceivable to have a substantial ongoing number of coronavirus cases happening for some time to come without it making very many people seriously ill, in which case the presence of the virus doesn't matter.


_"Surely the most important factor in immunity is who is immune not how many?"_
For reducing the number of deaths and serious illness: yes. But we're trying to get beyond that to getting back to a new normal where individuals, communities and the economy can thrive, with the associated necessary tax revenue. And so we need to vaccinate enough to achieve herd immunity, with or without an estimated contribution (?2M under 30) of those who have had C19 since November (June minus 6 months). So "how many" matters (is a major factor).
_"Why would it matter if the low risk population is susceptible, since only a small number of those are ever likely to be hospitalised or die? It's quite conceivable to have a substantial ongoing number of coronavirus cases happening for some time to come without it making very many people seriously ill, in which case the presence of the virus doesn't matter."_
Two reasons: first: the small number who do get seriously ill or die could be cut by 90%: a good thing in itself. Second: those low risk people are both liable to infect others so contributing to continued circulation of the virus, and increasing its opportunities to mutate to a more lethal and/or a more transmissible and/or a variant against which the current set of vaccinations is less or in-effective. This is not a 'good thing' and by mass vaccination (and other mitigations) the risk can be minimised. [Edit: x post with Julia on that.]
Thus "the presence of the virus" does matter, and herd immunity is an objective worth shooting for, nationally and world-wide. I encourage everyone to say 'yes' to the offer.
By my maths (at a (conservative) 2.5M total doses a week in UK from now on) herd immunity (80% of 67M) on these islands might be achieved by end July (with a few reasonable assumptions, see earlier posts).


----------



## SpokeyDokey (13 Feb 2021)

Wife had hers this pm. Very slick operation. Even in a small backwater town the throughput was astonishing to watch. 12 vaccination booths in use and in the short time I was waiting for her to come back out the number of people exiting was very impressive.

No holding the patients (?) back re 15 minutes observation time. She was told not to drive for 15 minutes and that was it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Feb 2021)

Were her peers in the hall/queue all under 60? Your time will come soon enough.
Administration of the Oxford-AZ vaccine does not mandate 15 minutes under observation.


----------



## AuroraSaab (13 Feb 2021)

The covid jab conspiracy theories are interesting but, as I read elsewhere, what exactly was Bill Gates planning to do on his first day in control of 90 year old Margaret from Coventry?


----------



## nickyboy (13 Feb 2021)

AuroraSaab said:


> The covid jab conspiracy theories are interesting but, as I read elsewhere, what exactly was Bill Gates planning to do on his first day in control of 90 year old Margaret from Coventry?


You've seen Westworld, starring Yul Brinner?


----------



## dodgy (13 Feb 2021)

I'm sure the people who are unable to be vaccinated are comforted by those exercising their choice not to get vaccinated.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (13 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> Look at the US to see what happens when restrictions are lifted too soon, or not there in the first place.



Except that the per capita mortality rate in the US is actually quite a bit *lower* than that of the UK and several other European countries. Some parts of Europe can't shout too much about their virus stats either. The official infected percentage of the population in the USA is 8.2%, mortality 145/100k. In the Czech Republic the official infected population is 10%, mortality 168/100k. Same goes for Slovenia, infected percentage 8.5%, mortality is 177/100k. In fact there are *nine* countries within Europe who have a worse virus mortality rate than the USA, but everyone with a political axe to grind against Trump conveniently turns a blind eye to those and focuses on the total number of recorded US cases, which although high, is not the worst performance by a country that probably has reasonably accurate stats.
Then you've got the global figures that are not realistic. For example does anyone seriously believe that Nigeria, with a population of around 206 million, has only had 144,000 cases and 1710 deaths?  Or Iran only having 1.5 million cases amongst 84 million population? Half the official national stats across the globe are just fantasy.


----------



## classic33 (13 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> It doesn't have to be on the list. All you need is to be able to claim discrimination as one of the others. Employers are going to run a mile from this, along with any business providing goods & services. You think this won't happen? The ambulance chasers are always on the lookout for the next tranche of business. They'll lie low for a good few months yet, because in the current climate it would be bad PR, but when it calms down later in the year the lawyers will be out with a vengeance; "were you refused work or service due to your beliefs not to have a vaccine?" and "did your employer endanger your safety by making you come into contact with others who may have had the virus at work"?
> Business are treading on eggshells ATM. Loads of people on my job have had way more time off work than they would normally get away with. Most of them would ordinarily be on a warning for excessive absences by now. Any case of a sniffle or possible virus contact (real or made up) and its "don't come in, you better stay at home on full pay" No questions asked. *I could have an extra couple of weeks off anytime I fancy it to do some DIY if I tell them I might have been in contact with the virus, and nobody will bat an eyelid.* They're all covering their arses. The unproductive wage costs they will happily swallow this year, they don't want a legal claims time bomb going off in future.


And more work places are demanding offical proof that you've been told to isolate. Similar with the tests, some are asking for a negative test result before allowing you back.


----------



## PaulSB (14 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Surely going seriously stir crazy paul if you're looking forward to a trip to blackburn that much. Especially as the cathedral spoons will be shut.
> (Excellent outdoor shop in blackburn though probs shut as well i suppose)


Sadly the shop is currently closed! 'Twas partly tongue in cheek but, yes, this lockdown is getting to everyone I know.

Most of my buddies are spending hours on the turbo. I don't have one. This is a worry.


----------



## PaulSB (14 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> I won't be bothering to have it, once they start offering it to the lower age groups. I'm just not that concerned about the virus. Half the population will have either had the vaccine or the virus itself, by the end of March anyway. There won't be so much virus circulating around, and a high proportion of the population will have some level of immunity, so there will be less and less benefit going forward in bothering to get the vaccine.


An astonishingly selfish attitude showing scant regard for society and those you live and work with.

A few hours out of your day to help tackle a pandemic is asking nothing of you.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (14 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> I'm sure the people who are unable to be vaccinated are comforted by those exercising their choice not to get vaccinated.



At the end of the day, if someone else chooses, for whatever reason, not to have the vaccine that's up to them. Even if it's because they believe the conspiracy theories and think the government wants to inject them with a microchip. Whatever the reason, its their right to say either yes or no, and it's no business of yours or anyone else's. You make your own decisions, don't poke your nose into other peoples decisions.
It's the typical busybody Remainer attitude from 2016 all over again, where one group of people think everyone who doesn't agree with them must be stupid and need to be lectured about how they should think or act.


----------



## mjr (14 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> There are 9 protected characteristics where you can claim discrimination, "no Covid vaccination" is not on the list.


No, but while vaccination has been restricted by age and disability, and while takeup differs by race and nationality, then "no covid vaccination" is effectively a proxy for several protected characteristics.

So-called "vaccine passports" would be discriminatory until vaccination is available to all.


----------



## midlife (14 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> No, but while vaccination has been restricted by age and disability, and while takeup differs by race and nationality, then "no covid vaccination" is effectively a proxy for several protected characteristics.
> 
> So-called "vaccine passports" would be discriminatory until vaccination is available to all.



Is the second paragraph illegal? 

https://travel.saga.co.uk/travel-updates/coronavirus-holidays-guests.aspx


----------



## mjr (14 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> Is the second paragraph illegal?
> 
> https://travel.saga.co.uk/travel-updates/coronavirus-holidays-guests.aspx


It is important to note the following paragraph where operations are suspended until May, by which time I think the currently-age-limited vaccination is expected to be available to all of their potential customers, so it is not age discrimination.

They also will allow travel by those who cannot have the vaccine, according to https://travel.saga.co.uk/travel-updates/holidays-coronavirus-vaccine.aspx so it is not disability discrimination.

I think they may be open to accusations of racism but I would not like to say if it is illegal or not. Wait for the courts?


----------



## fossyant (14 Feb 2021)

AuroraSaab said:


> The covid jab conspiracy theories are interesting but, as I read elsewhere, what exactly was Bill Gates planning to do on his first day in control of 90 year old Margaret from Coventry?


He'll be making doubly sure the oldies vote Conservative again


----------



## Pale Rider (14 Feb 2021)

fossyant said:


> He'll be making doubly sure the oldies vote Conservative again



I expect 90-year-old Margaret from Coventry will be pleased just to make it to the next General Election.


----------



## midlife (14 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> It is important to note the following paragraph where operations are suspended until May, by which time I think the currently-age-limited vaccination is expected to be available to all of their potential customers, so it is not age discrimination.
> 
> They also will allow travel by those who cannot have the vaccine, according to https://travel.saga.co.uk/travel-updates/holidays-coronavirus-vaccine.aspx so it is not disability discrimination.
> 
> I think they may be open to accusations of racism but I would not like to say if it is illegal or not. Wait for the courts?



Tricky one isn't it. I guess if there comes a time when you can "buy" the vaccine it might be different?


----------



## mjr (14 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> Tricky one isn't it. I guess if there comes a time when you can "buy" the vaccine it might be different?


I don't see how that would change the race-correlated hesitancy aspect?

And vaccines for sale before general availability would be a big can of worms I hope isn't opened in the UK.


----------



## shep (14 Feb 2021)

PaulSB said:


> An astonishingly selfish attitude showing scant regard for society and those you live and work with.
> 
> A few hours out of your day to help tackle a pandemic is asking nothing of you.


What's your thoughts on the BAME folks apparently refusing the jab, considering many work in the care home industry, whether those have refused I'm unsure.


----------



## mjr (14 Feb 2021)

I wonder how many care home workers refuse either due to fears of time off unpaid from side effects or pressure from managers for similar, rather than any scepticism.


----------



## marinyork (14 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I think they may be open to accusations of racism but I would not like to say if it is illegal or not. Wait for the courts?



Whether it is illegal or not a large organisation needs to be sharper and consider things. I think a test in a court would hone in like an eagle on the word "guidance" whilst simultaneously using the words "must" elsewhere and particularly when trying to defend things the words "full immunity". I don't think they'd be amused by people saying it was available to the rest of the population when it blatantly was likely not after May for some time. Judges in discrimination cases tend to consider quite vague statements like this and what they actually mean in real life. In a discrimination case the burden is on the provider or employer and it seems to me an unnecessarily high hurdle to jump of their own making!

Whether it is illegal will come down to other things like whether it's proportionate. An organised cruise ship with 2000 people on board for two weeks organised by a large company is completely different to a set of small holiday homes with people kept separately run by small businesses. Are there alternatives?

It's worth saying that contrary to what many people say that many discrimination cases for covid will likely be harassment and victimisation rather than necessarily other things.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (14 Feb 2021)

The issue of low ethnic minority take-up rates is not just confined to people of working age. It goes much deeper than that. It's the "whitest" parts of the country that have made the most progress in administering the vaccine. The worst performing place when I last checked was Greater London, which also has the most ethnic population.


----------



## shep (14 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I wonder how many care home workers refuse either due to fears of time off unpaid from side effects or pressure from managers for similar, rather than any scepticism.


I wonder, and the non care home workers or just the ' not having it ' one's?

No less impacting than our skip driving refusee's.


----------



## marinyork (14 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I wonder how many care home workers refuse either due to fears of time off unpaid from side effects or pressure from managers for similar, rather than any scepticism.



Yes. I expect having had to interact with care home and support workers in previous roles and jobs that there are a variety of reasons. 

Mass vaccination centres can be far away, when booking we were offered the one in this city or 20 miles away. This is the sort of travel setup that can be problematic for care workers. This is in an ultra urban area too! The mass vaccination slots may not necessarily suit care worker shifts quite as much as people think but it's not a black or white thing.

There are quite a few fertility rumours doing the rounds, which I've heard off people myself the last six months for women in their late 20s and early 30s. It's not really cyclechat's thing, but a recent guardian article highlighted (it wasn't talking about the vaccine) saying about singletons and time marching on particularly for women and how people felt which I think some on here would jump on and say this stuff is ridiculous. These are very much things I've heard from singletons in their 20s and 30s by the time we got onto the second wave. Also people feeling quite isolated from the atomic family where much of the covid attention and policy was focussed on so they may dare not voice the views outside their circles.


----------



## midlife (14 Feb 2021)

Just curious but are care home staff vaccinated at their place of work along with the residents?


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> fertility rumours


Find Out Now survey (55k persons): the (age/sex defined) group most likely to refuse the vaccine is currently 18-34 year-old women: 25% v general population's 18% (latter figure seems high cf other surveys).
Think this msn article is a good appraisal of the concerns and facts/evidence/lack of evidence on the likely/possible effect of vaccination on fertility.
Article covers everything but I thought this was a point well worth making:
"There is no reason to expect [a COVID-19 vaccine to have] an effect on fertility: specific research would've been done if there were a plausible reason to expect this being a problem. Instead, *the risk of COVID-19 affecting your fertility is far greater*." Dr Karan Rajan NHS surgeon, and lecturer at ICL
Some worried that the antibodies developed could attack the placenta as well as the virus. But "if this was going to happen it would've happened when women got the virus originally.
"We have evidence this doesn’t happen, because we are now seeing people becoming pregnant having had COVID-19 in the spring. No one who is serious about vaccines or immunology is worried about this."
Dr Victoria Male, a lecturer in reproductive immunology at ICL


----------



## lane (14 Feb 2021)

The person I know was vaccinated at work. Smallish care home all staff were Vaccinated at the same time even if day off or not on shift they went in and the staff and residents were vaccinated.


----------



## marinyork (14 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Find Out Now survey (55k persons): the (age/sex defined) group most likely to refuse the vaccine is currently 18-34 year-old women: 25% v general population's 18% (latter figure seems high cf other surveys).
> Think this msn article is a good appraisal of the concerns and facts/evidence/lack of evidence on the likely/possible effect of vaccination on fertility.
> Article covers everything but I thought this was a point well worth making:
> "There is no reason to expect [a COVID-19 vaccine to have] an effect on fertility, specific research would've been done if there were a plausible reason to expect this being a problem. Instead, *the risk of COVID-19 affecting your fertility is far greater*." Dr Karan Rajan NHS surgeon, and lecturer at ICL



Yes, this is what researchers have said, this is my experience hearing these things.

One of the ones that caused concern as well was the guidance on covid for pregnant women 'changing' over time, which is viewed by many in a much more worrisome way. And during covid how pregnant women have been treated and affect on many hasn't been a great advert for quelling these worries. It may ramp up the worries. It's of interest and ironic to me that the MHRA during covid has decided to go on a massive consultation on selling some continuous contraception OTC from prescription. That's a good thing, but it demonstrates how out of step the rest of society is from this subset of the population.

I didn't ever say the rumours made much sense. If you consider the range of mental health, neurological and other things covid can bring in a small but terrifying minority as well as zika wasn't very far back, it doesn't make sense from a medical point of view. From a societal point of view it makes a lot more sense.


----------



## Buck (14 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> Just curious but are care home staff vaccinated at their place of work along with the residents?



When vaccinating the residents, we asked the care home managers to arrange staff at the same time with some even coming in on their day off for this. The uptake was pretty high amongst the staff regardless of their demographic.


----------



## srw (14 Feb 2021)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...irst-covid-jab-to-four-most-vulnerable-groups
" The UK government has reached its target of offering at least first vaccinations to the four groups of people in the UK seen as most vulnerable to coronavirus by mid-February, it has announced. "

So much for the sceptics like ...errr... me. Some of these comments really haven't lasted very well, have they?



srw said:


> In reality, the difference of a couple of weeks in the first vaccination is completely irrelevant. What counts is how quickly the thing is stuffed into the arms of very large numbers of people. I'd put decent money on that happening more quickly in Germany than in the UK.





srw said:


> That's an operationally very difficult problem to solve using the central dictat tools we're trying to impose on a health system that is run very locally.





srw said:


> Let's talk again in a couple of months when there is some robust data rather than political spin.





srw said:


> They need to be stretching but achievable.
> 
> We've had nine months of Johnson over-promising and under-delivering. Why should we believe him now?





srw said:


> This stretch is utterly ludicrous. It is ridiculous. It is a figment of the imagination of a few advisors in Whitehall who have never had to deal with the messy reality of actually getting drugs into people's arms.


----------



## mjr (14 Feb 2021)

I await confirmation that this is "offered" in the Boris sense of in the arms and not the usual dictionary sense, but it seems I was right that it needed to accelerate, wasn't I? They needed a slight buffer to cope with the days lost to snow around here.


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Feb 2021)

I thought going back to look at a few of the "We're doomed" comments from the first 30 pages and exposing them to the blast of February's cold gales was poor form, but fair play to you @srw for looking for some of yours, and sharing.
In your defence it was not general knowledge that the government's quick choice for leading the VTF was impeccably qualified from the private sector (a dreaming spires alumna, scientific and venture capitalist), with the added advantage of a matrimonial insight into Cabinet.
Got a tip for the Gold Cup?


----------



## nickyboy (14 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...irst-covid-jab-to-four-most-vulnerable-groups
> " The UK government has reached its target of offering at least first vaccinations to the four groups of people in the UK seen as most vulnerable to coronavirus by mid-February, it has announced. "
> 
> So much for the sceptics like ...errr... me. Some of these comments really haven't lasted very well, have they?


Predicting the success or otherwise of something that nobody has ever done before is always going to be a challenge. I'm just glad, as I'm sure everyone is, that we have achieved the stretch target. Hopefully there won't be a collective exhalation and a reduction in the daily rate and instead we continue to get the vaccines into arms asap


----------



## PaulSB (14 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> What's your thoughts on the BAME folks apparently refusing the jab, considering many work in the care home industry, whether those have refused I'm unsure.


My view is everyone should be vaccinated provided they do not have a health condition which prevents this. I am not advocating forced vaccination.

In my view we all have a responsibility to ourselves, those we interact with socially (in the broadest possible sense) and society as a whole. To refuse the vaccine is irresponsible and a threat to one's own health and those we interact with.


----------



## Rocky (14 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...irst-covid-jab-to-four-most-vulnerable-groups
> " The UK government has reached its target of offering at least first vaccinations to the four groups of people in the UK seen as most vulnerable to coronavirus by mid-February, it has announced. "
> 
> So much for the sceptics like ...errr... me. Some of these comments really haven't lasted very well, have they?


I think where the vaccination programme has succeeded when other initiatives, like test and trace have failed is largely down to the use of public sector infrastructure which has a proven track record of delivery as opposed to services being contracted out to the private sector. Vaccination is the business of general practice and wider primary care. That's what GPs do and they've shown why it made sense to put them at the centre of this.


----------



## MrGrumpy (14 Feb 2021)

PaulSB said:


> My view is everyone should be vaccinated provided they do not have a health condition which prevents this. I am not advocating forced vaccination.
> 
> In my view we all have a responsibility to ourselves, those we interact with socially (in the broadest possible sense) and society as a whole. To refuse the vaccine is irresponsible and a threat to one's own health and those we interact with.


I’m with you on that if the vaccine prevents spread. The same folk complaining about freedom to do what they want , don’t want the vaccine neither . Very strange behaviour really.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (14 Feb 2021)

srw said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...irst-covid-jab-to-four-most-vulnerable-groups
> " The UK government has reached its target of offering at least first vaccinations to the four groups of people in the UK seen as most vulnerable to coronavirus by mid-February, it has announced. "
> 
> So much for the sceptics like ...errr... me. Some of these comments really haven't lasted very well, have they?



Fair play to you for making that post.


----------



## Pale Rider (14 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I await confirmation that this is "offered" in the Boris sense of in the arms and not the usual dictionary sense,



The Sun's jab-o-meter is showing 15m jabs, so it absolutely must be 15m administered.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14039306/15-million-covid-vaccines-target-hit/



Rocky said:


> That's what GPs do and they've shown why it made sense to put them at the centre of this.



My GP didn't do a lot more than pass my details onto a vaccination centre.

Not that I'm complaining, it's all the NHS, and I am one of the 15m who has received an excellent first jab service.


----------



## midlife (14 Feb 2021)

Has anybody seen any figure on how many in each group has been vaccinated or is it just the total?


----------



## mjr (14 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> The Sun's jab-o-meter is showing 15m jabs, so it absolutely must be 15m administered.


While great, 15m was not the target. It was a particular 15m. Delivery to the willing and able in priority groups is what interests me and, yes, I am slightly suspicious of the lack of detail on this on https://www.gov.uk/search/all?level...=news_and_communications&order=updated-newest but, you know, won't get fooled again.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (14 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> While great, 15m was not the target. It was a particular 15m.



What's the alternative, throw a hissy fit and stop vaccinating everyone else until they've managed to mop up the outstanding numbers in the highest priority groups?.
Pedantry gets you nowhere, pragmatism gets the job done, just slightly differently to how you might have planned it.
Anyone who sets a near-100% target on anything is a prize idiot. You're only going to get what you get, and if that means 10-15% of your target group don't get done, then that's just the way the dice rolls. You just move on to the next target group further down the list and end up bringing some of those forward a bit sooner than you would have got to otherwise. Have a look at the EU coronashambles and just be grateful we're doing it our way, not ballsing it up collectively just to show some european unity.


----------



## Rocky (14 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Have a look at the EU coronashambles and just be grateful we're doing it our way, not ballsing it up collectively just to show some european unity.


It appears that you can't see the obvious that is right under your nose...the UK corona shambles.....how many dead? 117,000. That is the shambles......


----------



## mjr (14 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> What's the alternative, throw a hissy fit and stop vaccinating everyone else until they've managed to mop up the outstanding numbers in the highest priority groups?.


False dilemma. If a chunk of a group has been missed, find out why and find another way to reach them! They are a priority for good reason and just giving up and moving on to easier patients from lower-priority groups would be unfair to them.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (14 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> If a chunk of a group has been missed, find out why and find another way to reach them!



Maybe they don't all want the vaccine! Not everyone does. I know someone in the over 75-group who has no intention of having it. It might not be sensible, but that's how it is.


----------



## mjr (14 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Maybe they don't all want the vaccine! Not everyone does. I know someone in the over 75-group who has no intention of having it. It might not be sensible, but that's how it is.


Then they will be on record as refusing. Not a problem for the target. It is the unreached that are concerning.


----------



## classic33 (14 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> The issue of low ethnic minority take-up rates is not just confined to people of working age. It goes much deeper than that. It's the "whitest" parts of the country that have made the most progress in administering the vaccine. The worst performing place when I last checked was Greater London, which also has the most ethnic population.


Why do you make the assumption that to be "Minority Ethnic" means only skin colour is considered?


----------



## marinyork (14 Feb 2021)

I believe PHE have detailed breakdowns by areas (where the areas were a bit different from other covid stats) but it broke them right down. I saw them last week, but I can't find the link any more .

The percentages for the top 4 groups were already very high percentages by then.


----------



## marinyork (14 Feb 2021)

It's a brilliant achievement, made possible also by the smart change of tack on giving 1 dose with longer breaks. One of the problems was Pfizer in particular at the end of November were a bit coy with their data and we've seen since people criticise the approach even after the data became available.

People aren't out celebrating in the streets because they know perfectly well this is just the start and a slowdown will come with jab 2. Maybe this can be mitigated a bit with better supply and other things in the pipeline. We're still not doing sustained 2 million first jabs a week and 2 million second jabs a week it has to be noted. It's above 2 million as it's been halfs. If 4 million in total a week can be done sustained then the sort of sunny happy uplands people are talking about out there will be a little closer.


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Feb 2021)

In @mjr world, if the figures for actually vaccinated is not 100% in all those groups (1-4) then the government has, entirely predictably, just managed a big fat 'Freddie'.
In the real world, the NHS has made sterling efforts to reach every individual and offer a vaccination. Some are unable (medically or other); some would prefer not to (refusers) and some can't be bothered, like Skippy. The 15M+ first dose total will include many hundreds of thousands of Gp 5 (over 65s, about 3M) who the programme has rolled onto. Anyone who fits into Gps 1-5 and has not had a jab, and wants one can go on the booking website now.
Well done all those involved. This is a marathon, but we've got to the Cutty Sark (7 miles) ahead the time we 'wanted', without any need for pace acceleration in the last fortnight.





Second doses kick in from 14 Mar. Until then at current rates another 11M will receive their first vaccination. After that the first rate will drop from 400k a day to 200k a day (over about 10 days), if the overall delivery rate stays the same (@400+k per day).


----------



## midlife (15 Feb 2021)

First data I have come across on the take up rate of vaccination for NHS staff in a Trust. Our Trust release no figures.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-56069325


----------



## johnblack (15 Feb 2021)

Rocky said:


> I think where the vaccination programme has succeeded when other initiatives, like test and trace have failed


Test and trace has been an obvious issue, but I asked this question a week or so back and haven't received a reply that I can remember, I would like to know which countries have made a success of Test and Trace. The only real positives I seem to find are in SE Asia, dealing with far lower numbers and possibly a far more intrusive use of personal data. We need a really good system to learn from, but I don't know where that is.


----------



## Bazzer (15 Feb 2021)

My letter asking me to make an appointment arrived Saturday and had the first jab this morning. 2nd jab booked for early May
A hiccup in registration process caused a small (6 -8) queue of people, but that seemed to have been resolved when I left the centre. I was sat in the 10 minute post jab wait, within 5 minutes of being registered.


----------



## johnblack (15 Feb 2021)

My mate, early 30's, has to shield, had his jab yesterday, been in bed since, said he felt ill within 20 minutes! he usually gets every illness know to man worse than any of us, so it was to be expected, he's feeling a bit better this afternoon.


----------



## Rocky (15 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> Test and trace has been an obvious issue, but I asked this question a week or so back and haven't received a reply that I can remember, I would like to know which countries have made a success of Test and Trace. The only real positives I seem to find are in SE Asia, dealing with far lower numbers and possibly a far more intrusive use of personal data. We need a really good system to learn from, but I don't know where that is.


Although this article is 5 months old, it’s worth a read....

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...es-south-korea-germany?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

The crucial thing is that Germany’s system linked to existing health care structures and didn’t require a new network being set up. Public health and primary care are good at testing and tracing. Odd that they should largely be excluded from the UK system.


----------



## marinyork (15 Feb 2021)

The communication and public messages given by politicians among others for track and trace have not been up to scratch.


----------



## Pale Rider (15 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> My mate, early 30's, has to shield, had his jab yesterday, been in bed since, said he felt ill within 20 minutes! he usually gets every illness know to man worse than any of us, so it was to be expected, he's feeling a bit better this afternoon.



I've spoken to quite a few vaccinated people, not least the nurses involved in my regular care.

A straw poll among them indicates lots of instances of AZ causing flu-like symptoms, but almost no adverse reaction to Pfizer.

One of the AZ'ed nurses had a nasty swelling on her arm and felt properly grotty for several days.

I think that extreme reaction is unusual, the other AZ people I've spoken to either had no reaction or felt below par for a day or so.


----------



## byegad (15 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I've spoken to quite a few vaccinated people, not least the nurses involved in my regular care.
> 
> A straw poll among them indicates lots of instances of AZ causing flu-like symptoms, but almost no adverse reaction to Pfizer.
> 
> ...



Yes, got my Oxford-AZ Friday evening and by Saturday as I got up I felt as if 'I was coming down with Something', By Sunday lunchtime I was back to normal, I suspect the vaccine sets off your infection response big time, which is a 'good thing' as it means you're body is ready to fight the actual bug.
Lady Byegad, who got her jab a few days before me had a similar experience.
Personally I'm looking forward to early May when I get my second shot, even if I have a similar reaction. Far better that than getting the bug.


----------



## PK99 (15 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> Test and trace has been an obvious issue, but I asked this question a week or so back and haven't received a reply that I can remember, I would like to know which countries have made a success of Test and Trace. The only real positives I seem to find are in SE Asia, dealing with far lower numbers and possibly a far more intrusive use of personal data. We need a really good system to learn from, but I don't know where that is.



And despite apparent early success, Germany is not that place or system


----------



## Julia9054 (15 Feb 2021)

Al has just got a text to book his vaccine. I'm surprised as he is 57 which means that either we are onto group 8 round here or that his blood pressure medication puts him in group 6 - which, reading all the literature about who is in group 6, we didn't think it did.
Really pleased (if a tiny bit jealous!)


----------



## johnblack (15 Feb 2021)

Rocky said:


> Although this article is 5 months old, it’s worth a read....
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...es-south-korea-germany?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
> 
> The crucial thing is that Germany’s system linked to existing health care structures and didn’t require a new network being set up. Public health and primary care are good at testing and tracing. Odd that they should largely be excluded from the UK system.


Germanys fell over as soon as they had a lot of cases.


----------



## mjr (15 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> In @mjr world, if the figures for actually vaccinated is not 100% in all those groups (1-4) then the government has, entirely predictably, just managed a big fat 'Freddie'.


When you have to resort to lying about other people's views, you know you are losing the argument! I never said the figures for actually vaccinated would be 100%. What I said is that Boris's address to the nation was quite clear that offered "means vaccinating", but I was quite willing to accept that there would be those unable and those unwilling who must be excluded from the count.

What there must not be is people who are able and willing to have the vaccine who have only had a farking message sent to them — and definitely not if a letter was sent and there is no confirmation of receipt yet, given the very variable state of the post service now. Even people waiting for appointments doesn't seem in the spirit of the target IMO.

Today, the BBC is reporting that "An "offer" means you've received an invitation for a vaccine, normally through a phone call, text or letter" and also that we do not know how many have been vaccinated or declined in each group.

If this is confirmed, Johnson and Hancock have pulled the testing mailshot stunt again. That must not be accepted IMO. I hope the BBC is mistaken on these and the target was really hit.


----------



## Rocky (15 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> Germanys fell over as soon as they had a lot of cases.


The UK’s never stood up......I agree it’s hard to find examples of a really good system but my point still stands...why invent a completely new system when you’ve got experienced people already in post? Ignoring primary care and the communicable disease parts of the public health network wasn’t the best way forward. Thank goodness the government changed tack for the vaccine roll out.


----------



## johnblack (15 Feb 2021)

Rocky said:


> The UK’s never stood up......I agree it’s hard to find examples of a really good system but my point still stands...why invent a completely new system when you’ve got experienced people already in post? Ignoring primary care and the communicable disease parts of the public health network wasn’t the best way forward. Thank goodness the government changed tack for the vaccine roll out.


What's the point of using a system that doesn't work, at least in trying something different you may hit upon a better way? I think we just have to accept that currently Track and Trace is not really viable, that may well change when we are dealing with far fewer cases and can use the experience of the past year to refine a system. Dido and her friends are a great target for mockery, and they didn't help themselves, but we need to put it into perspective, they failed, as have nearly every other country.


----------



## Rocky (15 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> What's the point of using a system that doesn't work, at least in trying something different you may hit upon a better way? I think we just have to accept that currently Track and Trace is not really viable, that may well change when we are dealing with far fewer cases and can use the experience of the past year to refine a system. Dido and her friends are a great target for mockery, and they didn't help themselves, but we need to put it into perspective, they failed, as have nearly every other country.


I’m not sure I agree with a couple of your points. I may have misunderstood but are you saying that primary care and public health test and tracing failed? It never had the chance, the app was given to NHS X to develop and Harding was brought in to head up a largely privatised service. My argument is that the country had the expertise and experience and this was ignored. That was a major mistake.

If I’ve misinterpreted your post, my apologies.


----------



## johnblack (15 Feb 2021)

Rocky said:


> I’m not sure I agree with a couple of your points. I may have misunderstood but are you saying that primary care and public health test and tracing failed? It never had the chance, the app was given to NHS X to develop and Harding was brought in to head up a largely privatised service. My argument is that the country had the expertise and experience and this was ignored. That was a major mistake.
> 
> If I’ve misinterpreted your post, my apologies.


No apologise required and I may have misunderstood yours too! Germany used local health authorities to contact trace and it worked while numbers were very low, then buckled as soon as numbers ramped up, so I'm not sure why ours would've faired any better, but you're right they didn't get the chance. I also think there was maybe a decision to take responsibility away as to not overload an overstretched and creaking service. Ideology would obviously have played some part. The use of outside help in the vaccine programme is a great example of how non NHS and the NHS can work together and should be used as template for future. The NHS as the knowledge and experience, but is such a huge and slow moving organisation that outside help for procurement, logistics and technology in times of emergency is vital.


----------



## lane (15 Feb 2021)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56069455

It's definite Asthma sufferers will not be prioritized unless taking oral steroids or have emergency admission to hospital


----------



## AuroraSaab (15 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56069455
> 
> It's definite Asthma sufferers will not be prioritized unless taking oral steroids or have emergency admission to hospital



I guess they are working from stats on the danger, though I can imagine a bad case of covid would be more unpleasant to an asthma sufferer, even if their asthma is under control, than to the average non sufferer. There is a lot of variance between asthma sufferers anyway but presumably they had to look at the data from admissions and draw the line somewhere.


----------



## vickster (15 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56069455
> 
> It's definite Asthma sufferers will not be prioritized unless taking oral steroids or have emergency admission to hospital


Not sure why my friend has been invited, doesn’t meet those criteria?


----------



## marinyork (15 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> Not sure why my friend has been invited, doesn’t meet those criteria?



A GP can bump someone into group 6 based on 'clinical judgement' and do out of order under 'extreme individual circumstances'. These are where a lot of group 6s have been done a bit early.

The same is true of a number of other conditions which are also 'not included' but very interesting and slightly scary when it comes to covid, it's just the tabloids focus on asthma.


----------



## vickster (15 Feb 2021)

He’s only 36 and was rather surprised to be invited


----------



## Julia9054 (15 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> A GP can bump someone into group 6 based on 'clinical judgement' and do out of order under 'extreme individual circumstances'. These are where a lot of group 6s have been done a bit early.
> 
> The same is true of a number of other conditions which are also 'not included' but very interesting and slightly scary when it comes to covid, it's just the tabloids focus on asthma.


I guess this is what must have happened with Al then. He has hypertension under control with medication (like lots of middle aged men). The rules seem to say that hypertension is only in group 6 if it has also caused damage to the heart - which it hasn't in Al's case.


----------



## potsy (15 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> He’s only 36 and was rather surprised to be invited


My cousin has been invited too, only 49, no medical reasons at all... Strange. 
Heard of a few locally that should be way down the criteria getting asked to come in.


----------



## lane (15 Feb 2021)

Hot a call from the surgery when I was out on my bike. Got to call back tomorrow but fairly sure it will be the asthma review.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (15 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> People aren't out celebrating in the streets because they know perfectly well this is just the start and a slowdown will come with jab 2. Maybe this can be mitigated a bit with better supply and other things in the pipeline. We're still not doing sustained 2 million first jabs a week and 2 million second jabs a week it has to be noted. It's above 2 million as it's been halfs. If 4 million in total a week can be done sustained then the sort of sunny happy uplands people are talking about out there will be a little closer.



The recent UK infection numbers look very encouraging; under 9,800 cases today, yesterday was just under 11,000 IIRC. Hospitalisations declining steadily, and the deaths are pretty low now as well. Its dropping pretty quickly, which suggests either the virus is really slowing down a lot, or that the people who are now getting infected aren't being made ill enough to even bother with getting a virus test to confirm what they've got.
The strategy of giving as many first doses as possible before worrying about the second doses makes a lot of sense. You don't need to gold plate the vaccination programme, you just need enough people to have sufficient immunity to prevent the hospitals being overwhelmed with virus cases. On the face of it, even with only a quarter of the population having a degree of immunity, plus those immune through having already actually had the virus itself, we are now seeing a significant reduction in transmission. The true number of infections will be way more than the official 4 million, especially in the early days with virtually no testing being done, so it's quite possible we now have as many immune through previous infection as we have through vaccination, so getting on for half the population already.


----------



## lane (15 Feb 2021)

Maybe it's the result of the lockdown.


----------



## lane (15 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> The recent UK infection numbers look very encouraging; under 9,800 cases today, yesterday was just under 11,000 IIRC. Hospitalisations declining steadily, and the deaths are pretty low now as well. Its dropping pretty quickly, which suggests either the virus is really slowing down a lot, or that the people who are now getting infected aren't being made ill enough to even bother with getting a virus test to confirm what they've got.
> The strategy of giving as many first doses as possible before worrying about the second doses makes a lot of sense. You don't need to gold plate the vaccination programme, you just need enough people to have sufficient immunity to prevent the hospitals being overwhelmed with virus cases. On the face of it, even with only a quarter of the population having a degree of immunity, plus those immune through having already actually had the virus itself, we are now seeing a significant reduction in transmission. The true number of infections will be way more than the official 4 million, especially in the early days with virtually no testing being done, so it's quite possible we now have as many immune through previous infection as we have through vaccination, so getting on for half the population already.



The scientists will respectfully disagree with your analysis but, hey, what do they know.


----------



## classic33 (15 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Maybe it's the result of the lockdown.


And the mask wearing, social distancing (where it's being don't).

I've seen the town centre with more activity at 02:00 than I have at 1400 of late.

Talking to someone laid off at Wetherspoons, last year, they are considering proof of vaccination and/or negative test result if you want to be served.


----------



## MrGrumpy (15 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> Talking to someone laid off at Wetherspoons, last year, they are considering proof of vaccination and/or negative test result if you want to be served.


Oooh the gammon Brexiteers won’t like that


----------



## Blue Hills (16 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> And the mask wearing, social distancing (where it's being don't).
> 
> I've seen the town centre with more activity at 02:00 than I have at 1400 of late.
> 
> Talking to someone laid off at Wetherspoons, last year, they are considering proof of vaccination and/or negative test result if you want to be served.


Do you get a "proof of vaccination"?


----------



## Blue Hills (16 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Oooh the gammon Brexiteers won’t like that


you think that describes folk who wander into a spoons?


----------



## Pale Rider (16 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Oooh the gammon Brexiteers won’t like that



Curious thing, gammon.

I''m very partial to cooked ham, and will eat bacon, pork joints, and sausages.

But I cannot get away with gammon.



Blue Hills said:


> Do you get a "proof of vaccination"?



I was given a little card with the date and batch number on it, but not my name.


----------



## DaveReading (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Maybe it's the result of the lockdown.



And it's just after the weekend.


----------



## Bazzer (16 Feb 2021)

Wow, that was a rough night after my first jab yesterday of the AZ vaccine.
Woke up at midnight with a temperature and feeling like I had been hit by a bus. Paracetamol taken which helped matters and 24 hours after the jab, my body now seems to be just suffering from a lack of sleep.
On the other hand, it's better than a longer stay in an ICU, or worse.


----------



## marinyork (16 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> He’s only 36 and was rather surprised to be invited



A number of people will have been bumped in. This will be seen a lot more over the coming weeks on a fairly large scale when doing the whole of group 6.

The difficulties in deciding on group 6 applies equally for carers as several people have said and the 'severely mentally ill' rather vaguely defined as 'severe functional impairment' are also going to potentially be controversial to the public. The latter category there's a lot more to the matter which Chris Whitty sort of made a hint to at today's press conference. I don't want to go into it too much but there have been all sorts of very bad things happening the last year like Psychological Intensive Care Units shut down temporarily, issues in A&E, outbreaks at crisis services. Vaccinating staff, possibly volunteers but now some of the patients is extremely welcome. The public might not like it though.


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

Well that was a bit of a surprise. Called the Doctor back expecting the asthma clinic and turns out to be a booking for the vaccine at 5.30pm today. Apparently I am classed as clinically vulnerable; not sure why as I just use my inhalers which as we know doesn't count. However I was admitted to hospital as a child for asthma one time which was a long time ago, so not sure if that counts and also had a course of oral steroids, probably 7 years ago when I had pleurisy so not sure if that is that is the reason. Anyway certainly didn't query it, very pleased to be getting the vaccine. Booked in for second dose on the 4th May.


----------



## pawl (16 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Do you get a "proof of vaccination"?





I was given a little sticker to put on my coat


----------



## PK99 (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Well that was a bit of a surprise. Called the Doctor back expecting the asthma clinic and turns out to be a booking for the vaccine at 5.30pm today. Apparently I am classed as clinically vulnerable; not sure why as I just use my inhalers which as we know doesn't count. However I was admitted to hospital as a child for asthma one time which was a long time ago, so not sure if that counts and also had a course of oral steroids, probably 7 years ago when I had pleurisy so not sure if that is that is the reason. Anyway certainly didn't query it, very pleased to be getting the vaccine. Booked in for second dose on the 4th May.



From what I hear and read, now that the first blanket phase of vaccinating the elderly and highly vulnerable is all but over, GP's are able to use discretion wrt people on their lists.

Sounds like you are part of that.


----------



## Julia9054 (16 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> From what I hear and read, now that the first blanket phase of vaccinating the elderly and highly vulnerable is all but over, GP's are able to use discretion wrt people on their lists.
> 
> Sounds like you are part of that.


So . . . bit of a lottery who gets chosen then. Someone with exactly the same medical history may not if they are reg with a different GP


----------



## Blue Hills (16 Feb 2021)

pawl said:


> I was given a little sticker to put on my coat


yep that was what I had in mind.
I can't see that being any sort of authoritative doc.


----------



## vickster (16 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> So . . . bit of a lottery who gets chosen then. Someone with exactly the same medical history may not if they are reg with a different GP


Maybe depends on the size of practice/ demographic spread?
You could discuss with your Dr? But if you’re over 50 hopefully won’t be too long a wait regardless?


----------



## Julia9054 (16 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> Maybe depends on the size of practice/ demographic spread?
> You could discuss with your Dr? But if you’re over 50 hopefully won’t be too long a wait regardless?


Not too bothered personally. I am 53 and if our area has got down to inviting 57 year olds I shouldn't have to wait too long.
Would be a bit more pissed off if I was under 50 though !


----------



## pawl (16 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> yep that was what I had in mind.
> I can't see that being any sort of authoritative doc.




Don’t think mine was sticky enough as it disappeared after two days


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> yep that was what I had in mind.
> I can't see that being any sort of authoritative doc.



Soon be available on ebay and amazon!


----------



## marinyork (16 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Not too bothered personally. I am 53 and if our area has got down to inviting 57 year olds I shouldn't have to wait too long.
> Would be a bit more pissed off if I was under 50 though !



Until recently the government had no plans that it actually owned up to to vaccinate anyone under 50 that didn't fit into group 4 or 6. 

As Ajax boy glossed over without mentioning it in another post, the problems with the slow down for second doses and groups 8 and 9 and beyond really comes down to whether you believe the NHS. Yesterday's vague promises from Simon Stevens is that they'll be able to ramp up from 400,000 doses a day average to 1,000,000 doses a day sustained average. This isn't immediate, it's vaguely said by this may be around April or May. If that happens it's not so much of a biggie. If we're in the scenario of people in their 20s, 30s and 40s still waiting for first jabs in September that's quite different. And then there's the problem of 14-17 year olds as well.


----------



## mjr (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Soon be available on ebay and amazon!


What do you mean "soon"? Big bad A have been selling them for ages: 
View: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?k=vaccination+certificate


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

I thought the plan was all adults (over 18 by the autumn). Government have delivered what they have promised so far. 

Then as soon as that is done we will need to have the updated vaccine for the variants - so will be ongoing non stop vaccinations for the foreseeable future.


----------



## PK99 (16 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> So . . . bit of a lottery who gets chosen then. Someone with exactly the same medical history may not if they are reg with a different GP



Earlier, pushing some people (Asthma) up the list meant using high priority people (Age, clinically very vulnerable eg cancer) down the list.

Now as I read it, there is more flexibility to identify different priority criteria on a more localised and personalised basis.

Earlier it was blanket and easy. Now more nuanced, but surely better now that the highest priority groups have been dealt with?

I have had a long history (since my 40's) of recurrent, difficult-to-treat chest infections. I did not fall into the very vulnerable or shielding groups but my GP advised extreme caution and effectively advised me to Shield - I suspect she would have bumped me up the list as soon as she was able. As it is, other recent issues formally bumped me up into the top tiers and I had my jab earlier than my age cohort.


----------



## marinyork (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> I thought the plan was all adults (over 18 by the autumn). Government have delivered what they have promised so far.
> 
> Then as soon as that is done we will need to have the updated vaccine for the variants - so will be ongoing non stop vaccinations for the foreseeable future.



None of that is new, but current vaccines should offer some cross-immunity to the new variants that are already here. How low cases are going into summer and numbers of vaccinations done will make a gigantic difference that won't be noticeable for some time to how things play out over the next six months. I'm not of the view at all that we can get cases to 5000 per day, 25% of the population done and release and cross our fingers.

I don't think you'd be very happy if you had to wait till September or October though!


----------



## mjr (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> I thought the plan was all adults (over 18 by the autumn). Government have delivered what they have promised so far.
> 
> Then as soon as that is done we will need to have the updated vaccine for the variants - so will be ongoing non stop vaccinations for the foreseeable future.


I've seen no confirmation of any of that yet.


----------



## rockyroller (16 Feb 2021)

many mass vaccination sites around here are shutting down due to lack of vaccine


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I've seen no confirmation of any of that yet.



Well here is one link. It has defiantly been confirmed and widely reported

https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/c...e-vaccine-by-autumn-health-secretary-pledges/


----------



## mjr (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Well here is one link. It has defiantly been confirmed and widely reported
> 
> https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/c...e-vaccine-by-autumn-health-secretary-pledges/


Link leads to an infinite loop, but from the link text, I'll just note that this health minister pledging something has not always meant there is a plan!


----------



## classic33 (16 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Do you get a "proof of vaccination"?


I have no idea.


----------



## PaulSB (16 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Do you get a "proof of vaccination"?


You get a sticker in Blackburn...........but no lollipop for being brave.

Loads of friends proudly sporting them in our village FB group.


----------



## Pale Rider (16 Feb 2021)

I was hoping for an "I've been Pfizered" pin badge.


----------



## Blue Hills (16 Feb 2021)

Looks like there is going to be no easy yet authoritative way of showing venues etc that you have been done then.


----------



## PK99 (16 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I was hoping for an "I've been Pfizered" pin badge.



I wanted the lollipop!


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Link leads to an infinite loop, but from the link text, I'll just note that this health minister pledging something has not always meant there is a plan!





mjr said:


> Link leads to an infinite loop, but from the link text, I'll just note that this health minister pledging something has not always meant there is a plan!




Well the text is


The health secretary has promised that all adults in the UK will be offered the Covid vaccine by the autumn.

It comes as the Government will set out its vaccines delivery plan at a Downing Street press conference this afternoon.


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

The plan is very clear. First 4 groups by Feb 15th Done. Rest of vulnerable groups down to age 50 by end of April (in progress). Adults aged 18 to 50 May to August or maybe a little later. It does not appear that there is currently any reason to doubt this timetable things seem to going well. Timescales appear reasonable in the light of current progress.

Edit - next phase may well be children plus updated vaccine in the autumn seems likely. One thing this country seems good at is vaccinating - I expect they will continue to want to progress as far as possible.


----------



## Pale Rider (16 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Looks like there is going to be no easy yet authoritative way of showing venues etc that you have been done then.



I think the venue idea was for rapid at the door testing.

It was no more than an off the cuff suggestion from Boris, so I doubt there are any firm plans at present.


----------



## PaulSB (16 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Looks like there is going to be no easy yet authoritative way of showing venues etc that you have been done then.


I don't think there is one yet. I'm in two minds on this as it could be seen as discriminatory. What I badly want is confirmation I can't infectious, there are so many people I'd like to hug or shake hands with who won't be getting their shot for months. A year without physical contact is a long, long time.


----------



## Poacher (16 Feb 2021)

Having followed the instructions in my invitation letter to the, er, letter, the nearest site offered was over 13 miles away as the crow flies, and a damp sight further by road. Others varied from 16 to more than 50 miles away. What was the official guidance about staying local?
I know for a fact that there is a site within easy walking distance, and several more in Nottingham.
The best advice I can give to anyone else who encounters this problem is to ignore the NHS letter and go on to the swiftqueue website instead. This showed loads of available appointments locally.


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

More on the problems of allocating to people in group 6. I guess this sort of thing is inevitable.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56083051


----------



## Bazzer (16 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Do you get a "proof of vaccination"?





Blue Hills said:


> Looks like there is going to be no easy yet authoritative way of showing venues etc that you have been done then.


I don't know if it is widespread, but I was given a card on which was written the date of my first vaccination and told to take the same card to the second vaccination. In the "name" section there is my NHS number. So in theory, for proof of vaccination, I would need to show my appointment letter and blue card as the former is one of two documents I have that link my name to my NHS number.


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I think the venue idea was for rapid at the door testing.
> 
> It was no more than an off the cuff suggestion from Boris, so I doubt there are any firm plans at present.



Just been reiterated in the H of C by, I think, the vaccine minister. So does seem to represent Government thinking.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Just been reiterated in the H of C by, I think, the vaccine minister. So does seem to represent Government thinking.



Project Moonshot.

Better named project Bullshoot.


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Project Moonshot.
> 
> Better named project Bullshoot.



Well I think it was originally Project Cummings.....................

Edit - The man who always wished he could have worked on the Apollo project .......so made his own one


----------



## Pale Rider (16 Feb 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Project Moonshot.
> 
> Better named project Bullshoot.



That didn't take long, did it?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (16 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> That didn't take long, did it?



Well, Johnson first promised it about 6 months ago and bugger all useful has been delivered. Seems quite a long time to me.


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

I think at best - project moonshot is still unproven. Lots of concerns regarding how it would be used in schools - and since the regulator determined that it was not a proven technology and could not be used to avoid pupils and teachers self isolating it lost some of its proposed rationale. Someone I know has regular flow tests in a care home and these are then compared with regular "proper" tests to see if they are reliable. Interesting she said today they had someone who tested negative on the "normal" test but positive on the flow test - so was re tested on "normal" and came back positive. Maybe timing I am not sure. Anyway I don't think we know yet if moonshot is going to be great like vaccines or shoot like test and trace. Myself I can't see it ever working as well as Cummings intended.


----------



## mjr (16 Feb 2021)

I think they are overestimating the number of people wanting to go to theatres badly enough to have their nose swabbed and wait half an hour (edit: and risk the cost of quarantine?). I don't think it will be viable unless something like one of the in-development spit or breath tests works.


----------



## mjr (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> The plan is very clear. [...] Adults aged 18 to 50 May to August or maybe a little later. It does not appear that there is currently any reason to doubt this timetable things seem to going well. Timescales appear reasonable in the light of current progress.
> 
> Edit - next phase may well be children plus updated vaccine in the autumn seems likely. One thing this country seems good at is vaccinating - I expect they will continue to want to progress as far as possible.


1. If so, prudent 18-50s can kiss lots of summer fun goodbye, pretty much. Even if we are thrown under the bus by the country unlocking before we are vaccinated, we will still be exhorted to obey loads of rulez.

2. That "maybe" and "may well be" rather contradicts the claim that the plan is clear! So far it looks like guesswork. Let us see what is announced.


----------



## mjr (16 Feb 2021)

PaulSB said:


> I don't think there is one yet. I'm in two minds on this as it could be seen as discriminatory. What I badly want is confirmation I can't infectious, there are so many people I'd like to hug or shake hands with who won't be getting their shot for months. A year without physical contact is a long, long time.


Yes, where are the antibody tests needed to check a vaccine worked and is still working at an individual level?


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> 1. If so, prudent 18-50s can kiss lots of summer fun goodbye, pretty much. Even if we are thrown under the bus by the country unlocking before we are vaccinated, we will still be exhorted to obey loads of rulez.
> 
> 2. That "maybe" and "may well be" rather contradicts the claim that the plan is clear! So far it looks like guesswork. Let us see what is announced.



The plan so far announced is down to all adults 18+ by the ens of summer. This is the plan already announced and well understood.

The maybe and may well are not currently part of the plan but considered likely. Just because this isn't yet decoded does not mean the rest of the plan is not clear - it is.


----------



## midlife (16 Feb 2021)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56086965

1.7 more people added to the shielding list and moved up the vaccine priority ladder.


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

800,000 added to vaccine priority list. Also an extra 900,000 told to shield who have already had the vaccine.

Surprised that people who have had the vaccine are told to shield. I thought who had the vaccine would be deemed to have a measure of protection, although I know it's not 100% with one dose.


----------



## mjr (16 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56086965
> 
> 1.7 more people added to the shielding list and moved up the vaccine priority ladder.


Either you've missed a "million" off there or someone is being rude and ableist!


----------



## mjr (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Surprised that people who have had the vaccine are told to shield. I thought who had the vaccine would be deemed to have a measure of protection, although I know it's not 100% with one dose.


Vaccines are not certain to work at an individual level. Until either cases are very very low or we have antibody tests to confirm successful vaccinations, shielding should continue. ☹


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Vaccines are not certain to work at an individual level. Until either cases are very very low or we have antibody tests to confirm successful vaccinations, shielding should continue. ☹



Is that official guidance?


----------



## midlife (16 Feb 2021)

https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/c...ontinue-shielding-after-vaccination-gps-told/

Still have to shield, at least until end of March when I think it's being reviewed


----------



## mjr (16 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Is that official guidance?


fark knows. Probably not.

China has missed its vaccination target, apparently favouring exporting it to get some goodwill over jabs for Chinese residents. https://www.newindianexpress.com/wo...s-behind-in-domestic-jabs-report-2264414.html

China has also prosecuted a load of vaccine fakers and smugglers. https://www.afr.com/world/asia/china-arrests-70-in-fake-vaccine-smuggling-ring-20210216-p572sw

Ominously "It did not say which country they were sent to."


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

Just got back from getting my vaccine at the veledrom in Derby. Very efficient, very busy. Pfizer for me.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Until recently the government had no plans that it actually owned up to to vaccinate anyone under 50 that didn't fit into group 4 or 6.
> As Ajax boy glossed over without mentioning it in another post, the problems with the slow down for second doses and groups 8 and 9 and beyond really comes down to whether you believe the NHS. . . . If we're in the scenario of people in their 20s, 30s and 40s still waiting for first jabs in September that's quite different. And then there's the problem of 14-17 year olds as well.





lane said:


> The plan is very clear. First 4 groups by Feb 15th Done. Rest of vulnerable groups down to age 50 by end of April (in progress). Adults aged 18 to 50 May to August or maybe a little later. It does not appear that there is currently any reason to doubt this timetable things seem to going well.
> UK Health-Secretary-pledges


Not quite sure what I glossed over @marinyork but here's an effort to describe the "slow down". Does not depend on "whether you believe the NHS" (I do btw) nor on increasing the vaccination rate beyond current (I suspect supply will be the limiting factor in practice btw),- but obviously any increased rate is a bonus.
I have plotted the vaccine rollout, taking into account the need to give everyone a second jab at 12 weeks, using the gov.uk daily data (@ 14 Feb): assumes sustained 427k per day (= 3Mpw) vaccination (dose) rate.





Key amounts (assumes 100% take-up which won't happen, regrettably) are:
Gps 1-4 = 15M
Gps 5-9 = 32M (maybe 33M after the extra 825k announced as being moved into Gp 6 today)
39M total adding over 40s (= 5.4M (8.4 less 3M guess for all those already done in Gps 2, 4, 6))
46M total adding over 30s (=6.9M (8.9 less 2M guess for all those already done in Gps 2, 4, 6))
From graph: Over 30s should all have received/been offered first jab by early August and, extrapolating, the over 18s should all have received/been offered first jab by end August.
The population of UK is 67M. 63M over 4 years old. 80% of that is 50M. The percentage needed for herd immunity will be dependent on a number of factors.


----------



## Landsurfer (16 Feb 2021)

Well its been an interesting 24 hours ...
About 1900hrs last night i had a coughing fit, coughing and coughing ... i went into a fugue (?) semi conscious but unresponsive, my right hand becoming claw like..
I was un responsive for nearly 20 seconds and have no recollection of the event. 999 called and 2 paramedics arrived did all the stickers on the chest thing and thought i had suffered a TIA (mini-stroke) .... Parked up for 2 hours in the carpark of A&E then in for more tests .... Top Staff.
0200hrs i get a covid test ... 

Seems that the covid inspired coughing fit had led to an artery in my neck becoming restricted stopping / reducing blood flow to my brain. I have an embedded loop recorder installed in my chest which showed the atrial ectopic event. Whatever that means.
So after contact with 19 members of hospital staff they let me know i tested positive ...
So home now, feeling rough, covid positive and spending 72 hours resting while my artery sorts itself out.

Which is slightly annoying as i was due my jab in the morning ....


----------



## steve292 (16 Feb 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Well its been an interesting 24 hours ...
> About 1900hrs last night i had a coughing fit, coughing and coughing ... i went into a fugue (?) semi conscious but unresponsive, my right hand becoming claw like..
> I was un responsive for nearly 20 seconds and have no recollection of the event. 999 called and 2 paramedics arrived did all the stickers on the chest thing and thought i had suffered a TIA (mini-stroke) .... Parked up for 2 hours in the carpark of A&E then in for more tests .... Top Staff.
> 0200hrs i get a covid test ...
> ...


Sounds rough. good job the paramedics got to you.look after yourself mate.


----------



## PK99 (16 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/c...ontinue-shielding-after-vaccination-gps-told/
> 
> Still *have to shield*, at least until end of March when I think it's being reviewed



Advised, there is no compulsion.


----------



## midlife (16 Feb 2021)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ng-extremely-vulnerable-persons-from-covid-19

I guess saying "Should continue" is not compulsion


----------



## PK99 (16 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ng-extremely-vulnerable-persons-from-covid-19
> 
> I guess saying "Should continue" is not compulsion



From an official NHS shielding letter;

"Whilst you are strongly advised to follow these extra precautionary shielding measures to help keep you safe, this is advice, and not the law, so you can choose whether or not you want to follow it"


----------



## MrGrumpy (16 Feb 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Well its been an interesting 24 hours ...
> About 1900hrs last night i had a coughing fit, coughing and coughing ... i went into a fugue (?) semi conscious but unresponsive, my right hand becoming claw like..
> I was un responsive for nearly 20 seconds and have no recollection of the event. 999 called and 2 paramedics arrived did all the stickers on the chest thing and thought i had suffered a TIA (mini-stroke) .... Parked up for 2 hours in the carpark of A&E then in for more tests .... Top Staff.
> 0200hrs i get a covid test ...
> ...


Get well soon !!


----------



## lane (16 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> Advised, there is no compulsion.



My parents - coincidentally - just received an email telling them to shield to the end of March - they have been vaccinated. Given the restrictions currently in place not sure impacts them really.


----------



## lazybloke (16 Feb 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> At the end of the day, if someone else chooses, for whatever reason, not to have the vaccine that's up to them. Even if it's because they believe the conspiracy theories and think the government wants to inject them with a microchip. Whatever the reason, its their right to say either yes or no, and *it's no business of yours or anyone else's. You make your own decisions, don't poke your nose into other peoples decisions.*
> It's the typical busybody Remainer attitude from 2016 all over again, where one group of people think everyone who doesn't agree with them must be stupid and need to be lectured about how they should think or act.


I don't know your reasons for rejecting the virus or being so dismissive of others; but herd immunity is everyone's business.


----------



## Landsurfer (17 Feb 2021)

steve292 said:


> Sounds rough. good job the paramedics got to you.look after yourself mate.


Just over an hour from 999 to paramedics arriving ... nice guys ... did some tests them we parked up right outside the A&E door for an hour and had a good chat ,,,


----------



## Landsurfer (17 Feb 2021)

Thank you everyone for their best wishes ... feel like i’ve done a 100 mile TT this morning .... aching in places i didn’t know i had ...


----------



## lane (17 Feb 2021)

The government is sitting on a vast supply of hundreds of millions of quick turnaround lateral flow tests bought as part of the previously aborted Operation Moonshot, a mass testing scheme championed by Dominic Cummings, the prime minister’s former chief adviser. Those tests, however, were found to be inaccurate as much as 60% of the time.

The latest scheme will involve children, their parents and their support bubbles being offered tests twice a week once schools reopen in March, with a similar policy intended for teachers and close contacts. Including existing tests for people who have to leave home for work, the plan will mean about 68% of England’s population is eligible for repeated rapid testing, the Times said, citing a government document.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...e-part-of-england-lockdown-easing-report-says


----------



## matticus (17 Feb 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> So home now, feeling rough, covid positive and spending 72 hours resting while my artery sorts itself out.
> 
> Which is slightly annoying as i was due my jab in the morning ....


Can I suggest you have a lie-in, and skip the jab for now?
;-)

Get well soon!


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Feb 2021)

_Why I am in a higher priority group for a vaccine than younger people with chronic health conditions_
Professor David Spiegelhalter
Statistician, communicator about evidence, risk, probability, chance, uncertainty, etc. Chair, Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, Cambridge.


----------



## mjr (17 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Those tests, however, were found to be inaccurate as much as 60% of the time.


That depends what you mean by inaccurate. As I understand it, a lateral flow test is more likely to detect severe cases (which means it misses some mild cases) and less likely to detect debris from a passed infection. The two biggest challenges are getting people to swab themselves correctly and to not treat a LFT negative as permission to go unmasked and up-close needlessly.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> That depends what you mean by inaccurate. As I understand it, a lateral flow test is more likely to detect severe cases (which means it misses some mild cases) and less likely to detect debris from a passed infection. The two biggest challenges are getting people to swab themselves correctly and to *not treat a LFT negative as permission to go unmasked and up-close needlessly.*



This in spades - I know a number of people who are, foolishly and irresponsibly, using these kits and because they are negative they think they can ignore Gov' guidelines/rules. Four of them are NHS employees. One works in a school. Idiots the lot of them.


----------



## PK99 (17 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> _Why I am in a higher priority group for a vaccine than younger people with chronic health conditions_
> Professor David Spiegelhalter
> Statistician, communicator about evidence, risk, probability, chance, uncertainty, etc. Chair, Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, Cambridge.



That guy has a gift for explaining the ourput of complex analysis in a simple and understandable way.

I've asked those very questions, now I have a glimmer of understanding


----------



## Chromatic (17 Feb 2021)

Had a text today inviting me to book my first jab.


----------



## matticus (17 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> This in spades - I know a number of people who are, foolishly and irresponsibly, using these kits and because they are negative they think they can ignore Gov' guidelines/rules. Four of them are NHS employees. One works in a school. Idiots the lot of them.


Surely that's an issue with ANY test - it only says you are (probably) clean NOW. It doesn't say you are now invulnerable!!!


----------



## Blue Hills (17 Feb 2021)

Any case for moving this thread to the cafe?
I fear folks who might find it genuinely interesting, useful, even encouraging in these dark times won't see it due to having their NACAs left off for understandable reasons.


----------



## mjr (17 Feb 2021)

matticus said:


> Surely that's an issue with ANY test - it only says you are (probably) clean NOW. It doesn't say you are now invulnerable!!!


To a degree, but an LFT negative doesn't even really say you are clean now. At best, it says that you probably won't infect others right now, but at the moment, with hospitals still busy and treatments still being developed, it is still worth reducing that probability even further by covering nose and mouth, keeping distance and washing better.

I still feel the game-changer will be if antibodies and immunity become much better understood and someone develops an equivalent of the Heaf test for covid immunity.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 Feb 2021)

Early signs that the vaccine is starting to reduce the number of deaths?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56072684


_BBC News analysis, using data from England only, suggests the vaccine is starting to push the numbers down.

Coronavirus deaths are falling faster for vaccinated than unvaccinated groups.

On average, deaths of over-80s fell by 53% between 28 January and 11 February, compared with 44% for under-80s.

This week, Prof Chris Whitty, the UK's chief medical adviser, said: "The earliest indications would imply there is some effect.
"But I think it's too early to put a number on that.

"We would expect to see some evidence that is strong enough to put into the public domain in the next few weeks."_


----------



## AuroraSaab (17 Feb 2021)

Average deaths down 53% in a fortnight.....that would be great news if accurate, Spokey. Let's hope so.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> On average, deaths of over-80s fell by 53% between 28 January and 11 February, compared with 44% for under-80s.


I'd observe that:
1) 53% - 44% is a small difference; and not clear what the confidence interval is on those two figures.
2) Deaths during this period will be related to infection around 19 days earlier (median) so between 9 - 22 Jan.
3) The over-80s population is 3.3M. The number of over-80s who received their first dose 20 days before that (ie 20 Dec - 2 Jan) was small: about 15% by 20 Dec growing to 30% by 9 Jan. Note that by 9 Jan only about 2M first doses had been administered (assume that half went to NHS frontline staff - also in Gp 2)
4) The protection (?52%) (stopping catching the infection and suffering serious disease) generated by a (Pfizer) jab is not as much as 7 days after 2 doses (?94%).
5) So doing the sums: with 22% of cohort getting 52% protection we might expect to reduce (over-80) deaths by 11% compared to the 'by then' unvaccinated under 80s.
6) There will have been behavioural difference between over-80s and the general population during Christmas and up till Epiphany.
White smoke? Maybe. I sincerely hope that we shall see a dramatic reduction in over-80s hospitalisation and in extremis deaths progressively over the next fortnight: a combination of sharply falling cases per day rate since mid Jan, and even those catching not getting it badly.


----------



## fossyant (18 Feb 2021)

MrsF's booked in for her jab on Monday - text arrived last night, literally minutes after I said - I bet you'll have your's before me.

I'm 51, she's 49. But she has slight asthma and is also a registered carer for her mum/my son - mum is in a care home now.

It's rolling down folks. All good news.


----------



## C R (18 Feb 2021)

So I am officially group 6. Got a text from my surgery and booked in for first dose on the 27th.


----------



## marinyork (18 Feb 2021)

AuroraSaab said:


> Average deaths down 53% in a fortnight.....that would be great news if accurate, Spokey. Let's hope so.



There's going to be more data coming out on Friday and we may see it on Friday or Monday.

One of the difficulties on comparing deaths is what brings those things about in the first place, the supposed infection rates by age vary a lot by geographic area and there's a lot of noise. However one of the things to come out of data in a lot but not all local authority areas is the infection rates of 70-74 year olds and in some areas older groups seems to have come down a lot and gone 'green' when other ages haven't. 

The bad news is in many urban areas cases are not falling particularly fast, with a bit of an exception towards this having been in South East England and Wales.


----------



## lane (18 Feb 2021)

Quick update following my Pfizer vaccine on Tuesday. Slightly sore arm, nothing much. One of the possible side effects is feeling tired; think I did feel a bit tired yesterday but I sometimes do anyway so can't say it was the vaccine. No headache at all. Anyway feeling fine today and arm no longer sore. Side effects such as they were, on the mild side of mild. Now just need to wait two or three weeks for the immunity to develop.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Now just need to wait two or three weeks for the immunity [% limited protection from serious illness] to develop..... and May for the second jab.


FTFY


----------



## lane (18 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> FTFY



Well it does depend what studies you read. According to one from (I think) Oxford I was reading yesterday they calculated that Pfizer was over 90% effective with one jab after three weeks. But don't worry I will be carefully following all the rules jab or no jab until told differently.


----------



## lane (18 Feb 2021)

Actually University of east Anglia 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ab-gives-90-immunity-from-covid-after-21-days


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Feb 2021)

Report-to-jcvi-on-estimated-efficacy-of-single-vaccine-dose (Pfizer)
52% up to 90% depending how you calculate it. There ought to be about 5 million data points available for a single dose of Pfizer now (all those in UK with a first dose (Pfizer) since 20 Dec).
Here is the U of EA non-peer reviewed paper "Estimating the effectiveness of the Pfizer COVID-19 BNT162b2 vaccine after a single dose. A reanalysis of a study of ‘real-world’ vaccination outcomes from Israel"
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.01.21250957v1
See the second comment on that paper. Getting a 90% result does depend on careful choices of which day 18-22 and with period you choose as 'normal'. Also overall case rate varied significantly in Israel over that period, further widening the confidence interval of the paper's headline finding.


----------



## classic33 (18 Feb 2021)

Had to turn down/decline the first jab next week. There's concern (it appears) that the Pfizer vaccine isn't suitable for people who've had strong reactions to other medications.

I, for one, wouldn't want the person administering the vaccine to be held responsible if there was a reaction.


----------



## rockyroller (18 Feb 2021)

finally a pre-existing condition I qualify for! obesity!


----------



## PK99 (18 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> Had to turn down/decline the first jab next week. There's concern (it appears) that the Pfizer vaccine isn't suitable for people who've had strong reactions to other medications.
> 
> I, for one, wouldn't want the person administering the vaccine to be held responsible if there was a reaction.



My understanding was that the concern was wrt anaphylaxis history

That is expressly addressed here along with other concers

https://www.anaphylaxis.org.uk/covid-19-advice/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-and-allergies/


----------



## vickster (18 Feb 2021)

rockyroller said:


> finally a pre-existing condition I qualify for! obesity!


In the UK, it's morbid obesity, BMI 40+


----------



## classic33 (18 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> My understanding was that the concern was wrt anaphylaxis history
> 
> That is expressly addressed here along with other concers
> 
> https://www.anaphylaxis.org.uk/covid-19-advice/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-and-allergies/


Does sudden cardiac arrest count?


----------



## vickster (18 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> Had to turn down/decline the first jab next week. There's concern (it appears) that the Pfizer vaccine isn't suitable for people who've had strong reactions to other medications.
> 
> I, for one, wouldn't want the person administering the vaccine to be held responsible if there was a reaction.


Check with your GP/specialist or phone the Vaccine helpline (119?)


----------



## vickster (18 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> Does sudden cardiac arrest count?


Depends what caused it presumably

From the Gov website https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ovid-19-vaccination-easy-read-guide#allergies


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> The NHS clarified the last couple of days that the fantastical aims they've said about doing 7 million vaccinations per week is based on JCVI rather lazily just ploughing downwards through the age categories 45-49 etc as it's quicker and supply issues will be sorted. That only makes sense if you keep things restricted till the summer. It also means you have to deliver the goods. Unfortunately the vaccination drive has slowed down of late, not speeded up, something which does not seem to have been picked up by the media.


Moving this to the 'vaccine' thread. Not sure whether the massive increase in rate of vaccination was a 'what if' rather than even an aim. I have assumed that the daily rate established 400k+ will be maintained for this second '*sprint*' (to complete the first phase (Gps 1-9) by end April) and then the* marathon* of 'the rest' followed by school age (September) and then autumn booster for the oldies (O65 plus, so likely the 20M in Gps 1-6) in the autumn, maybe with a vaccine optimised for what might be the prevalent or most challenging virus.
The supply issue to which you refer will soon become apparent (to the media) but be transient. The supply profile was structured to allow the *sprint* to the 15 Feb target to be hit and a lean period (?fortnight) expected till March. The leaked Scottish supply shape gave an insight to that back in early Jan (see my post from ?19 Jan and rehashed here https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/page-152#post-6311862).
"Supplies for the next week or so will mean the vaccination rate (per day) will be lower for the second half of February (but pick up again in March)."


----------



## classic33 (18 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> Depends what caused it presumably
> 
> From the Gov website https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ovid-19-vaccination-easy-read-guide#allergies


Lignocaine. Given in the A&E as they went to start treatment.

It was the GP that decided it was best to decline.

I've to wait until I hear from someone else now.


----------



## guitarpete247 (18 Feb 2021)

I had phone call yesterday offering me jab this Saturday. All the health questions I was asked, over the phone, were to do with reaction to vaccinations and allergic reactions. Do I suffer from anaphylactic shock etc. They told me I would be there for about 20 mins. This leads me to think I may be being given the Pfizer jab. Does that sound right.


----------



## marinyork (18 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Moving this to the 'vaccine' thread. Not sure whether the massive increase in rate of vaccination was a 'what if' rather than even an aim. I have assumed that the daily rate established 400k+ will be maintained for this second '*sprint*' (to complete the first phase (Gps 1-9) by end April) and then the* marathon* of 'the rest' followed by school age (September) and then autumn booster for the oldies (O65 plus, so likely the 20M in Gps 1-6) in the autumn, maybe with a vaccine optimised for what might be the prevalent or most challenging virus.
> The supply issue to which you refer will soon become apparent (to the media) but be transient. The supply profile was structured to allow the *sprint* to the 15 Feb target to be hit and a lean period (?fortnight) expected till March. The leaked Scottish supply shape gave an insight to that back in early Jan (see my post from ?19 Jan and rehashed here https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/page-152#post-6311862).
> "Supplies for the next week or so will mean the vaccination rate (per day) will be lower for the second half of February (but pick up again in March)."



I know all that and in fact that's trivial, but with respect if you think people can't read graphs that they've already seen, the discussion isn't going to get very far when in another post you're asking for graphics such as evidence lockdowns work locally such as the covid dashboard.

I've assumed that it'll stay at about 400k, which is bad news except for those over 50 who are all right jack, sod everyone else and we're already seeing quite a bit of that even on here. You can't separate the different aspects, the two parts go together, if you don't deliver the goods on upping then ploughing through the age ranges at the same or slower rate is the wrong decision. Or extend restrictions, but we're already seeing a backlash by over 50s who want to disappear off to the pub. It doesn't negate doing a younger age range such as 18-24 by age before some of the others either.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Feb 2021)

Depends if they're allowing 15 minutes before for admin and queuing (in which case Oxford AZ). Matters not.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> in another post you're asking for graphics such as evidence lockdowns work locally such as the covid dashboard.


Thanks. To be clear I haven't asked for graphics nor did I ask for evidence that lockdowns work 'locally'. Those were the constructs placed in others' answers/comments.


Ajax Bay said:


> Please could someone share a good link for me to use with someone down here (ie local) showing the direct effect of lock down on the number of cases reported daily - any country.


To use with someone down here (ie not on-line) - sorry for any confusion caused. @mjr did a neat FT alignment graphic.


----------



## vickster (18 Feb 2021)

guitarpete247 said:


> I had phone call yesterday offering me jab this Saturday. All the health questions I was asked, over the phone, were to do with reaction to vaccinations and allergic reactions. Do I suffer from anaphylactic shock etc. They told me I would be there for about 20 mins. This leads me to think I may be being given the Pfizer jab. Does that sound right.


Some centres also ask you to wait after the AZ vaccine (a friend of mine was)


----------



## vickster (18 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> Lignocaine. Given in the A&E as they went to start treatment.
> 
> It was the GP that decided it was best to decline.
> 
> I've to wait until I hear from someone else now.


I've had palpitations from that at the dentist I think


----------



## C R (18 Feb 2021)

I had no indication on which vaccine I will be getting, have others been told beforehand?


----------



## Chromatic (18 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> I had no indication on which vaccine I will be getting, have others been told beforehand?



I haven't been told either, will find out on the night I suppose.


----------



## Beebo (18 Feb 2021)

Im 45 with very mild asthma but have been called for vaccination on Monday. 
Seems very early to be called but I’m not complaining.


----------



## lane (18 Feb 2021)

guitarpete247 said:


> I had phone call yesterday offering me jab this Saturday. All the health questions I was asked, over the phone, were to do with reaction to vaccinations and allergic reactions. Do I suffer from anaphylactic shock etc. They told me I would be there for about 20 mins. This leads me to think I may be being given the Pfizer jab. Does that sound right.



Depends where you are going. Took me a good 50 mins to get the Pfizer - 15 mins was waiting after and about 5 mins max for the jab - rest was checking in and queueing.


----------



## lane (18 Feb 2021)

I don't even know at what point someone decides what jab you have. GP booked me online and then I turned up at a mass centre checked in, went to gate 6 as told and joined the queue. For all I know could be pot luck which queue I had to join.

Mum in theory should have been OK with Pfizer but got turned away due to peanut allergy and had to re book for AZ.


----------



## classic33 (18 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> I had no indication on which vaccine I will be getting, have others been told beforehand?


I got told which they'd be using next week, and I'd have been given. But that after being asked about allergies/reactions to medications.

Don't let what happened to one person, who never expected to be contacted, put you off going for the jab.


----------



## mjr (18 Feb 2021)

Beebo said:


> Im 45 with very mild asthma but have been called for vaccination on Monday.
> Seems very early to be called but I’m not complaining.


I'm 45 with very mild asthma (and some irrelevant chronic illnesses) and jealousy because I have not been called. 

Good luck!


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Feb 2021)

Take your doctor a bunch of daffodils, as a please offering?


----------



## mjr (18 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Take your doctor a bunch of daffodils, as a please offering?


I wonder whether you typed daffodils there...


----------



## Smokin Joe (18 Feb 2021)

Mrs SJ got her jab today, the AZ flavour. I asked her to query when mine was due as I'm a year older than her and haven't had mine yet, they told her I should have and I'm booked in for next Thursday. I wish I'd gone with her as they were running ahead of schedule and if she'd been able to say I was outside in the car I might have got a shout.


----------



## C R (18 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> I got told which they'd be using next week, and I'd have been given. But that after being asked about allergies/reactions to medications.
> 
> Don't let what happened to one person, who never expected to be contacted, put you off going for the jab.


Oh, I was just wondering, not put off at all. I have no history of anaphylaxis or reactions to vaccines, so not expecting problems.

I am feeling slightly guilty, as I am only 48, but type 1 diabetic.


----------



## classic33 (18 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> Oh, I was just wondering, not put off at all. I have no history of anaphylaxis or reactions to vaccines, so not expecting problems.
> 
> I am feeling slightly guilty, as I am only 48, but type 1 diabetic.


Why feel guilty for three things that are out of your control?
The latest two are out of everyones control.


----------



## C R (18 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> Why feel guilty for three things that are out of your control?
> The latest two are out of everyones control.


I mean that there's older people than me still waiting.


----------



## classic33 (18 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> I mean that there's older people than me still waiting.


You have a condition that puts you in a group, which is something that is out of your control. It's been decide by someone else for you.

Think of it as seeking to keep you out of the need for more intensive treatment.


----------



## Jenkins (18 Feb 2021)

After a very slow start in East Suffolk (the local hospital didn't have the appropriate freezer facilities until a couple of weeks after they started elsewhere) things have picked up remarkably quickly. My 79 year old mother & stepfather had their first jabs on the 26th February and I have mine next Thursday which is less than 4 weeks later (only just turned 56).


----------



## PaulSB (18 Feb 2021)

I had the AZ vaccine today. All very quick and efficient. I mentioned I'd heard stories of long queues at my centre. The nurse said this was because the previous age group like to arrive early "just in case!" I started to feel a bit tired around 5.00pm but don't now at 10.00pm. Could be life, could be the vaccine.

One thing which took me by surprise was the question:

"Have you had any Covid related symptoms in the last 28 days?"

For me the answer was "Yes" and my test result last Friday was negative. This lead to a five minute chat with medical staff before admin was given the OK to book me in. If this is a potential problem I'm surprised the question isn't asked when one makes the online booking.


----------



## lane (19 Feb 2021)

"COVID-19: Pfizer vaccine is up to 85% effective after first dose, new Israeli study finds | World News | Sky News" https://news.sky.com/story/amp/covi...r-first-dose-new-israeli-study-finds-12222164

Another study says Pfizer 85% effective after 1st dose


----------



## Svendo (19 Feb 2021)

I got my AZ vaccine on 5th Feb. I’m 49 with no health issues but am a frontline health and social care worker with homeless people. Rochdale Borough has included us in the group 2. They injected the same side I’d crashed on the Friday before; I didn’t want to be unable to sleep on both sides! I didn’t have any major side effects, and no soreness at the injection site. I was already full of paracetamol and ibuprofen and with the head injury can’t say what caused the soreness and mild shivers. I’d been cold n shivery all day the day before you see. I got my next spot in April, 10 weeks later, as I left the infirmary.
Mrs Svendo, also a H&SC worker has been offered but is still occasionally breast feeding our youngest; we’re hoping to self-wean her but are discussing forcing the issue to enable vaccination.


----------



## lane (19 Feb 2021)

Man in 30s offered the vaccine as thought to have a BMI of 28,000. The NHS recorded his height as 6.2cm.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-56111209


----------



## vickster (19 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Man in 30s offered the vaccine as thought to have a BMI of 28,000. The NHS recorded his height as 6.2cm.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-56111209


Could have been negative if they‘d recorded it as 6.2m on the flip side


----------



## C R (19 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> Could have been negative if they‘d recorded it as 6.2m on the flip side


Strictly BMI is never negative, it would just be very small but still positive.


----------



## vickster (19 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> Strictly BMI is never negative, it would just be very small but still positive.


It was a joke


----------



## C R (19 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> It was a joke


Sorry, Mrs C R usually comments on my lack of humour awareness.


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> "COVID-19: Pfizer vaccine is up to 85% effective after first dose, new Israeli study finds | World News | Sky News"


Here is the Lancet paper:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00448-7/fulltext
An easy, persuasive read with few significant caveats. Here's hoping. Points out the implicit merit of extending the gap beyond 21 days. I wonder if other countries will recognise the merit and the potential to save lives?
Next bits in jigsaw will be:
* an early assessment of the effect on vaccination on virus transmissibility (by vaccinated but then infected but asymptomatics)
* similar data/deductions on the Oxford-AZ vaccine's effectiveness.


----------



## mjr (19 Feb 2021)

BBC More or Less this week mentioned the vaccine target in a brief item just to say, basically, that the data collected isn't detailed enough to decide whether either version of the target was met!


----------



## midlife (19 Feb 2021)

Eldest son in his 20's been sent invite for vaccine in Lancaster next Thursday. Type 1 diabetic since young. Been on his own working from home since first lockdown.....


----------



## Andy in Germany (20 Feb 2021)

Someone pointed me at the vaccine statistics from John Hopkins university today. According to them Germany isn't doing as badly as I thought: the UK is looking more effective because they are publicising the numbers of people who had the first vaccine, but the total number of fully vaccinated people in the UK is 0.86% compared to Germany at 1.97% and the EU as a whole running at 1.64%.

It's interesting that Italy and Spain as well as a lot of eastern European countries like Romania and Lithuania have the highest rates of full vaccination. Germany could certainly do a lot better, but I was under the impression that it had barely vaccinated anyone at all.


----------



## PK99 (20 Feb 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Someone pointed me at the vaccine statistics from John Hopkins university today. According to them Germany isn't doing as badly as I thought: the UK is looking more effective because they are publicising the numbers of people who had the first vaccine, but the total number of fully vaccinated people in the UK is 0.86% compared to Germany at 1.97% and the EU as a whole running at 1.64%.
> 
> It's interesting that Italy and Spain as well as a lot of eastern European countries like Romania and Lithuania have the highest rates of full vaccination. Germany could certainly do a lot better, but I was under the impression that it had barely vaccinated anyone at all.


----------



## Unkraut (20 Feb 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Germany could certainly do a lot better, but I was under the impression that it had barely vaccinated anyone at all.


It's easy - but wrong - to treat this as a race. But I understand your frustration at what might have been achieved with better procurement. I also hope the government in the form of its bureaucracy will cope in March as the supplies of vaccine massively increase. That's an area the country hasn't done so well on and is revealing where 'money was saved' pre-pandemic. It has sometimes been positively shameful.

If you want the figures both absolute and percentage, they are supplied by the RKI on a daily basis (in German):

https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Daten/Impfquoten-Tab.html

My sister in the UK is getting her jab next Wednesday. From then on I expect her to become a devoted fan of Microsoft ...


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Feb 2021)

Close followers of this thread may remember some discussion about the 15 Feb target and how we would(n't) know whether they'd been met (JCVI Gps 1-4)++ or to what extent they'd been met. Do not feed the mathematicians/statisticians, please, unless it's raining and windy outside.
PHE have published the 16 Feb data: https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/
These are England figures but perhaps it is reasonable to assume that this success is reflected in the other nations of our United Kingdom.
Group 1: 94% of residents; 69% of staff. About 54k (>33k + >20k) couldn't be vaccinated because they'd had C19 within 28 days. 561k vaccinated (at least first dose).








Groups 2a, 3 and 4a++
2,649k over 80s (pop = 2,837k) so 93%. (7% = med unable, hesitant, too soon since C19 infection)
1,928k 75-79 (pop = 1941k) >99%! - one of these figures must be wrong (pop figures from ONS)
2,564k 70-74 (pop = 2779k) 92%
The 5.7M under 70s will be some Gp 5s (including chatters OTP) but mostly care home staff (Gp 1 above: 304k), health and social care frontline workers (Gp 2b), CEV in Gp 4b (and carers). I have seen estimates (England) for these elements as Gp1=465k, Gp2b=3.8M, Gp4b=1.2M (Edit: think this is a low estimate). Those numbers suggest a very high percentage (Edit: but not a narrow CI) have been jabbed.




++ JCVI Gps 1-6
1 Residents in a care home for older adults and their carers
2a All those 80 years of age and over
2b Frontline health and social care workers
3 All those 75 years of age and over
4a All those 70 years of age and over
4b Clinically extremely vulnerable individuals* (and carers)
5 All those 65 years of age and over
6 All individuals aged 16 years**to 64 years with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality*** (and some carers)
Population Estimates for the UK, England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland: mid-2019

ENGLANDWALESSCOTLANDNORTHERN IRELAND56,286,9613,152,8795,463,3001,893,667


----------



## fossyant (20 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> Eldest son in his 20's been sent invite for vaccine in Lancaster next Thursday. Type 1 diabetic since young. Been on his own working from home since first lockdown.....



Good stuff - hopefully my son, T1, will get a call soon.


----------



## cyberknight (20 Feb 2021)

Mrs ck had invite as a carer for mink ck 1 , we went today and when i asked why i hadnt got one they signed me up so we both have had the astra zeneca jab


----------



## marinyork (20 Feb 2021)

One of my friends has got moved up to group 6 as UHC 1.7 million people. He feels bad about having it though.


----------



## Kingfisher101 (20 Feb 2021)

I'm donating mine to the 3rd world.


----------



## MrGrumpy (20 Feb 2021)

Kingfisher101 said:


> I'm donating mine to the 3rd world.


I fear that will take a long time.... still not sorted out polio in these countries yet


----------



## marinyork (20 Feb 2021)

I'm going to donate mine to Michael Gove's daughter or a celebrity influencer so they can go back to Dubai.


----------



## guitarpete247 (21 Feb 2021)

I got my jab yesterday. Pfizer. When we got home my laptop, set up with Google Chrome as default browser, reset itself to Bing. Took ages to reset. When got it done my arm started to ache.
Is this coincidence?


----------



## welsh dragon (21 Feb 2021)

My twin grandsons had their jab 1 week ago as did Mr WD. My son had his ( no idea why) on Friday, and I have received an invte to have mine Next Friday. Half my immediate family will have had the Covid vaccine. They seem to be very efficient here in Wales after an initial very slow start.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Feb 2021)

Target announced today of all adults offered a jab by end July depends on:
Maintaining vaccination rate at close to 400k per day and a (reasonable if regrettable) expectation that take-up rate will be less than 90% overall.
Gps 5 and 6 complete by 6 Mar (about 22M in total with those)
Gps 1-9 = 33M - by mid to late April. NB All these 33M will need their second dose before end July.
38M total adding over 40s not already done
44M total adding over 30s not already done
Another 9M over 16 to 30s: 53M
To achieve target:
Number of doses need = 53M plus 33M second doses (JCVI Gps 1-9) = 86M
21 Feb + 17M. Days till end July = 160. 69M divided by 160 = 431k per day. Less 10% unable/unwilling = 388k per day.
Doable, provided supply holds up.
The population of UK is 67M. 63M over 4 years old and 53M are over 16 (Hence Hancock's "we've now given a third of UK's adult population their first dose."
Hancock said: “Our vaccination programme is accelerating at unprecedented pace" - Fact check: it's not accelerating; it reached an excellent and sustained 400k+ per day rate for three weeks and has dropped a bit since the 15 Feb target was time expired.


----------



## Andy in Germany (21 Feb 2021)

Unkraut said:


> It's easy - but wrong - to treat this as a race. But I understand your frustration at what might have been achieved with better procurement. I also hope the government in the form of its bureaucracy will cope in March as the supplies of vaccine massively increase. That's an area the country hasn't done so well on and is revealing where 'money was saved' pre-pandemic. It has sometimes been positively shameful.
> 
> If you want the figures both absolute and percentage, they are supplied by the RKI on a daily basis (in German):
> 
> ...



Thanks for the link, it's good to see what is happening...

I agree that this isn't a race, as we wither all win or all lose, but I'd posted earlier thinking the German response was worse than it was, bsed in inaccurate data, and I wanted to set the record straight.


----------



## Andy in Germany (21 Feb 2021)

PK99 said:


> View attachment 574746



That's what the sort of data I mean: judging by the John Hopkins figures, this graph compares the UK's first vaccine which is going very fast, with the EU and Germany's progress with full vaccination.


----------



## MrGrumpy (21 Feb 2021)

Riddle me this a colleague has just messaged me to say he has to isolate for 10 days along with this wife . Due to son testing positive with flu like symptoms?! They have all had the Pfizer vaccine. Albeit only the son has had the first dose , they have had two doses as both work in care. Not seeing a way out here folks ? Seems an inevitability that the rona well infect everyone eventually .


----------



## midlife (21 Feb 2021)

There's no guarantee that after vaccination you cannot be a carrier, hence the current requirement to self isolate. Requirement to self isolate might change with more data


----------



## fossyant (21 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Riddle me this a colleague has just messaged me to say he has to isolate for 10 days along with this wife . Due to son testing positive with flu like symptoms?! They have all had the Pfizer vaccine. Albeit only the son has had the first dose , they have had two doses as both work in care. Not seeing a way out here folks ? Seems an inevitability that the rona well infect everyone eventually .



After the vaccine you don't get it as bad if you do get it.

Wife's friend feeling very fatigued after her daughter brought it in.

My nephew is 28 and he get's his next week - no health conditions. We can only presume that both neice and nephew have regular heart check-ups as their dad has congenital heart issues at 60 so the docs check the rest of the family. He's not been called up yet ! Different practice though.


----------



## marinyork (21 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> There's no guarantee that after vaccination you cannot be a carrier, hence the current requirement to self isolate. Requirement to self isolate might change with more data



Yes absolutely. 

Although in the US, if you've had both vaccinations and come into close contact with someone positive guidance is significantly different there than here now, you can forgo isolation.


----------



## rualexander (21 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Riddle me this a colleague has just messaged me to say he has to isolate for 10 days along with this wife . Due to son testing positive with flu like symptoms?! They have all had the Pfizer vaccine. Albeit only the son has had the first dose , they have had two doses as both work in care. Not seeing a way out here folks ? Seems an inevitability that the rona well infect everyone eventually .


When did the son have his first dose though? 
If less than 2-3 weeks then not particularly surprising.


----------



## vickster (21 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Riddle me this a colleague has just messaged me to say he has to isolate for 10 days along with this wife . Due to son testing positive with flu like symptoms?! They have all had the Pfizer vaccine. Albeit only the son has had the first dose , they have had two doses as both work in care. Not seeing a way out here folks ? Seems an inevitability that the rona well infect everyone eventually .


Vaccination doesn’t stop you catching it however, makes it less likely you’ll be hospitalised or will die


----------



## MrGrumpy (21 Feb 2021)

rualexander said:


> When did the son have his first dose though?
> If less than 2-3 weeks then not particularly surprising.



January. Hard to see an end to this unless we all build up antibodies


----------



## lane (21 Feb 2021)

When did the son have first dose? Takes three weeks to be fully effective so being infected in approx. 5 week window - two weeks before / 3 weeks after the vaccine won't save you. Thereafter with Pfizer still a low 15% chance of infection.


----------



## lane (21 Feb 2021)

Also a chance of a false positive test


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Riddle me this a colleague has just messaged me to say he has to isolate for 10 days along with this wife . Due to son testing positive with flu like symptoms?! They have all had the Pfizer vaccine. Albeit only the son has had the first dose
> . . . in January. Hard to see an end to this unless we all build up antibodies


After the first dose, even after 20 days, the trials and the data recently out of Israel suggest 89% efficacy/effectiveness.
If 89% IS the protection effectiveness (more datasets inbound) then of 100 vaccinated (Pfizer) more than 20 days ago [Edit: who would have caught C19], 11 will catch C19. But as @vickster says, serious illness very unlikely. I guess your colleague's son is one of those '11'.
Everyone who's previously 'had' C19 will have antibodies, the level of which will decay over time. In addition all those vaccinated will also have built up antibodies. So by 21 August, (if target met) all UK adults (?over 16) will have protection (but NB percentage varies depending on one/two doses (all Gps 1-9 will have had two doses) and whether Pfizer, Oxford-AZ or Moderna. Except the 10+% who are either unable or unwilling to be vaccinated.
Well before then we should have reached herd immunity. When depends on, _inter alia_, the NPI measures still in place, the retention of antibodies in those infected last year, and the reduced transmission R (yet to be shown) of vaccinated but infected individuals.


----------



## mjr (21 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> If 89% IS the protection effectiveness (more datasets inbound) then of 100 vaccinated (Pfizer) more than 20 days ago, 11 will catch C19.


...of 100 vaccinated who would have caught C19....


> Well before then we should have reached herd immunity. When depends on, inter alia, the NPI measures still in place,


National Provider Identifier?!?

And "inter alia" is not English!



> the retention of antibodies in those infected last year, and the reduced transmission R (yet to be shown) of vaccinated but infected individuals.


One theory is that the virus only lodges in the throat of vaccinated people, not getting into the blood and multiplying as much. We will have to wait and see if that proves true and its effect on R.


----------



## marinyork (21 Feb 2021)

Well if herd immunity effects start coming in over the summer, we'll get an idea if it's possible so early long before then because Israel are on the lookout for whether it's happening in March there. I think it's a bit optimistic at 70%, but let's hope it does.


----------



## mjr (21 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Target announced today of all adults offered a jab by end July depends on:
> Maintaining vaccination rate at close to 400k per day and a (reasonable if regrettable) expectation that take-up rate will be less than 90% overall.


Daily vaccinations is now averaging about 370k/day over the last week. Hancock should act now if he wants to hit that target. Not that it will be possible to tell unless they collect more data or it is a big miss.


----------



## marinyork (21 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Daily vaccinations is now averaging about 370k/day over the last week. Hancock should act now if he wants to hit that target. Not that it will be possible to tell unless they collect more data or it is a big miss.



From a political, not medical point of view I find it amusing. It pleases me as I'm in that and July sounds much better than September or 'Autumn'. Similarly papers have speculated Boris may allow some pubs to very partially open on 29th March. Politically, March sound brilliant to the voters.

I wish the politicians would stop dancing around the 2nd jab slowdown. They will hit the over 50s target likely, but it's what happens after that that is more worrying.

Anecdotally we do know that some of the mass vaccination centres seem to have quite a lot of capacity going spare which when you go down the age groups may be easier to utilise, but so far nothing much said on if this is one of the reasons why the NHS is so bullish.


----------



## midlife (21 Feb 2021)

My redeployment to the vaccine hub tomorrow has been cancelled and I'm back doing my regular work. Not been told why but its either

1. Run out of vaccine 
2. Run out of people to vaccinate
3. Money is there to buy in locum and bank staff instead of redeployment. 

I'm hoping it's number 3


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> ...of 100 vaccinated who would have caught C19....
> National Provider Identifier?!?
> And "inter alia" is not English!
> Daily vaccinations is now averaging about 370k/day over the last week. Hancock should act now


You are correct: I didn't get it right. Thank you for spotting.
Here: " If 89% IS the protection effectiveness (more datasets inbound) then of 100 vaccinated (Pfizer) more than 20 days ago who would have caught C19, statistically 11 will catch C19."
Non-pharmaceutical Interventions - I thought 'NPI' might pique your interest: thank you for not disappointing me.
"actions, apart from getting vaccinated and taking medicine, that people and communities can take to help slow the spread of illnesses"
'inter alia' is a Latin phrase which is in common English usage - please add it to your vocab. et cetera.
I have suggested why the rate of vaccination has taken a dip (weighting supply into the late Jan / early Feb period to hit the 15 Feb target). There are more than 5 months to the end of July so I don't think there's any urgency that "Hancock should act now". The excellent vaccination programme has shown that, with supply, it can manage well over 400k a day. And that will be more than enough (as I sought to show with the figures I shared). Anyway, what ad hoc actions do you think "Hancock" should take "now", exactly (or even vaguely)?
I'd say that a key action is to engage those communities who are, for whatever reasons, found to be more hesitant and offer them factual, consumable and persuasive communications, either directly or through community leaders. This will have no significant effect on the main figures and the 'end of July' 'offered' target. But we owe it to those elements in society.


----------



## marinyork (22 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I'd say that a key action is to engage those communities who are, for whatever reasons, found to be more hesitant and offer them factual, consumable and persuasive communications, either directly or through community leaders. This will have no significant effect on the main figures and the 'end of July' 'offered' target. But we owe it to those elements in society.



Some quite good stuff, so in this county and this city vaccination centres or temporary ones have been set up in mosques. 

Whenever PHE publishes the more detailed stuff by area and subgroups or other data comes out it can be quite worrying. Take up as low as 50% in some areas in some ethnic groups such as black. These are amongst over 70s, CEVs and UHCs. Israel has talked about the next stage of their campaign may run up against lower vaccinations in younger age groups and people expect it to be harder here. If take up is so low in the higher risk groups for people who are black in particular places then will the percentages be even lower when you get down the age groups? If so then very worrying.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> I wish the politicians would stop dancing around the 2nd jab slowdown. They will hit the over 50s target likely, but it's what happens after that that is more worrying.


Not sure I've seen "politicians dancing around the 2nd jab slowdown", in the first place, before 'stopping' - got a link?
As I've sought to show with figures, there will be an increasing reduction in 'first jab rate' but that will, as you've suggested, kick in after the JCVI Gps 1-9 have been all given their first dose (estimating 32M, less unable/unwilling).
By my calculations at 400k per day (first or second doses), we should reach the 32M first dose figure by 4 Apr, with about 2.6M second doses already given. Increasingly in April, and all of May and June, nearly all the vaccinations will be second doses. Think this is what you mean by "the 2nd jab slowdown".
I suspect that the first jabs in latter half of April and in May will go to under 50s in specific employments. I think there's going to be direction from JCVI in combination with the government (criteria moving from clinical risk of illness to likelihood of catching, with politico-economic undertones) early next month.
The first doses will have crept up to 38M by end June. For July most (80+%) of the jabs will be first doses again and this will mean about 10M more first jabs - which should mean that all UK adults wishing to be vaccinated will have received their first dose (assumes 90% overall acceptance).


----------



## JBGooner (22 Feb 2021)

Public Health Scotland study just published shows the AstraZeneca jab reducing covid hospital admissions by 94% and the Pfizer jab by 85%.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56153600
I wonder why the AZ jab is more effective. That seems to run counter to the trials. Still, great news


----------



## coldash (22 Feb 2021)

JBGooner said:


> Public Health Scotland study just published shows the AstraZeneca jab reducing covid hospital admissions by 94% and the Pfizer jab by 85%.
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56153600
> I wonder why the AZ jab is more effective. That seems to run counter to the trials. Still, great news


I believe that the Pfizer jab was given first to the most at risk in care homes so it isn’t a straight forward comparison


----------



## mjr (22 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Non-pharmaceutical Interventions - I thought 'NPI' might pique your interest: thank you for not disappointing me.


Thanks for the admission of trolling, even if not an apology. Maybe you could avoid it in future.


> 'inter alia' is a Latin phrase which is in common English usage - please add it to your vocab. et cetera.


Not amongst us plebs, it ain't. Using "et cetera" instead of "and so on" gets you marked as a wannabe Etonian. Let's keep to English, as we've had posts in other languages removed before.


> There are more than 5 months to the end of July so I don't think there's any urgency that "Hancock should act now".


Sorry for believing your repeated assumption and implied assertion that 400k/day is necessary as the basis for these calculations. I haven't time to make independent calculations now.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Feb 2021)

Here's the PH Scotland EAVE II report:
https://www.publichealthscotland.sc...-in-risk-of-covid-19-admissions-to-hospitals/
In the first month of vaccinations Scotland received about 500k Pfizer and 100k Oxford-AZ. These doses will be the 'first jabs' which will have been administered and had 21 days to have effect (so mostly Pfizer, as @coldash has said). The numbers in the study is a decent sized cohort so we might have some confidence in the conclusions.


----------



## lazybloke (22 Feb 2021)

The covidiots next door have been having people over and in the house for weeks. The single grandparent is fair enough as a support bubble, but the other parents pop in for hours at a time, and the grown-up children, and the grandchildren, and the friends...


JBGooner said:


> Public Health Scotland study just published shows the AstraZeneca jab reducing covid hospital admissions by 94% and the *Pfizer jab by 85%*.
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56153600
> *I wonder why the AZ jab is more effective*. That seems to run counter to the trials. Still, great news


Wasn't there a story in the last week that the Pfizer efficacy had been overestimated, due to some data of infections being 'mislaid' during the clinical trials?

Pretty sure I heard it on Beeb radio over the weekend, or possibly LBC, but can't find any mention of the story from a quick google.
Can anyone verify?


----------



## nickyboy (22 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Thanks for the admission of trolling, even if not an apology. Maybe you could avoid it in future.
> 
> Not amongst us plebs, it ain't. Using "et cetera" instead of "and so on" gets you marked as a wannabe Etonian. Let's keep to English, as we've had posts in other languages removed before.
> 
> Sorry for believing your repeated assumption and implied assertion that 400k/day is necessary as the basis for these calculations. I haven't time to make independent calculations now.


Almost all the words used in English language are foreign. From Texel, via Germany, France, Italy, Scandinavia.

Even I, a comp kid who didn't go to university knows what "inter alia" means and, on occasions, use it

Maybe we shouldn't use derailleur. Call it a bike gear change thingy instead?


----------



## Andy in Germany (22 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Maybe we shouldn't use derailleur. Call it a bike gear change thingy instead?



As English is at core a Germanic dialect, can I suggest the German word for Derailleur: "Umwerfer" Literally "Thrower-over" which I think describes it perfectly.


----------



## Pale Rider (22 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> gets you marked as a wannabe Etonian.



What's wrong with that?

The war was won, inter alia, on the playing fields of Eton.


----------



## nickyboy (22 Feb 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> As English is at core a Germanic dialect, can I suggest the German word for Derailleur: "Umwerfer" Literally "Thrower-over" which I think describes it perfectly.


That's far too short to be a real German word. You're making it up


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Feb 2021)

The Pfizer efficacy from the clinical trials (complete in November) was estimated at 94% 7 days after 2 doses, 21 days apart. The research @JBGooner noted was effectiveness after the first dose (only), after 21 days.
Nearly all those who received a first dose before 21 Dec would have received a second dose. Anyone vaccinated (first dose) after 20 Dec will have been moved to the 12 week gap protocol. Edit: I have looked at the data shared in the paper in a little more detail. The numbers in the Oxford-AZ vaccinated cohort (who made the 28-34 days by 14 Feb) are small (cf those who had Pfizer) and I'm a bit surprised by the 95% CI quoted. Reports like these will be coming thick and fast, from now on. Whatever it reinforced the UK 'bet' to extend the gap to 12 weeks to get the 88% most vulnerable jabbed up.
https://www.ed.ac.uk/usher/eave-ii/key-outputs/scottish-vaccine-roll-out-working-data-suggests
Pre-print: https://www.ed.ac.uk/files/atoms/files/scotland_firstvaccinedata_preprint.pdf
"Findings: The first dose of the Pfizer vaccine was associated with a vaccine effect of 85% (95% CI 76 to 91) for COVID-19 related hospitalisation at 28-34 days post-vaccination. [NB 21 days plus 7 days mean time infection to hospitalisation]. Vaccine effect at the same time interval for the Oxford-AZ vaccine was 94% (95% CI 73 to 99).
"Implications: We provide compelling evidence that the two COVID-19 vaccines currently being used in the UK vaccination programme substantially reduce the risk of COVID-19 related hospital admissions in the population who are at highest risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes."
Very promising news.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> The war was won, inter alia, on the playing fields of Eton.


OT: () Not sure about that. Got any evidence? Think that there were a fair few plebians who 'helped' the 'win', and who lost.


----------



## Andy in Germany (22 Feb 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> What's wrong with that?
> 
> The war was won, inter alia, on the playing fields of Eton.



The Russian army was trained in Eaton?


----------



## vickster (22 Feb 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> The Russian army was trained in Eaton?


Etonskigrad


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Feb 2021)

(OT) Wrong war, Andy. The Bolsheviks were otherwise engaged in 1917-18.


----------



## marinyork (22 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> Why can people not be happy that things are moving along nicely and hopefully by the middle of the year most if not all Adults would have had a jab.
> 
> Get back to normal ASAP in my opinion and get on with life, all this whinging isn't good for people.



There is a divide on here.

The people who are happy are either not that worried or are over 50 and getting their jabs before everything opens up properly.

'Middle of the year' means months of interacting indoors with no protection whatsoever from the virus.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (22 Feb 2021)

Getting first jab 9am this coming Friday (25 Feb).

Second jab booked for 6.45pm Monday 17 May.


----------



## Pale Rider (22 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> OT: () Not sure about that. Got any evidence? Think that there were a fair few plebians who 'helped' the 'win', and who lost.



Hence 'inter alia' - among other things.

I'm sure you are aware of the evidence, such as it is.

The officer class had leadership skills, the benefits of teamwork, and a strong desire to win ingrained into them at an early age.

Anyone for a wall game?


----------



## fossyant (22 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> That's far too short to be a real German word. You're making it up



Umwerfer Vorsprung Durch Technic


----------



## fossyant (22 Feb 2021)

MrsF was jabbed today with the Astra Zenica/Oxford jab. There was a fair queue at the practice ! She was told that no effect for 2-3 weeks and only 60% until you've had the second. I think the information is aimed at those that will be thinking they are superhuman now and it was time to party.


----------



## JBGooner (22 Feb 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Almost all the words used in English language are foreign. From Texel, via Germany, France, Italy, Scandinavia.
> 
> Even I, a comp kid who didn't go to university knows what "inter alia" means and, on occasions, use it


----------



## Andy in Germany (22 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> (OT) Wrong war, Andy. The Bolsheviks were otherwise engaged in 1917-18.



I don't think anyone "won" that war: the best anyone can say about that one is that we didn't quite lose.


----------



## marinyork (22 Feb 2021)

midlife said:


> My redeployment to the vaccine hub tomorrow has been cancelled and I'm back doing my regular work. Not been told why but its either
> 
> 1. Run out of vaccine
> 2. Run out of people to vaccinate
> ...



Vaccine numbers for the weekend published. Quite poor unfortunately. It may be running out of vaccine.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (22 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Vaccine numbers for the weekend published. Quite poor unfortunately. It may be running out of vaccine.



I may well be wrong on this and if I am then my apologies. 

I thought on one of the TV briefings within the last 2 weeks or so that there was a predicted drop in vaccination rate due to reductions in the supply chain prior to rising again.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Vaccine numbers for the weekend published. Quite poor unfortunately. It may [because we] be running out of vaccine.


Agree with first part.
As I shared last month (maybe you missed it), I suspect there was a surge in the first half of February to get 'over the line' for the 15 Feb 'offer' target. With the corollary that supplies for the second half of February or so will mean the vaccination rate (per day) will be lower for a fortnight (and the Scottish supply info suggests that too). It will pick up again in March: Hancock has said that vaccine supply is assured, or some such words.


----------



## newts (22 Feb 2021)

I got a 'good boy' sticker today after my jab (mid 50's with asthma). 
Gp practice said supplies were arriving on time & they were ahead of planned age group schedule 👍


----------



## Beebo (23 Feb 2021)

I had the Astra Zeneca one yesterday. 
I now have a high temperature feeling achy and didn’t sleep last night. 
The flu vaccine never affects me but this one has knocked me sideways.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

Has anyone on this thread not had the vaccine or been booked in for later this week except the people who cannot have it? I think there are 1 or 2 on here who haven't.


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Feb 2021)

Some counties/CCGs have started the under 60s but the main February effort is going into the last (ie unjabbed) third of the over 65s and all the Group 6 - Adults aged 16 to 65 years in an at-risk group (with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality), and their carers. Those who received a Pfizer vaccine in the week starting 20 Dec are also being called in small numbers for their second jab, including one OTP, iirc.


----------



## fossyant (23 Feb 2021)

MrsF just has a rather sore arm. Was a bit knackered last night, so went to bed early.


----------



## jayonabike (23 Feb 2021)

Had the Pfizer jab a couple of hours ago (50 years old and have C.O.P.D
Bit of an aching arm but no more than when I have the flu jab each October
Feel like there is light at the end of the tunnel


----------



## Julia9054 (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Has anyone on this thread not had the vaccine or been booked in for later this week except the people who cannot have it? I think there are 1 or 2 on here who haven't.


I haven’t. I’m in group 9 and they haven’t started on those round here yet (has anywhere?)


----------



## mjr (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Has anyone on this thread not had the vaccine or been booked in for later this week except the people who cannot have it? I think there are 1 or 2 on here who haven't.


I haven't. I'm not in a priority group. I'm in the "to be thrown under the bus on 21 June" group under the current plans.


----------



## vickster (23 Feb 2021)

My SIL in her early 40s who has asthma has had her first jab.

Don't know anyone in their 50s without conditions who has yet heard. There are a lot of people in group 6

A couple of ex colleagues who are breast cancer survivors have also had their first jabs


----------



## Craig the cyclist (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I haven't. I'm not in a priority group. I'm in the "to be thrown under the bus on 21 June" group under the current plans.



You mean 'low risk' then?

When should you have had it?


----------



## Blue Hills (23 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> Don't know anyone in their 50s without conditions who has yet heard. There are a lot of people in group 6


Yes - I noticed that - it will really act as a big buffer to the lower ages.
I was somewhat shocked by the way by the number of folk in that "with conditions" group.
Don't know if that's a bigger percentage of the population in the UK than other places.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> Yes - I noticed that - it will really act as a big buffer to the lower ages.
> I was somewhat shocked by the way by the number of folk in that "with conditions" group.
> Don't know if that's a bigger percentage of the population in the UK than other places.



A buffer to slow the rate of vaccination down, or a buffer to stop death/hospitalisation/transmission?

Even taking UHCs out of it, the number of those to be theoretically vaccinated as carers and those on the severely mentally ill in group 6 is very large.


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I'm not in a priority group. I'm in the "to be thrown under the bus on 21 June" group


Except (in the under the bus metaphor) you will have have a he1met on, young person, which will save you from serious injury  - the bus will be travelling at less than 8mph. So its BSEN1078 standard should be relevant.
By then (21 June), unless you are under 45 (which the style of your posts doesn't suggest), you will have been 'offered' a vaccination, or already received one. If the take up is less than 90% in the next JCVI groups your jab date will be earlier still. And 37 million (2/3rds of the adult population) will have been vaccinated and another 4 million (under 45, unvaccinated, estimated) will have antibodies from having had C19 in the last 6 months.


----------



## johnblack (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I haven't. I'm not in a priority group. I'm in the "to be thrown under the bus on 21 June" group under the current plans.


You will still have the option not to go anywhere.


----------



## matticus (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I haven't. I'm not in a priority group. I'm in the "to be thrown under the bus on 21 June" group under the current plans.


Just stay away from the Grannies, you'll be fine.


----------



## lazybloke (23 Feb 2021)

Not expecting my Group 9 jabs for months yet, although I know a Group 9 friend (with NO underlying conditions) who had hers last week. She was mystified why it was so early, and had to check it wasn't a scam.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> You will still have the option not to go anywhere.



If the step 4 stuff comes along at the earliest possible date (and step 3 stuff), someone can choose not to attend those higher risk events. I won't be going in a nightclub on 21st June even on a date. That's fine to me. Many others may work in these sectors or work in other workplaces with masses of unvaccinated people and poor ventillation. There are way too many people a year on that bang on about cleaning venues and not enough focus on ventillation, length of time exposed, face coverings and actually staying 2 metres apart. It's understandable as so many diseases in human history are related to hygiene and handwashing and large parts of the population are wired in to worry about this, but it also means the public message isn't getting in a year in.


----------



## Blue Hills (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> A buffer to slow the rate of vaccination down, or a buffer to stop death/hospitalisation/transmission?


I didn't mean it in a critical way.
Or that it will slow the number of folks getting the vaccine.
Simply that there are an awful lot in that group (one of the largest I think), so a lot will need doing before folks further down the age range will get it. They may have thought that the jab was hurtling towards them faster than it will.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> I didn't mean it in a critical way.
> Or that it will slow the number of folks getting the vaccine.
> Simply that there are an awful lot in that group (one of the largest I think), so a lot will need doing before folks further down the age range will get it. They may have thought that the jab was hurtling towards them faster than it will.



I didn't think you meant it negatively at all. People in groups 8 and 9 may think the jab's hurtling towards them faster than it would otherwise, however outside of this board I've heard of quite a number of people in their 50s without UHC who've been offered jabs. It's more the mixed messaging/hints off politicians where the 'offered' has swung in a short space of time between end of March, End of April, back to mid-April and then for a while (which has stopped now) very bullish talk of offering all over 18s the vaccination by May/June. Group 6 was estimated to be 7.3 million people and with last week's UHCs it may be something like 9 million. Time has passed, so I think people are a bit more aware of how long this'll take. I think people appreciate that for many in group 6 a vaccination is a massive uplift in quality of life.


----------



## vickster (23 Feb 2021)

lazybloke said:


> Not expecting my Group 9 jabs for months yet, although I know a Group 9 friend (with NO underlying conditions) who had hers last week. She was mystified why it was so early, and had to check it wasn't a scam.


50+ by mid April so not months to wait (according to Beeb yesterday)
Covid: When will I get the vaccine? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55045639


----------



## mjr (23 Feb 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> You mean 'low risk' then?
> 
> When should you have had it?


I'm fine with having it after the more vulnerable people. I was just answering the question asked.

I do think it stinks that the current plan is to lift all restrictions before all workers have been vaccinated or even had the first part.



Ajax Bay said:


> Except (in the under the bus metaphor) you will have have a he1met on, young person, which will save you from serious injury


Good metaphor in one way: how much does a helmet stop your chest being crushed?



> - the bus will be travelling at less than 8mph. So its BSEN1078 standard should be relevant.


BSEN1078 is only relevant if it hit the top of my head square on!  At which point, the weight of the bus becomes rather more important than the impact from the speed it was dropped on me!



> By then (21 June), unless you are under 45 (which the style of your posts doesn't suggest), you will have been 'offered' a vaccination, or already received one.


Only the first part, if that. And then there's the rest of my household to protect, all under 45. Or am I meant to not care about them, the same way that all these 50+ politicians don't seem to care about us?



> If the take up is less than 90% in the next JCVI groups your jab date will be earlier still. And 37 million (2/3rds of the adult population) will have been vaccinated and another 4 million (under 45, unvaccinated, estimated) will have antibodies from having had C19 in the last 6 months.


As usual, those numbers seem optimistically high to me, both in assumed rate and assumed take-up. Are you taking the top of the confidence intervals again?

And then there's the implication that that level of vaccination might suffice to avoid negative consequences.



johnblack said:


> You will still have the option not to go anywhere.


Probably not easily if the restrictions on workplaces are also lifted, unless I fancy having no work. The "lock yourself up" approach doesn't work if the virus runs riot and it would still be a crap tactic in June.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Probably not easily if the restrictions on workplaces are also lifted, unless I fancy having no work. The "lock yourself up" approach doesn't work if the virus runs riot and it would still be a crap tactic in June.



It's hard making comparisons between countries as an Oxford study rated our 'lockdown' as the 2nd toughest in the developed world, but Israel has vaccinated twice the proportion of their country including many younger people (and way more with 2nd jabs) and if you adjust for the Israeli population vs UK population, their case rates are still stonkingly sky high but have fallen a lot. Israel's deaths per head of the population are lower currently and possibly around the number many here would regard as acceptable for opening stuff up - which they are doing.


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I haven't. I'm not in a priority group. I'm in the "to be thrown under the bus on 21 June" group under the current plans.


Stop in then!


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> Stop in then!



That works fine if you are the worker who looks after ferocious bears in a country park with several square miles, working outside and alone where no visitors want to visit.

In the real world though there aren't too many of those jobs.


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> That works fine if you are the worker who looks after ferocious bears in a country park with several square miles, working outside and alone where no visitors want to visit.
> 
> In the real world though there aren't too many of those jobs.


What you been doing for the last 11 months?
I've worked throughout and will carry on the same, both Son and Daughter also worked.


----------



## matticus (23 Feb 2021)

It's not for me to lecture other folks on how dangerous this-or-that virus or hazard is, or how much you should worry ...
but if you're NOT in a group that gets jabbed by June, then CV isn't high up your list of likely routes to the morgue. And you can do lots of things to mitigate it - assuming you don't have some nightmare job like hairdresser, or unregulated warehouse worker.
Home delivery food, avoiding cinema, pubs, planes, hand-washing, general distancing, yelling at people. Just those make a huge difference in improving your odds.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> What you been doing for the last 11 months?
> I've worked throughout and will carry on the same, both Son and Daughter also worked.



I've been working from home. Running around like crazy caring for CEVs as well.


----------



## johnblack (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Probably not easily if the restrictions on workplaces are also lifted, unless I fancy having no work. The "lock yourself up" approach doesn't work if the virus runs riot and it would still be a crap tactic in June.


At some point, we have to take some risks. The risk by June should be tolerable for a young healthy person. There will still be the virus, it's not going to go away, but we should be in a far better position than last summer, when it didn't run riot.

We have to accept the fact that there will still be infections and some deaths, but also that continued lockdown is not financially viable and will contribute to more death, terrible outcomes for kids and horrible mental health issues.


----------



## matticus (23 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> At some point, we have to take some risks. The risk by June should be tolerable for a young healthy person. There will still be the virus, it's not going to go away, but *we should be in a far better position than last summer, when it didn't run riot*.


That's a good point. During last July the chances of dying from CV were tiny (outside vulnerable groups). In summer 2021 the chances will be even lower. Speaking for myself, I'm simply not worried about it.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

matticus said:


> That's a good point. During last July the chances of dying from CV were tiny (outside vulnerable groups). In summer 2021 the chances will be even lower. Speaking for myself, I'm simply not worried about it.



In theory. The B117 Kentish strain is much more spreadable. If we didn't have the new variants I think the "lockdown" and vaccines would putting things in a great state. 

Also last summer, people didn't really do much. Many were so scared they didn't really do anything till August/early September and then after that the virus went whoosh. So people doing far more stuff, far earlier in 2021 may matter.


----------



## mjr (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> What you been doing for the last 11 months?
> I've worked throughout and will carry on the same, both Son and Daughter also worked.


I've been working, mostly from home but occasionally visiting places where the risk has been greatly reduced by the restrictions that workplaces have to comply with if they don't want to be shut down or fined by inspectors.



matticus said:


> [...] but if you're NOT in a group that gets jabbed by June, then CV isn't high up your list of likely routes to the morgue.


Maybe not, but is death all you care about? You don't care about long covid? You don't care about those who get PTSD from the experience? You don't even care about the added risk from increased number of mutations arising in all the unnecessary extra infections?



> And you can do lots of things to mitigate it - assuming you don't have some nightmare job like hairdresser, or unregulated warehouse worker.
> Home delivery food, avoiding cinema, pubs, planes, hand-washing, general distancing, yelling at people. Just those make a huge difference in improving your odds.


But they only improve your odds. "The only winning move is not to play." I resent the gov.uk plan to basically force me and many other under-50s to play covid roulette before we are allowed to make a huger difference in improving our odds by vaccination.


----------



## matticus (23 Feb 2021)

EDIT @marinyork : I think you're picking the bleakest, less likely options, and stirring them altogether. And adding in Boris not noticing, and failing to adapt plans.
That combo seems _extremely _unlikely to me. I'm better off worrying about my battery lights making it all the way home tonight.


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

I doubt those restrictions are going to be removed and suddenly everyone is forced to feel unsafe at work, people will just go off sick.

People can't change how they look at risk I know but C'mon you seem to be overreacting a bit.

Not judging you here but you don't come across as a very positive person at the best of times so I doubt you're ever going to feel completely safe.


----------



## matticus (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> You don't care about those who get PTSD from the experience?


oh chr1st, here we go. Debate by telepathy ...


----------



## mjr (23 Feb 2021)

johnblack said:


> At some point, we have to take some risks. The risk by June should be tolerable for a young healthy person.


Great for the young healthy person, but pretty shoot for me. I'm not that young any more and I've multiple chronic illnesses, which is why I describe myself as part of the group being thrown under the bus.



> There will still be the virus, it's not going to go away, but we should be in a far better position than last summer, when it didn't run riot.


Except that it was a less infectious, less deadly variant last summer and people were very cautious about restarting activities - until they weren't, and that plus schools let things really kick off again.



> We have to accept the fact that there will still be infections and some deaths,


30'000 more deaths, they said yesterday.



> but also that continued lockdown is not financially viable and will contribute to more death, terrible outcomes for kids and horrible mental health issues.


There is a space between "continued lockdown" and "remove all legal limits". It is false to pretend that we can only do one extreme or the other.

You know what will really be not financially viable, with terrible outcomes for kids and horrible mental health issues? A fourth wave and/or a vaccine-resistant variant arising from the unnecessarily high level of cases enabled by this plan.

Never mind suggestions that Boris is being controlled by Dom or Bill Gates's microchips: it sometimes looks like he's being controlled by some remnant of covid! Maybe it got into his brain and took over?


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> In the real world though there aren't too many of those jobs.



There's plenty of people out there working, I know no-one who works from home.

Stuck at home away from society breeds fear in my opinion, if you were out mixing since this lot kicked off you may be less fearful.

Personal health condition is an important consideration obviously and I would never suggest people with any health issues not to be cautious.


----------



## vickster (23 Feb 2021)

If the chronic health issues increase your risk, shouldn't you be discussing with Dr and getting moved into group 6 for vaccination (or even 4)? Group 6 covers a pretty wide range.

Personally I'd be more than happy for key workers to be vaccinated before me but it's not up to me  (there'll be plenty aged 50+ or with health conditions who will...but they do need to actually go get it)


----------



## mjr (23 Feb 2021)

matticus said:


> oh chr1st, here we go. Debate by telepathy ...


Or you could just answer the questions... and if you do care, maybe the obvious follow-up question of how you reconcile unnecessary cases with that.


----------



## mjr (23 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> If the chronic health issues increase your risk, shouldn't you be discussing with Dr and getting moved into group 6 for vaccination (or even 4)? Group 6 covers a pretty wide range.


I've discussed it. My understanding is that my asthma is too mild, two of my illnesses are currently thought to be irrelevant and another not a mortality-increaser — but this is an evolving topic, as you know.



> Personally I'd be more than happy for key workers to be vaccinated before me but it's not up to me  (there'll be plenty aged 50+ or with health conditions who will...but they do need to actually go get it)


Yes, I think that the vaccine priority group ordering broadly makes sense. It's the lifting all restrictions totally before vaccines are offered to all which seems wrong to me. It's not up to me, but I feel I must speak out against the stupidity and injustice of this plan.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

matticus said:


> EDIT @marinyork : I think you're picking the bleakest, less likely options, and stirring them altogether. And adding in Boris not noticing, and failing to adapt plans.
> That combo seems _extremely _unlikely to me. I'm better off worrying about my battery lights making it all the way home tonight.



Like many people and some of the scientists, once we safely (for want of a better word) get past the first bit of the summer, I'm actually pretty optimistic, if the NHS does these spectacular figures they were voicing in recent weeks of up to 7 million jabs a week. This has come up in conversation in real life where people have been er, yer wott, so you're saying that we'll likely be wearing masks and distancing in september but you don't think there'll be that many people dying and not many people in hospital? Yes. People find this crazy. For me it's getting thing as low as possible, as good as possible going into the summer.

I'm intensely relaxed about many things outdoors in small groups with basic precautions. I'm actually quite relaxed about some of the workplaces where they've made a big effort, it's just there is too much variation and the HSE haven't taken a single piece of action from thousands of inspections where people may have been naughty boys.

I think some of the bits in steps 3 and 4 are spot on and other bits are misguided and may well be delayed. I would have sent Primary schools back sooner, secondary schools a bit later and colleges after that. I think Boris will notice on some of the superlarge events and some of them will get delayed.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> I doubt those restrictions are going to be removed and suddenly everyone is forced to feel unsafe at work, people will just go off sick.
> 
> People can't change how they look at risk I know but C'mon you seem to be overreacting a bit.
> 
> Not judging you here but you don't come across as a very positive person at the best of times so I doubt you're ever going to feel completely safe.



It's perspective. Millenials tend to pick up very fast on people climbing up ladders and then pulling them up. Covid vaccines is just another in a long list of things where this has happened, so why should anyone be surprised that we wouldn't pick up on that? Remember, until not that long ago the government had no plans to vaccinate anyone who isn't a UHC under 50.

Other things that change my perceptions are I remember swine flu well and how people behaved there (similar to now but covid is much worse). I had a post-viral infection in the past in some ways very similar to long covid. I have to do a lot of caring duties for two CEVs. If I still worked in pharmacy and had been coughed on all winter as is routine, my perception of covid would be different, as I've said before. As more or less one of my ex-colleagues said to me recently. The isolation has not been there by choice for many. Similarly for those of my friends that have young children and working from home, I would probably feel differently in their circumstances.

For me, a vaccine makes many situations a tolerable risk. It makes covid-19 a 10x less hazardous disease. Still nasty, but livable with.

How I see risk will change over the summer when I get vaccinated, that's the point!

P.S. were I 18, I'd be volunteering for the challenge trials.


----------



## newts (23 Feb 2021)

Beebo said:


> I had the Astra Zeneca one yesterday.
> I now have a high temperature feeling achy and didn’t sleep last night.
> The flu vaccine never affects me but this one has knocked me sideways.


I would echo these symptoms for the AZ vaccine😷


----------



## vickster (23 Feb 2021)

I heard that the side effects can be worse if have already had Covid 
(From a friend of mine doing lots of volunteering at vaccine centres)


----------



## lane (23 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> I haven’t. I’m in group 9 and they haven’t started on those round here yet (has anywhere?)



There seem to be a lot of people on here with Asthma being included in group 6, me included.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> There's plenty of people out there working, I know no-one who works from home.
> 
> Stuck at home away from society breeds fear in my opinion, if you were out mixing since this lot kicked off you may be less fearful.



I kind of answered this one.

I only know one person well who goes to work 5 days a week currently. I'm acquainted with a few others. Many I know are unemployed or WFH. My friend that goes in 5 days a week loves that and recognises he'd go mad if he didn't. In January and February it's been noticeable his mood and thoughts ebb and flow on it. He doesn't worry about the virus but as the workplace emptied frustrations crept in about uneven workloads and seemed to almost worry about the virus a bit and preoccupied with people returning.

If we'd only ever had a few weeks of "lockdown" in wave 1 and that'd been it, it would still have not been great, but a year on it's really cemented in a lot of problems for people. My work is WFH, my voluntary activities have all gone up in smoke with "lockdown 3" and friends I see little of them for various reasons - busy, depressed and hibernating, or just fallen out of contact. "Lockdown 3" has been the worst for a lot of young/single/house sharers/precarious circumstances. As I hinted at in another post, for many last summer it took many some considerable time to adjust to things - around August. This winter's been worse. People are very wary of even going for a walk in 2s for fear of the virus, or guilt, or not up to it, or too busy. It's not good, but it's society is separated from everyone else.


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I've discussed it. My understanding is that my asthma is too mild, two of my illnesses are currently thought to be irrelevant and another not a mortality-increaser — but this is an evolving topic, as you know.
> 
> 
> Yes, I think that the vaccine priority group ordering broadly makes sense. It's the lifting all restrictions totally before vaccines are offered to all which seems wrong to me. It's not up to me, but I feel I must speak out against the stupidity and injustice of this plan.


In your opinion, which is fine.

My opinion differs, I stand by my previous comments.

Keep doing what you feel necessary to stay safe by all means but just because you're frightened to death of this disease doesn't mean the decisions are wrong.

This isn't some young carefree young sprog speaking either, I'm 56 this year.


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> I kind of answered this one.
> 
> I only know one person well who goes to work 5 days a week currently. I'm acquainted with a few others. Many I know are unemployed or WFH. My friend that goes in 5 days a week loves that and recognises he'd go mad if he didn't. In January and February it's been noticeable his mood and thoughts ebb and flow on it. He doesn't worry about the virus but as the workplace emptied frustrations crept in about uneven workloads and seemed to almost worry about the virus a bit and preoccupied with people returning.
> 
> If we'd only ever had a few weeks of "lockdown" in wave 1 and that'd been it, it would still have not been great, but a year on it's really cemented in a lot of problems for people. My work is WFH, my voluntary activities have all gone up in smoke with "lockdown 3" and friends I see little of them for various reasons - busy, depressed and hibernating, or just fallen out of contact. "Lockdown 3" has been the worst for a lot of young/single/house sharers/precarious circumstances. As I hinted at in another post, for many last summer it took many some considerable time to adjust to things - around August. This winter's been worse. People are very wary of even going for a walk in 2s for fear of the virus, or guilt, or not up to it, or too busy. It's not good, but it's society is separated from everyone else.


Again, totally different to me and people I know.

For everyone with an opinion like the above one there is probably one exactly the opposite, it just appears most posters on here are similar.

No right or wrong.


----------



## classic33 (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> In your opinion, which is fine.
> 
> My opinion differs, I stand by my previous comments.
> 
> ...


My opinion differs from yours, with three conditions that have the ability to do more damage than this virus could muster. The last 343 days have been an inconvenience, nothing more, for me.

What I'll not do is mock the fears that someone else has about this last few months, even if I've disagreed with some of what they've said.

An unfortunate situation with regards to medications, means that I'll not be on the receiving end of a needle.


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> My opinion differs from yours, with three conditions that have the ability to do more damage than this virus could muster. The last 343 days have been an inconvenience, nothing more, for me.
> 
> What I'll not do is mock the fears that someone else has about this last few months, even if I've disagreed with some of what they've said.
> 
> An unfortunate situation with regards to medications, means that I'll not be on the receiving end of a needle.


Thank you for your opinion.
I don't think I'm mocking anyone by saying they're frightened of the disease though if they are and this person clearly is.


----------



## classic33 (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> Again, totally different to me and people I know.
> 
> For everyone with an opinion like the above one there is probably one exactly the opposite, it just appears most posters on here are similar.
> 
> No right or wrong.


There's no right or wrong, because of the variations amongst any given group of folk on this.


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

I assume you're agreeing with me?


----------



## classic33 (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> I assume you're agreeing with me?


You assume wrongly.


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> You assume wrongly.


Sorry, 

I said there's no right or wrong and then you said it?


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Group 6 was estimated to be 7.3 million people and with last week's UHCs it may be something like 9 million.


I think it was suggested that the additional element to be added into Gp 6 was estimated to be 825k, as the rest were already in higher groups so already vaccinated.
I have been trying to see if the number in Group 6 has been shared authoritatively, but without much success.
If anyone has a decent link, please share.
Best I could do is this paper: 'UK prevalence of underlying conditions which increase the risk of severe COVID-19'
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.24.20179192v1
8M has separately been suggested, but I think that a proportion of that 8M (includes unpaid carers) have already been included in earlier cohorts. My calculation suggests 4M in (JCVI 30 Dec) Gp 6* and add 825k (as above).

*32M is a widely shared figure for the total of Gps 1-9 (but add 825k (as above)).
14M in Gps 1-4. 
11M in Gps 7-9 (aged 50-64) ONS stats give 13M but maybe 2M of those ages will have been vaccinated in higher groups because of morbidity (Gps 4 and 6), NHS and other heath and care workers.
Leaves 7M Gps 5-6.
3M in Gp 5 (65-69) - 3.4M (less maybe 400k in Gp 4).


----------



## lane (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> I haven't. I'm not in a priority group. I'm in the "to be thrown under the bus on 21 June" group under the current plans.



I think it is quite unlikely that the lifting of all restrictions on the 21st June will happen so you may have nothing to worry about. What predictions has Boris made about the medium term have have proved correct? I can't think of any off hand. These dates are primarily aimed at keeping his backbenches on board for a while longer.


----------



## matticus (23 Feb 2021)

_Debate by telepathy ... _



mjr said:


> Or you could just answer the questions... and if you do care, maybe the obvious follow-up question of how you reconcile unnecessary cases with that.


... and right on its heels, debate by cross-examination.
"YES OR NO, YOU MUST ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!! AND PROVIDE EVIDENCE "

I wasn't sure if I cared about death, sickness, PTSD, mental health of other people ... but then I came to CycleChat and was soon told that I don't.
Phew! Big weight off my mind - I can now debate without worrying about troubling issues like morality.👍


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> Again, totally different to me and people I know.
> 
> For everyone with an opinion like the above one there is probably one exactly the opposite, it just appears most posters on here are similar.
> 
> No right or wrong.



On NACA there are certainly many WFH, there's no doubt about that. There are people that have to go to work, otherwise everything would have ground to a halt. Some of those people have had to take a lot of risks, or paid for it. There are people who have WFH and been to work for stints before being sent home again, I'm not one of them.

It depends what you mean by worry. During and after the first wave I did work out that I worry about it a lot more than other people, maybe more than 90% of people and initially I thought I was in the top quarter. On the other hand I was fairly open to socialising in as safe and limited way as possible last summer because I realised a second wave would very likely come from September onwards (we were told this in Jan/Feb). I really would be doing very poorly had I not. I do know of two people in their 20s/early 30s who have literally locked themselves away for a year.

My friend says things like scared to death, frightened and fear of the virus, so I'm quite used to people saying that. The thing that he gets a bit funny about is that he almost talks as if I wish this state of affairs. Um, no. I would love to go back to the office and various things restart. I think quite a few on here would say well if it was safe I'd like to go back to the office one or two days a week. It seems very all or nothing with employers though. I suspect it's that that worries quite a few.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> Again, totally different to me and people I know.



I'm not just interested in the work side of things.

You are also saying that people you know are having fairly normal levels of socialisation in person (pubs and many venues are closed and I'm not suggesting anyone is breaking rules)?


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

Interesting article on a number of levels (apologies to non-Guardian readers) about vaccine disparities and ideas to remedy things.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...to-door-covid-jabs-tackle-vaccine-disparities


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> I think it is quite unlikely that the lifting of all restrictions on the 21st June will happen so you may have nothing to worry about. What predictions has Boris made about the medium term have have proved correct? I can't think of any off hand. These dates are primarily aimed at keeping his backbenches on board for a while longer.



You might well be right that there won't be weddings with 400 people indoors. However the 17th May has 10,000 seated people or 25% capacity whichever is larger for large outdoor venues as well as 1,000 indoor sport or half capacity.


----------



## mjr (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> [...] but just because you're frightened to death of this disease doesn't mean the decisions are wrong.


When you have to start making shoot up about the person you're replying to, you've lost the argument.



> This isn't some young carefree young sprog speaking either, I'm 56 this year.


To be offered vaccination before the lifting, in other words.


----------



## lane (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> You might well be right that there won't be weddings with 400 people indoors. However the 17th May has 10,000 seated people or 25% capacity whichever is larger for large outdoor venues as well as 1,000 indoor sport or half capacity.



If it happens. No guarantee let's wait and see. Especially what happens after 8th March when schools go back. If that doesn't work out so well may push the other dates back.


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> When you have to start making shoot up about the person you're replying to, you've lost the argument.
> 
> 
> To be offered vaccination before the lifting, in other words.


You are feeling sorry for yourself, it's not an argument to be won or lost it's my opinion compared to yours and the reason I think you've got that opinion.


----------



## classic33 (23 Feb 2021)

Isn't the situation bad enough, without having to resort to personal insults!


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> You are feeling sorry for yourself, it's not an argument to be won or lost it's my opinion compared to yours and the reason I think you've got that opinion.



Why is nearly everything an opinion and not experience or in some cases facts?


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Why is nearly everything an opinion and not experience or in some cases facts?


The fella is saying in his opinion he's being 'thrown under the bus ' and the decision is wrong to ease restrictions until everyone is vaccinated, isn't that HIS opinion?

It isn't fact is it?


----------



## shep (23 Feb 2021)

classic33 said:


> Isn't the situation bad enough, without having to resort to personal insults!


I'm sorry but saying 'I'm not in a priority group I'm in the thrown under the bus group ' cries out as a bit of self pity in my book.

If someone said that in a pub during a conversation what would your response be?

Sorry, I'm not used to this sort of overreacting.


----------



## classic33 (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> I'm sorry but saying 'I'm not in a priority group I'm in the thrown under the bus group ' cries out as a bit of self pity in my book.
> 
> If someone said that in a pub during a conversation what would your response be?
> 
> Sorry, I'm not used to this sort of overreacting.


As I've said, I've three conditions that could kill me quicker, than this. It's a minor irritation for me.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> The fella is saying in his opinion he's being 'thrown under the bus ' and the decision is wrong to ease restrictions until everyone is vaccinated, isn't that HIS opinion?
> 
> It isn't fact is it?



Being thrown under the bus is his opinion. However someone in groups 1-9 being offered the vaccine before mjr is by plan is a fact. Whether that happens is pretty likely to happen based on evidence. Being thrown under the bus is an opinion and way of describing it, but the vaccine's a pretty big issue. In other countries waiting for the vaccines is killing large numbers of people. It's not like saying I've been thrown under the bus as the supermarket didn't stock enough TV magazines and they sold out. There are other big things at the moment, people dying of cancer and other diseases not able to access treatment fully, people who've lost businesses, relationships, their jobs, perhaps everything. 

We can't vaccinate everyone before restrictions are eased, as we cannot vaccinate those under 18 on the timescales discussed. It's his opinion on what is reasonable. Some people have factored in people who've already had the virus and themselves being in the vaccinated group that that's all right. For others, the mutations, the B117 strain and that covid spreading via particular routes means that we should go more cautiously.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> I'm sorry but saying 'I'm not in a priority group I'm in the thrown under the bus group ' cries out as a bit of self pity in my book.
> 
> If someone said that in a pub during a conversation what would your response be?
> 
> Sorry, I'm not used to this sort of overreacting.



I'd agree with someone that if they were 45-49 years old that sucks as they have a very similar risk level on the metrics to someone 50-54 years old who is getting vaccinated before things are planned to really start to open up.

The vaccine is great. Having a third of adults having had one vaccination is great, it protects people indirectly, everyone understands that. When it comes down to direct more personal protection if you haven't had it it's a big deal, but also not all groups are equal. If you are under 50 and most/all of the people you interact with are under 50 then most/all of them may not have been vaccinated. The massive benefits of vaccination for your local group of people doesn't exist. The virus just belts around indifferent. It's certainly the case for me that most of the people I'd interact with will not be vaccinated for a long time. So mjr and others may not only not have personal protection, but they don't have that local group protection either. Someone over 50 more typically would have the personal protection, some/a lot of local group protection and protection through the population of cases having been limited. If you cannot be vaccinated the local group and population protection is a very big deal too. It's not like we've randomly vaccinated people and we all interact with 2000 people on a regular basis and so we all get an equal chance of protection in our local groups.


----------



## mjr (23 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> We can't vaccinate everyone before restrictions are eased, as we cannot vaccinate those under 18 on the timescales discussed.


So the conclusion is the timescale for lifting all restrictions is obviously wrong. There is no good reason to do it. Just lift them enough to get the economy running again. This lifting all restrictions prematurely step just seems to be another sop from Boris to his core base, like the Christmas covid-spreading craziness which killed so many and put us into this long, damaging lockdown.

And it ain't just me. There are millions of us in the bus group.


----------



## marinyork (23 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> So the conclusion is the timescale for lifting all restrictions is obviously wrong. There is no good reason to do it. Just lift them enough to get the economy running again. This lifting all restrictions prematurely step just seems to be another sop from Boris to his core base, like the Christmas covid-spreading craziness which killed so many and put us into this long, damaging lockdown.
> 
> And it ain't just me. There are millions of us in the bus group.



I think Farrar, Edmunds and others are right we need to get the virus down to very low levels. You do that and it gives you more options later, including some of the options other people might be keener on than us. It let's you do backward tracing, which I wish we'd do in this country.

The politicians have dodged one aspect. They've not been clear, perhaps for political reasons when they expect to vaccinate 14-17 year olds or younger. However, they could actually vaccinate 16 and 17 year olds by saving Pfizer supply for that age group. It'd be a very messy decision, but one that would be in the best interests of the country, even though it sucks if you're 14 or 15.

Tens of millions of us. I think some people just don't get that if you're under 50 (not even got that far yet) the virus, especially B117, will just spread like wildfire in the other half/two thirds of the population (depending on dates) with barely any difference if you open everything up, as the top third of the population in particular includes many that don't interact as much with the other two thirds and sadly certainly haven't the last year. Israel's vaccinated about 50% of the population and the actual recorded case rates are way higher than here!


----------



## Chislenko (24 Feb 2021)

Sorry haven't read all 177 pages but vac numbers seem low at the moment, are we having supply issues, nobody saying much on the news just giving the daily number.


----------



## marinyork (24 Feb 2021)

Chislenko said:


> Sorry haven't read all 177 pages but vac numbers seem low at the moment, are we having supply issues, nobody saying much on the news just giving the daily number.



Matt Hancock made some comments yesterday, said it would be a slow week but that 'bumper' weeks in March would make up for it.


----------



## shep (24 Feb 2021)

I don't even know when my age group will be done but I'll be out the first opportunity in April jab or not, I won't be relying on a vaccination.


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> The politicians have . . . not been clear, perhaps for political reasons when they expect to vaccinate 14-17 year olds or younger. However, they could actually vaccinate 16 and 17 year olds by saving Pfizer supply for that age group. It'd be a very messy decision, but one that would be in the best interests of the country, even though it sucks if you're 14 or 15.
> 
> Tens of millions of us. I think some people just don't get that if you're under 50 (not even got that far yet) the virus, especially B117, will just spread like wildfire in the other half/two thirds of the population (depending on dates) with barely any difference if you open everything up, as the top third of the population in particular includes many that don't interact as much with the other two thirds and sadly certainly haven't the last year.


1) By the time the programme gets to the extremely low risk 16 and 17 year olds (maybe in August before start of term in September) the Oxford-AZ age 5-18 trial will have delivered results. The reason why that vaccine is not authorised for under 18s is that the clinical trial (Jul-Oct) population did not include under 18s, by design, so there's no trial evidence of efficacy or safety. Provided the trial started last week gives positive satisfactory results, the doses will be there when their turn comes. This assumes the precedence is going to match roughly vulnerability with age as the easy metric and that the vaccination rate averages 400k per day (well below this last week, as expected/predicted).

2) "Tens of millions". We can expect JCVI Groups 1-9 (9 is '50-54s') (total = 32M) all to have received their first dose by end April (I think rather sooner, but it matters not). Nearly all (?85%) of the doses will then be used for second jabs till about 21 Jun. Another 4M first doses will have been given by then (to under 50s, maybe targeting particular ethnic, deprived or employment groups (currently unknown) who are judged relatively more vulnerable. So if things go to plan *over half the population will have been vaccinated by 21 Jun* (with about 25M laso having had their second dose). And for the next 40 days nearly all the doses go back to first doses so roughly 15M more 18-50s vaccinated (total = 51M). The total UK adult (over 18) population is 53M.

Maybe the JCVI, having set its list by vulnerability for the first phase (NB half the population over age 3) will set the next priorities to focus on the 'interacting' cohort responsible per capita for most of the transmission (is that the 18-30s? or might that be employment based?).


----------



## marinyork (24 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> I don't even know when my age group will be done but I'll be out the first opportunity in April jab or not, I won't be relying on a vaccination.



You'll likely get vaccinated 2nd to 4th week of March.


----------



## marinyork (24 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Maybe the JCVI, having set its list by vulnerability for the first phase (NB half the population over age 3) will set the next priorities to focus on the 'interacting' cohort responsible per capita for most of the transmission (is that the 18-30s? or might that be employment based?).



You have said this already, but the leaked reports last week said they'll just keep on going down in age order.

Things are opening up in April, not June!


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Feb 2021)

Chislenko said:


> vac numbers seem low at the moment, are we having supply issues


 See the Scottish supply graph: https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/page-152#post-6311862
We can assume the other nations' supply profile mirrors it (and the Scottish Health Sec said almost exactly that today: it's an 'all UK' thing).


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> the leaked reports last week said they'll just keep on going down in age order.


The JCVI will set out who they believe should be next in line for Covid-19 jabs in a few weeks time.
Asked who would be next to be vaccinated after the top nine priority groups, JCVI member Professor Adam Finn (University of Bristol’s School of Clinical Sciences), told BBC Breakfast (9 Feb):
“That discussion is ongoing at the moment and of course it goes beyond just medicine and public health as to who society values most and who they think are most important.
“In terms of the JCVI, we’re very focused on the evidence of who’s at the highest risk and at the moment the outstanding factors predicting that is still age.
“And of course you need a system that you can operationalise, so you can identify the people and quickly get the vaccine to them. So I can’t give you an answer to exactly how that will look.
“But over the coming few weeks we’re making those plans and I think they will have to be an announced by the end of February or early March so that we know what we’re doing next.”
I'd be amazed if there wasn't some special pleading, and indeed would support it in the second phase. The 99% most vulnerable will have been vaccinated in the first phase (by April). The differences in vulnerability to serious illness in the various elements of the under 50 cohort are very small, so these decisions will move into the politico-economic realm, unless the JCVI play the 'prone to transmission' card. Or maybe there will be merit in targeting the programme geographically, in particular constituencies which have higher than average daily case rate or test positivity %.


----------



## mjr (24 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> I don't even know when my age group will be done but I'll be out the first opportunity in April jab or not, I won't be relying on a vaccination.


It is easy to be brave when you will probably have been offered vaccination by then.


----------



## classic33 (24 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Has anyone on this thread not had the vaccine or been booked in for later this week except the people who cannot have it? I think there are 1 or 2 on here who haven't.


I'd have been there in half an hours time, 11:40 today, but unable to have the jab. Someone else got the spot instead.


----------



## PaulSB (24 Feb 2021)

I think this is an interesting article highlighting the varying uptake of vaccines. I agree this is a potentially serious issue with some similarities to the probable vaccination problems in poorer countries.

At present I'm unlikely to visit a country where the vaccine programme hasn't been rolled out effectively. It would be a terrible situation if people began to avoid areas of our towns and cities through a perceived threat from low vaccination levels.

Guardian


----------



## lane (24 Feb 2021)

I saw an article by a scientist yesterday that said the maximum R rate for covid in the UK is now 2 (down form the natural rate of 3) due the level of vaccinations and people already infected. Presumably the max R will be even lower in April and lower again in June, so any increase in cases will be slower than we have seen in the two peaks so far. 

I can understand the feeling of being thrown under a bus. As someone who had to go back to work in September, in not the most covid secure environment by any means, I was concerned by discussion of returning to normal by Easter before I got my jab. However as it turned out we didn't return to normal, we went back into lockdown and I went back to working form home. I also got my jab much earlier than expected. 

To me talk of dates and returning to normal is just that - it has been said many times before and didn't happen.


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> I don't even know when my age group will be done but I'll be out the first opportunity in April, jab or not, I won't be relying on a vaccination.





mjr said:


> It is easy to be brave


@shep won't need to be brave. He'll judges the risk to be low, and he's right. Low for him, and low for his mum (under 60 (say) and low for his aged, vaccinated grandad. You don't need to be brave either, @mjr, just have a reasonable approach to risk - of course you may have other morbidities which will inform the risk to you personally - and avoid any buses.
@shep may want to consider prudence as to the type of social contact when he's "out in April" as there is a risk of increased transmission. But those infected are at minimal risk (under 60 or vaccinated) in the overall scheme of things. The NHS will not be crammed with C19 patients (<10%) and will have more resources to treat all the other serious diseases and illness (>90%) and hopefully rebalancing and staff taking the leave owed to them.
The number of C19 cases in mid April will result in few serious illness and very few tragic deaths. As a percentage of deaths in late April in UK it's likely that weekly deaths with C19 as the underlying cause of death will be less than half of 1% of all deaths each week, comparable with the number of deaths from road traffic incidents (averaged 37 per week in 2019) and about a third the number of weekly suicides (averaged over 130 per week in 2018).
As @marinyork says:


marinyork said:


> There are other big things at the moment, people dying of cancer and other diseases not able to access treatment fully, people who've lost businesses, relationships, their jobs, perhaps everything.


----------



## shep (24 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> It is easy to be brave when you will probably have been offered vaccination by then.


I was out last year at every opportunity when there was no vaccine and cared not one jot, bravery has nothing to do with it.

People are different and that's fine, how old are you?


----------



## shep (24 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @shep won't need to be brave. He'll judges the risk to be low, and he's right. Low for him, and low for his mum (under 60 (say) and low for his aged, vaccinated grandad. You don't need to be brave either, @mjr, just have a reasonable approach to risk - of course you may have other morbidities which will inform the risk to you personally - and avoid any buses.
> @shep may want to consider prudence as to the type of social contact when he's "out in April" as there is a risk of increased transmission. But those infected are at minimal risk (under 60 or vaccinated) in the overall scheme of things. The NHS will not be crammed with C19 patients (<10%) and will have more resources to treat all the other serious diseases and illness (>90%) and hopefully rebalancing and staff taking the leave owed to them.
> The number of C19 cases in mid April will result in few serious illness and very few tragic deaths. As a percentage of deaths in late April in UK it's likely that weekly deaths with C19 as the underlying cause of death will be less than half of 1% of all deaths each week, comparable with the number of deaths from road traffic incidents (averaged 37 per week in 2019).
> As @marinyork says:


Got no Parents or Grandparents so won't be worried about them unfortunately and I see the risk as low as I genuinely feel it won't kill me.

Can't help how I look at risk but it's how I am and in my opinion it's a calculated risk I'm happy to take. 

I've been mixing through either work or family throughout in which time the Son had it with next to no symptoms and his girlfriend who was a bit 'fluey 'for a while.


----------



## Archie_tect (24 Feb 2021)

Shep, I genuinely don't know if you are a real person or an internet character you've made up.


----------



## MrGrumpy (24 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> I've been mixing through either work or family throughout in which time the Son had it with next to no symptoms and his girlfriend who was a bit 'fluey 'for a while.



Excellent so you have been doing your bit to spread it....


----------



## MrGrumpy (24 Feb 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> Shep, I genuinely don't know if you are a real person or an internet character you've made up.


Took my words out of mouth as well, I do wonder if this person is just at the wind up lol . It sure does come across as that.


----------



## shep (24 Feb 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> Shep, I genuinely don't know if you are a real person or an internet character you've made up.


Why, what have I said that's so shocking?


----------



## shep (24 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Excellent so you have been doing your bit to spread it....


I have to go to work and my Son and his Girlfriend live with us, we don't all have jobs we can do from home you know.


----------



## Archie_tect (24 Feb 2021)

Ah no, not playing that game!


----------



## shep (24 Feb 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> Ah no, not playing that game!


I'm lost?
You don't think I work or have a Son and Daughter at home?

I've shared my occupation previously, with some photos as it happens, I don't think you need proof of offspring but I have some. 🤷‍♂️


----------



## shep (24 Feb 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> Shep, I genuinely don't know if you are a real person or an internet character you've made up.


Just a rough arsed rigger from the Midlands who says it as he sees it, didn't think I'd offended anyone, sorry.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (24 Feb 2021)

*Mod note:*

Now, come on fellow Cycle Chatters let's not descend into personal digs/accusations/counter retorts etc - please!

I've just been singing the praises of these (excellent imo) Covid threads over in Chat.

Many thanks.


----------



## lane (24 Feb 2021)

People have a different approach to risk for various reasons. I have no doubt that for many being at work each day and having kids at home who go to school each day, will have changed their view of things versus people working from home for a year. Being back at work in September did somewhat change my approach to risk and looking back I would say I was too risk adverse over the summer when the prevalence of the disease was incredibly low.


----------



## Bazzer (24 Feb 2021)

As the other thread has been locked, thanks @Archie_tect for the heads up regarding booking for the over 60s.


----------



## shep (24 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> *Mod note:*
> 
> Now, come on fellow Cycle Chatters let's not descend into personal digs/accusations/counter retorts etc - please!
> 
> ...


I'm not offended


----------



## Oldhippy (24 Feb 2021)

Best news of the days for those of with siblings or family with profound and multiple learning disabilities is that thanks to the great Jo Whiley from Radio 2 the government will finally recognise that the LD community are real people who matter as well and have largely been ignored throughout this virus.


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Feb 2021)

All people on the learning disability register should now be prioritised for a Covid vaccine, JCVI has advised the government.
This means 150,000 more people at higher risk being offered a jab more quickly in England.
Now everyone on the GP learning disability register will be invited for vaccination as part of priority group six, Public Health England has confirmed, regardless of how severe their disability is.
And the NHS is being asked to work with local authorities to identify other adults in the community who are severely affected by a learning disability and who may not be registered, but should be offered a vaccine.
It comes after an analysis found that people registered with their GP as having a learning disability, who tend to be those at the more severe end, are more at risk of being seriously ill and dying from Covid.
There are 1.2 million people with a learning disability in England - but only a quarter to a third of them are thought to be on the GP learning disability register.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56181154


----------



## Oldhippy (24 Feb 2021)

About time. I know others on here have family and siblings with LD and can vouch for the uphill struggle it can be to get the most basic wants and needs met if you have a learning disability.


----------



## mjr (24 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I've just been singing the praises of these (excellent imo) Covid threads over in Chat.


Ah, so that's what caused it(!) Is there a Covid equivalent of the P fairy?


----------



## Archie_tect (24 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> *Mod note:*
> 
> Now, come on fellow Cycle Chatters let's not descend into personal digs/accusations/counter retorts etc - please!
> 
> ...


Thanks Spokey... hadn't appreciated how difficult making a public service announcement would be!

The vaccination programme is fantastic- heartfelt thanks to all the volunteers and medical staff.


----------



## mjr (24 Feb 2021)

shep said:


> I was out last year at every opportunity when there was no vaccine and cared not one jot, bravery has nothing to do with it.
> 
> People are different and that's fine, how old are you?


I was out last year when we could lawfully, but I did take care. If you didn't, I'd say that was brave or foolhardy.

I'm fortysomething.



Ajax Bay said:


> @shep won't need to be brave. He'll judges the risk to be low, and he's right. Low for him, and low for his mum (under 60 (say) and low for his aged, vaccinated grandad.


Of course their risk will probably be low: they'll all have been farking vaccinated! 



> You don't need to be brave either, @mjr, just have a reasonable approach to risk - of course you may have other morbidities which will inform the risk to you personally - and avoid any buses.


I think my approach to risk is reasonable, but OK, then: how much have you studied risk? Are you well up on your micromorts and QALYs? What's your track record of past posts correctly identifying the risks which were mishandled and caused many deaths?

And how are you able to judge with absolute certainty the risk levels four months ahead? For example, four months ago was before we knew how serious B.1.1.7 was and I don't recall you warning us about today's risk levels back then, or even January's.



> The number of C19 cases in mid April will result in few serious illness and very few tragic deaths. As a percentage of deaths in late April in UK it's likely that weekly deaths with C19 as the underlying cause of death will be less than half of 1% of all deaths each week, comparable with the number of deaths from road traffic incidents (averaged 37 per week in 2019) and about a third the number of weekly suicides (averaged over 130 per week in 2018).


Firstly, that's far from certain, and secondly, deaths are not the only potential damage of this.



shep said:


> Just a rough arsed rigger from the Midlands who says it as he sees it, didn't think I'd offended anyone, sorry.


No worries from me (a mechanic's son from the East Midlands, meduck) but you must know that Midlanders are basically blunt Northerners cursed with soft Southern accents, which can look rather intimidating when written down, and we don't want to scare off our less Midland compatriots (or any other people who speak something resembling our English) from here, so let's leave out the personal attacks!


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> Of course their risk will probably be low: they'll all have been farking vaccinated!
> I think my approach to risk is reasonable, but OK, then: how much have you studied risk? Are you well up on your micromorts and QALYs? What's your track record of past posts correctly identifying the risks which were mishandled and caused many deaths?
> And how are you able to judge with absolute certainty the risk levels four months ahead? For example, four months ago was before we knew how serious B.1.1.7 was and I don't recall you warning us about today's risk levels back then, or even January's.


1) As we have heard, the risk to @shep 's antecedents are nil (and they haven't been vaccinated).
2) I'm sure your approach to risk is reasonable - as I said "You don't need to be brave either, @mjr, just have a reasonable approach to risk".
3) I doubt discussion of my, your or other people's depth of knowledge of risk will add value, but what I am sure about is, that it would bore them. Always keen to hear about your risk explorations, of course.
4) Feel free to offer an opinion on the track record of my past posts on vaccines, ideally with an egregious example or two.
5) "how are you able to judge with absolute certainty the risk levels four months ahead?" I made predictions for late April (only 2 months ahead btw) which are based on current data, previous experience and a minimum of maths. Can one ever be "absolutely certain" about risk? I asserted the risk to @shep was low and sought to give context. I said "The number of C19 cases in mid April will result in few serious illnesses and very few tragic deaths." In the 4 months Nov-Feb the average number of patients with C19 in a UK hospital was circa 20k (~15% of beds). In late April I reckon the number will be less than 5000, with "absolute certainty". Last summer for a month it was below 1000.
Edit: 6) Last year I wasn't sharing any warnings about risk on here so unsurprised you cannot recall anything: nothing to recall. I alert you to the fact that this is the 'vaccine' thread.


----------



## lane (24 Feb 2021)

@Ajax Bay it would be interesting to understand how you reach your conclusions around numbers late April - 8 weeks away. i would expect rates of infection to have increased quite significantly by then, but primarily among the under 60s who are less likely to be hospitalized and quite a lot less likely to die.


----------



## johnblack (24 Feb 2021)

I was talking to my Aunt who lives in Manhattan, she's 70 with cancer (in remission). Trying to book a vaccine slot is an absolute lottery, there are many different sites where you have the ability to apply, NYC Health Dept. , individual hospitals, clinics and healthcare centres. The NYC Health site requires a load of questions to be asked, I think it was 40-50, then when you get passed that and find there are no available slots, you have to fill it in again when you next try to get one. So although the States are still jabbing more in comparison to other countries it sounds as though it is going to be quantity over quality, with older less tech savvy people possible missing out. 

When I explained the way it works here and the progress made she was amazed.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Feb 2021)

I said:
"In the 4 months Nov-Feb the average number of patients with C19 in a UK hospital was circa 20k (~15% of beds). In late April I reckon the number will be less than 5000, with "absolute certainty". Last summer for a month it was below 1000."


lane said:


> @Ajax Bay it would be interesting to understand how you reach your conclusions around numbers late April - 8 weeks away. I would expect rates of infection to have increased quite significantly by then, but primarily among the under 60s who are less likely to be hospitalized and quite a lot less likely to die.


All figures 7-day averages
14-21 Feb - 23501 > 18680 reduction 4821 in a week (similar %age reduction the week before - about 20%)
I assumed an exponential decay on the basis that that's what was experienced mid April to mid July 2020. The days taken to reduce by half (each time) averaged 27 days (31, 26, 24).
21 Feb to 20 Mar - 18680 halved gets you to 9340
20 Mar to 16 Apr - halved again = 4670; hence "In late April I reckon the number of patients with C19 in a UK hospital will be less than 5000."
Last spring there was no vaccine effect, however:
By now (24 Feb) nearly all those in JCVI Gps 1 and 2 have had at least 14 days since their first jab. By the end of the month it'll be 14 days (so first dose effectiveness) since all the over 70s and CEV (Gp 4) cohorts had their jab.
Of 100 in hospital, up till 88 have come from those cohorts. With vaccine effectiveness at a conservative 80% (to prevent serious illness (aka hospitalisation) that's 88% x 20% will still be hospitalised = 18. If we assume the 12 people under 70 will still need admission that's 30 in hospital, not 100. And the over 65s and UHC in Group 6 will soon (?22 March) have had 14 days since their first jab. That's another ~5 off the 30.
If a variant of increased lethality (and/or causing serious illness) starts to dominate, that could make a difference, but only if the effectiveness of the current vaccine (~20M by end Feb) is significantly reduced.
While there are high levels of cases in the community, the threat to the vulnerable is still there, even if they are vaccinated. Hopefully all the people they are coming into contact with have also been vaccinated. The vulnerable must continue to be careful: their guard should not drop till the infection rate generally is much lower.
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare#card-patients_in_hospital


----------



## lane (25 Feb 2021)

Mid April to Mid July 2020 was quite different. Lockdown and schools closed v opening up and schools open.


----------



## marinyork (25 Feb 2021)

There was also no B117 which if people look in depth by local area on the covid dashboard can see how incredibly spreadable that is versus the bog standard variant indoors in winter.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Feb 2021)

Mid April to Mid July 2020 was quite different. Dead right. Vaccine roll-out and the effect on prevention of serious illness means cases will not read across to numbers in hospital to nearly the same extent. I was using Apr-Jul 2020 as an example of exponential decay.
Feel free to share your estimates of the number of general hospital beds that you think will be occupied by C19 positive patients, @lane and/or @marinyork. Then, in due course, we can see.


----------



## marinyork (25 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Feel free to share your estimates of the number of general hospital beds that you think will be occupied by C19 positive patients, @lane and/or @marinyork. Then, in due course, we can see.



As I've said about 3 or 4 times now it's a bit more complicated to predict as I look at regions and individual trusts and there's a great deal of variation.

The hospital figures from Israel are starting to look very promising, but the transmission rates in Israel are still extremely high.

Those on mechanical ventillation fall off slower. Sky News was only complaining about an hour ago there's been a non-covid hospital surge, as it's winter.


----------



## Chromatic (25 Feb 2021)

C R said:


> I had no indication on which vaccine I will be getting, have others been told beforehand?



Had my first jab yesterday evening, it was the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine.


----------



## Bazzer (25 Feb 2021)

My youngest (uni student), has hers booked for tomorrow. The notification to make an appointment came out out of the blue. But as she was flattened with what was believed to be Covid last February, I am not complaining.
Mrs B gets hers on Saturday.


----------



## lane (25 Feb 2021)

Son just got invite for vaccine tomorrow. He is 17 with asthma and a record of some heath issues, but like me I don't see he exactly meets the criteria of group 6, but pleased anyway. He starts back at college on the 15th so timing is actually very good. next on the list should be Mrs Lane hopefully in a few weeks.


----------



## lane (25 Feb 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Mid April to Mid July 2020 was quite different. Dead right. Vaccine roll-out and the effect on prevention of serious illness means cases will not read across to numbers in hospital to nearly the same extent. I was using Apr-Jul 2020 as an example of exponential decay.
> Feel free to share your estimates of the number of general hospital beds that you think will be occupied by C19 positive patients, @lane and/or @marinyork. Then, in due course, we can see.



I don't intend to give an estimate; even experts are unsure regarding the potential impact of unlocking, and despite the fact that being a poster on cyclechat does bestow status of expert on me, I still don't feel qualified to give an opinion. I do certainly think that cases will rise quite quickly after the 8th March, would expect them to be very much higher by late April, but don't really have a feel for how that will read across to cases in hospital. I do have a feeling that your projection is optimistic and will be very pleased indeed if it is correct.


----------



## mjr (25 Feb 2021)

US FDA concludes that the Janssen/Johnson&Johnson fridge-temperature one-shot vaccine has "favorable safety", reported as the last step before emergency use authorisation, which will trigger shipment of about 4 million doses to the USA. The EU has ordered 200m doses with assessment expected mid-March; the UK has ordered 30m and assessment was reportedly expected weeks ago but I don't think it's been approved yet?


----------



## marinyork (25 Feb 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> Shep, I genuinely don't know if you are a real person or an internet character you've made up.



I don't think he's an internet character. I bumped into someone this morning very randomly and accidentally I went to college with and they said they only knew 1 person who was work from home and you could tell they were really surprised and didn't really interact with people as shielders, unemployed or people that were work from home or worried a lot about the virus. They'd been to work 5-6 days a week throughout. They were particularly interested in what I had to say about "lockdown 3" and trying to get their head around why that was 'worse' for most people than 1 and 2.


----------



## Gunk (25 Feb 2021)

Chromatic said:


> Had my first jab yesterday evening, it was the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine.



I had the same earlier today


----------



## marinyork (25 Feb 2021)

People have previously asked about vaccine take up by area and the Daily Mail have a prominent piece.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9299781/Coronavirus-UK-60-people-Isle-Wight-jab.html

Of interest to me is the argument people keep on advancing of how vaccinating a quarter of adults protects loads of people. Sheffield, Manchester, Nottingham and Leeds all have prominent districts due to demographics and other factors with insanely low vaccinations. Never mind 27%+ of the population, these are 3-6%. By contrast down the road from another poster who is quite chillaxed, 57% of the population of Sidmouth have been jabbed!


----------



## Bazzer (25 Feb 2021)

That link is extremely helpful, thank you.
I was looking at the uptakes for areas in my locality and there is a difference of 10% between where I live (30%) and the worst area.
Some of the difference will, I think, be down to the number of children bumping up the population of some areas. Fortunately, locally there are not some of the extremely low take ups, but even at this stage, this is disturbing trend.


----------



## lane (25 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> People have previously asked about vaccine take up by area and the Daily Mail have a prominent piece.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9299781/Coronavirus-UK-60-people-Isle-Wight-jab.html
> 
> Of interest to me is the argument people keep on advancing of how vaccinating a quarter of adults protects loads of people. Sheffield, Manchester, Nottingham and Leeds all have prominent districts due to demographics and other factors with insanely low vaccinations. Never mind 27%+ of the population, these are 3-6%. By contrast down the road from another poster who is quite chillaxed, 57% of the population of Sidmouth have been jabbed!



Possibly a bit misleading. I believe the Isle of White has quite an elderly population so maybe why it's high. The area in Nottingham with 4.82% actually has Trent University in the title - that is an area with quite lot of young people - most of whom probably aren't living there currently.


----------



## vickster (25 Feb 2021)

Gunk said:


> This is the scale I used. £15 off Amazon will weigh up to 200 LG’s
> 
> View attachment 575787


Does it give Covid vaccination? SinoVax perhaps?


----------



## Gunk (25 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> Does it give Covid vaccination? SinoVax perhaps?



Wrong thread sorry 🤨


----------



## marinyork (25 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Possibly a bit misleading. I believe the Isle of White has quite an elderly population so maybe why it's high. The area in Nottingham with 4.82% actually has Trent University in the title - that is an area with quite lot of young people - most of whom probably aren't living there currently.



That's what demographics means, but the virus isn't bothered. It wasn't bothered in Manaus. It'll rip through these areas very quickly if things are opened up too soon and it takes a hold.

Is the future rich, rural areas with high vaccination as a % of the population areas having low cases and horrid outbreaks in urban enclaves?

Another way of looking at it, is that you may need to add 2-3 months to where we are for areas to get similar benefits experienced by other areas.


----------



## lane (25 Feb 2021)

Doubt there are many students in Nottingham who haven't had the virus! That's why the rate per 100,000 went up to 1000 after the students arrived back in Nottingham in the autumn. In other words it has already ripped through that area.


----------



## marinyork (25 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Doubt there are many students in Nottingham who haven't had the virus! That's why the rate per 100,000 went up to 1000 after the students arrived back in Nottingham in the autumn. In other words it has already ripped through that area.



Now who's being misleading? That's a bit like someone saying to you that don't worry your offspring don't need a vaccine because in Nottingham at the start of the academic year the cases went up to above 8000 per 100,000 for 15-19 year olds.


----------



## mjr (25 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Now who's being misleading? That's a bit like someone saying to you that don't worry your offspring don't need a vaccine because in Nottingham at the start of the academic year the cases went up to above 8000 per 100,000 for 15-19 year olds.


So 92% fresh meat ready for infection, then? (assuming that is cumulative cases)


----------



## marinyork (25 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> So 92% fresh meat ready for infection, then? (assuming that is cumulative cases)



Cumulatively over the first camel hump of the second wave it will have been huge. 15%? 25%? 50%? These are possible numbers from elsewhere in the world/UK. The rates in the age group went up to above 400 per 400,000 in the second hump of the camel though and that was when everything was shut down so it's not a fair comparison. So what would happen if it'd have been a proper start of term? I'm a bit sceptical.

Interestingly Nottingham like many other areas shows green shoots emerging for the 75-79 year olds. Or sometimes in other age groups. In other words "lockdown" + vaccines may be working better than lockdown + no vaccine. This green shoot effect is seen in many areas. This is Nottingham:-







For comparison, this is Brighton and shows that you cannot assume it's the same in every area (chosen for young population and in the South East and good old B117 going wild):-




And East Devon where it was revealed some stonkingly high %s have been vaccinated (other factors at play)




Havering:-


----------



## Jenkins (25 Feb 2021)

Chromatic said:


> Had my first jab yesterday evening, it was the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine.





Gunk said:


> I had the same earlier today


Make that three of us.


----------



## mjr (25 Feb 2021)

Jenkins said:


> Make that three of us.


They really should have given you a jab each!


----------



## lane (25 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> So 92% fresh meat ready for infection, then? (assuming that is cumulative cases)



I am assuming those figures are based on tests, then I would imagine among that age group the actual number asymptomatic or just didn't get a test would be quite high. Also i don't think they are cumulative; the 1,000 for the populations as a whole in Nottingham was not cumulative and so 8,000 among the students sounds about right as non cumulative. 

It's a bit of a side track really. The point I was making is that the 5% vaccinated figure - for an area where the vast majority are students - is really no surprise and nothing to be alarmed about. As a side issue - quite a significant proportion of that community also happen to have some immunity so it's even less of an issue.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> That's a bit like someone saying to you that don't worry your offspring don't need a vaccine because in Nottingham at the start of the academic year the cases went up to above 8000 per 100,000 for 15-19 year olds.


My (sensible) daughter started at Exeter uni in September and was one of about 4000 18-23 year olds who tested positive in Devon in the first 21 days. There were masses of uni provided general testing as well as, quickly, access to testing for those who developed symptoms.
But the reason someone might give for saying "don't worry your offspring doesn't need a vaccine" or at least "there's no rush" is that, in 2020 of the 674 15-19 year olds who died, only 11 died of C19 (death certificate). Obviously that's 11 too many but not enough to disagree with the person giving that advice. Unless the young person has other health conditions which make them more vulnerable. In which case (if in the UHC categories so in Gp 6) they'll have received a vaccine by 8 March.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Hospitalisation. Long covid. Your repeated attempts to divert the issue and constantly go on about deaths will not work.


Sorry, what was 'the issue' from which I was "attempting to divert".
Are there data on the 'hospitalisation' rates for under 20s? Entirely content to draw on those. Regrettably data on deaths have good quality and are accessible. For 'Long Covid' - on the 'to do' list. I suspect the data are not split by age group.


marinyork said:


> New covid death map published by the ONS
> https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...athsinvolvingcovid19interactivemap/2020-06-12


Thank you for "constantly" sharing 'death maps'.


----------



## marinyork (26 Feb 2021)

It's not just down to being students, some areas like Devon are way ahead. In just over a week from now projected to have vaccinated the first dose to everyone over 50.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14128039/ten-areas-all-over-50s-covid-jab-march-7/


----------



## marinyork (26 Feb 2021)

Bizarre story from the US.

Pfizer vaccine can now be stored at higher temperatures for much longer. But only in the US?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...sport-Pfizer-vaccine-higher-temperatures.html


----------



## classic33 (26 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Bizarre story from the US.
> 
> Pfizer vaccine can now be stored at higher temperatures for much longer. But only in the US?
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...sport-Pfizer-vaccine-higher-temperatures.html


Wonder how that affects the shelf life.


----------



## Pale Rider (26 Feb 2021)

One has had one's vaccine and one is urging everyone else to do the same.

The Queen can still grab nearly every front page when she wants to.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-56204989


----------



## marinyork (26 Feb 2021)

Think Queenie probably did it for uptake at the moment rather than stuff in the papers about millenials not taking it unless there is a vaccine passport for sports and events or even green passport for pubs.


----------



## lane (26 Feb 2021)

Nottingham was absolutely bonkers when the students came back. Trams packed like sardines for literally hours when they all went into town to go round the pubs; even had a big Fresher ball so i am told. Not many students impacted but it soon went up through the age groups and within weeks hospital was under pressure and Nottingham went from a low rate to highest in the country.


----------



## lane (26 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> Cumulatively over the first camel hump of the second wave it will have been huge. 15%? 25%? 50%? These are possible numbers from elsewhere in the world/UK. The rates in the age group went up to above 400 per 400,000 in the second hump of the camel though and that was when everything was shut down so it's not a fair comparison. So what would happen if it'd have been a proper start of term? I'm a bit sceptical.
> 
> Interestingly Nottingham like many other areas shows green shoots emerging for the 75-79 year olds. Or sometimes in other age groups. In other words "lockdown" + vaccines may be working better than lockdown + no vaccine. This green shoot effect is seen in many areas. This is Nottingham:-
> 
> ...



Just so I understand. For Nottingham that graph shows the current rate not cumulative? It shows it started low in September, went higher, then there was a short gap that was lower after the November lockdown ad Tier 4, then went back up and has only very recently started to reduce?


----------



## lane (26 Feb 2021)

Some very good news reported in the Guardian:

*Nearly 95% of adults happy to get Covid jab*
Positive attitudes towards the coronavirus vaccine have increased, with nearly 95% of adults saying they have either received the jab or would be likely to have it if offered, new data shows.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures, published on Friday, show 94% of adults surveyed between February 17 and 21 reported they had now either received the vaccine or would be very or fairly likely to have it if offered, PA news reports.
This is up from 91% the previous week and has risen from early December 2020 when around eight in 10 (78%) adults indicated they would be likely to accept the vaccine if offered it.
Of the adults who said they would be unlikely to have the vaccine or had decided not to have it, the most common reasons were being worried about long-term impacts on their health (43%), being concerned about the side effects (37%) and waiting to see how well it worked (34%).


----------



## lane (26 Feb 2021)

17 year old Son just had the vaccine at the Derby Velodrome. Pfizer same as I had there a week or so ago. Wasn't anywhere near as busy as when I went but might be time of day.


----------



## marinyork (26 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Just so I understand. For Nottingham that graph shows the current rate not cumulative? It shows it started low in September, went higher, then there was a short gap that was lower after the November lockdown ad Tier 4, then went back up and has only very recently started to reduce?



It's case rates. As in some places like the guardian/wikipedia/PHE there are some issues with scaling and discerning the details, which that colour chart isn't the friendliest. You can always visit the site and track along to get the numbers.

PHE has said in the autumn about it starting in younger age groups and climbing upwards, it's just you can see clearly from these coloured diagrams, but precisely why things are different in different places no one knows. Brighton didn't have a massive outbreak despite case cases in 15-19 going very high. Where I live it climbed up the age ranges to those in their 80s and 90s, then the 80s and 90s stayed high and it came right back down the age groups for a second hump of the camel. So in my area a theory about infection might go along the lines of if you vaccinate health, social care, those over 70 and so on those cases drop and then it stops a third hump of the camel/would have stopped a second one. But what about other mechanisms? There are multiple infection mechanisms in society though. In some areas the second wave arrived first in age groups in the 40s for example. If you look at 40 or 50 of these coloured diagrams you can see for some time now some strong hints that the vaccines are working in all the noise.

PHE actually publishes cumulative case rates for boroughs as a whole (why I put a picture of Havering in) but a lot of people don't regard this as that useful. PHE has separately done antibody testing and comes to a very different conclusion to some here that in many areas the over 80s now show the most antibodies (from vaccine + infections). In other words there are vast numbers of 'younger' people for virus to be a gigantic reservoir on, just in the same way that it's killed loads of people in their 80s x3 occasions.

PHE also tracks antibodies. Although a healthworker study suggested that after 6 months only 15% recaught covid, how realistic this is for the real world we still don't know. I have an acquaintance in their 20s who has just caught covid for the 2nd time.


----------



## lane (26 Feb 2021)

marinyork said:


> It's case rates. As in some places like the guardian/wikipedia/PHE there are some issues with scaling and discerning the details, which that colour chart isn't the friendliest. You can always visit the site and track along to get the numbers.
> 
> PHE has said in the autumn about it starting in younger age groups and climbing upwards, it's just you can see clearly from these coloured diagrams, but precisely why things are different in different places no one knows. Brighton didn't have a massive outbreak despite case cases in 15-19 going very high. Where I live it climbed up the age ranges to those in their 80s and 90s, then the 80s and 90s stayed high and it came right back down the age groups for a second hump of the camel. So in my area a theory about infection might go along the lines of if you vaccinate health, social care, those over 70 and so on those cases drop and then it stops a third hump of the camel/would have stopped a second one. But what about other mechanisms? There are multiple infection mechanisms in society though. In some areas the second wave arrived first in age groups in the 40s for example. If you look at 40 or 50 of these coloured diagrams you can see for some time now some strong hints that the vaccines are working in all the noise.
> 
> ...



Very interesting. Looks like 15-19 year olds got hit first whens schools returned and then slightly later 20-24 when universities returned. 20-24 went down in November lockdown - maybe students left Nottingham to go home?

One thing i am aware of though is, that until quite recently, people tested positive were recorded at where they were registered with a GP. Many students in Nottingham were recorded at their home location rather than Nottingham so actual rates among students was probably quite a bit higher than shown.

However, more on topic, it does look like form the data the vaccine has had a positive impact on the quite old just recently.


----------



## Bazzer (26 Feb 2021)

Youngest daughter had hers this morning. Far from sparkling this afternoon and evening, but the alternative is potentially far worse. Just Mrs B tomorrow and that's our household with a set of first jabs. 
Now looking forward to eldest daughter being jabbed.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Feb 2021)

We have seen the JCVI Recommendations for after the first phase (Gps 1-9, 9 is over 50s) which are just based on age: 40-49, then 30-39, then 18-29. The foundation for that is that the primary correlation with risk of severe illness is age.
It seems likely that the Government will agree/adopt these, for implementation from late April, slowly for 2 months (because of the second dose demand from then) and then at pace in July.
"However, no occupations will be prioritised. The JCVI has considered whether groups such as teachers and police officers should be vaccinated next, but concluded that the most effective way to prevent death and hospital admission is to carry on prioritising people by age."
Professor Wei Shen Lim, COVID-19 Chair for JCVI, said:
"Vaccinations stop people from dying and the current strategy is to prioritise those who are more likely to have severe outcomes and die from COVID-19. The evidence is clear that the risk of hospitalisation and death increases with age. The vaccination programme is a huge success and continuing the age-based rollout will provide the greatest benefit in the shortest time, including to those in occupations at a higher risk of exposure."

From a purely health PoV I'm sure the JCVI is right, and I expect the Government to follow on. By doing so (as opposed to introducing complications which have politico-economic aspects) they can keep good cover behind the concrete wall of the trusted medics/science. The other element of the JCVI thinking is that the NHS have advised that shuffling down by age is straightforward and anything more complicated (see below) is liable to slow down vaccine delivery. The 'phone for a jab' system seems to be working quite well: I can't really see why that would create friction or introduce inefficiency.

Once below 50 with their lower risk, the health aspects are proportionately less important to the country as a whole, imo, compared to a combination of risk of catching, risk to others of transmission and age-based vulnerability. The categories I list below (and there will be other equally justifiable groups) represent less than 2 days vaccinations' worth (700k). So I'd effectively delay the 40-49 year olds by two whole days.

I am surprised that various employment categories have not been nominated at the front of those cohorts: workers who have 'public facing roles' eg: police, prison officers, public road transport and taxi drivers, secondary school teachers. Not on the health basis, but because practically and politically there seems merit.


----------



## marinyork (26 Feb 2021)

Politically it's hard to sell as it pleases nearly no one. Unless they do proceed at breakneck speed in March/April/May/June and then most people would probably be more or less all right with it. Up to Stevens has gone through this stuff before, it's whether it's delivered. I don't think they can do an average of 1 million jabs a day sustained as claimed. If they do then the summer could be much better than hoped.


----------



## lane (26 Feb 2021)

Prioritisation for occupations may make less sense than age as the economy opens up more April onwards and people mix more regardless of occupation. However I agree with @Ajax Bay given the actual impact of prioritising occupations is relatively minor - and i don't think the admin would be that insurmountable - it would make sense to do so.


----------



## MrGrumpy (26 Feb 2021)

Completely off topic but I feel bleedin ancient now  50 in June ! However we reading this thread I’m soon to be in the dodgy group !


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Feb 2021)

Early 50th birthday present for you then, in May(be).


----------



## C R (27 Feb 2021)

Just got my first dose of the AZ vaccine at my GPs surgery building. All very efficient, people arriving at their allotted time and no queues forming. Told to wait for 15 minutes in the car before going home.


----------



## Julia9054 (27 Feb 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Completely off topic but I feel bleedin ancient now  50 in June ! However we reading this thread I’m soon to be in the dodgy group !


From the number of people on here who have already had their vaccine, I would say that turning 50 makes you a youngster round here


----------



## dodgy (27 Feb 2021)

It would be useful if people were to state the very basic reason why daughters/sons/friends are getting the jab at well under 50 years old, no details needed. Otherwise it looks like you can get jabbed at 25 in some parts of the country


----------



## Craig the cyclist (27 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> It would be useful if people were to state the very basic reason why daughters/sons/friends are getting the jab at well under 50 years old, no details needed. Otherwise it looks like you can get jabbed at 25 in some parts of the country



My 18 year old daughter got it because she works in adult social care.

My 21 year old son went for a job in a care home and was asked 'would you be willing to have the C19 vaccine if we offered you the job?' No hint that he wouldn't be offered the job if he had said no, but you do wonder.


----------



## vickster (27 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> It would be useful if people were to state the very basic reason why daughters/sons/friends are getting the jab at well under 50 years old, no details needed. Otherwise it looks like you can get jabbed at 25 in some parts of the country


You can according to my colleague who’s been invited (Harrow I think)


----------



## mjr (27 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Prioritisation for occupations may make less sense than age as the economy opens up more April onwards and people mix more regardless of occupation. However I agree with @Ajax Bay given the actual impact of prioritising occupations is relatively minor - and i don't think the admin would be that insurmountable - it would make sense to do so.


And if vaccination does reduce transmission, it makes sense from a public health point of view to prioritise occupations that come into contact with most people. Potential/probable superspreaders.


----------



## dodgy (27 Feb 2021)

vickster said:


> You can according to my colleague who’s been invited (Harrow I think)



But surely there's a reason for that? Underlying health, occupation, something else? Or maybe just pure luck 🤷‍♂️


----------



## dodgy (27 Feb 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> 'would you be willing to have the C19 vaccine if we offered you the job?'



Sounds like one of the best perks of the job!


----------



## vickster (27 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> But surely there's a reason for that? Underlying health, occupation, something else? Or maybe just pure luck 🤷‍♂️


Apparently his practice has got through the 50+. No UHC. Does same job as me, wah
This was before the announcement of wave 2 by age.
Male, BAME background but those aren’t priorities, even if higher risk of morbidity and mortality


----------



## SpokeyDokey (27 Feb 2021)

Had the jab (O-AZ) yesterday and absolutely no after effects 24 hours on - not even a sore arm. Although the vaccine burned going in unlike the painless flu jab I had back in December.

Seems to vary a lot by individual as to the effect:

Wife: following day was knackered, achy and sleepy.

Best mate: 'flattened' and felt very flu like for a couple of days.

His wife: no after effects whatsoever.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (27 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Prioritisation for occupations may make less sense than age as the economy opens up more April onwards and people mix more regardless of occupation. However I agree with @Ajax Bay given the actual impact of prioritising occupations is relatively minor - and i don't think the admin would be that insurmountable - it would make sense to do so.



Not sure I understand which side of the fence you are on re prioritisation by occupation. Sorry, maybe I am just being dopey. 

JVT gave an excellent explanation as to why vaccinating by age cohorts made more sense and had more positive impact on deaths etc than by occupation during last night's televised briefing.

This was followed up by some (more simplistic) explanations from some other members of the JCVI panel by one of the news channels (probably BBC but I can't remember for sure).

All seemed to make sense to me.


----------



## midlife (27 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> It would be useful if people were to state the very basic reason why daughters/sons/friends are getting the jab at well under 50 years old, no details needed. Otherwise it looks like you can get jabbed at 25 in some parts of the country



25 year old son has had number 1 of Pfizer as he is a type 1 diabetic. Bigger anomaly is why the NHS won't pay for his Freestyle arm sensors which will cost me quite a bit over the years. I suppose we get his insulin on prescription.......


----------



## Julia9054 (27 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Had the jab (O-AZ) yesterday and absolutely no after effects 24 hours on - not even a sore arm. Although the vaccine burned going in unlike the painless flu jab I had back in December.
> 
> Seems to vary a lot by individual as to the effect:
> 
> ...


Al had a bit of a delayed reaction to his. Jabbed on Saturday, slightly sore arm nothing more. On Wednesday he went to work and came home after 2 hours feeling like crap. 24 hours in bed, got up Thursday feeling fine.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (27 Feb 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Al had a bit of a delayed reaction to his. Jabbed on Saturday, slightly sore arm nothing more. On Wednesday he went to work and came home after 2 hours feeling like crap. 24 hours in bed, got up Thursday feeling fine.



Arghhhh! You have now filled me with gloom as I'm now thinking I may have a delayed reaction on it's way. 

Still, come what may it'd be worth it in the long run plus would get me out of a multitude of household duties. 

I'm glad that Al (not sure what relation he is to you) is now feeling chipper!


----------



## C R (27 Feb 2021)

From what I could see at our surgery it was all group 6 today. Of the ten or so people I saw going in and out, I would say half were younger than me, I am 48, type 1 diabetic.


----------



## Julia9054 (27 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Arghhhh! You have now filled me with gloom as I'm now thinking I may have a delayed reaction on it's way.
> 
> Still, come what may it'd be worth it in the long run plus would get me out of a multitude of household duties.
> 
> I'm glad that Al (not sure what relation he is to you) is now feeling chipper!


We have started a bit of a fitness thing at the moment. Al (husband) sees the 24 hours of not eating as a kick start to his diet! 🤣


----------



## Bazzer (27 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> It would be useful if people were to state the very basic reason why daughters/sons/friends are getting the jab at well under 50 years old, no details needed. Otherwise it looks like you can get jabbed at 25 in some parts of the country


I have no idea why my youngest (uni student) was called up. We have discussed this at home and can only assume it her autism diagnosis. - Although she is a high functioning autistic.
My other daughter is an assistant head teacher. She lives 20 miles away, but neither she nor us have any idea why she has been given an appointment. Possibly working in a deprived inner city borough? I don't think any of her long term health conditions would qualify.


----------



## dodgy (27 Feb 2021)

It really brightens my day when I read on here of people getting their jabs, especially the lower age ones, tells me we're progressing well.


----------



## marinyork (27 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> It really brightens my day when I read on here of people getting their jabs, especially the lower age ones, tells me we're progressing well.



If you want good stories, I can tell you that numerically loads people in their teens, 20s and 30s have been vaccinated as parts of groups 2, 4 and 6. As a percentage, is it typical etc, the answer is no it's relatively rare unless you work in health or social care. People who I'm acquainted with loosely, who I volunteer with, other organisations I'm in contact with. Group 6 is 7+ million people (we'll find out precisely how large later) and this means the vaccinated program is running slightly ahead of time. It's running ahead by a month+ in some areas and about a week ahead in the slowest areas.

Unfortunately there are downsides on group 6 and these have started to emerge the last week or so and it's only really been the Jo Wiley stuff that's got publicity. There are big positives because some people who are carers or severely mentally ill or on the spectrum are getting vaccinated. Others are not. I think in about a month's time people may to start to fall out because there are very big cliff edges when you're doing group 6 vs group 11 or 12 comparisons.


----------



## dodgy (27 Feb 2021)

Thanks for the thoughtful reply MY.


----------



## shep (27 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> It would be useful if people were to state the very basic reason why daughters/sons/friends are getting the jab at well under 50 years old, no details needed. Otherwise it looks like you can get jabbed at 25 in some parts of the country


My 19 yr old Daughter got it because she is a TA in a school with Vulnerable kids, my 22 yr old Son is a Prison officer and hasn't had it and I'm apparently a 'key worker ' as I work in Telecoms and haven't had it, 55.


----------



## shep (27 Feb 2021)

I think the youngsters should get it now, 18+ and work from there.


----------



## marinyork (27 Feb 2021)

Interesting, a celebrity has just posted about getting the moderna vaccine, drawing attention to that has finally come on stream. Seems scant information how long it's been used for.

That's very good news as it'll boost supply.


----------



## lane (27 Feb 2021)

Google suggests that it was to be available in the UK from the Spring - so it has arrived early!


----------



## dodgy (27 Feb 2021)

Think moderna has a greater propensity to induce side effects?


----------



## C R (27 Feb 2021)

I was feeling ok all day, so I was hoping I wouldn't be getting much on the way of side effects, but starting about half an hour ago, first my shoulders and then all my joints feel like I was hit by an artic.


----------



## dodgy (27 Feb 2021)

I'm 55, so hoping for the vaccine in the next 6 weeks or so, I already have a plan for feeling a bit like I have a bad cold, it consists of all my favourite foods/treats in the kitchen and an understanding wife  Best trade ever; feeling a bit rough in exchange for eventual freedom.


----------



## marinyork (27 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Google suggests that it was to be available in the UK from the Spring - so it has arrived early!



Oh I know, just fed up of hearing autumn for this, spring for that, summer for the other .


----------



## dodgy (27 Feb 2021)

Using seasons as dates allows quite a bit of flex


----------



## marinyork (27 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> I'm 55, so hoping for the vaccine in the next 6 weeks or so, I already have a plan for feeling a bit like I have a bad cold, it consists of all my favourite foods/treats in the kitchen and an understanding wife  Best trade ever; feeling a bit rough in exchange for eventual freedom.



You will get offered a vaccine in the next six weeks otherwise Bojo will have failed his target if it's slightly over six weeks. You'll probably get it end of March.

As anecdotally things seem to be booking further ahead now, you may even hear pretty soon if you're lucky and that sure does feel good if it happens.


----------



## Milzy (27 Feb 2021)

Had mine last night. My arm is only just starting to stop aching. It was aching all through my century today.


----------



## lane (28 Feb 2021)

dodgy said:


> Using seasons as dates allows quite a bit of flex



Especially as there is not even a generally accepted definition of when the seasons start and finish.


----------



## dodgy (28 Feb 2021)

lane said:


> Especially as there is not even a generally accepted definition of when the seasons start and finish.


That's what I meant really.


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Feb 2021)

Thought I'd have a look at the use of 'spring' and 'summer' (in 2021) as used in this thread after @marinyork said he was "just fed up of hearing autumn for this, spring for that, summer for the other " and @dodgy articulated his implication: "Using seasons as dates allows quite a bit of flex "
There actually isn't much. I have deliberately avoided "spring" and "summer", naming months, shading them with early/mid/late/end when there's uncertainty.


marinyork said:


> Back to normal is perception as much as what's happening. Things will be back to normal in late *spring* and early *summer*, but that's because people will have had enough, as opposed to virus transmission or even deaths and hospitalisations. So it's quite possible that you might have what many on here regard as scarily high deaths going on in the background, but life is more like say tier 1 is now, but for most of the country.





MrGrumpy said:


> I'm way down the pecking order just!! Shall see though the big 50 awaits this *summer*.





Ajax Bay said:


> You're right [@lane ] . . There will be restrictions through till the summer, so it'd be disingenuous for the PM to say otherwise.
> 
> Reiterate: All those involved in procurement, distribution, storage (at the various levels across the nation), management and delivery (into arms) deserve massive plaudits. This is not a short race though; but by the *end of spring* the UK should be close to herd immunity . . . . Internal transmission will diminish and infections brought in from abroad will not gain a foothold and should be much easier to control, with minimal loss of life or serious illness.


Last bit's wrong (was posted in late Jan). The earliest the UK can get 'close to' or 'approach' herd immunity is end July (all adults vaccinated).


----------



## marinyork (28 Feb 2021)

Yeah but you aren't a politician! The daily briefings and news coverage were terrible for saying seasons or Christmas, perhaps why people stopped watching them .


----------



## SpokeyDokey (28 Feb 2021)

Well, 48 hours (50 to be precise) after the jab and nothing - not even a sore arm so I'm off outside this morning to hack back a load of Buddlela that are taking over a chunk of the garden before they start to go mad again this season.

My lovely girl is teasing me by saying that I am so old now that my, equally old, immune system hasn't realised what is happening yet and that when it eventually wakes up and sets to work producing antibodies that I will be well and truly clobbered. 

***

In all seriousness we have both had our first jab and our intention is to act exactly as we have been for the last year and abide by the rules as they change going forward - we are definitely not in the 'we're done so sod the rest' camp that, if past compliance issues with a few of our friends/family suggests that this may well be an attitude that will emerge in some people as time goes by. 

I think the phased lockdown release plan is the way to go for a number of reasons but I do believe the 'it's not all over just because_ you_ have had your jab' message is going to be a toughie to get across.

I am a JVT fan but thought his reinforcement of the above message in the TV briefing a few nights back was not hard hitting enough when delivered in a softly patronising tone. Ditto Hancock who I have not been particularly critical of thus far. Needs a bit more ooomph the get the 'it's not all over' message across imo.


----------



## mjr (28 Feb 2021)

USA FDA approved Janssen/J&J one dose vaccine. 85% protective even in South Africa, says https://www.thejournal.ie/johnson-j...cine-cleared-by-us-officials-5367928-Feb2021/


----------



## IaninSheffield (28 Feb 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> I am a JVT fan but thought his reinforcement of the above message in the TV briefing a few nights back was not hard hitting enough when delivered in a softly patronising tone. Ditto Hancock who I have not been particularly critical of thus far. Needs a bit more ooomph the get the 'it's not all over' message across imo.


Who might we look to when a 'a bit more oomph' is needed?
Ray Winstone?
Vinnie Jones?
Sean Bean?
😉


----------



## roubaixtuesday (28 Feb 2021)

mjr said:


> USA FDA approved Janssen/J&J one dose vaccine. 85% protective even in South Africa, says https://www.thejournal.ie/johnson-j...cine-cleared-by-us-officials-5367928-Feb2021/



Read carefully. 

The 85% is against severe illness and death; efficacy is normally quoted against all symptomatic disease. 

The J&J vaccine is very similar to the AZ vaccine, and has similar efficacy for one shot too, for time periods where comparisons are available. AZ did not do a phase III trial with one shot, so can't claim efficacy for that. 

None of which is to say there's anything wrong with the J&J vaccine, far from it, just to be cautious of what's in press releases. 

We don't know what difference on long term efficacy the single shot strategy has, but I'd be happier with a two shot, given the limited data we have. I think J&J are also doing a two shot study.


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Feb 2021)

Janssen COVID-19 vaccine - FDA Approval


mjr said:


> USA FDA approved Janssen/J&J one dose vaccine. 85% protective even in South Africa, says [an Irish newspaper]





roubaixtuesday said:


> Read carefully. The 85% is against severe illness and death; efficacy is normally quoted against all symptomatic disease.
> None of which is to say there's anything wrong with the J&J vaccine, far from it, just to be cautious of what's in press releases.


Thank you for that 'heads up'. Here is the J&J Announcement of Clinical Trial Results (29 Jan) which (assume) reflects the results shared with the FDA. I don't know if similar definitions were used in the Pfizer, Oxford-AZ and/or Moderna clinical trails.
Vaccine was 66% effective overall in preventing *moderate# to severe COVID-19*, 28 days post-vaccination, with varying levels found: 72% in the United States, 66% in Latin America and 57% in South Africa (mostly against B.1.351 variant in SA).
The vaccine was 85 percent effective in preventing *severe disease** across all regions studied 28 days after vaccination in all adults 18 years and older. Efficacy against severe disease* increased over time [to 100% by] day 49.
The vaccine demonstrated complete protection (100% effective) against COVID-related hospitalization *and* death, after 28 days. There was a clear effect of the vaccine on COVID-19 cases requiring medical intervention (hospitalization, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), with no reported cases among participants who had received the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine, 28 days post-vaccination.
# *Moderate 'to severe' COVID-19 disease* was defined as one or more of:
+ evidence of pneumonia,
+ deep vein thrombosis,
+ shortness of breath or abnormal blood oxygen saturation above 93%, abnormal respiratory rate (≥20);
+ or two or more systemic symptoms suggestive of COVID-19.
** Severe COVID-19 disease* defined as including one or more of: 
+ signs consistent with severe systemic illness, 
+ admission to an intensive care unit, 
+ respiratory failure, shock, organ failure or death, among other factors.


----------



## Archie_tect (28 Feb 2021)

ITV News full of dread over 6 cases of Brazil variant in the UK... no evidence, just whipping up tension as they can't report whether the Brazil variant will or won't adversely affect vaccinated population... must be a slow news day.


----------



## mjr (28 Feb 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> ITV News full of dread over 6 cases of Brazil variant in the UK... no evidence, just whipping up tension as they can't report whether the Brazil variant will or won't adversely affect vaccinated population... must be a slow news day.


I blame the chancellor and shadow chancellor for giving such bland interviews this morning!


----------



## mjr (28 Feb 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Read carefully.
> 
> The 85% is against severe illness and death; efficacy is normally quoted against all symptomatic disease.


Yep, that's the difference between efficacy and protectiveness. Sorry if it's not been covered in this thread before and thank you for filling in the gap.


----------



## Bazzer (1 Mar 2021)

Mrs B had the AZ vaccine on Saturday morning. Felt a bit sleepy in the afternoon, but otherwise no after effects. 
Youngest daughter has a cracking bruise on her arm.


----------



## Archie_tect (1 Mar 2021)

I'll be happier when my daughter [30], primary teacher, has had her jabs.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (1 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Read carefully.
> 
> *The 85% is against severe illness and death;* efficacy is normally quoted against all symptomatic disease.
> 
> ...



Interesting quote you have written there. The study you quoted doesn't actually say that. It says this........

"One dose was 85% protective against the most severe Covid-19 illness, in a massive study that spanned three continents — protection that remained strong even in countries such as South Africa, where the variants of most concern are spreading."


----------



## roubaixtuesday (1 Mar 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Interesting quote you have written there. The study you quoted doesn't actually say that. It says this........
> 
> "One dose was 85% protective against the most severe Covid-19 illness, in a massive study that spanned three continents — protection that remained strong even in countries such as South Africa, where the variants of most concern are spreading."



Can you clarify what you think the difference is? Cheers.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (1 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Can you clarify what you think the difference is? Cheers.



Most obviously, the parameters you are quoting. The study you referenced doesn't mention death, but you do, after telling us to 'Read carefully'



roubaixtuesday said:


> efficacy is normally quoted against all symptomatic disease.



What does that even mean? If I knew what it meant I would respond


----------



## roubaixtuesday (1 Mar 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> you do, after telling us to 'Read carefully'



I'm very happy to be corrected when mistaken. I don't *think* I am here, as severe disease I think includes fatal disease, but I've not read the precise definition in the trial. The "read carefully" was that the 85% quoted is not the measure commonly quoted:



Craig the cyclist said:


> What does that even mean?



Efficacy primary endpoint in all the trials I've read is reduction in symptomatic disease, regardless of severity of the disease.

Reduction in severity is not normally the primary endpoint or quoted as headline figure. 

Neither is asymptomatic disease as detected by PCR (not all trials test asymptomatic subjects).

Does that clarify?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (1 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I'm very happy to be corrected when mistaken. I don't *think* I am here, as severe disease I think includes fatal disease, but I've not read the precise definition in the trial. The "read carefully" was that the 85% quoted is not the measure commonly quoted:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thank you, it clarifies, but isn't quite correct. The main quoted figure is actually efficacy of preventing the disease being caught, not reduction in severity of the disease.

Lots of the studies are also looking at transmission rates, asymptomatic disease treatment, asymptomatic disease transmission, efficacy of one or two doses, efficacy in different groups etc.

A vaccine isn't a treatment as such, it is actually a prophylactic. There is little point giving one to a sick person with the disease.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (1 Mar 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> The main quoted figure is actually efficacy of preventing the disease being caught, not reduction in severity of the disease.



I don't think it is efficacy against COVID being caught.

I think the 85% is reduction is of *severe* disease reported. 

Headline figure normally quoted is reduction of *all symptomatic* disease. 

All studies I've seen show a much larger reduction in severe disease than mild disease. So the 85% overstates the efficacy of this vaccine against the variant, relative to how efficacy is normally quoted. Again, that's not to criticise the vaccine or the study, just to caution that it doesn't mean this vaccine is better than others where lower efficacy has been reported against the variant - it's not the same measure of efficacy. 

[Caveat: I've not read the paper, just the report. I may be wrong!]



Craig the cyclist said:


> A vaccine isn't a treatment as such, it is actually a prophylactic



Agreed.


----------



## Buck (1 Mar 2021)

Direction is for Local Vaccine Centres/GPS not to use Pfizer for first doses as guarantee of supply is not there. Any Pfizer to be used for second doses only.

Currently we‘ve only got AZ for first vaccines although supply does seem to be increasing (slightly).


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Mar 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Interesting quote you have written there. The study you quoted doesn't actually say that. It says this........
> "One dose was 85% protective against the most severe Covid-19 illness, in a massive study that spanned three continents — protection that remained strong even in countries such as South Africa, where the variants of most concern are spreading."


Craig - after rt's 'heads-up' I commented in a little more detail drawing not on the news report shared by rt but from the J&J Announcement of Clinical Trial (RCT) Results (29 Jan) . Did I get it right? Here's the (US) NIH report of the Jansen RCT which had "combined endpoints of (1) moderate and (2) severe disease".
I'll share the criteria of illness against which the Pfizer and Oxford-AZ trials reported their efficacy in another post.
J&J-Jansen: "Vaccine was *66% effective* overall in preventing *moderate# to severe COVID-19*, 28 days post-vaccination, with varying levels found: 72% in the United States, 66% in Latin America and 57% in South Africa (mostly against B.1.351 variant in SA). The vaccine was *85% effective* in preventing *severe disease** across all regions"
People have to suffer severe illness before death (assumed) so there's 85% efficacy against the latter (too). I included the definitions that J&J gave for 'moderate' and 'severe' COVID-19 in my post #2768 ^^.


roubaixtuesday said:


> I'm very happy to be corrected when mistaken. I don't *think* I am here, as severe disease I think includes fatal disease, but I've not read the precise definition in the trial. The "read carefully" was that the 85% quoted is not the measure commonly quoted:
> Efficacy primary endpoint in all the trials I've read is reduction in symptomatic disease, regardless of severity of the disease.
> Reduction in severity is not normally the primary endpoint or quoted as headline figure.


I do not think you are mistaken but I shall look at this 'next'. Maybe the 85% is being used for communications purposes to minimise hesitancy. Look at Germany's hesitancy with Oxford-AZ after the tragic 'only 8% efficacy' claim by newspapers which was weakly refuted by its Federal MoH, followed by an unwillingness by BfArM to licence its use for over 65s (still in place).


----------



## postman (2 Mar 2021)

Thirteen million people could not be aresenaled to vote in the referendum.I wonder how many people are going to refuse the jab,saying covid is a fake.How will the Gov react to that and what about treating them if they end up catching it.Is there anyone on here who is not having the jab and why.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Mar 2021)

Deepo breath @classic33  . Skippy has shared his reasons already, @postman. Just put a bit of effort in and scroll back a few pages and read. Are you here for a chat or an argument postie? Why don't you list the reasons for refusal you'd find acceptable? And 'yes' if someone falls ill with COVID-19, the NHS will 'treat them'. Do you think that's right?
Bear in mind that of those who would have caught it if there'd been no vaccination, one in ten who have been vaccinated will still, as you put it, "end up catching it". The vaccine is not 100% effective - but looks like both Pfizer and Oxford-AZ are >80% effective after one dose, for a time period uncertain.


----------



## classic33 (2 Mar 2021)

postman said:


> Thirteen million people could not be aresenaled to vote in the referendum.I wonder how many people are going to refuse the jab,saying covid is a fake.How will the Gov react to that and what about treating them if they end up catching it.Is there anyone on here who is not having the jab and why.


Me, on medical grounds. Not my choice, manufacturer's recommendation.
I'd not want the person who gave the injection being held responsible.

And I'm not reading anything into your question, before anyone has a go at you for asking a reasonable question.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Mar 2021)

From the 'Germany hesitancy' thread


PK99 said:


> My understanding is that *clinical trials of this type consciously exclude older people* - for the simple reason that they are more vulnerable and, by definition, a clinical trial exposes all participants to a degree of risk.
> BUT there is no medical reason to suppose that an immune system response would cut off at the upper age of the trial participants, and therefore no reason to exclude older folk from vaccine rollout.


The emboldened bit: I think they actually don't (but agree with all the rest of what you said). In fact the lack of efficacy data for the Oxford-AZ vaccine for over 65s from that trial is as a result of that trial not having sufficient O/65s (and a small percentage of O/55s). And then not many of the control group of the O/55 cohort catching C19, to compare with none in the vaccinated O/55 group.

The Oxford-AZ RCT report has this on participation (edited):
"Only 1418 (12·1%) of those assessed for efficacy were older than 55 years . . [cf Pfizer trial participation, below] . . meaning that from the interim analysis of these trials, we cannot yet infer efficacy in older adults, who are the group at greatest risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes.
"less than 4% of participants were older than 70 years of age," 
Just shows you have to be super careful about putting a trial together, and a lesson identified from this has to be that if the disease you're trying to test a candidate vaccine attacks older people (or black/BAME or men or ) then it's wise to structure trial participants accordingly, including ones with relevant morbidities.

The Pfizer RCT report has this on participation (edited):
"43,548 persons 16 years of age or older started, and a total of 37,706 participants finished (various drop out reasons). Among these 37,706 participants, 49% were female, 83% were White, 9% were Black or African American, 28% were Hispanic or Latinx, 35% were obese (body mass index [the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters] of at least 30.0), and 21% had at least one coexisting condition. The median age was 52 years, and 42% of participants were older than 55 years of age." Plenty of oldies (ish) and 16s and 17s in the trial.


----------



## postman (2 Mar 2021)

No no arguments God forbid.I am of the opinion that covid is going to get a bashing from the vaccine and apart from medical reasons I can't see why anyone would refuse to have it.I would like to see stronger travel restrictions on people coming in from other countries who are not as up to date as we are.And I think that should have been done earlier.I hope by this summer people with doubts will see a difference and believe in the vaccine.


----------



## lazybloke (2 Mar 2021)

postman said:


> No no arguments God forbid.I am of the opinion that covid is going to get a bashing from the vaccine and apart from medical reasons I can't see why anyone would refuse to have it.I would like to see stronger travel restrictions on people coming in from other countries who are not as up to date as we are.And I think that should have been done earlier.I hope by this summer people with doubts will see a difference and believe in the vaccine.


Vaccine reluctance is one thing.
Testing reluctance - ie the withholding parental consent to testing of school children - is a whole new world of stupidity.

I accept that some people need an opt out. The majority do NOT.


----------



## lane (2 Mar 2021)

So going back to the 85%. Someone in my age group has something like 8.5% chance of ending up in hospital if they catch it - so severe - on average. So 85% effective reduced the 8.5% to 15% X 8.5% = 1.2% which is reasonably low. 

What I don't quite get is - does someone have a much lower chance of catching it AND if they do they have a much lower chance of it being serious or is that double counting somehow?


----------



## classic33 (2 Mar 2021)

lazybloke said:


> Vaccine reluctance is one thing.
> Testing reluctance - ie the withholding parental consent to testing of school children - is a whole new world of stupidity.
> 
> I accept that some people need an opt out. The majority do NOT.


_"Not recommended"_, from the manufacturer, isn't an opt out.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Mar 2021)

England vaccine performance in over 80s (source not available):





Londinium at 82% bringing up the rear. The eager south west over 80s @ >98%!


----------



## lazybloke (3 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> _"Not recommended"_, from the manufacturer, isn't an opt out.


I don"t know what you"re talking about. I was talking about Covid testing.


----------



## classic33 (3 Mar 2021)

lazybloke said:


> I don"t know what you"re talking about. I was talking about Covid testing.


Mis-understanding on my part.


----------



## Bazzer (3 Mar 2021)

My daughter rang uni yesterday to ask about return procedures. Apparently, if a student refuses a test, college will do nothing about it and they will still be allowed back to resume normal college life.  If replicated across the country, I can see cases of infection exploding again.


----------



## Julia9054 (3 Mar 2021)

Bazzer said:


> My daughter rang uni yesterday to ask about return procedures. Apparently, if a student refuses a test, college will do nothing about it and they will still be allowed back to resume normal college life.  If replicated across the country, I can see cases of infection exploding again.


It’s the same in schools. We are not allowed to force people - students or staff. My son is a carer - staff have been doing weekly pcr testing since December. Again, it seems that legally they cannot stop a member of staff from working if they refuse.


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> So going back to the 85%. Someone in my age group has something like 8.5% chance of ending up in hospital if they catch it - so severe - on average. So 85% effective reduced the 8.5% to 15% X 8.5% = 1.2% which is reasonably low.
> 
> What I don't quite get is - does someone have a much lower chance of catching it AND if they do they have a much lower chance of it being serious or is that double counting somehow?


@lane John Cambell's video (daily) update answers that well for Pfizer and Oxford-AX vaccines.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3otWaBrvEc


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Mar 2021)

Vaccine supply fluctuations
@marinyork has heralded this possibility before.
Bad news: Dip in supply next week (Mon 8 Mar)
Seriously good news: Doubled supply (cf early Feb) from 15 Mar for 'several' weeks (till well after Easter) will mean the daily rate of giving first doses can return to 300k+ concurrently with the necessary second doses (for those on the 12 week gap regime: first doses from 20 December onwards). The mid-April estimate for all over 50s (plus CEV and UHC U/50) to have received their first dose now looks a conservative one - the end of the first 'sprint'.
NHS England: "From 11 March, vaccine supply will increase substantially and be sustained at a higher level for several weeks. Therefore, from the week of 15 March we are now asking systems to plan and support all vaccination centres and local vaccination services to deliver around twice the level of vaccine available in the week of 1 March."
Reading between the lines it looks as if there will be so much supply in the weeks starting 15 Mar that the Vaccine HQ thinks that local storage may become an issue if centres have too much stock 'carried over' and then shed loads arrive on the lorries.
Around the country the programme has already moved on to Group 7 (60-64) by letter invitation, while local primary care concentrates on Group 6 (16-64 with UHC) - because those people's doctors/ PC health staff have a better handle on their identities (and conditions) and offers the chance for any contraindications, concerns or other issues to be personally addressed/raised.
Generally, over 60s can book a vaccination using this link aiui.


----------



## lane (3 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @lane John Cambell's video (daily) update answers that well for Pfizer and Oxford-AX vaccines.
> 
> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3otWaBrvEc




Thanks @Ajax Bay that is a very illuminating video. It answers my question.


----------



## johnblack (4 Mar 2021)

Italy have stopped a shipment of AZ vaccine due for Australia - the rights or wrongs are up for discussion, but for anyone outside the EU this really doesn't show them in a great light.


----------



## PK99 (4 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> England vaccine performance in over 80s (source not available):
> View attachment 576786
> 
> Londinium at 82% bringing up the rear. The eager south west over 80s @ >98%!



1.8% of Cornish population is BAME
5.1% of Devon population is BAME
40% of London Population is BAME

BAME vaccine hesitancy is undoubtedly a significant factor.
The range across London authorities show the same pattern.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Mar 2021)

Wife (steward volunteer) has just received a text stating that there will be a major vaccine ramp-up from 15 March as vaccine supplies will rise and more new centres will be opening.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Mar 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Wife (steward volunteer) has just received a text stating that there will be a major vaccine ramp-up from 15 March


As above ^^, here's the NHSE letter NHS England: "From 11 March, vaccine supply will increase substantially and be sustained at a higher level for several weeks."


----------



## mjr (4 Mar 2021)

johnblack said:


> Italy have stopped a shipment of AZ vaccine due for Australia - the rights or wrongs are up for discussion, but for anyone outside the EU this really doesn't show them in a great light.


I don't see how you figure that out. It was an Italian government decision. They've just got a new PM last month. I bet this decision is popular there, where AZ is seen as exporting vaccines to less hard-hit countries rather than deliver their EU orders fully.


----------



## PK99 (5 Mar 2021)

I had Pfizer a week or few ago at normal GP surgery - no side effects at all.

MrsPK had Oxford on Tuesday at Pharmacy in Tooting and ran a temp feeling under the weather for 48 hours. ok today.

We both had untested Covid in March20


----------



## johnblack (5 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> I don't see how you figure that out. It was an Italian government decision. They've just got a new PM last month. I bet this decision is popular there, where AZ is seen as exporting vaccines to less hard-hit countries rather than deliver their EU orders fully.


As I said, seen from outside the EU. I'm sure that it is seen in positive terms from inside Italy. The Italian Gov. went to Brussels last Friday to get their backing. so yes an Italian decision, but agreed by the EU under an EU export authorisation scheme. 

As I also said, the rights and wrongs are up for debate. Well, debate by most people, but by others, it can only ever be seen in absolute terms as soon as the EU are mentioned.


----------



## mjr (5 Mar 2021)

johnblack said:


> As I said, seen from outside the EU. I'm sure that it is seen in positive terms from inside Italy. [...]


We are outside the EU. If not positive, it looks completely understandable from here and I bet gov.uk would do similar if the positions were reversed.


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 Mar 2021)

"Completely understandable from here"! Depends on your comprehension level, I suppose.
I bet the UK Government would do no such thing. Italy's behaviour is myopic, peninsular and politically inward-facing. Will Italy also prevent the export of Ox-AZ vaccine - next week, say - to adjacent countries from the Rome factory? And if not, where does the rationale differ?


----------



## mjr (5 Mar 2021)

Canada approved Ox-AZ only for under-65s https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...mmittee-says-in-split-from-health-canada.html

Let's face it, the decision on who to include in the clinical trials may have satisfied the UK MHRA quickly, but it's not seeming to cut it with other regulators, and surely no-one can credibly claim that Canada is trying to punish the UK for something just now?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (5 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Canada approved Ox-AZ only for under-65s https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...mmittee-says-in-split-from-health-canada.html
> 
> Let's face it, the decision on who to include in the clinical trials may have satisfied the UK MHRA quickly, but it's not seeming to cut it with other regulators, and surely no-one can credibly claim that Canada is trying to punish the UK for something just now?



On a point of clarification, it's not a regulatory decision. 

Health Canada are the regulator. They have approved it.

It's a policy decision, equivalent of JVCI here I think.


----------



## mjr (5 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> "Completely understandable from here"! Depends on your comprehension level, I suppose.
> I bet the UK Government would do no such thing.


That is a safe bet because there's not much chance that we're going to find out.



> Italy's behaviour is myopic, peninsular and politically inward-facing. Will Italy also prevent the export of Ox-AZ vaccine - next week, say - to adjacent countries from the Rome factory? And if not, where does the rationale differ?


Politically, their neighbours part of a common purchasing system with Italy and have helped earlier in the pandemic, so it would be easier to sell as reciprocation, but it's not completely impossible that the Draghi government of national unity might try to block shipments if the one of the three right-wing parties demanded it. Maybe @marinyork or someone can opine whether the others — PD, Italia Viva or Art.1 — would threaten to bring down the government to support internationalism?

Practically, I suspect the EU would object, which they can as the single market regulator, but these would be murky waters to sail into. I would expect both Italy and the EU would launch a new round of criticism of AZ rather than each other.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (5 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I bet the UK Government would do no such thing. Italy's behaviour is myopic, peninsular and politically inward-facing



Myopic and inward facing is a perfect description of UK foreign policy for the past 5 years. Our foreign policy has been designed to appease an extreme faction of the Conservative party. 

Which is in no way to support Italy here; I don't know much about exactly what's gone on, but it seems petty and political rather than health driven.


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 Mar 2021)

I suspect Oxford-AZ regret not having a wider age range in their Phase 3 RCT and the MHRA 'in bed' with them during the set up of that trial missed a trick. Consequently the efficacy of the Ox-AZ candidate vaccine in over 65s could not be evidenced directly.
The UK MHRA are world class. Other regulators must follow their own star. But in UK the approach has saved many, many lives and the real life UK data now available allow other regulators to use those as evidence of effectiveness.
No, Canada is neither "trying to punish" nor "punishing" anyone. It may be they have sufficient supply of other makes of vaccine to jab their aged, and keep the efficacious Ox-AZ for their lucky health care workers.


----------



## mjr (5 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> On a point of clarification, it's not a regulatory decision.
> 
> Health Canada are the regulator. They have approved it.
> 
> It's a policy decision, equivalent of JVCI here I think.


Health Canada are the licensing regulator. NaCI inform the provincial vaccination program regulators, which all seem to be following suit: Ontario, PEI, Saskatchewan and Alberta, and so on.

It doesn't really matter which regulator of what made the decision. Practically, Ox-AZ still ain't going into the arms of Canadians over 65.


----------



## mjr (5 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The UK MHRA are world class. Other regulators must follow their own star. But in UK the approach has saved many, many lives and the real life UK data now available allow other regulators to use those as evidence of effectiveness.


It is bittersweet, though, as it looks like those UK lives may have been saved at the expense of lives lost elsewhere as a result of slower approvals and fuelling hesitancy among some of the most vulnerable to covid.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (5 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> It is bittersweet, though, as it looks like those UK lives may have been saved at the expense of lives lost elsewhere as a result of slower approvals and fuelling hesitancy among the most vulnerable to covid.



You're saying hesitancy elsewhere is as a result of the MHRA accepting immunological bridging for older subjects?

Even though the EMA took the identical decision?

If you say so.


----------



## johnblack (5 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I suspect Oxford-AZ regret not having a wider age range in their Phase 3 RCT and the MHRA 'in bed' with them during the set up of that trial missed a trick.


I reckon that AZ probably regret submitting its vaccine for approval in the EU at all, and entering contract to supply, especially as it is doing so without the profit margin of the other vaccine suppliers, the grief they seem to be faced with, will make them think twice for future approvals.


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> it looks like those UK lives may have been saved at the expense of lives lost elsewhere as a result of slower approvals and fuelling hesitancy among the most vulnerable to covid.


Please share your thinking towards a conclusion that the UK's approach has influenced the "slowness of [other nations'] approval" mechanisms or has "fuelled vaccine hesitancy".
Who are you identifying as "the most vulnerable to covid" please?


----------



## mjr (5 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Please share your thinking towards a conclusion that the UK's approach has influenced the "slowness of [other nations'] approval" mechanisms or has "fuelled vaccine hesitancy".


The regulators of Germany, France, Greece, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, Poland, Austria, Italy, Belgium and Spain all initially cited lack of data about over-65s (over-55s in some!) as a reason not to approve it above that age at first. Some have modified that since. Some have not. So it seems likely that including more older subjects in the third phase would have avoided that, even if it was not necessary to please the UK regulator.



> Who are you identifying as "the most vulnerable to covid" please?


Older people. It was missing a "some of" which has been added.

In other news, Sky News claims at the end of https://news.sky.com/story/astrazen...ut-in-the-eu-but-how-did-it-play-out-12236052 (without sources) that the export-blocked vaccines will be distributed across the EU, not kept only in Italy.


----------



## oldworld (5 Mar 2021)

If the UK saw shipments of vaccines leaving as exports and their contract with the supplier wasn't being fulfilled, then no one would think the UK was acting unreasonably if they stopped these exports.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (5 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> So it seems likely that including more older subjects in the third phase would have avoided that, even if it was not necessary to please the UK regulator.



It was not, though, a "UK approach".

It was clinical trial ethics, avoiding exposing older subjects until more data was in on younger subjects. 

Nothing to do with the UK per se - the trial was run across geographies. 

The only "UK" approach here was to accept the phase 2 bridging data to older subjects on immunological response rather than outcome. 

And the EMA accepted this too.

There's no blame here for the UK in European vaccine hesitancy.


----------



## mjr (5 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> It was not, though, a "UK approach".


Yes, thank you, good spot. @Ajax Bay switched slickly from discussing "the approach" of the Ox-AZ trials to calling it "the UK's approach" and I failed to notice, so continued discussing the trial participant selection.

It's interesting that 240 out of 560 second phase trial participants were 70+.


----------



## Milkfloat (5 Mar 2021)

oldworld said:


> If the UK saw shipments of vaccines leaving as exports and their contract with the supplier wasn't being fulfilled, then no one would think the UK was acting unreasonably if they stopped these exports.


Probably not, but that is not what is happening in Italy.


----------



## lane (5 Mar 2021)

Whatever the reasons the regulators and medical officers in the UK seem to have made all the right calls where the vaccine is concerned. Good for the UK and helps other countries by providing data. Top job.


----------



## rualexander (5 Mar 2021)

PK99 said:


> I had Pfizer a week or few ago at normal GP surgery - no side effects at all.
> 
> MrsPK had Oxford on Tuesday at Pharmacy in Tooting and ran a temp feeling under the weather for 48 hours. ok today.
> 
> We both had untested Covid in March20


If it was 'untested', how do you know you had Covid?


----------



## PK99 (5 Mar 2021)

rualexander said:


> If it was 'untested', how do you know you had Covid?



"classic" symptoms: Dry cough, Temperature, loss of appetite
Clincher was after 4/5 days I lost my since of smell for a week - ZERO sense of smell, I tried every spice jar, nothing.


----------



## Ajax Bay (6 Mar 2021)

English resident over 55s please note - your jabber awaits:


Ming the Merciless said:


> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/





Poacher said:


> Same here. No AZ in any local vaccination centre for most of the last week and probably all of next week. The rollout seems to be stalling.


Just a blip for a week, @Poacher See: https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/page-187#post-6333618
Note increasing number of daily doses are going to 'second jabs' (70k+ yesterday) and this will slowly ramp up throughout March, reaching 400k+ in April, with the balance going to first doses for 50+ year olds by (say) 20 April.


----------



## Bazzer (6 Mar 2021)

Eldest daughter had the first jab of the AZ vaccine this morning, after a mix up on dates. (She thought it was going to be last Saturday). Just son in law to be done now, but he isn't going to be for a while. So that's all the immediate blood family.
Being entirely selfish, very relieved.


----------



## rockyroller (6 Mar 2021)

Wifey just scored her 2 appointments! cheering at 6am! as a K-12 Teacher she's in a priority group. she's been pow-powing w/ colleagues for a cpl weeks on how to work the system. came down to using the local pharmacy in our tiny town. go figure ... she then tried to get me enlisted but no-go, not yet, anyway


----------



## midlife (6 Mar 2021)

Just curious, what's a K-12 teacher?


----------



## Ajax Bay (6 Mar 2021)

3 more than a K-9, perhaps?


----------



## lane (6 Mar 2021)

Might be KS 1 and 2 - infants in primary school?


----------



## C R (6 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> Might be KS 1 and 2 - infants in primary school?


I think it is a US term, kindergarten to 12yo if I remember correctly.


----------



## midlife (6 Mar 2021)

Ah, just twigged from other posts (lives in a condo) that rocky roller lives in the States...


----------



## vickster (6 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Ah, just twigged from other posts (lives in a condo) that rocky roller lives in the States...


His location also says 20 miles Northwest of Boston, MA


----------



## Ajax Bay (6 Mar 2021)

Did you have to 'put the knife in' @vickster?


----------



## midlife (6 Mar 2021)

Don't see location in his posts, maybe it's a mobile device thing?


----------



## vickster (6 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Don't see location in his posts, maybe it's a mobile device thing?


You have to look in landscape, can’t see if portrait orientation


----------



## lane (7 Mar 2021)

Mrs Lane booked for next Thursday following link posted above- a week earlier than earliest date the vaccine calculator we looked at gave


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 Mar 2021)

johnblack said:


> Italy have stopped a shipment of AZ vaccine due for Australia - the rights or wrongs are up for discussion, but for anyone outside the EU this really doesn't show them in a great light.


To offer context to Italy's vaccine stock when blocking the shipment to Australia last week, on 'we need it more' grounds aiui, it had the largest supply of Ox-AZ doses in the EU: more than 1.5M (and loads of Pfizer and Moderna as well).
[Source: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control]
But by 5 Mar Italy had used just 322,801 of its Ox-AZ doses (~21%).
Germany had used about a tird of its Ox-AZ supply (1.4M) and France a quarter of its 1.1M.


----------



## rockyroller (8 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Just curious, what's a K-12 teacher?


a Teacher that teaches students in grades Kindergarten thru 12. where 12 indicates senior year of high school. the last grade before college/university. Wifey works K-4, so she's part of that group of teachers. I guess they are being prioritized before college level teachers/professors


----------



## IanSmithCSE (8 Mar 2021)

Good morning,

There is article here https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-56312817 - NHS pay-rise demo organiser fined £10,000 in Manchester

How would be people here react to an immediate NHS strike, especially if it included stopping giving new vaccine doses?

I am generally quite right wing and have always been troubled by the amount of power the Government took over covid and the lack of kickback by both politicians and the general population.

Now the right to protest over working condition has hit the covid restrictions.

It is certainly possible that everyone will ignore this as an isolated incident, or the union movement might see this as an existential question and feel they have to start organising mass rallies.

I appreciate that the police appear to have had no other options open to them, but that doesn't resolve the issue on a larger scale.

Bye

Ian


----------



## matticus (8 Mar 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Now the right to protest over working condition has hit the covid restrictions.


<ramble>
Did I not read that employment-related protests were one of the few exemptions for public gatherings? Or maybe that's a USA thing ...


----------



## AuroraSaab (8 Mar 2021)

Political demos are exempt. I understand you have to inform the police you are intending to meet etc. The police have broken up other demos and meetings, whilst letting others continue. Hopefully this fine will be rescinded.


----------



## mjr (8 Mar 2021)

AuroraSaab said:


> Political demos are exempt. [...]


That exemption was removed, I think in the November lockdown. I had attended political demonstrations in defence of a local cycleway during Lockdown 1.

An exception for Picketing was added on Boxing Day. A further exception for two-person outdoor (or common hallways in things like blocks of flats) meetings for political campaigning was added to the law today, which looks badly phrased and allows non-candidate campaigners seeking to influence the elections to go door-to-door too.


----------



## mjr (8 Mar 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> How would be people here react to an immediate NHS strike, especially if it included stopping giving new vaccine doses?


I would be disappointed and I would blame the government's deliberate pay insult for it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (8 Mar 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> I am generally quite right wing and have always been troubled by the amount of power the Government took over covid and the lack of kickback by both politicians and the general population.


Here's a website for you, Ian: Lockdown Sceptics Enjoy!


----------



## dodgy (8 Mar 2021)

Anyone know why the previous established groups (75 to 80, 70 to 75, 65 to 70, 60 to 65, 55 to 60 etc etc) has somehow become 56+ and not 55+ ?


----------



## fossyant (8 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> Anyone know why the previous established groups (75 to 80, 70 to 75, 65 to 70, 60 to 65, 55 to 60 etc etc) has somehow become 56+ and not 55+ ?



Dunno, just turned 51, phew !


----------



## Julia9054 (8 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> Anyone know why the previous established groups (75 to 80, 70 to 75, 65 to 70, 60 to 65, 55 to 60 etc etc) has somehow become 56+ and not 55+ ?


Because using your groups in brackets, a 55 year old would fall into 2 groups


----------



## dodgy (8 Mar 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Because using your groups in brackets, a 55 year old would fall into 2 groups


Yeah I messed up on the numbers. But you get the idea. It was originally 50+, 55+, 60+ etc. Now an arbitrary 56+


----------



## shep (8 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> Yeah I messed up on the numbers. But you get the idea. It was originally 50+, 55+, 60+ etc. Now an arbitrary 56+


It's a Government ploy, they've worked out there's loads of 55 year olds waiting to take their pension so hope to kill em off!


----------



## Ajax Bay (8 Mar 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Vaccination booking now opened to 56 and over as of this morning. Looks to be 11 days after it opened for 60 and over. So 50 and over from 17th March?
> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/





dodgy said:


> Anyone know why the previous established groups (75 to 80, 70 to 75, 65 to 70, 60 to 65, 55 to 60 etc etc) has somehow become 56+ and not 55+ ?


From the link MtM shared:
*Who can use this service*
You can only use this service if any of the following apply:

you are aged 55 or over
JCVI Groups:
6. all individuals aged 16 years[footnote 2] to 64 years with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality[footnote 3]
7 all those 60 years of age and over
8 all those 55 years of age and over
9 all those 50 years of age and over


----------



## shep (8 Mar 2021)

Many thanks @Ajax Bay , just booked myself in for March 13th. 55 and over as you say.


----------



## cookiemonster (9 Mar 2021)

Just booked my two jabs here in HK as teachers are now able to book as a priority group. First one 30/3 with the second on 20/4. Getting the BioNtech one.


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Mar 2021)

Reuters: Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine was able to neutralize a new variant of the coronavirus spreading rapidly in Brazil, according to a laboratory study published in the New England Journal of Medicine yesterday (8 Mar).
"Blood taken from people who had been given the vaccine neutralized an engineered version of the virus that contained the same mutations carried on the spike portion of the highly contagious P.1 variant first identified in Brazil, the study conducted by scientists from the companies and the University of Texas Medical Branch found."
Paper published in NEJM.
They also tested against the B.1.351 (SA) and B.1.1.7 (Kent) variants. Compared with neutralization of the 'original' (prevalent in USA in April) variant, "neutralization of B.1.1.7-spike and P.1-spike viruses was roughly equivalent, and neutralization of B.1.351-spike virus was robust but lower."
Good news!


----------



## DCLane (9 Mar 2021)

Vaccination booked for Saturday. Given I'm well under 55, but _may_ be classed as a 'vulnerable adult' for health reasons, the notification's earlier than I thought it'd be.


----------



## numbnuts (9 Mar 2021)

I've been


----------



## marzjennings (9 Mar 2021)

Getting my vaccination today after registering on about 10 different sites. Getting your shot over here is something of a crap shoot and I'm only getting mine today because a neighbour happened to be on a local pharmacy website midnight last week when the site posted they had available appointments. My daughter who's 16 has already had both of her shots, and my wife hopes to get hers next month.

There's no central planning for vaccine role out, just a bunch of distributors (hospitals, ER's, pharmacies, city hall, etc) you have to call to register for a shot.


----------



## Bazzer (9 Mar 2021)

Eldest daughter had the AZ on Saturday morning. 24 hours after the jab she was feeling very smug, as her Mum, sister and myself had all felt rough at some stage in the post 24 hour period. Then wallop and laid up in bed for 8 hours.


----------



## fossyant (9 Mar 2021)

Son's is effectively Group 6, Type 1 diabetic, no sign yet, but he's unlikely to be poorly if he get's covid.


----------



## C R (9 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> Son's is effectively Group 6, Type 1 diabetic, no sign yet, but he's unlikely to be poorly if he get's covid.


You should chase that up, every single type 1 I know were contacted by their GP and offered an appointment on the third week of February.


----------



## Mtbsensa (9 Mar 2021)

numbnuts said:


> I've been
> View attachment 577791


Good for you! As a young person i have completely given up all hope for the near future, but i'm happy to see some people are getting it!


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Mar 2021)

One thing gleaned from the SPI-M paper effectively commissioned by the UK Goverment to inform the best way of easing lockdown (linked and commented on in the main C19 thread) is the vaccine rollout they were asked/told to assume:
"Rollout assumptions are significantly quicker: a large increase from current rates [as at paper's 7 Feb when they were ~3M a week] to 4m doses per week from 22 March." This has been heralded previously but this is the first time I've seen it quantified. If the programme can achieve 4M per week, that means the 40s (7M) will get their first jab early than they expect. Here's my graph on that basis (NB 32M = JCVI Gps 1-9 complete, 53M = all adults O/18):





This will then allow us to vaccinate all those of school age (~11M) before the start of [edited for clarity] the autumn term, if the trials already under way go OK.


----------



## classic33 (9 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> One thing gleaned from the SPI-M paper effectively commissioned by the UK Goverment to inform the best way of easing lockdown (linked and commented on in the main C19 thread) is the vaccine rollout they were asked/told to assume:
> "Rollout assumptions are significantly quicker: a large increase from current rates [as at paper's 7 Feb when they were ~3M a week] to 4m doses per week from 22 March." This has been heralded previously but this is the first time I've seen it quantified. If the programme can achieve 4M per week, that means the 40s (7M) will get their first jab early than they expect. Here's my graph on that basis (NB 32M = JCVI Gps 1-9 complete, 53M = all adults O/18):
> View attachment 577802
> 
> *This will then allow us to vaccinate all those of school age (~11M) before the start of term*, if the trials already under way go OK.


Most schools started going back yesterday, for the current term.


----------



## fossyant (9 Mar 2021)

C R said:


> You should chase that up, every single type 1 I know were contacted by their GP and offered an appointment on the third week of February.



Well he might have had a text, or even a letter - not that he tells us anything. He has a doc's appointment by phone shortly, I'll get him to ask.


----------



## johnblack (9 Mar 2021)

marzjennings said:


> Getting my vaccination today after registering on about 10 different sites. Getting your shot over here is something of a crap shoot and I'm only getting mine today because a neighbour happened to be on a local pharmacy website midnight last week when the site posted they had available appointments. My daughter who's 16 has already had both of her shots, and my wife hopes to get hers next month.
> 
> There's no central planning for vaccine role out, just a bunch of distributors (hospitals, ER's, pharmacies, city hall, etc) you have to call to register for a shot.


I mentioned it on here a couple of weeks ago, my Aunt and Uncle are in Manhattan, 70 & 65, both in cancer remission and are finding it almost impossible to get vaccinated. Having to register with different websites and distributors, they can't believe it is so chaotic and when I explained the process here they were impressed.


----------



## mjr (10 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> "Completely understandable from here"! Depends on your comprehension level, I suppose.
> I bet the UK Government would do no such thing. Italy's behaviour is myopic, peninsular and politically inward-facing. [...]


"Britain and the United States have outright bans on exports of COVID-19 shots" according to Charles Michel in https://www.reuters.com/article/hea...ow-about-the-coronavirus-right-now-idUSVIRUS1 — anyone able to confirm or refute that? That might explain how quiet gov.uk were about the Italian block!


----------



## vickster (10 Mar 2021)

Covid-19: UK hasn't banned export of vaccines, says PM https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56347716


----------



## newfhouse (10 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Covid-19: UK hasn't banned export of vaccines, says PM https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56347716


Yes, but is he being truthful? It's not like he doesn't have form, is it?


----------



## Bazzer (10 Mar 2021)

I wonder if it a question of interpretation?
EU - "We are are not getting any vaccine from the UK therefore an export ban".
HMG - "AZ our contract with you states you are to provide the UK with Xm doses on these milestone dates," Therefore there is de facto none available for export to the EU under contracts you have with them.

Note also Boris said the country had "not blocked" the sale abroad of "a single vaccine or its components". No specific mention of the EU. Given the very public spat with the EU at the end of January and some of the Brexit difficulties, I wouldn't put it past the Government to use stocks it contractually receives but considers are not of immediate or short term requirement, to engender goodwill to help smooth the paths of trade deal discussions, or those deals which have already been done.


----------



## vickster (10 Mar 2021)

newfhouse said:


> Yes, but is he being truthful? It's not like he doesn't have form, is it?


Dunno but it doesn’t sound like Mr Michel is being exactly open either, personally I don’t believe anything on Twitter. Why do officials post stuff on Twitter, can’t they write more than 140 letters or whatever it is?
Twitter is full of utter shoot


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Mar 2021)

Context and nuance on the latest vaccine spat via twitter.

It'll never catch on.


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369604521232654338


----------



## newfhouse (10 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Dunno but it doesn’t sound like Mr Michel is being exactly open either, personally I don’t believe anything on Twitter. Why do officials post stuff on Twitter, can’t they write more than 140 letters or whatever it is?
> Twitter is full of utter shoot


I don't know the truth either, and on this subject both sides have a poor track record. I hope a trustworthy fact checker will soon present the actual facts.


----------



## houblon (10 Mar 2021)

I had a word with Sasha Baron Cohen. Mine's on its way.


----------



## mjr (10 Mar 2021)

newfhouse said:


> Yes, but is he being truthful? It's not like he doesn't have form, is it?


I am always deeply suspicious of statements prefaced with "let me be clear". He said ""Let me be clear: we have not blocked the export of a single Covid-19 vaccine or vaccine components."

I do hope someone asked how many vaccines have been exported from the UK. The above statement would be just as true if no one had tried.


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 Mar 2021)

AstraZeneca produces its vaccines in its UK and EU plants but also operates production chains in other countries across the world, including the USA. The USA intends to use domestically-made doses to inoculate US citizens first, in accordance with a Presidential executive order (Dec 2020) so bans export of those. The EU is seeking to have that USA ban lifted. Early indications that that's unlikely.
Let me be clear: this is the 'word' from Mr Machel:
09/03/2021 | *A WORD FROM THE [EU] PRESIDENT*
Key erroneous text, with a brilliant first phrase: " the facts do not lie. The United Kingdom and the United States [of America] have imposed an outright ban on the export of vaccines or vaccine components produced on their territory. But the European Union, the region with the largest vaccine production capacity in the world, has simply put in place a system for controlling the export of doses produced in the EU. Our objective: to prevent companies from which we have ordered and pre-financed doses from exporting them to other advanced countries when they have not delivered to us what was promised."
The "system for controlling the export of doses produced in the EU" was used by Italy to block the despatch of vaccines to Australia: Italy had to get the 'OK' from the EU before doing so (and France have indicated they'd do the same, under the same EU 'control' mechanism. The UK has a similar system for controlling the export a variety of medicines. But the UK has not, as far as we know, exercised that for COVID-19 vaccines or vaccine constituents, let alone "an outright ban".
The trick with this stuff is to establish and maintain a good relationship with, _inter alii_, () vaccine manufacturers and not an adversarial one. Adopting the latter approach is liable to generate chain suck.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Mar 2021)

I think it's pretty simple: one person's "contractually for the exclusive use of the country it is manufactured in" is another's "export ban".

Both perspectives can be empathised with. 

A much better and more nuanced view is in the Twitter thread above, but that's the essence as I see it.

Naturally, our govt sees this as a golden opportunity to kick the EU for political gain. Likewise, the EU wants to show its own citizenry that it's standing up for them. 

All very depressing.


----------



## mjr (10 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Let me be clear: [...] But the UK has not, as far as we know, exercised that for COVID-19 vaccines or vaccine constituents, let alone "an outright ban".


Thank you for giving another example of "let me be clear" preceding misdirection! Have any vaccines been exported from the UK? If not, there was no opportunity to exercise control over them and saying it hasn't happened is not the same as saying it wouldn't happen.



> The trick with this stuff is to establish and maintain a good relationship with, _inter alii_, () vaccine manufacturers and not an adversarial one. Adopting the latter approach is liable to generate chain suck.


So do you, for example, tell a customer shoot on by a dodgy bike shop that it was their fault for not maintaining a good relationship with it? I don't remember that attitude in your past posts.


----------



## lazybloke (10 Mar 2021)

Mrs L had the ADZ1222 jab yesterday afternoon. Group 9 by age, but registered as a carer which presumably brought her appt forward.
Minor side effects of feeling out of sorts / spaced-out today, and a very sore arm.

Wish I'd gone with her, as there was a suggestion of spare jabs being up for grabs.


----------



## Edwardoka (10 Mar 2021)

I'm sure it's pure coincidence but a day after the finest minds of CycleChat elected me as leader of The New Republic of Whatever This Country Will Be Called I got the letter confirming that I'd be getting my first inoculation in 9 days' time. I wouldn't have categorised myself in a vulnerable group as my health complication is both minor and successfully controlled by medication.

I must confess that I've not been following this thread - it all seems so terribly serious, with talks of export bans and blockading the Hanseatic League. So what follows is almost certainly retreading old ground.

I remain unconvinced by the UK government's now (in?)famous gamble to ignore the manufacturer's recommended schedule and instead pull "12 weeks" from their hindquarters. It's inarguable that it appears to be to have paid off spectacularly, although how long it will take before any "unintended consequences" become apparent is a subject for people more informed than me (or at least a subject for those who have watched many youtube videos with clickbait titles and scary pictures of virus particles)

In any case the gamble seems to have been a largely unnecessary one; my mum (several levels higher than me on the vulnerable people list) got her first jab 4 weeks ago, they could have given my first dose to her and barely deviated from the recommended schedule.

As an upstanding leader (behold my noble visage and ducal finery) I will of course do my patriotic duty next week and accept Mr. Gates' wundermachines. I wonder which flavour of nanoprobes they'll give me.

Kind regards,
Serene Doge Edgar I "The Misinformed" Pugglesworth


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> I'm sure it's pure coincidence but a day after the finest minds of CycleChat elected me as leader of The New Republic of Whatever This Country Will Be Called I got the letter confirming that I'd be getting my first inoculation in 9 days' time. I wouldn't have categorised myself in a vulnerable group as my health complication is both minor and successfully controlled by medication.
> 
> I must confess that I've not been following this thread - it all seems so terribly serious, with talks of export bans and blockading the Hanseatic League. So what follows is almost certainly retreading old ground.
> 
> ...



Your most Gracious Doge, Czar of all Irkutsk and Uggle Barnby.

You are in this case indeed misinformed. Evidence was always strong that a single dose have good protection, and that staggering the doses might actually improve protection. 

Thousands of lives have been saved as a result, and confirmation for the AZ vaccine that the efficacy improves with a spaced dose is now in the peer- reviewed literature. References can be provided should your Grace require it.

I remain your most obedient etc etc scrape bow etc etc please don't behead me for my insolence


----------



## Edwardoka (10 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Your most Gracious Doge, Czar of all Irkutsk and Uggle Barnby.
> 
> You are in this case indeed misinformed. Evidence was always strong that a single dose have good protection, and that staggering the doses might actually improve protection.
> 
> ...


I thank you, sir, for both indulging in my nonsensical shtick (laudanum? I hardly knew 'im!) and rebuffing my ignorance.
I will trust the fine minds of CC to correct you if you have misled me in this matter, I do not need to see references at this time.

Serene etc etc


----------



## DCLane (10 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> I'm sure it's pure coincidence but a day after the finest minds of CycleChat elected me as leader of The New Republic of Whatever This Country Will Be Called I got the letter confirming that I'd be getting my first inoculation in 9 days' time. I wouldn't have categorised myself in a vulnerable group as my health complication is both minor and successfully controlled by medication.
> 
> As an upstanding leader (behold my noble visage and ducal finery) I will of course do my patriotic duty next week and accept Mr. Gates' wundermachines. I wonder which flavour of nanoprobes they'll give me.



I get mine on Saturday despite being not in the correct age group, although I do have asthma.

Does Mr Gates' chip cause the 'blue screen of death' his Windows software offers?


----------



## IaninSheffield (10 Mar 2021)

Barely been away for a coupla hours and appear to have missed a coup d'etat!

There'll be mony a skelpin' on the streets o' Hawick the night.


----------



## Edwardoka (10 Mar 2021)

DCLane said:


> I get mine on Saturday despite being not in the correct age group, although I do have asthma.
> 
> Does Mr Gates' chip cause the 'blue screen of death' his Windows software offers?


That at least is understandable, as it's a respiratory condition.
If my epilepsy were more serious form or uncontrolled I'd say "yeah that's legit", but even at its worst I've never fully lost consciousness. I guess the system isn't capable of triaging people at that level of granularity.

As for Mr. Gates' finest, Windows these days is a very stable operating system; Blue Screens of Death are almost always caused by hardware failure or incompatible drivers.
I understand that the main effect of his nanoprobes is that the inoculated person keeps trying to convince others to set Edge as their default web browser and Bing as their search engine. Resistance is futile.


----------



## DCLane (10 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> That at least is understandable, as it's a respiratory condition.



Given I've had an 'episode' in the past year where the doctor put me on the powerful medication rather than the standard stuff when I get ill I'm guessing that, despite not being hospitalised, it pushed me up the list. The numbers I put out on my breathing test kit were under half the normal score, so I wasn't well.

Basically I'd raced on the Friday at Manchester, TT'd Saturday in Leicestershire (down the A46 in cold damp conditions), tried to train at Manchester on Sunday evening, then keeled over and it turned out I'd got a lung infection following a heavy cold a couple of weeks before.

The doctor, who's usually polite and nice, responded to me when I said I'd pop down to the pharmacy to collect the meds with "Can you just behave for once. Which bit of 'do not leave your house' don't you understand? Get someone else to fetch your medication or you're the dimwit* I think you are." 

* Note: I _think_ she used the f word instead of dim, but I was probably struggling to breathe at the time.


----------



## C R (10 Mar 2021)

DCLane said:


> I get mine on Saturday despite being not in the correct age group, although I do have asthma.
> 
> Does Mr Gates' chip cause the 'blue screen of death' his Windows software offers?


All I can say after being AZd a couple of weeks ago is that I still hate windows with a passion, so the nanobots seem to be as capable as windows 3.1. Now get off m'lawn you kids.


----------



## johnblack (10 Mar 2021)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-no-ban-on-covid-vaccine-exports-eu-concedes
A European commission spokesperson conceded on Wednesday that the UK had not imposed a ban, following the allegation made by the European council president, Charles Michel, on Tuesday.


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> We are outside the EU. If not positive, [Italy blocking vaccines export to Australia] looks completely understandable from here and I bet gov.uk would do similar if the positions were reversed.





Ajax Bay said:


> "Completely understandable from here"! Depends on your comprehension level, I suppose.
> I bet the UK Government would do no such thing.





mjr said:


> Thank you for giving another example of "let me be clear" preceding misdirection! Have any vaccines been exported from the UK? If not, there was no opportunity to exercise control over them and saying it hasn't happened is not the same as saying it wouldn't happen.


"misdirection!" I shared the word of the President (EU)
"Have any vaccines been exported from the UK?" No idea. Let us know after you've made the effort to find out. But I will have a stab and say 'yes'. (And I'm not counting vaccines sent out for trials recently.)
"If not, there was no opportunity to exercise control over them and saying it hasn't happened is not the same as saying it wouldn't happen." You're quite right: it's "not the same" and I didn't say that there'd been no opportunity to block vaccine exports. In fact I linked to the UK export-drugs-and-medicines-special-rules which would allow the UK to do this, as a sovereign nation.
Let me be crystal clear: I'm saying that 'UK Government banning the export of vaccines' hasn't happened (and the UK Government appears pretty clear on that). I have suggested previously that I think it most unlikely ("I bet" - see quote above) that the UK Government would ban the export of vaccines. In fact I suggest that the UK sends a plane load to Australia asap (and another across the Irish Sea, to augment the paucity of supply Ireland is getting from the Union Commission).


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 Mar 2021)

johnblack said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-no-ban-on-covid-vaccine-exports-eu-concedes
> A European commission spokesperson conceded on Wednesday that the UK had not imposed a ban, following the allegation made by the European council president, Charles Michel, on Tuesday.


Michel tweeted on Tuesday night: “Glad if the UK reaction leads to more transparency and increased exports to EU and [other] countries. Different ways of imposing bans or restrictions on vaccines/medicines.” 
Saying 'I was wrong' is so hard to do.


----------



## classic33 (10 Mar 2021)

DCLane said:


> I get mine on Saturday despite being not in the correct age group, although I do have asthma.
> 
> Does Mr Gates' chip cause the 'blue screen of death' his Windows software offers?


The Oxford one seems to be the flavour of the day for this Saturday round these parts. I'm due mine at 09:40, the same day.


----------



## Rusty Nails (10 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Dunno but it doesn’t sound like Mr Michel is being exactly open either, personally I don’t believe anything on Twitter. Why do officials post stuff on Twitter, can’t they write more than 140 letters or whatever it is?
> Twitter is full of utter shoot



And re-posting it avoids having to come up with anything original..........or think.


----------



## rockyroller (10 Mar 2021)

Wifey got her 1st shot of the Pfizer vaccine & she is absolutely beaming!


----------



## midlife (10 Mar 2021)

Second jab for me tomorrow, first was January 7th. 6.00pm, hope there's some left......


----------



## fossyant (10 Mar 2021)

Brother is a dentist, He had two young dental nurses refusing to have the jab. Nothing he could do about it TBH - puts the practice at risk from close down. Anyway, both have come under pressure from their own families, as they are putting the rest of their family at risk - their parent's have told them. Both now jabbed.

Social Media is the pits in my opinion.


----------



## midlife (10 Mar 2021)

Cycling_Samurai said:


> After seeing what the vaccine did to me my wife isn't inclined to get it.



Everybody I know at work has been vaccinated, mix of symptoms but mainly a sore arm or feeling a bit off colour. Only one person in our place was actually unwell. Hope it doesn't put her off


----------



## Cycling_Samurai (10 Mar 2021)

rockyroller said:


> Wifey got her 1st shot of the Pfizer vaccine & she is absolutely beaming!


My wife is refusing after seeing what the vaccine did to me. I was in terrible pain and couldn't move for the better part of a day.


----------



## PK99 (10 Mar 2021)

Cycling_Samurai said:


> My wife is refusing after seeing what the vaccine did to me. I was in terrible pain and couldn't move for the better part of a day.



I trust if she refuses the vaccine and gets Covid, she will also refuse hospital treatment.


----------



## Cycling_Samurai (10 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Everybody I know at work has been vaccinated, mix of symptoms but mainly a sore arm or feeling a bit off colour. Only one person in our place was actually unwell. Hope it doesn't put her off


Thanks. It did. I slept 12 hours woke and had severe stomach pain and back pain when moving. Chills and feeling tired. I barely could walk or stand up. The first shot left my arm sore for a day. The second hurt the second day. I ended up sleeping 16 hours and going to bed sleeping 8 hours next night. So yeah a bit rough. Coworkers had similar symptoms but not as bad as mine.


----------



## C R (10 Mar 2021)

Cycling_Samurai said:


> Thanks. It did. I slept 12 hours woke and had severe stomach pain and back pain when moving. Chills and feeling tired. I barely could walk or stand up. The first shot left my arm sore for a day. The second hurt the second day. I ended up sleeping 16 hours and going to bed sleeping 8 hours next night. So yeah a bit rough. Coworkers had similar symptoms but not as bad as mine.


Still better than spending weeks on a ventilator, or passing covid on to someone who then end up spending weeks on a ventilator, or worse.


----------



## fossyant (10 Mar 2021)

Cycling_Samurai said:


> My wife is refusing after seeing what the vaccine did to me. I was in terrible pain and couldn't move for the better part of a day.



A day... FFS. I get more hurt from riding my bike and just general age as I ignore getting older.  

Get jabbed, get riding with mates, get staying over and getting boozed up with mates, and riding again next day.... simple. 

Oh yeh, seeing family again....


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> The Oxford one seems to be the flavour of the day


If we look at the supply revealed last month 'in error' by the SNP (I've shared this graph before) one can deduce that most of the rest of the Pfizer vaccine supply from now till mid June (3 months) will go on second doses (for those who received their Pfizer jab after 20 Dec).
(previously shared 25 days ago):


----------



## classic33 (10 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> If we look at the supply revealed last month 'in error' by the SNP (I've shared this graph before) one can deduce that most of the rest of the Pfizer vaccine supply from now till mid June (3 months) will go on second doses (for those who received their Pfizer jab after 20 Dec).
> (previously shared 25 days ago):
> View attachment 578031


Quoting part of a post does nothing bar take the origional post out of context.
It was an observation on my part as to the actual vaccine that seems to be in use, locally, this Saturday.

Today, Wednesday, would have been the Pfizer one.


----------



## mjr (10 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> "Have any vaccines been exported from the UK?" No idea. Let us know after you've made the effort to find out. But I will have a stab and say 'yes'. (And I'm not counting vaccines sent out for trials recently.)


I can't find any being exported. The 10pm news on MGN's Euronews just said none are being exported because Ox-AZ is the only one being made here and more than the entire current production is contracted to the UK.



> Let me be crystal clear: I'm saying that 'UK Government banning the export of vaccines' hasn't happened (and the UK Government appears pretty clear on that). I have suggested previously that I think it most unlikely ("I bet" - see quote above) that the UK Government would ban the export of vaccines.


The UK has similar export control measures ("ban") to what's recently been introduced in the EU. The UK just hasn't had to use them because no UK-based manufacturer is attempting to export any.

This meaningless distinction reminds me of "I did not overrule him" and "did you threaten to overrule him?"



> In fact I suggest that the UK sends a plane load to Australia asap (and another across the Irish Sea, to augment the paucity of supply Ireland is getting from the Union Commission).


That hasn't happened and it won't until the UK has more than it can use.

In other news, the EU is getting another 4m Pfizer doses before the end of March, and the EMA is expected to approve the Janssen/J&J vaccine tomorrow.


----------



## DaveReading (10 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> I understand that the main effect of his nanoprobes is that the inoculated person keeps trying to convince others to set Edge as their default web browser and Bing as their search engine. Resistance is futile.



Spooky.

I had my first jab 4 weeks ago. A few days later, I gave in to my mounting frustration with Firefox and migrated to Edge (which actually appears to be much better behaved).

Now I know why I did it ...


----------



## rockyroller (10 Mar 2021)

Cycling_Samurai said:


> My wife is refusing after seeing what the vaccine did to me. I was in terrible pain and couldn't move for the better part of a day.


hang in there


----------



## classic33 (10 Mar 2021)

Has the UK banned/refused to export/held back any of the UK Pfizer vaccine production.


----------



## Cycling_Samurai (10 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Has the UK banned/refused to export/held back any of the UK Pfizer vaccine production.


Why ban?


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Mar 2021)

Pretty sure Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is not manufactured or finished in UK. Supplies received in UK are not for re-export. So there's been no question of 'banning' exports.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (11 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Has the UK banned/refused to export/held back any of the UK Pfizer vaccine production.



The pfizer vaccine is not produced in the uk


----------



## Bazzer (11 Mar 2021)

This report (about half way down the page) back in January, referred to the Wrexham plant producing 150,000 phials a day. At six doses per phial that's 900,000 jabs. The figures I have seen don't get anywhere near that number being vaccinated everyday, even with (say) 10% wastage. The peak was at the end of January/early February.

The Government isn't going to be announcing vaccine exports unless it is in its interests to do so. Particularly with the noisy neighbours.


----------



## johnblack (11 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Michel tweeted on Tuesday night: “Glad if the UK reaction leads to more transparency and increased exports to EU and [other] countries. Different ways of imposing bans or restrictions on vaccines/medicines.”
> Saying 'I was wrong' is so hard to do.


It also bringing the UK in to a spat the EU has with AZ. AZ are the exporter and they will do so based on their contracts, the EU hasn't exported any, AZ and Pfizer have, again based on the contracts they entered in to.


----------



## Edwardoka (11 Mar 2021)

C R said:


> All I can say after being AZd a couple of weeks ago is that I still hate windows with a passion, so the nanobots seem to be as capable as windows 3.1. Now get off m'lawn you kids.


You must have gotten the linux version. Good luck playing audio through bluetooth.


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Mar 2021)

Bazzer said:


> This report (about half way down the page) back in January, referred to the Wrexham plant producing 150,000 phials a day. At six doses per phial that's 900,000 jabs. The figures I have seen don't get anywhere near that number being vaccinated everyday, even with (say) 10% wastage. The peak was at the end of January/early February.


Well done for finding that Business Live article:
*The factories making Oxford-AstraZeneca, Pfizer-BioNTech and other Covid-19 vaccine in the UK*
*Oxford-AZ* CP Pharma's Wrexham plant now has the capacity to produce (finish) about 800,000 doses a day and these are all the Oxford-AZ variety. The vaccine is actually made in England in Oxford and Keele (there's also a factory in the Netherlands). In February about 50% of the Wrexham production was exported, including to the EU. This percentage has dropped this month as the supply to UK has been ramped up. We will see 500,000+ doses overall per day being administered in UK from 14 Mar onwards so this will take more of the capacity, for several months. Most of the first jabs mid-March onwards will be Oxford-AZ. And increasing amounts will be needed for second jabs (from Easter onwards).
Oxford-AZ vaccine production is increasingly international.
*Pfizer-BioNTech* Nearly all the UK's Pfizer supply (e.g. from Germany (Marburg)/Belgium(Puurs)) will be used for second jabs from now on. As a contingency (to be exercised if the current under 18 trials fail), some Pfizer supply (not before August) might be earmarked for 16 and 17 year olds.
In UK the Croda plant outside Snaith (Yorkshire) has been producing/supplying four component excipients/lipids for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine - these have been separately listed as: [maybe worth a read @classic33 ?]

ALC-0315 = (4-hydroxybutyl) azanediyl)bis (hexane-6,1-diyl)bis(2-hexyldecanoate)
ALC-0159 = 2-[(polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide
1,2-Distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine
cholesterol
There has been no report of any UK export 'ban' being placed on the export of these vaccine 'components' which need to go to the continent for the manufacture of the final vaccine (and then fill&finish).
*Moderna* From now on (mid March) some people's first jab will be the Moderna mRNA vaccine - perhaps 50,000 a day average, and from early June their second jab of Moderna.
*Novavax* The Novavax vaccine will be manufactured near Middleborough (Yorks), from April (Phase 3 trial successfully complete, so hopefully getting the MHRA 'OK' in April too).
*Valneva* The French Biotech firm's UK plant in Livingston (Scotland) will make the UK's supply of this vaccine which has yet to complete its Phase 1/2 trials (so still early days).
*Janssen* UK supply (idc) to be manufactured in Belgium and fill/finish at Sanofi's Marcy l'Etoile plant (France). Vaccine already being rolled out in USA and Canada.


----------



## lane (11 Mar 2021)

Mrs lane just has just had AZ, will see how she feels over the next couple of days.


----------



## DCLane (11 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> Mrs lane just has just had AZ, will see how she feels over the next couple of days.



My Mrs Lane was fine but a couple of her colleagues, who've had Covid, weren't well for a few days afterwards.


----------



## lane (11 Mar 2021)

Yes also have a couple of relatives who had AZ suffered - one quite poorly got a couple of days - so will see.


----------



## mjr (11 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Well done for finding that Business Live article:
> *The factories making Oxford-AstraZeneca, Pfizer-BioNTech and other Covid-19 vaccine in the UK*
> [...] In February about 50% of the Wrexham production was exported, including to the EU.


That's not in that article, is it? Where did you see it?



> *Novavax* The Novavax vaccine will be manufactured near Middleborough (Yorks), from April (Phase 3 trial successfully complete, so hopefully getting the MHRA 'OK' in April too).
> *Valneva* The French Biotech firm's UK plant in Livingston (Scotland) will make the UK's supply of this vaccine which has yet to complete its Phase 1/2 trials (so still early days).


Neither of those are yet approved anywhere, so no test of exporting there.


----------



## fossyant (11 Mar 2021)

Son's had the call. Gets jabbed Tuesday (Type 1) and 20 y/o.


----------



## fossyant (11 Mar 2021)

PS both my two kids are up for it. Lets them get back to normal sooner, like socialising.

No pressure from us. Daughter will be far down the line, but she'd prefer a jab to being poked up the nose twice a week for college.


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Mar 2021)

The JCVI have advised that people experiencing homelessness, including those sleeping rough, should be prioritised for the coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine citing heightened risks and a likelihood of health conditions and therefore poorer outcomes if they catch the disease.
Adults in these circumstances will therefore be offered a vaccine immediately (alongside priority group 6).
There's also suggested flexibility with regard to second doses, as calling people back 12 weeks later is recognised as a challenge.
Last week in Manchester, Urban Village (a primary healthcare practice with a dedicated service for homeless people) decided its homeless patients all fell into priority group 6 – anyone "aged 16 to 64 with underlying health conditions". The then guidance allowed some flexibility in vaccine deployment to mitigate health inequalities, “such as might occur in relation to access to healthcare and ethnicity”.


----------



## mjr (12 Mar 2021)

Vaccine news off TV this morning:

USA President Biden has announced general availability of vaccines from 1st May, with the aim being to declare independence from the virus by 4th July. https://www.krtv.com/news/national/...ines-available-to-all-adults-by-may-1-reports

Norway, Denmark and Iceland are suspending use of OxAZ while some deaths are investigated. EMA has advised continuing use during the investigation because the evidence suggests the benefits still outweigh the risks. https://www.euronews.com/2021/03/11...tions-as-a-precaution-after-blood-clot-report


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> the aim being to declare independence from the virus by 4th July


Politicians, eh? They can offer the dream. Feasible? See below.
USA have vaccinated 98M; 54M in the last month and the weeky rate seems pretty steady (13M).
USA population is 331M, so over 16s and @ 80% acceptance = 214M to give two doses to: 428M doses required.
98M so far. 330M to go at 13M per week = 6 months. To crack it by 4 July they'll need to ramp up quickly to over 19M a week.


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> Lets them get back to normal sooner, like socialising.


I know you'll break it to them gently, fossy, but it doesn't work like that, I'm afraid.


----------



## lane (12 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I know you'll break it to them gently, fossy, but it doesn't work like that, I'm afraid.



Depends how you look at it. More people vaccinated including under 18s more chance of getting back to normal overall.


----------



## vickster (12 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> Depends how you look at it. More people vaccinated including under 18s more chance of getting back to normal overall.


Except the vaccines isn’t guaranteed for sure to stop catching or transmission


----------



## houblon (12 Mar 2021)

And that's ="Ajax Bay, post: 6344002, member: 44950"]
Politicians, eh? They can offer the dream. Feasible? See below.
USA have vaccinated 98M; 54M in the last month and the weeky rate seems pretty steady (13M).
USA population is 331M, so over 16s and @ 80% acceptance = 214M to give two doses to: 428M doses required.
98M so far. 330M to go at 13M per week = 6 months. To crack it by 4 July they'll need to ramp up quickly to over 19M a week.
[/QUOTE]

And is 80% acceptance realistic? I believe there's considerable scepticism in France and Italy, and the US is home to a lot of conspiracy theorists.


----------



## houblon (12 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Except the vaccines isn’t guaranteed for sure to stop catching or transmission



Not guaranteed for sure, for sure, but the more of a population is vaccinated the harder it is for the virus to find hosts.


----------



## lane (12 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Except the vaccines isn’t guaranteed for sure to stop catching or transmission



There is a lot of evidence not that it does.


----------



## vickster (12 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> There is a lot of evidence not that it does.


Let’s wait and see what happens now the schools are back and lockdowns are lifted. hence, I said not guaranteed


----------



## lane (12 Mar 2021)

Since no children and many parents are not yet vaccinated I would anticipate rates will increase - at least temporarily. The reduction in rates has almost levelled off already before the impact of schools is apparent. That does not mean the vaccine fails to prevent transmission.


----------



## MontyVeda (12 Mar 2021)

Not sure what's going on with the vaccine roll out up here. As I understand it, we wait to be notified that the vaccine is available for our age group and book an appointment.

Yet I know of a handful of friends and acquaintances who aren't health workers or in a vulnerable group (as far as I'm aware) and are a few years younger than me (51) who've had their vaccines.


----------



## classic33 (12 Mar 2021)

MontyVeda said:


> Not sure what's going on with the vaccine roll out up here. As I understand it, we wait to be notified that the vaccine is available for our age group and book an appointment.
> 
> Yet I know of a handful of friends and acquaintances who aren't health workers or in a vulnerable group (as far as I'm aware) and are a few years younger than me (51) who've had their vaccines.


There's some pre-school kids that have received their first jab near me. How or why I don't know.


----------



## C R (12 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> There's some pre-school kids that have received their first jab near me. How or why I don't know.


Perhaps they are part of the AZ trial for under 18.


----------



## classic33 (12 Mar 2021)

C R said:


> Perhaps they are part of the AZ trial for under 18.


Possible, but these are 2 - 3 year olds. 
With parents pushing for the second dose.


----------



## mikeIow (12 Mar 2021)

Jabbed this morning....very efficient organisation 
SWMBO turned feverish about 5 hours later. 
Paracetamol helped....then the shakes returned. Second dose now, & she's off to bed.
I've got a bit of a dull head, & feeling like I'm warming up now........but who knows what the night & tomorrow bring, eh 
Still, jobby jobbed


----------



## lane (12 Mar 2021)

Study suggests Pfizer reduces transmission between 30 and 54 percent after two doses.

Although actual results likely to be better.


https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...ission-by-more-than-half-study-shows-12243898


----------



## lane (12 Mar 2021)

According to various press reports all over 40s will be offered vaccine by Easter and all adults offered a vaccine by early June.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> According to various press reports all over 40s will be offered vaccine by Easter and all adults offered a vaccine by early June.



There are 8.4M 40-49s (of which maybe 2M have been vaccinated in Groups 2,4,6). My excellent estimate (see recent black background graph) is that the UK should have delivered enough first jabs to vaccinate all over 50s (JCVI Gps 1-9) by Easter Monday and all over 40s by May Day PH (38M total). After that there are another 15M for 18-39 year olds. May crack 'all adults O/18' by 4 July. Will be earlier if the uptake percentage is lower in the junior age groups.

23.3M first doses have been administered. To get to 'all over 40s by Easter' would need a daily rate of 800k a day (>13% for second jabs) from 14 March onwards.
On the basis of what's been said publicly by NHS England et al, I'm using 4M a [Edit] weekday (first and second doses) from next week till the end of June. Note: Peak rate was just over 3M a week (440k per day) in early Feb.

I note the word "offered" has been used - and as others have said and reiterated, 'offered' is lugubrious in this context. Maybe the reports you mention fail to recognise the (average) 2.5M jabs a week needed from Easter to mid June for second jabs. Either that or they are reporting to frame the 'early release of restrictions' clamour, or being manipulated by people/'informants' who similarly think that vaccination successes will get the lockdown dates brought forward (it won't - it's cases and hospitalisations, and no emergence of significant VoC which will be considered).


----------



## lane (13 Mar 2021)

Report in Telegraph (aggressively anti lockdown agenda) is talking about 1 million a day to achieve the Easter target. Same report talks about pressure for early opening.

Report in Times re early June.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Mar 2021)

I read elsewhere that 90% of both JCVI Group 5 (65-70) and Group 6 (UHC and and) have received their first jab. If that's true that is an excellent uptake; quite excellent.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (13 Mar 2021)

Guess which country is currently vaccinating a higher rate of its population than anywhere else?







Yup. Chile.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Mar 2021)

Here's a good synopis of Chile's vaccination effort, from procurement to heath system;
https://www.vox.com/22309620/chile-covid-19-vaccination-campaign
I like the #YoMeVacuno (“I get vaccinated”) cards idea.
Edit: Heading to catch up with the UK by end of June (in % of population first dose terms) as the virus case levels rise with the onset of winter, proper.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Mar 2021)

UK's rate is 'artificially' suppressed this last fortnight but will jump to double current 'per 100' level in the next 10 days: but still not as good as Chile.


----------



## Andy in Germany (13 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> UK's rate is 'artificially' suppressed this last fortnight but will jump to double current 'per 100' level in the next 10 days: but still not as good as Chile.



Bear in mind that graph shows the first dose only.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (13 Mar 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Bear in mind that graph shows the first dose only.



The graph, I think, is total doses, they don't differentiate whether 1st or 2nd. Could be wrong, but note Israel is over 100%.

Chile is actually due to overtake UK probably this week.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Mar 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Bear in mind that graph shows the first dose only.


As @rt says, 'all doses'.
Bear in mind that effectiveness of the second dose is improved if the gap is extended, science and some evidence suggests. Do you want half the number with 90+% effective protection (say 10M) or 20M with 80%? Do the math. Make the 'bet'. China is a nation obsessed with gambling. What have they done?


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Mar 2021)

By end June Chile aims to have given at least one dose to 15M (of its 19M population) - 78%.
I wonder if Chile is adopting a 12 week gap? Reading between the vox article lines, it looks as if they're being fairly relaxed about the gap, with people being told, come anytime.
By end June UK expects (my estimate) to have given at least one dose to 52M (of its 67M population) - 77% (as well as second doses to 36M).


----------



## mjr (13 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> On the basis of what's been said publicly by NHS England et al, I'm using 4M a day (first and second doses) from next week till the end of June. Note: Peak rate was just over 3M a week (440k per day) in early Feb.


Where have they said 4M a day, please? I looked and can't find it and that is a very big increase, moving towards NYC 1947 smallpox vaccination territory.


----------



## Pale Rider (13 Mar 2021)

The EU continues to squabble over vaccines without getting much done.

And while Brussels fiddles, the rest of the EU doesn't exactly burn, but cases are rising in many countries.

It's still not clear to me if the vaccine helps reduce transmission, but UK cases continue to drop so maybe our vaccine advantage is playing a role.

That drop must play into the death rate, which reinforces my view that eventually death rates will be similar for comparable developed countries.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56361840


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Where have they said 4M a day, please? I looked and can't find it and that is a very big increase, moving towards NYC 1947 smallpox vaccination territory.


Here's the NHSE letter NHS England: "From 11 March, vaccine supply will increase substantially and be sustained at a higher level for several weeks." Also Pulse reported this:
"NHS England: Therefore, from the week of 15 March we are now asking systems to plan and support all vaccination centres and local vaccination services to deliver around twice the level of vaccine available in the week of 1 March."
If anything it'll be more than 4M a week (double the 2.1M 7-day average rate in the week of 1 March). Of these 4M, about a quarter will be second doses.
I said on 3 March:


Ajax Bay said:


> Vaccine supply fluctuations
> @marinyork has heralded this possibility before.
> Bad news: Dip in supply next week (Mon 8 Mar)
> Seriously good news: Doubled supply (cf early Feb) from 15 Mar for 'several' weeks (till well after Easter) will mean the daily rate of giving first doses can return to 300k+ concurrently with the necessary second doses (for those on the 12 week gap regime: first doses from 20 December onwards). The mid-April estimate for all over 50s (plus CEV and UHC U/50) to have received their first dose now looks a conservative one - the end of the first 'sprint'.
> ...


----------



## mjr (13 Mar 2021)

Isn't that 4M a week, not day?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (13 Mar 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> my view that eventually death rates will be similar for comparable developed countries.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56361840



I recall we have a wager on UK vs Germany death rates. 

https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/why-i-voted-for-brexit.271529/page-28#post-6304384

I think Paddy Power would already have paid up.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Isn't that 4M a week, not day?


Correct. At 4M a weekday we'd have all adults (plus 16 and 17s) first doses (78% ie all over 16s) by 25 March and herd immunity by mid April!! Now that would be 'acceleration'. [I have amended that post - thank you.]


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Mar 2021)

More good news: "Positive vaccine sentiment has increased to 94% in the latest period (24 to 28 February), from 78% when the data were first collected (10 to 13 December 2020)." (ONS Coronavirus and vaccine hesitancy, Great Britain: 13 January to 7 February 2021)
If this is reflected in reality, that would be excellent. Bear in mind the modelling for releasing restrictions progressively assumed (relied in part) on rather more pessimistic %ages (85% over 50 and 75% under 50 iirc).




This level of uptake also mean that UK herd immunity is more achievable (other key factors are: transmissibility of whatever is the by then dominant variant (looking like B.1.1.7), the actual reduction in transmission of the virus which vaccines afford, the by then depressive effect on 'R' of whatever restrictions remain).
Rugby calling!


----------



## mjr (13 Mar 2021)

AstraZeneca informs EU of failing to supply the full amount again. Blames export restrictions (do they mean the UK and US?) https://www.thejournal.ie/astrazeneca-vaccine-delivery-shortfall-5380507-Mar2021/

Just as well the EU have bought more Pfizer.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (13 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Blames export restrictions



A guess, but... The MHRA recently inspected the Indian Serum Institute. Were they planning to import from India to make up the shortfall?


----------



## Pale Rider (13 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I recall we have a wager on UK vs Germany death rates.
> 
> https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/why-i-voted-for-brexit.271529/page-28#post-6304384
> 
> I think Paddy Power would already have paid up.



UK daily case rates 6,000 and falling, Germany daily case rates 9,000 and rising.

I think Paddy will be keeping his powder dry for a while longer.


----------



## DCLane (13 Mar 2021)

Vaccine jab done this afternoon. A pleasant and very organised process in Dewsbury. Given the news elsewhere, and the multi-ethnic community I live in, those having their injections appeared to be similar to local population ethnicities.


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Mar 2021)

The whole health incidents after an Oxford-AZ jab seems to be very well reported Europe (plus Norway)-wide.
https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0307/1201536-astrazeneca-inquiry/
Should we assume that there have been no such incidents in UK (where more Ox-AZ doses have been given than the rest of world combined (assumed)) or are such adverse reaction event notification reporting being supressed here?
I expect the stats will show that the adverse events following immunisation (AEFIs) experienced are typical of the (normalised) population and no causal link with vaccination will be established. Perfectly reasonable to take a precautionary approach. There is a risk, though, that loud/unblanced reporting will undermine vaccine confidence/uptake.
In parallel, are we to assume that there have been no adverse incidents with other vaccines eg Pfizer-BioNTech across the world (Israel/USA/EU)? Or is this an EU 'B'ehavioural or anti-AZ recrimination issue?
https://www.euractiv.com/section/co...azeneca-covid-shots-after-blood-clot-reports/
[ETA]
"More than 11 million doses of AstraZeneca’s vaccine have so far been administered across the UK.
"In a statement, AstraZeneca said it had found no evidence of an increased risk of pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis in safety data of more than 10 million records, even when considering subgroups based on age, gender, production batch or country of use.
""In fact, the observed number of these types of events are significantly lower in those vaccinated than what would be expected among the general population,” it added."


----------



## midlife (14 Mar 2021)

I think Ireland have now suspended the use of AZ vaccine.


----------



## vickster (14 Mar 2021)

What’s the incidence of blood clots in Covid patients?
Friend of mine, Consultant anaesthetist in large tertiary referral centre says she’s seen a number of cases of Covid clots leading to limb amputation in young patients 
it can be a very nasty disease even if it doesn’t kill you


----------



## dodgy (14 Mar 2021)

The UK has given over 10 million doses of both the Oxford and Pfizer vaccine. Number of blood clot related events: Oxford = 13 Pfizer = 15 These numbers are no higher than what is seen in the general population (no increased risk).


----------



## PK99 (14 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> The UK has given over 10 million doses of both the Oxford and Pfizer vaccine. Number of blood clot related events: Oxford = 13 Pfizer = 15 *These numbers are no higher than what is seen in the general population *(no increased risk).



I had a dvt a few years ago.

Risk factors: male, 6ft and over 60

Turned out I know a goodly number of blokes my age who have had a DVT, it is MUCH more common than I would ever have thought.

Across the population it is 1 in 1000 per year


----------



## Buck (14 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The whole health incidents after an Oxford-AZ jab seems to be very well reported Europe (plus Norway)-wide.
> https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0307/1201536-astrazeneca-inquiry/
> Should we assume that there have been no such incidents in UK (where more Ox-AZ doses have been given than the rest of world combined (assumed)) or are such adverse reaction event notification reporting being supressed here?
> I expect the stats will show that the adverse events following immunisation (AEFIs) experienced are typical of the (normalised) population and no causal link with vaccination will be established. Perfectly reasonable to take a precautionary approach. There is a risk, though, that loud/unblanced reporting will undermine vaccine confidence/uptake.
> ...



all incidents should be reported by the patient or clinician using the MHRA Yellow Card scheme and this is actively encouraged via https://coronavirus-yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/

There have been a relatively small number of incidents (not just clots). Out of the thousands that we have administered we have had literally just a handful of patients who have felt feint (the majority of whom were already predisposed to such events) and zero adverse reactions in clinic or reported afterwards. 

The vaccine related thrombosis is reported to us as 1 in 136,000 which is lower than the natural incidence.


----------



## houblon (14 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Friend of mine, Consultant anaesthetist in large tertiary referral centre says she’s seen a number of cases of Covid clots...





dodgy said:


> The UK has given over 10 million doses of both the Oxford and Pfizer vaccine. Number of blood clot related events: Oxford = 13 Pfizer = 15 These numbers are no higher than what is seen in the general population (no increased risk).



Unfortunately the anecdote will have got halfway round the world before the statistic has got its shoes on


----------



## classic33 (14 Mar 2021)

Buck said:


> all incidents should be reported by the patient or clinician using the MHRA Yellow Card scheme and this is actively encouraged via https://coronavirus-yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/
> 
> There have been a relatively small number of incidents (not just clots). Out of the thousands that we have administered we have had literally just a handful of patients who have felt feint (the majority of whom were already predisposed to such events) and zero adverse reactions in clinic or reported afterwards.
> 
> The vaccine related thrombosis is reported to us as 1 in 136,000 which is lower than the natural incidence.


Well I got to spend four hours in the local A&E, via ambulance from the vaccination centre. Having been given the safer of two currently in use. 

Wondering now if the second would result in similar results.

Constant bombardment with text message's about it, and the importance of being part of the program, got me P'd off. Six a day since the appointment was confirmed.


----------



## vickster (14 Mar 2021)

houblon said:


> Unfortunately the anecdote will have got halfway round the world before the statistic has got its shoes on


Yep and will further delay the roll out in Europe for example


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Mar 2021)

@Buck - thank you. To be clear I was using the verb 'reporting' in a public media sense. Ch8 of the Green Book is very clear on adverse reaction event notification reporting - and I'm sure it's being done/followed with extra care during this vaccination programme.
@dodgy - thank you for the stats. The supply split between the two vaccines was about 50/50% - statistically the same as the blood clot split.
As @vickster says, press reporting of isolated adverse events cannot but hinder vaccine acceptance in populations ready to hear 'why not'. Macron's 'quasi-ineffective' remark (and others' less egregious behaviours) will have cost many European lives.
Second dose in a hospital setting @classic33 ? Clap on the back though! Bravo!


----------



## classic33 (14 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @Buck - thank you. To be clear I was using the verb 'reporting' in a public media sense. Ch8 of the Green Book is very clear on adverse reaction event notification reporting - and I'm sure it's being done/followed with extra care during this vaccination programme.
> @dodgy - thank you for the stats. The supply split between the two vaccines was about 50/50% - statistically the same as the blood clot split.
> As @vickster says, press reporting of isolated adverse events cannot but hinder vaccine acceptance in populations ready to hear 'why not'. Macron's 'quasi-ineffective' remark (and others' less egregious behaviours) will have cost many European lives.
> *Second dose in a hospital setting @classic33 ? Clap on the back though! Bravo!*


Clap on the back for what. Being put into A&E as a result?


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Mar 2021)

For being brave and going for it.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (14 Mar 2021)

.


classic33 said:


> the safer of two currently in use.



Sorry to hear you ended up in hospital, and hope all is well now. 

Intrigued to hear which you think is safer and why? AFAICT both have very similar safety profiles.


----------



## classic33 (14 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> .
> 
> 
> Sorry to hear you ended up in hospital, and hope all is well now.
> ...


Chest pain that isn't easing, and at least one fit/seizure/episode/call it what you want, during the night.

Was informed that due to previous adverse reactions to medications, the Pfizer one was classed as unsafe for me. Wait until the other was being used was the advice given.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (14 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Chest pain that isn't easing, and at least one fit/seizure/episode/call it what you want, during the night.
> 
> Was informed that due to previous adverse reactions to medications, the Pfizer one was classed as unsafe for me. Wait until the other was being used.



So you had the AZ one, right?

Small consolation, but COVID could be much worse, and your experience will help inform risk for others too.

I really hope you recover, very best wishes.


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Blames export restrictions (do they mean the UK and US?) https://www.thejournal.ie/astrazeneca-vaccine-delivery-shortfall-5380507-Mar2021/





roubaixtuesday said:


> Were they planning to import from India to make up the shortfall?


The contract between the EU and AZ for the vaccines specified that they were to be made only in the EU or in the UK (Clause 5.4). Any other site (eg India or USA) for manufacture that AZ wanted to use for EU supply had to be cleared with the EU first. I suspect we'd have heard about this.
Of course USA have a ban in place.
The Irish article quoted is just reiterating the frustration felt that the scheduled EU supply AZ thought in early January, with 'best reasonable efforts' they'd be able to achieve, were kiboshed by poor productivity in the Belgian AZ factory, and there was minimal spare to export from the UK. We don't know but I reckon several million doses of Ox-AZ HAS been exported to the EU (in Feb) from one or both of the UK sites (via Wrexham). And as we've heard from the UK Government, no C19 vaccine or vaccine components have been banned from export.
The precipitate pause in various EU countries of the use of Ox-Az vaccine till the blood clot events have been worked out will allow supplies to build up (assumed). For politicians, one can see the atractiveness of this approach, indulging/encouraging an over-precautionary 'stop'.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (14 Mar 2021)

Buck said:


> all incidents should be reported by the patient or clinician using the MHRA Yellow Card scheme and this is actively encouraged via https://coronavirus-yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/
> 
> There have been a relatively small number of incidents (not just clots). Out of the thousands that we have administered we have had literally just a handful of patients who have felt feint (the majority of whom were already predisposed to such events) and zero adverse reactions in clinic or reported afterwards.
> 
> The vaccine related thrombosis is reported to us as 1 in 136,000 which is lower than the natural incidence.



We have also done tens of thousands down here. In one clinic, in one afternoon, they had three anaphylactic events, in all of the other clinics combined we have had zero! Thank god I wasn't on that shift


----------



## Buck (14 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Well I got to spend four hours in the local A&E, via ambulance from the vaccination centre. Having been given the safer of two currently in use.
> 
> Wondering now if the second would result in similar results.
> 
> Constant bombardment with text message's about it, and the importance of being part of the program, got me P'd off. Six a day since the appointment was confirmed.



Hope you’re feeling better. Advice is second dose has to be administered in a hospital setting due to an adverse reaction so no mass vaccination centre or GPs (that’s if you want to have the second? )

Take care


----------



## Buck (14 Mar 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> We have also done tens of thousands down here. In one clinic, in one afternoon, they had three anaphylactic events, in all of the other clinics combined we have had zero! Thank god I wasn't on that shift



That would have been stressful for those involved!


----------



## randynewmanscat (14 Mar 2021)

houblon said:


> I believe there's considerable scepticism in France and Italy


Considerable understatement!


----------



## Craig the cyclist (14 Mar 2021)

Buck said:


> That would have been stressful for those involved!



Yeah, the colleague I know who was on that shift described it as 'a right f***ing laugh'


----------



## lane (15 Mar 2021)

All over 50s should be offered vaccine two weeks ahead of timetable. Surprisingly made possible by a large shipment of vaccine from India. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56407251


----------



## Ajax Bay (15 Mar 2021)

You would have thought there'd be better, closer places for India to send batches of Ox-AZ vaccine than here. Wockhardt (Wrexham) have the capacity to ship out over 700,000 doses a day - more than is needed for even the accelerated UK programme. Maybe the supplies from India are coming here so AZ can supply EU from UK (so staying within the AZ-EU Advance Purchase contract (Clause 5.4)) with enough doses for them to store for 10 days while they find scientists confident enough to explain the stats on blood clots.
My estimate is that sufficient first jabs for JCVI Gps 1-9 (over 50s plus plus) - 32M - will be delivered into arms by Easter Sunday (4 April).
The 32M assumes high 100% acceptance, btw. Every 3% below that is a million less (with which we can start the high 40s).


----------



## lane (15 Mar 2021)

Nottingham opened bookings to over 40s today by mistake - but those that have booked appointments are being honoured.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56407251


----------



## lane (15 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> You would have thought there'd be better, closer places for India to send batches of Ox-AZ vaccine than here. Wockhardt (Wrexham) have the capacity to ship out over 700,000 doses a day - more than is needed for even the accelerated UK programme. Maybe the supplies from India are coming here so AZ can supply EU from UK (so staying within the AZ-EU Advance Purchase contract (Clause 5.4)) with enough doses for them to store for 10 days while they find scientists confident enough to explain the stats on blood clots.
> My estimate is that sufficient first jabs for JCVI Gps 1-9 (over 50s plus plus) - 32M - will be delivered into arms by Easter Sunday (4 April).
> The 32M assumes high 100% acceptance, btw. Every 3% below that is a million less (with which we can start the high 40s).



700,000 a day from UK plus supplies from India? My post over the weekend Telegraph quoted as saying we will increase to 1m a day. Maybe that is the reason.


----------



## Rusty Nails (15 Mar 2021)

Will the Oxford AZ vaccine ever get fully accepted in the EU following the decision by many countries to pause its use until the latest scare over blood clots is resolved?

I have confidence that the science will show that the risk of blood clots is no greater in those vaccinated with the Oxford AZ than those without, but sadly there will be enough people who will now never have confidence in it that it will slow the vaccination programme down even further throughout Europe, resulting in further deaths.

My wife was just showing me comments on a forum she looks at where people in this country are saying there must be problems with it if so many other countries are banning it, and that they are worried that they might be offered it instead of the Pfizer vaccine.

Very worrying.


----------



## fossyant (15 Mar 2021)

How are you now @classic33 ?


----------



## classic33 (15 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> How are you now @classic33 ?


Lump is still there at the injection site.
Chest pain is still there, eases from time to time. Never quite going though.

I've not had any of the other reactions folk are listing though. Not even where the needle went in.

Thanks for asking though.


----------



## lane (15 Mar 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Will the Oxford AZ vaccine ever get fully accepted in the EU following the decision by many countries to pause its use until the latest scare over blood clots is resolved?
> 
> I have confidence that the science will show that the risk of blood clots is no greater in those vaccinated with the Oxford AZ than those without, but sadly there will be enough people who will now never have confidence in it that it will slow the vaccination programme down even further throughout Europe, resulting in further deaths.
> 
> ...



I see the European Medicine Agency have issued a statement saying it should still be used.

I agree there will be some impact on people in the UK, but personally don't know of anyone not having the vaccine because of what's happening in Europe, so hope it won't have too much impact. Plus in a couple of weeks, if not before, Europe will be back to using AZ I am sure. Sadly it will have an impact on deaths in the EU but less here I feel.


----------



## classic33 (15 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> For being brave and going for it.


First vaccination ever, with me knowing there was a chance something would go wrong. Brave or Barmy?

08:40 appointment, 08:49 the doctor made the call for the ambulance. Doctor who called for it made sure she didn't let go of me.

I'd got about 50 yards away before the head went tight, whilst feeling it was going to explode. Vision went, nothing in front of me, before returning as blurred vision. Someone stopped, to ask if I was alright, and all I could manage was "I'm going back". A choice between making my own way to A&E or back to where I'd come from. Volunteer on the door said she thought I was drunk due to being all over the place whilst walking in from the gate. I thought I'd walked a fairly straight line. Blurred vision went to double vision.

All the time this was going on the queue outside was getting longer, and they'd all to wait watching what was going on in front of them. What they thought who knows.

Corrected time in edit
Was 09:49, corrected to 08:49


----------



## mjr (16 Mar 2021)

ITV News: Coronavirus: What You Need To Know: What to say (and not say) to someone who's reluctant to get the vaccine https://www.spreaker.com/user/12084139/080321-covid-pod-dr-ranj


----------



## fossyant (16 Mar 2021)

Sounds scary @classic33 but at least the side effects were near the surgery. You were wary, quite rightly, but just think how bad it could have been if you caught the virus, and anyone not vaccinated has a high chance after June


----------



## Mo1959 (16 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> Sounds scary @classic33 but at least the side effects were near the surgery. You were wary, quite rightly, but just think how bad it could have been if you caught the virus, and anyone not vaccinated has a high chance after June


Why any more of a high chance than what the past year has been like?


----------



## fossyant (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> Why any more of a high chance than what the past year has been like?



No restrictions at all from June (end of).


----------



## Craig the cyclist (16 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> First vaccination ever, with me knowing there was a chance something would go wrong. Brave or Barmy?
> 
> 08:40 appointment, 09:49 the doctor made the call for the ambulance. Doctor who called for it made sure she didn't let go of me.
> 
> ...



I hope you have reported these extremely side effects?

https://yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> Sounds scary @classic33 but at least the side effects were near the surgery. You were wary, quite rightly, but just think how bad it could have been if you caught the virus, and anyone not vaccinated has a high chance after June


I'm as wary as hell about taking any medication, going on past experience. Never seems to end well.

This happened with the safer, for me, vaccine. What'll happen if the use the other for the second, hospital setting or not.

And for anyone who might feel I'm making a mountain out of a molehill, simple paracetamol has had me in A&E, so their use is out.


----------



## shep (16 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> No restrictions at all from June (end of).


Again, unless 'forced' into a position where you might be at risk just carry on taking the same precautions as you have for the past 12 months.


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Again, unless 'forced' into a position where you might be at risk just carry on taking the same precautions as you have for the past 12 months.


That's me "turkeyed' then!


----------



## shep (16 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> That's me "turkeyed' then!


How come, work I assume?


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> How come, work I assume?


Saturday was the first day in just under a year that I've been out of the house for more than three hours. I'm living with epilepsy, cancer and a known heart issue. Everything else is complicated by the epilepsy and it's treatment.


----------



## Unkraut (16 Mar 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> people in this country are saying there must be problems with it if so many other countries are banning it,


It's been suspended in several countries rather than banned, pending investigation. Having spoken to a friend of mine in England last night (now 65!) I thing the reporting of this in Britain is sometimes exaggerated.


Rusty Nails said:


> Will the Oxford AZ vaccine ever get fully accepted in the EU following the decision by many countries to pause its use until the latest scare over blood clots is resolved?


I was surprised to hear on the news last night that AZ is no longer being injected Germany-wide pending investigation.

Karl Lauterbach, SDP MP and epidemiologist whom I have come to respect, I think has rightly said vaccination should continue whilst the investigation is underway. It definitely needs investigating, but the potential loss of life through yet more delay in vaccinating is almost certainly more than due to the vaccine, if indeed with some people this is actually occurring. It is an extremely small number per million injected, and this is bound to happen with any vaccine injected in vast quantities.

I appreciate the vaccine has got something of an underserved bad reputation, but the health minister is now being over-cautious, listening to the worries of experts that don't imo justify the action taken. If the intention was to allay fears by proving the vaccine absolutely safe as far as that is possible the strategy may well backfire.


----------



## shep (16 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Saturday was the first day in just under a year that I've been out of the house for more than three hours. I'm living with epilepsy, cancer and a known heart issue. Everything else is complicated by the epilepsy and it's treatment.


That is bad news and obviously you are very vulnerable, however in the big scheme of things can't you just carry on being cautious as you have been?

You won't really be forced to go anywhere unsafe will you, apart from for your 2nd jab maybe.


----------



## mjr (16 Mar 2021)

Unkraut said:


> It's been suspended in several countries rather than banned, pending investigation.
> 
> I was surprised to hear on the news last night that AZ is no longer being injected Germany-wide pending investigation.


Scale of the suspension. Only Belgium in western Europe is now following the EMA advice to continue and their response is influenced by appointed experts more than politicians directly. Countries in red here have stopped using OxAZ and pink have limited use:


----------



## Mo1959 (16 Mar 2021)

I’m still probably irrationally reluctant to take it and this isn’t helping. I’ll need to make up my mind before Saturday as that’s when I’m supposed to get it.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I’m still probably irrationally reluctant to take it and this isn’t helping. I’ll need to make up my mind before Saturday as that’s when I’m supposed to get it.



What would be the key piece of information that will make you feel comfortable?


----------



## Mo1959 (16 Mar 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> What would be the key piece of information that will make you feel comfortable?


That it has been in bodies for at least two or three years with not the slightest sign of any side effects.


----------



## shep (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I’m still probably irrationally reluctant to take it and this isn’t helping. I’ll need to make up my mind before Saturday as that’s when I’m supposed to get it.


I know quite a few who have had the AZ one, after effects have ranged from absolutely nothing to at worst one chap felt 'really rough' for 17hrs.

Age group from 19 to 57.

Only you can decide really.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> That it has been in bodies for at least two or three years with not the slightest sign of any side effects.



Ah ok. Well that is simply impossible.

Have you cancelled your appointment so someone else can have it?


----------



## Milkfloat (16 Mar 2021)

It is incredibly sad that the reaction in Europe seems to be based more on politics than science. I know we Brits have always claimed to be different from Europe, but 11M doses in the UK without too many issues says a lot. I could understand it if they had very low active Covid case numbers, but they don't and they are rising.


----------



## dodgy (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I’m still probably irrationally reluctant to take it and this isn’t helping. I’ll need to make up my mind before Saturday as that’s when I’m supposed to get it.



A very good friend of mine lost his youngish wife to covid 2 weeks ago.


----------



## Archie_tect (16 Mar 2021)

I don't understand why someone wouldn't want to have the vaccine to be protected from Covid, but it is up to the individual.

There have been 37 reported blood clot incidents in 17 million people who have had an AZ vaccine. How many of those can be linked to taking the AZ vaccine?

How many incidents including deaths due to blood clots have occurred in people, over the same period, who haven't had the vaccine yet?


----------



## mjr (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> That it has been in bodies for at least two or three years with not the slightest sign of any side effects.


That's not really possible when the virus itself probably hasn't been in human bodies that long. The OxAZ has been in bodies since at least August 2020 if not before with few side effects, most of which have been scrutinised for safety.

Why two or three years? What do you expect to show up then which won't have shown up in a few months? I think (but I am not a medic so may have misunderstood the stuff about "shedding") that the published papers say the OxAZ vaccine itself has broken down and left the body within 28 days but the immune system effects remain.

I agree with the experts who estimate that the risk of vaccine side-effects is smaller than the risk of the virus. I would take it if offered, but I'd make sure I've a few days of supplies in, just in case I get the rare-but-more-common flu-like side-effect.

Whatever you decide, I wish you the best!


----------



## vickster (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> That it has been in bodies for at least two or three years with not the slightest sign of any side effects.


You'll never get any vaccine or medicinal product that has no side effects whatsoever. Do you take the flu jab usually?


----------



## Mo1959 (16 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> You'll never get any vaccine or medicinal product that has no side effects whatsoever. Do you take the flu jab usually?


Nope....and never had the flu.


----------



## vickster (16 Mar 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> I don't understand why someone would;dn't want to have the vaccine to be protected from Covid, but it is up to the individual.
> 
> There have been 37 reported blood clot incidents in 17 million people who have had an AZ vaccine. How many of those can be linked to taking the AZ vaccine?
> 
> How many incidents of death due to blood clots have occurred in people, over the same period, who haven't had the vaccine yet?


And how many people with Covid have died of blood clots / strokes / PEs as a result of Covid (as I said, there are even young people with Covid losing limbs as a result of clots)


----------



## dodgy (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> Nope....and never had the flu.



I've not needed the seatbelts in my car so far, but I always 'wear' them. Even that is a poor analogy, covid-19 isn't flu, it's way more contagious. I can't understand your logic at all, but respect your pause for thought. Hopefully you figure it out. I'm getting vaccinate for me, but also for that old person I stand next to in a pub, or the old lady I chat with at the bus stop etc


----------



## roubaixtuesday (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> That it has been in bodies for at least two or three years with not the slightest sign of any side effects.



As others have pointed out, this would preclude ever taking any medicine.

But on the risk/benefit of vaccination:

*Very* roughly
Ten million people in the UK have had COVID. Over 100,000 have died.
Ten million people in the UK have had the AZ jab. Nobody is known to have died.


----------



## C R (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I’m still probably irrationally reluctant to take it and this isn’t helping. I’ll need to make up my mind before Saturday as that’s when I’m supposed to get it.


If it is any comfort, I had the AZ vaccine on the 27th of February. Only side effect was about twelve hours of flu like muscle and joint aches, all fine otherwise. I am 48, generally healthy and fit, but with type 1 diabetes. Only you can make the decision for yourself, but the data indicates that the vaccine is safe.


----------



## mjr (16 Mar 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> It is incredibly sad that the reaction in Europe seems to be based more on politics than science.


I think it would be fairer to say "the British reporting of the reaction in Europe"



> I know we Brits have always claimed to be different from Europe, but 11M doses in the UK without too many issues says a lot. I could understand it if they had very low active Covid case numbers, but they don't and they are rising.


The mainland is in a very different situation in two major ways: starting with a more sceptical/hesistant population (which can hardly have been helped by an impression that AZ are sharp-suited Apprentices that duped the EC — and we could argue for more days whose fault that is); and having long land borders so they cannot vaccinate a few islands, restrict the borders and call it done as easily as the UK (which was Very Hard as we were told repeatedly in the other thread).

Also, cases are not rising uniformly across the EU, as posted in the other thread late last week, with Spain and Portugal seeing falls... Taking the EU as a whole, cases and deaths are fairly flat over the last two months, but France is a problem with the centrist government doing the wrong thing IMO, using what are effectively part-time regional lockdowns to try to avoid a general lockdown and flatlining around 350 confirmed cases per million, with death rate also pretty flat.

Czechia's still over the 1000/m cases 7-day average, Slovakia has a similar death rate to Czechia (20/m), and neighbouring Poland and Austria have been seeing steady increases, but Czechia, Slovakia and Poland are continuing to use OxAZ and Austria has only restricted it not stopped, which may be academic due to the supply problems. So, what to say? Being in the shoot seems to make countries keener on vaccines, unless you're French?


----------



## Milkfloat (16 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> I think it would be fairer to say "the British reporting of the reaction in Europe"
> 
> 
> The mainland is in a very different situation in two major ways: starting with a more sceptical/hesistant population (which can hardly have been helped by an impression that AZ are sharp-suited Apprentices that duped the EC — and we could argue for more days whose fault that is); and having long land borders so they cannot vaccinate a few islands, restrict the borders and call it done as easily as the UK (which was Very Hard as we were told repeatedly in the other thread).
> ...



I am not so sure that it is just a British press reaction. My colleagues in Europe are universally upset with their governments over the vaccine restrictions and the constant flip flopping on AZ, maybe they are not representative as they are highly educated, technical people with a world view and therefore not vaccine sceptics, but I don't think they are alone in the countries. As well as the counties you mentioned rates have risen considerably in countries such as Italy, Germany and Netherlands all of whom have banned the vaccine. The rates in Spain are rising again, not falling. Almost universally the scientists are backing the AZ jab, those governments who are suspending/blocking are seeding vaccine hesitancy, not resolving it.

40 cases of blood clotting out of 17 million is insignificant (with no deaths I believe), especially considering the risks that covid create of blood clotting itself.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> anyone not vaccinated has a high chance after June


Fossy - I appreciate you may trying to reinforce people's positivity towards vaccination, but allow me to point out that "anyone not vaccinated" has a vastly lower chance now than anytime in the last 6 months. Prevalence is low and continuing to fall, the 'R' in every region/nation of UK is well below 1 (0.6-0.8). By June, with 2/3rds of the population vaccinated (45M - first dose plus about half of those second dose as well) then chances of catching C19 in late June will be very low. Emerging variants of concern (with higher transmissibility) including ones brought into the country from overseas may complicate things, but within UK it's reasonable to hope/expect that the chance of catching C19 will be very low. And this is because of the long national lockdown which has turned round the exponential increases experienced Oct-Jan, so prevalence is low - and because other people (94% average) are accepting the vaccine. Even those vaccinated have a chance of catching C19, but they will be spared serious disease.
@Mo1959 - I am a similar age to you (assumed) and I have maybe had flu once. I had an Oxford-AZ jab (we are ahead of things in the SW) and had precisely no side effects. I encourage you to go for it; for you AND for others.


----------



## dodgy (16 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> for you AND for others



This needs to be driven home more in messaging. On so many forums, Twitter, etc, you hear people saying "it's not for *me*" or "I'm worried about side effects for *me*" or "insert other reason why it's inconvenient for *me*". It's not really about you, it's the greater good. We've just had probably the shittiest year since 1945, why would you not be part of the solution to kill this disease once and for all!?


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Only Belgium in western Europe is now following the EMA advice to continue


When you consider how reluctant the EU constituent nations were to authorise use of vaccines ahead of the EU's EMA, I do find it surprising that individual nations then choose, on the basis of an over-precautionary principle, to pause the use of Ox-AZ vaccine, despite the EMA still maintaining that the authorisation it gave remains valid.
"We can't start vaccinating till the EMA gives the 'OK' but we can stop whenever we like, ignoring the damage such irrational pausing and attention this will do to the overall vaccination programme" they might say.
Is there information which the wider public across Europe is not being told? Have the regulatory authorities in EU nations lost their marbles? How many blood clots have occurred after vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine? The UK figures are about a dozen post-vaccination blood clots for Oxford-AZ and Pfizer jabs each (and this is is typical of the incidence (or below it) in the normal population (aiui).
Think how many blood clot incidents there have been for those suffering from C19. Can't stop C19 on a precautionary basis though. Well not suddenly. But mass vaccination offers the way out - just get it done (as some politician said).


----------



## PK99 (16 Mar 2021)

.


Milkfloat said:


> 40 cases of blood clotting out of 17 million is insignificant (with no deaths I believe), especially considering the risks that covid create of blood clotting itself.



Meat on the bones of that from Spiegelhalter:


_Call it luck, chance or fate – it’s difficult to incorporate this into our thinking. So when the European Medicines Agency says there have been 30 “thromboembolic events” after around 5m vaccinations, the crucial question to ask is: how many would be expected anyway, in the normal run of things?

We can try a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation. Deep vein thromboses (DVTs) happen to around one person per 1,000 each year, and probably more in the older population being vaccinated. Working on the basis of these figures, out of 5 million people getting vaccinated, we would expect significantly more than 5,000 DVTs a year, or at least 100 every week. So it is not at all surprising that there have been 30 reports.

_There's no proof the Oxford vaccine causes blood clots. So why are people worried? | David Spiegelhalter | Opinion | The Guardian

And more on journalistic statistical ineptitude here:

How safe is the AstraZeneca jab? - UnHerd


----------



## Rusty Nails (16 Mar 2021)

Unkraut said:


> It's been suspended in several countries rather than banned, pending investigation. Having spoken to a friend of mine in England last night (now 65!) I thing the reporting of this in Britain is sometimes exaggerated.
> 
> I was surprised to hear on the news last night that AZ is no longer being injected Germany-wide pending investigation.
> 
> ...


The press and TV in the UK have all said it has been suspended rather than banned. Unfortunately people hear what they want to, and that is how rumours start. A bit like your last sentence and allaying fears.


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> This needs to be driven home more in messaging. On so many forums, Twitter, etc, you hear people saying "it's not for *me*" or "I'm worried about side effects for *me*" or "insert other reason why it's inconvenient for *me*". It's not really about you, it's the greater good. We've just had probably the shittiest year since 1945, why would you not be part of the solution to kill this disease once and for all!?


Because as "shitty" as this last year has been, I had my worst day last Saturday. That's including the nine "normal"* A&E visits last year(2020).

*Normal type for *me*.


----------



## cougie uk (16 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> That it has been in bodies for at least two or three years with not the slightest sign of any side effects.


Just wait until you hear about the 125k Covid deaths...


----------



## mjr (16 Mar 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> As well as the counties you mentioned rates have risen considerably in countries such as Italy, Germany and Netherlands all of whom have banned the vaccine. The rates in Spain are rising again, not falling.


The latest from Our World In Data doesn't agree about Spain, I did mention Italy in the other post as increasing and the picture is mixed in Germany and the Netherlands but I'd agree it looks like the start of a rise:
Italy: The death rate has increased +.56 deaths/m in a week, confirmed cases +43/m
Germany: deaths -0.44/m, c.cases +23/m
The Netherlands: deaths -0.43/m, c.cases +63/m
Spain: deaths -2.56/m, c.cases -2/m
(For comparison, UK: deaths -1.26/m, c.cases -2/m)

But all of these are considerably lower in current rate, increase or both than Czechia, Slovakia, Poland and Austria, so I don't think there's yet a strong enough incentive for politicians in Italy or Germany to overrule the regulators (suspensions were ordered by Agenzia Italia del Farmaco (AIFA) and the Paul Ehrlich Institute in Germany, but it was the Ministry of Health in Spain) and I think The Netherlands still has a lame duck caretaker government until elections tomorrow.



Ajax Bay said:


> Is there information which the wider public across Europe is not being told?


How do we know if we're not being told? I don't think anyone here has special access.



> Have the regulatory authorities in EU nations lost their marbles?


Only inquiries after the crisis will decide that.



> Think how many blood clot incidents there have been for those suffering from C19. Can't stop C19 on a precautionary basis though. Well not suddenly. But mass vaccination offers the way out - just get it done (as some politician said).


I don't think simplistically dismissing concerns and blindly steamrollering on would help either. That would be another quick way to destroy trust in the regulators IMO, if people start to feel that yellow cards are not being assessed sincerely. There is a lot of scope for stuff to go wrong with this and we must keep monitoring — but at the moment, it does seem that the vaccine is still worthwhile and some vaccination regulators are being overcautious, while hopefully some are assessing that they've got enough supply of other vaccines that they can afford to pause use of OxAZ.


----------



## mjr (16 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Because as "shitty" as this last year has been, I had my worst day last Saturday. That's including the nine "normal"* A&E visits last year(2020).
> 
> *Normal type for *me*.


Would you say that, ignoring the benefit of hindsight as much as you can, that being vaccinated was the correct decision based on what you knew at the time?

Would you advise someone with no history of adverse reactions to accept the vaccination?

In case I've not said it before: I hope you recover well and that your reaction informs the future treatment of yourself and many others.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (16 Mar 2021)

From Germany. Useful twitter thread laying out the reasons for suspension there.

Warning: contains nuance and acknowledgement of potential errors


View: https://twitter.com/olivernmoody/status/1371822984000847874


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Would you say that, ignoring the benefit of hindsight as much as you can, that being vaccinated was the correct decision based on what you knew at the time?
> 
> Would you advise someone with no history of adverse reactions to accept the vaccination?
> 
> In case I've not said it before: I hope you recover well and that your reaction informs the future treatment of yourself and many others.


I'd call it a crap decision on my part. Given what I knew at the time, which was practically nothing about what was going to be used. Based partly on the fact that the last time I took something new, clinical trial*, I spent just short of four months in hospital as a result, after less than a week on it. It's why I was as wary as hell about the whole thing. The Pfizer one was considered unsafe to be taken/used on me, so the safer one was used. It was also the first vaccination that I'd ever been given, the rest withheld on safety grounds by those who knew better than me.

Neither me nor thee can advise anyone on what medication they should/shouldn't use, because of a reaction to it. Nor should we make any attempt to. 
Paracetamol has put me in to A&E, but anyone can take that, can't they.

*It's been in use for a few years now, as far as I can find out. I'll not be going near it though.


----------



## dodgy (16 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Because as "shitty" as this last year has been, I had my worst day last Saturday. That's including the nine "normal"* A&E visits last year(2020).
> 
> *Normal type for *me*.


Yes we know you’ve had it tough. But you aren’t a typical case.


----------



## mjr (16 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> Yes we know you’ve had it tough. But you aren’t a typical case.


I am sure that helps @classic33 feel much better(!)

How about not asking "why would you not be part of the solution to kill this disease once and for all!?" so soon after someone has explained their resulting hospital trip? I feel it is pretty obvious that people hesitate to be vaccinated due to fears over their own health (some well founded) and not because they want the disease to continue.


----------



## shep (16 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Paracetamol has put me in to A&E,


Exactly this, obviously not a typical case.

This fella obviously has issues that I guess the vast majority of people don't, you wouldn't stop flying because half a dozen people a year had a blood clot would you?


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> Yes we know you’ve had it tough. But you aren’t a typical case.


And that somehow is supposed to help?

I got home on Saturday, at least one never left the A&E, whilst I was there, alive. 

I've never said I've had it rough, even calling this last year a minor inconvenience. And there's plenty more like me, just waiting for routine appointments to be restarted. When they do I'll have a chance to find out from some of those, how they've been over the last year.


----------



## dodgy (16 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> I am sure that helps @classic33 feel much better(!)
> 
> How about not asking "why would you not be part of the solution to kill this disease once and for all!?" so soon after someone has explained their resulting hospital trip? I feel it is pretty obvious that people hesitate to be vaccinated due to fears over their own health (some well founded) and not because they want the disease to continue.


It was a general comment for the masses not something specific. On general, people should get vaccinated unless you have valid reasons not to.


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Exactly this, obviously not a typical case.
> 
> If people are that concerned they haven't got to be vaccinated.


Paracetamol is an over the counter medication, has been for years now. This vaccination, and others are not.

How do you know how many people have adverse reactions to paracetamol?


----------



## shep (16 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Paracetamol is an over the counter medication, has been for years now. This vaccination, and others are not.
> 
> How do you know how many people have adverse reactions to paracetamol?


I would imagine there would be the odd news report around if A&E was inundated with Paracetamol reaction cases, but hey ho there may well be.


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> It was a general comment for the masses not something specific. On general, people should get vaccinated unless you have valid reasons not to.


First vaccination received in my life. How many have you had over the years? 
The common one's that most can expect to receive.


----------



## Kajjal (16 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Paracetamol is an over the counter medication, has been for years now. This vaccination, and others are not.
> 
> How do you know how many people have adverse reactions to paracetamol?


Like any other medications there is a detailed list of possible side effects and also groups of people who should not be using paracetamol without due consideration and in some of those cases expert medical advice due to existing conditions and interactions with other medications the patient is on. For paracetamol thankfully these are well documented.


----------



## Edwardoka (16 Mar 2021)

Without getting involved the current discussion (in which I have nothing constructive to add) I'm scheduled for my first on Friday night, probably AZ going by the trend in the numbers. However, I don't have a means of transport.

Those who've already had either (not including those who have had a serious adverse reaction): do you think cycling home afterwards will be manageable? I've seen the recommendation not to drive for at least 15 minutes, but the leaflet makes no mention of this. I live about 40 minutes away.


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Exactly this, obviously not a typical case.
> 
> This fella obviously has issues that I guess the vast majority of people don't, you wouldn't stop flying because half a dozen people a year had a blood clot would you?


I don't fly due to the epilepsy. UK airlines require a doctors letter giving a 24 hour seizure free period before the flight.


----------



## dodgy (16 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> First vaccination received in my life. How many have you had over the years?
> The common one's that most can expect to receive.


Just drop it mate. I still say people should get vaccinated. Sorry you got ill. That’s me out the thread.


----------



## classic33 (16 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> Without getting involved the current discussion (in which I have nothing constructive to add) I'm scheduled for my first on Friday night, probably AZ going by the trend in the numbers. However, I don't have a means of transport.
> 
> Those who've already had either (not including those who have had a serious adverse reaction): do you think cycling home afterwards will be manageable? I've seen the recommendation not to drive for at least 15 minutes, but the leaflet makes no mention of this. I live about 40 minutes away.


I think DCLane cycled there and back, with no problems.


----------



## Julia9054 (16 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> Without getting involved the current discussion (in which I have nothing constructive to add) I'm scheduled for my first on Friday night, probably AZ going by the trend in the numbers. However, I don't have a means of transport.
> 
> Those who've already had either (not including those who have had a serious adverse reaction): do you think cycling home afterwards will be manageable? I've seen the recommendation not to drive for at least 15 minutes, but the leaflet makes no mention of this. I live about 40 minutes away.


I have my first one tomorrow afternoon. I intend to cycle (about 20 minutes each way)


----------



## Pale Rider (16 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> Without getting involved the current discussion (in which I have nothing constructive to add) I'm scheduled for my first on Friday night, probably AZ going by the trend in the numbers. However, I don't have a means of transport.
> 
> Those who've already had either (not including those who have had a serious adverse reaction): do you think cycling home afterwards will be manageable? I've seen the recommendation not to drive for at least 15 minutes, but the leaflet makes no mention of this. I live about 40 minutes away.



I was fine after being Pfizered, apart from possibly feeling gummy the next day.

My regular nurses have told me there appears to be more incidents of adverse reaction from AZ, not least among their number.

That's usually confined to flu like symptoms resulting in a day or two in bed.

Either way, you ought to be OK to ride home.

Unless in the vanishingly unlikely event you suffer an immediate serious adverse reaction, in which case you won't be going home by car or bike.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 Mar 2021)

Same here: cycled down to the town vaccination (tennis) centre and back up the hill. No (car) parking issues.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 Mar 2021)

Emer Cooke, the Executive Director of the European Medical Agency (EMA) today:
The benefits of the Oxford-AZ vaccine in preventing death and hospitalisation outweigh the risks of side effects. At present there is no indication that vaccination has caused these conditions. The number of thromboembolic events overall in vaccinated people seems not to be higher than that seen in the general population. There had been similar reporting of blood clots related to other C19 vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna).
The EMA is the EU agency which authorises use of vaccines (and other medecines) and did so for the Ox-AZ vaccine, for all over 18s, on 29 Jan 2021.


----------



## C R (16 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> Without getting involved the current discussion (in which I have nothing constructive to add) I'm scheduled for my first on Friday night, probably AZ going by the trend in the numbers. However, I don't have a means of transport.
> 
> Those who've already had either (not including those who have had a serious adverse reaction): do you think cycling home afterwards will be manageable? I've seen the recommendation not to drive for at least 15 minutes, but the leaflet makes no mention of this. I live about 40 minutes away.


I had AZ, was going to cycle but my wife thought it would be a good idea to do some shopping from the Lidle next to the surgery, so took the car. I would have been fine to cycle back, as side effects didn't manifest until about 12h later.


----------



## Edwardoka (16 Mar 2021)

Thanks, all.

Ironically I'll be getting the jab in the same venue in which I saw Megadeth


----------



## Julia9054 (16 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> No (car) parking issues.


Exactly why I intend to cycle. That and the ridiculously large number of roadworks around here at the moment.


----------



## matticus (16 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> Thanks, all.
> 
> Ironically I'll be getting the jab in the same venue in which I saw Megadeth


Excellent!

(The vaccine centre I pass every day has a "CAUTION RUNNERS!" yellow sign zip-tied to the nearest lamp-post. I never noticed which event it was put up for.)


----------



## C R (16 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> Thanks, all.
> 
> Ironically I'll be getting the jab in the same venue in which I saw Megadeth


So you should be listening to this as you walk in to get the jab 

View: https://youtu.be/LnYTRJdMzKI


----------



## mjr (16 Mar 2021)

Sweden and Latvia join the list of those suspending OxAZ jabs, but Belgian Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke has called stopping OxAZ vaccinations "irresponsible". https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/16/mor...zeneca-shot-as-ema-reviews-side-effects-.html


----------



## Rusty Nails (16 Mar 2021)

matticus said:


> Excellent!
> 
> (The vaccine centre I pass every day has a "CAUTION RUNNERS!" yellow sign zip-tied to the nearest lamp-post. I never noticed which event it was put up for.)



That's people who were going to have the O-AZ vaccine but were scared off by the rumours.


----------



## shep (16 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Sweden and Latvia join the list of those suspending OxAZ jabs, but Belgian Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke has called stopping OxAZ vaccinations "irresponsible". https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/16/mor...zeneca-shot-as-ema-reviews-side-effects-.html


Glad I've had mine this afternoon in case they suspend it here, no-one is being forced to get vaccinated.

If people are unhappy about it then either get the other one, if possible, or go without and risk the obvious consequences.


----------



## LarryDuff (16 Mar 2021)

Suspending its use for a few weeks is a handy way of building up supplies for people who got their initial orders wrong.


----------



## randynewmanscat (16 Mar 2021)

The EMA said everything is good with the Astra vaccine but the damage has been done. It was covered thoroughly here and no doubt in the neighbouring countries, was in Holland for sure according to a friend there.
The viewers, listeners and readers saw the wall to wall coverage on dastardly Britain withholding the vaccines from the deserving Eurps and I think the story stuck so ears and eyes have been receptive to the new thrombo' story. More for you lot in blight, always an upside! 
The downside may be that you will be avoiding the mainland for a while at least, at the current rate of vaccinations and with a hole in their requirements they might reach herd immunity by this time next year.


----------



## randynewmanscat (16 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Glad I've had mine this afternoon in case they suspend it here, no-one is being forced to get vaccinated.
> 
> If people are unhappy about it then either get the other one, if possible, or go without and risk the obvious consequences.


It wont get suspended in the UK, vaccine sanity prevails in the UK.


----------



## shep (16 Mar 2021)

randynewmanscat said:


> It wont get suspended in the UK, vaccine sanity prevails in the UK.


It was a bit of a tongue in cheek comment in all fairness, only 1 person I know well has said he won't have it and that's out of around 30 close friends and family so in my circles sanity does seem to be prevailing.

Apart from my Daughter the people I'm referring to are all 50+ so whether younger people are equally keen I don't know.


----------



## randynewmanscat (16 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> It was a bit of a tongue in cheek comment in all fairness, only 1 person I know well has said he won't have it and that's out of around 30 close friends and family so in my circles sanity does seem to be prevailing.
> 
> Apart from my Daughter the people I'm referring to are all 50+ so whether younger people are equally keen I don't know.


They are not as keen as the older wiser chunk of the British population but they are very much less hesitant than the youngers of the richest nations in Europe.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Belgian Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke has called stopping OxAZ vaccinations "irresponsible". https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/16/mor...zeneca-shot-as-ema-reviews-side-effects-.html


The EU's supply of the Oxford-AZ vaccine is currently only produced at the Novasep plant in Seneffe (Belgium - SW of Brussels).
The Halix plant outside Leiden (also Belgium) is waiting on EMA regulatory approval and if it gets it (no hurry!) could produce more than 10M doses before the end of March.


----------



## randynewmanscat (16 Mar 2021)

I watched C4 Dispatches "long covid" focus on St Luke's Bradford, I have followed the stories of people who left hospital only to need an outpatients schedule for long after their unfortunate stays in intensive care and C4 did the story proud.
I have special interest in this due to past form, I think I may have had flu four times. The second time was in 1981 and I was as fit as the proverbial butchers dog at the time I caught it. I spent eight days in hospital and lost 20lb from my 149lb within the month that I fell ill. The leg muscles that pleased me to look at vanished, I think it took me seven months to fully recover.
Last time was late December 2020, I laughed it off as man flu on here but when I went out with the dogs during January I was wheezing badly and felt knackered on my return. I felt better by February and am as strong as a 60 year old might be now.
I'll take the thrombo', 5G, Bill Gates, unknown side effects over catching this one, I just do not seem to fair well with a flu type virus. Any possible risk is easily outweighed for me after watching the poor wretches on Dispatches.
Edit for stupidity!


----------



## newts (16 Mar 2021)

Dr John Campbell sums everything up very well as per usual in yesterday's podcast.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sjtrev8cZnk&list=RDCMUCF9IOB2TExg3QIBupFtBDxg&start_radio=1


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 Mar 2021)

randynewmanscat said:


> I watched C4 Dispatches "long covid" focus on St Luke's Bradford, I have followed the stories of people who left hospital only to need an outpatients schedule for long after their unfortunate stays in intensive care and C4 did the story proud.


There's some reporting that getting vaccinated has a beneficial therapeutic effect on those suffering from 'long-Covid'.


----------



## dodgy (16 Mar 2021)

Big leap in vaccinations week on week today, I think it might be even more pronounced as we go on this week.


----------



## Cirrus (16 Mar 2021)

According to this Poland seem to believe that there is a campaign of disinformation underway re the AZ vaccine, not a good look if true... 

https://www.newsweek.com/poland-off...sinformation-europe-divides-over-shot-1576614


----------



## gbb (16 Mar 2021)

Even our resident critic/cynic at work Alex, Latvian with a Russian heritage, who questions everything about British culture and politics...and often In a cynical, slightly mocking way...acknowledges the AZ question in Europe is just silly. Around 30 cases of blood clots in millions of doses, there can be no surprise there would be a handful of potential bad reactions. Even Alex can see its political and quite probably business driven.


----------



## Rusty Nails (16 Mar 2021)

The whole vaccine rollout is a huge embarrassment for the EU, and I cannot help but believe it is partly PR based, linked to their initial problems with AZ.......Vaccine rollout slow, blame AZ for the contract issue, then blame them for lack of efficacy in older people, then blame them for blood clot "safety problems". Not our fault Guv.


----------



## fossyant (16 Mar 2021)

Vaccines are using a very different technology now. It's not what was in the 1960's. I've had all the jabs as a kid, no issues. TB was wiped out by vaccines, that's nasty. Our insistance of global travel makes any virus spread fast. 

The blood clots - sorry but you take x amount of folk at any point in life, record them, y would get a blood clot within a short space of time of the sample. The get vaccine, then get blood clot is no different from normal expected cases without any vaccine. Folk get blood clots.

So much Social Media crap these days. 

I've got far more risk of me stacking it on my bike than any possible risk a vaccine could add to my life.... I've already smashed myself up far more.


----------



## PK99 (16 Mar 2021)

gbb said:


> Even our resident critic/cynic at work Alex, Latvian with a Russian heritage, who questions everything about British culture and politics...and often In a cynical, slightly mocking way...acknowledges the AZ question in Europe is just silly. Around 30 cases of blood clots in millions of doses, there can be no surprise there would be a *handful of potential bad reactions*. Even Alex can see its political and quite probably business driven.



But that is not what is being seen.

There is no evidence of any bad reactions resulting in blood clots

There are no more blood clots than would be expected without the vaccine

Risk across the whole population in 1 in 1000 or year

Risk for over 85 is 1 in 100 per year


----------



## fossyant (16 Mar 2021)

Son was jabbed today. Bit of a move on for him as he wouldn't let anyone stick a needle into him a few years ago. He's T1, and had a really bad phobia with needles from others - OK sticking himself.... went today, all OK. He got over it a couple of years ago, but it's not easy for T1's being 'in control' of 'sticking' themselves.... 

When came out from hospital with my busted spine, I had to have clot busters - I couldn't do it to myself. MrsF did it...


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

Well, had mine around quarter to 5 yesterday and as yet no side effects whatsoever, missus was the same, up ready for work so hopefully nothing will 'kick in' during the day but I'm pretty optimistic. 

Mate next door who's 50 is getting it today so things are moving well in 'Sunny Wolverhampton' 🌞.


----------



## gbb (17 Mar 2021)

PK99 said:


> But that is not what is being seen.
> 
> There is no evidence of any bad reactions resulting in blood clots
> 
> ...


Sorry, I maybe put it poorly, if I'm reading you right, I agree and know...I used the word 'potential'...to highlight the point these reactions have no definitive cause at the moment, and are quite likely to be normal rates without any AZ cause....as I said, even our resident cynic recognises it. European governments lurching toward banning the vaccines use is quite clearly political or business orientated...and they're playing with their citizens lives in doing so.


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

Unfortunately it might well affect people in this Country if they take on board the fears, there's enough sceptics about already.


----------



## Adam4868 (17 Mar 2021)

Got my appointment today for tommorow,I'm fifty two.My partner who's 49 has had notification to get it.


----------



## Bazzer (17 Mar 2021)

Well, if reports are to be believed, it looks like P& O cruises are going to announce passengers being required to provide proof of vaccination.


----------



## C R (17 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> Son was jabbed today. Bit of a move on for him as he wouldn't let anyone stick a needle into him a few years ago. He's T1, and had a really bad phobia with needles from others - OK sticking himself.... went today, all OK. He got over it a couple of years ago, but it's not easy for T1's being 'in control' of 'sticking' themselves....
> 
> When came out from hospital with my busted spine, I had to have clot busters - I couldn't do it to myself. MrsF did it...


There's a big difference between sticking yourself with insulin needles and sticking yourself with intramuscular needles. I do the former several times a day no probs, I tried doing the latter once and nearly fainted.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Mar 2021)

Over 50s, your time has come!
I have been keeping a beady eye on this webpage for bookings and they have changed the lower age limit to 'over 50s'
I said on Saturday: "I predict the NHS vaccine booking website will very soon be dropping the 'age' criterion down to 50."
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/
And 'Lo, it has come to pass'.
Vaccine supply and daily vaccination rate are ramping up. There are 4.6M 50-54 year olds in UK (a percentage will have had their first dose already in JCVI Gps 2,4 or 6), and daily rates will be half a million a day. Some will find that they are getting the Moderna mRNA vaccine - very effective (and the most expensive on the planet). The UK have an advance purchase contract for 17M doses of Moderna, for supply in 2021.


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2021)

Thanks @Ajax Bay , shared with brother and 50+ friends

at 48, I await the next update with baited breath


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

Good news indeed, do we think over 40's will have been done before June 21st at this pace?


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Good news indeed, do we think over 40's will have been done before June 21st at this pace?


Should be (at least first jab) given the aim is to do groups 1-9 by mid April


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Should be (at least first jab) given the aim is to do groups 1-9 by mid April


Nice one, at least that should ease the concerns of many in that age group.


----------



## fossyant (17 Mar 2021)

C R said:


> There's a big difference between sticking yourself with insulin needles and sticking yourself with intramuscular needles. I do the former several times a day no probs, I tried doing the latter once and nearly fainted.



I used to have a rather large needle every two weeks - when I was in hospital with the broken spine, most of the nurses wouldn't touch the needle as it was rather 'large' - they got the senior nurse to do it. No longer on them as I had a massive swelling from one injection, so moved on to a 'topical' application that is every day - burns the skin, but it's better than trying to get to the GP every two weeks, especially in covid times.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Good news indeed, do we think over 40's will have been done before June 21st at this pace?


If the vaccination programme accelerates to the daily 'doses administered' rate widely suggested (4M a week) then my estimate for completing the over 40s (there are 8.4M 40-49s in UK) is 2 May. And by then nearly all the JCVI Gps 1-4 (overs 70s plus H&SCW plus CEV) will have received their second jab.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

First dose only is not completion.


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> If the vaccination programme accelerates to the daily 'doses administered' rate widely suggested (4M a week) then my estimate for completing the over 40s (there are 8.4M 40-49s in UK) is 2 May. And by then nearly all the JCVI Gps 1-4 (overs 70s plus H&SCW plus CEV) will have received their second jab.


So a full Month before restrictions are fully lifted (at the earliest) the over 40's should have been jabbed, gives it time to work.

Great news for most of this Forum I would have thought?


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

Bazzer said:


> Well, if reports are to be believed, it looks like P& O cruises are going to announce passengers being required to provide proof of vaccination.


If they do that before general availability of second doses, I expect a court case for age discrimination. British Airways as most likely first target.


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> First dose only is not completion.


Correct, would people not feel a little safer though I wonder?

Also, by August the 2nd dose would have been administered I guess?


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> So a full Month before restrictions are fully lifted (at the earliest) the over 40's should have been jabbed, gives it time to work.
> 
> Great news for most of this Forum I would have thought?


In the words of Roy Walker, "It's good, but it's not right" as derestricting will see cases surge in younger people, mostly asymptomatic but not all, and giving a breeding ground for new variants of concern.

We're so close to sidelining this virus. Why give up three or four months short and risk waves 4 and probably 5 and reversing back into restrictions, for the sake of indoor boozing and ents?


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Correct, would people not feel a little safer though I wonder?
> 
> Also, by August the 2nd dose would have been administered I guess?


Yes to both, I think, but feeling safer will probably mean increased risk-taking and the vaccines aren't certainties, so that is a danger which there does not seem to be a huge amount of emphasis in in the TV ads and so on.


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> In the words of Roy Walker, "It's good, but it's not right" as derestricting will see cases surge in younger people, mostly asymptomatic but not all, and giving a breeding ground for new variants of concern.
> 
> We're so close to sidelining this virus. Why give up three or four months short and risk waves 4 and probably 5 and reversing back into restrictions, for the sake of indoor boozing and ents?


Sorry, don't understand what's 'not right'?

My opinion that it might be 'Great news for the people on this forum'?

It's only my opinion don't forget, if people on this forum don't think it's good news then I'm obviously wrong.

Everything else you've said is your opinion and your're entitled to it.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Sorry, don't understand what's 'not right'?
> 
> My opinion that it might be 'Great news for the people on this forum'?


No, that we are derestricting before general availability of the vaccines.

I think Boris is just determined to beat the world on this, even if it kills us (well, more of us). That means he wants to derestrict before Biden's 4th July target.


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> No, that we are derestricting before general availability of the vaccines.
> 
> I think Boris is just determined to beat the world on this, even if it kills us (well, more of us). That means he wants to derestrict before Biden's 4th July target.





shep said:


> So a full Month before restrictions are fully lifted (at the earliest) the over 40's should have been jabbed, gives it time to work.
> 
> Great news for most of this Forum I would have thought?


Oh I see,

Thought I said the above?

Again, YOU haven't GOT to go down the Pub or anywhere else for that matter until YOU feel safe surely?


----------



## Bazzer (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> If they do that before general availability of second doses, I expect a court case for age discrimination. British Airways as most likely first target.


Sorry, don't get the British Airways connection.

The first phase included health and social care workers and care home workers, who will be of all ages.
Also at least according to the report, it is trips departing from June. As currently 1.6m have had both jabs, a figure which is increasing and at 1 March (to allow for the 12 week gap), 20m had been vaccinated. Whilst the majority of the 20m will be older age groups, the demographic vaccinated may well be those who would go on a UK cruise.

I do also wonder if it is a toe in the water to see what the reaction is and one which will be closely watched both by other businesses? After all ships cannot just be unmothballed (?) overnight and if proof of having two vaccinations gets the wheels turning for some businesses, I can see others going down that route.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Mar 2021)

The suggestion that "we are derestricting before general availability of the vaccines" [ @mjr ] is manifestly wrong (UK perspective) - see detail below.
So "even if it kills us (well, more of us)" is verging on histrionic, or the uber-pessimistic or super-precautionary (look where that principle is costing lives).
The idea that the UK is 'in competition' with the USA over who can relax restrictions first is laughable. Both nations (indeed all nations) are trying to steer a course between rocks and a hard place. The UK has the tide with it and excellent charts (much improved from last year's experience).
I think it laudable that 'Global Britain' is making its best efforts to emerge from the pandemic, in the interest of its citizens, who are (mostly ) no doubt as determined as their leaders 'to beat the world' (would we prefer to 'lose to the world'?) and start living again.
This path is a combination of a determined vaccination programme and a prudently phased relaxation of restrictions, with an eye on 'data not dates'. By mid June, ready for the 'no earlier than' date for the last change, 50M first doses will have been given and of that 50M, 30M will have received their second jab. This is nearly all over 20s: 75% of the whole population - I'd call that a "general availability of the vaccine".


----------



## BrumJim (17 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> If the vaccination programme accelerates to the daily 'doses administered' rate widely suggested (4M a week) then my estimate for completing the over 40s (there are 8.4M 40-49s in UK) is 2 May. And by then nearly all the JCVI Gps 1-4 (overs 70s plus H&SCW plus CEV) will have received their second jab.


Not yet 50 (only months away, though), and I've been invited in for a jab.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

Bazzer said:


> Sorry, don't get the British Airways connection.


It says in the report you linked that BA are also preparing to require vaccination. I reckon someone is more likely to complain about BA than P&O Cruises.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Oh I see,
> 
> Thought I said the above?
> 
> Again, YOU haven't GOT to go down the Pub or anywhere else for that matter until YOU feel safe surely?


And you don't like anyone discussing their decision-making about that, I remember, and you disagree that the consequences of unnecessarily higher prevalence are unfair to those shielding. But happily, we are still allowed to discuss the approach, and other points. This is a public discussion thread, not a personal wall.


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> And you don't like anyone discussing their decision-making about that, I remember, and you disagree that the consequences of unnecessarily higher prevalence are unfair to those shielding. But happily, we are still allowed to discuss the approach, and other points. This is a public discussion thread, not a personal wall.


Discuss anything you like, I can't recall saying you can't or that I dislike it?

Are your personal opinions any less valid than mine, I would like to think not.

You have very strong opinions on when people should be 'let out' and I will follow what the Government say, you can do as you please.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Discuss anything you like, I can't recall saying you can't or that I dislike it?


Certainly the impression given by repeated posts like https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/coronavirus-outbreak.256913/post-6347097

I never said that your opinions were worth less and of course I've strong opinions on decisions that may kill my friends and family. What kind of heartless swine wouldn't?


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/coronavirus-outbreak.256913/post-6347097
> 
> I never said that your opinions were worth less and of course I've strong opinions on decisions that may kill my friends and family. What kind of heartless swine wouldn't?


I said I don't know why you could be ar*ed to post all the stats, It's a bit different to saying I don't like it or that you can't.

Again,

Your friends and Family can all ensure they're being cautious, at what stage would you feel comfortable resuming 'normal life'?


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The suggestion that "we are derestricting before general availability of the vaccines" [...] 75% of the whole population - I'd call that a "general availability of the vaccine".


75% and restricted by age with an ability modifier is not General Availability. Excluded minorities matter. We shouldn't throw fairness out of the window just because the beginning of the end is in sight.

"General availability, abbreviated as GA, refers to when a product is made widely available to users. It is the phase when all activities necessary to make the solution accessible to the general public for purchase are well underway." https://productfolio.com/general-availability/


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

C'mon then @mjr at what point would you have us out?

You're a Man of numbers and stat's, it's clearly a Data rather than Date thing I accept that but when will you be happy to 'emerge'?


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> I don't know why you could be ar*ed to post all the stats


To be fair, @shep , @mjr doesn't post many stats, any more than you do.
He does offer some useful definitions though, for eg: 'wavelet', 'wave', 'general availability' which sometimes founder on the 'applicability' to vaccines or pandemic NPI management tests.
I'm waiting for "excluded minorities" (is that minors eg under 16 for whom we await evidence on vaccine safety and efficacy?),
And as a real tester "fairness".


----------



## shep (17 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> To be fair, @shep , @mjr doesn't post many stats, any more than you do.
> He does offer some useful definitions though, for eg: 'wavelet', 'wave', 'general availability' which sometimes founder on the 'applicability' test.
> I'm waiting for "excluded minorities" (is that minors eg under 16 for whom we await evidence on safety and efficacy?),
> And as a real tester "fairness".


Sorry, when you lot get going I'm hard pushed to keep up!


----------



## stowie (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> Sorry, when you lot get going I'm hard pushed to keep up!



I have just deleted a post because since I started writing it, other posts have either said the same thing or superceeded it.

Does cycling increase typing speed? 😄


----------



## Bazzer (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> It says in the report you linked that BA are also preparing to require vaccination. I reckon someone is more likely to complain about BA than P&O Cruises.


They may well do, but ultimately BA has to ensure passenger safety. Filling an aluminium tube with people and recycling the air therein, in the knowledge that some in said aluminium tube are not fully vaccinated, (leaving to one side the efficacy of one jab or two), against a disease which has caused the death of millions in the last 12 months, sounds to me like a recipe for the engagement of m' learned friend. 
It will also have to comply with government rules, both UK and overseas and I would be extremely surprised if the parent company IAG, has not already been in discussions with governments, whether formally or informally, about how air travel can resume. Despite the economic damage which is being caused, it isn't hard to see some governments imposing restrictions on who can visit their countries, as we or they, move out of restrictions.


----------



## MontyVeda (17 Mar 2021)

all over 50s now allowed... off for mine tomorrow


----------



## Rusty Nails (17 Mar 2021)

Von der Leyen is now threatening to restrict vaccine supplies to the UK from the EU because we (Oxford AZ) are not being fair with our delivery of vaccines to them.

This is going to get nastier.


----------



## MrGrumpy (17 Mar 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Von der Leyen is now threatening to restrict vaccine supplies to the UK from the EU because we (Oxford AZ) are not being fair with our delivery of vaccines to them.
> 
> This is going to get nastier.


Yes...... it’s not half. On one hand we have countries n the EU stopping the AZ vaccine due to risks but at the same time they now want to halt exports. Still think Brussels have f.....d up and dithered too long assessing the vaccine. The cynic in me thinks this is all a ruse to make sure they have more supplies of AZ .


----------



## lazybloke (17 Mar 2021)

Family holiday season is very lucrative for the travel industry, so I'm certain that BA and other carrires will allow children with nothing more than a recent negative test result.

Why not have the same exemption others too? can't see the carriers being fussy about accepting cash.


But overseas travel is not for me. Far too much uncertainy around travel arrangements, poor availability of amenities at the destination, other restrictions, risk of travel disruption, last minute imposition of quarantine requirements etc. 
Imaging the disappointment of havin to cancel at short notice.

I'd rather minimise that risk, so I've opted for a UK holiday again this year.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Mar 2021)

The problem with these threats of export control, veiled and/or caveated, is that the mitigation is stockpiling doses to make sure a nation's got second doses of the same make available when needed. In UK this is a contingency issue only for its supplies of Pfizer-BioNTech doses. The downside is that rates of vaccination are liable to be adversely affected and additional lives (of under 50s) will be lost.
And in addition does nothing (or is negative) for vaccine acceptance/uptake. Will cause friction (the front brake cable I've just replaced had unnecessary friction 'tween inner and outer, adversely affecting the brake's operation).
In much of the EU, stocks of the Oxford-AZ vaccine are stacking up in cold storage because most EU nations have initiated a pause in its use. The EU will be stuffed if Belgium decides to stop exports to other EU countries!!! Of course it hasn't sufficient residual sovereignty to do so, even if it was bonkers enough to consider it.
Hancock, answering the BBC question, has used the EU Commission President's own words (regarding manufacturers honouring contracts) to demonstrate why these EU suggestions are ill founded and benefit noone, least of all the EU.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Mar 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Von der Leyen is now threatening to restrict vaccine supplies to the UK from the EU because we (Oxford AZ) are not being fair with our delivery of vaccines to them.
> 
> This is going to get nastier.



Nah.

It's just grandstanding for home consumption. Nothing will come of it. Same as our threatening the Chinese with battleships.


----------



## randynewmanscat (17 Mar 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> The whole vaccine rollout is a huge embarrassment for the EU, and I cannot help but believe it is partly PR based, linked to their initial problems with AZ.......Vaccine rollout slow, blame AZ for the contract issue, then blame them for lack of efficacy in older people, then blame them for blood clot "safety problems". Not our fault Guv.


Its more than an embarrassment Rusty, it is a disaster for individuals and the economies of the member states. I am a Europhile but if someone asked me if I thought something was wrong with the EU aside from the crap CAP I would mention the insipid vaccine none "rollout".
It would be funny if I was not affected as far as their economies go but there is nought for me to laugh at with the obviously later to be counted extra deaths.


----------



## lane (17 Mar 2021)

Warning of significant reduction in vaccine availability from end of March. This seems lower than was envisaged and may be exacerbated by export restrictions from EU.

BBC are saying this is not normal lumpyness in supply but an unanticipated reduction that will slow progress on over 40s. Although Government still say they will meet end of July target but earlier now looking less likely.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56435549

Edit Guardian calling it "a major shortage"


----------



## Rusty Nails (17 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Nah.
> 
> It's just grandstanding for home consumption. Nothing will come of it. Same as our threatening the Chinese with battleships.



I hope so, but like the legal action over our unilateral decision on the Brexit deal over NI, they could be serious.


----------



## Bazzer (17 Mar 2021)

Channel 4 reporting that half of the AZ vaccine in Europe is unused.


----------



## dodgy (17 Mar 2021)

Bazzer said:


> Channel 4 reporting that half of the AZ vaccine in Europe is unused.



I predict legal action by some member states in months to come against central Eu executive branch. They're risking life, I can't believe they're being like this!


----------



## midlife (17 Mar 2021)

Wife tried to book a vaccine slot today as over 50. Would not let her book as she is not a carer.


----------



## MrGrumpy (17 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> I predict legal action by some member states in months to come against central Eu executive branch. They're risking life, I can't believe they're being like this!


It does not look great and to the rest of the world it reeks of bully boy tactics


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Mar 2021)

.


dodgy said:


> I predict legal action by some member states in months to come against central Eu executive branch. They're risking life, I can't believe they're being like this!



The EU have done literally nothing to stop member states using the AZ vaccine. Indeed, EMA have explicitly said it's safe to continue. It's entirely individual member states. So they'd need to sue themselves.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Von der Leyen is now threatening to restrict vaccine supplies to the UK from the EU because we (Oxford AZ) are not being fair with our delivery of vaccines to them.
> 
> This is going to get nastier.


Actual statement at https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/STATEMENT_21_1222 is noticeably absent of any mention of UK, but has plenty of criticism of AZ for delivering only a third of the order.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> .
> 
> 
> The EU have done literally nothing to stop member states using the AZ vaccine. Indeed, EMA have explicitly said it's safe to continue. It's entirely individual member states. So they'd need to sue themselves.


Shush! Don't let facts get in the way of the UK press "EC bad" narrative!


----------



## lane (17 Mar 2021)

The EU and the member states have done an equally poor job overall


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Wife tried to book a vaccine slot today as over 50. Would not let her book as she is not a carer.


She shouldn't need to be if using this link in England
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Actual statement at https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/STATEMENT_21_1222 is noticeably absent of any mention of UK, but has plenty of criticism of AZ for delivering only a third of the order.



It's a load of arse covering crap though, I have to say.

That any of these vaccines are being produced at continent scale at all yet is an astonishing feat.

That some are slightly behind what they'd hoped is entirely unsurprising, and if Von der Leyen had signed up faster they'd likely have got them faster.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

shep said:


> C'mon then @mjr at what point would you have us out?
> 
> You're a Man of numbers and stat's, it's clearly a Data rather than Date thing I accept that but when will you be happy to 'emerge'?


Sheesh. I have to do other things and you take it as a sleight!

I would not remove the last restrictions until case numbers are within what can be traced. As for being "out", I would have removed the blanket "stay at home" restrictions for adults already and be allowing much outdoor activity and sales across thresholds, but I would also be doing much else differently, as posted previously.

I'm happy to go out once cases are below 0.1%/week, if spaced and outdoors, so I would already be out if there was anywhere open! I probably would not go indoors or use a train or bus unless all areas en route were a bit lower than that, maybe down to 0.03%/week.


----------



## midlife (17 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> She shouldn't need to be if using this link in England
> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/



Thanks, will check tomorrow


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> It's a load of arse covering crap though, I have to say.


It is not great but it is also not a direct attack on the UK.



> , and if Von der Leyen had signed up faster they'd likely have got them faster.


No evidence for that. I doubt a UK firm making a UK university's vaccine in UK factories would export it and tell Boris he did not order soon enough, or that he would take it lying down if so. But others here disagree and we will never know.

One interesting thing in the statement is how much has been exported from the EU, compared to the UK where none has yet been confirmed despite what some on this forum suspect.


----------



## dodgy (17 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> .
> 
> 
> The EU have done literally nothing to stop member states using the AZ vaccine. Indeed, EMA have explicitly said it's safe to continue. It's entirely individual member states. So they'd need to sue themselves.



Fair enough, I'm not that knowledgeable on the shenanigans going on, but what a mess.


----------



## randynewmanscat (17 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> TB was wiped out by vaccines, that's nasty


Polio. There is a man who used to work at my LBS who finished my wheels off after I laced them (I'm a cheap skate, was a lifetime ago) and he had one good leg and one bad leg. He was born just before the start of the national polio vaccination campaign. 
Credit where its due for the indomitable human spirit, he used to turn in mid table 10's on the club TT's.


----------



## Rusty Nails (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Actual statement at https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/STATEMENT_21_1222 is noticeably absent of any mention of UK, but has plenty of criticism of AZ for delivering only a third of the order.



I would have said conspicuously absent, as in the elephant in the room.

_"If the situation does not change, we will have to reflect on how to make exports to *vaccine-producing countries *dependent on their level of openness. So we are exporting a lot to countries *that are themselves producing vaccines. *And we think this is an invitation to be open. So that we also see exports from those countries coming back to the European Union.

And the second point that is of importance for us: We will reflect on whether exports to countries, *who have higher vaccination rates than us,* are still proportionate." _

Now who could she have been talking about, I wonder?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> No evidence for that.



According to both EU and AZ, they signed up two or three months after the UK did.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> I doubt a UK firm making a UK university's vaccine in UK factories would export it and tell Boris he did not order soon enough, or that he would take it lying down if so



No, Johnson would be coming out with the exact same arse covering crap that Von der Leyen is. That doesn't stop it being a load of crap, and I'm guessing you'd probably be right at the front of the queue saying so in those circumstances!


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> According to both EU and AZ, they signed up two or three months after the UK did.


Indeed but there is no evidence that jabs are allocated on who signed first, rather than (say) who is paying more.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Indeed but there is no evidence that jabs are allocated on who signed first, rather than (say) who is paying more.



AZ have stated, and indeed are contractually obliged by their license with Oxford (Oxford refused to collaborate with firms who wouldn't do this) to provide _at cost price_

Signing up to the contracts enabled investment in supply chains; specifically a UK based supply chain first, then an EU based supply chain when (later) the EU signed up.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> AZ have stated, and indeed are contractually obliged by their license with Oxford (Oxford refused to collaborate with firms who wouldn't do this) to provide _at cost price_


And yet, reportedly, the EU is paying about €2/dose, the UK €3/dose and SA €5.50/dose. How all of those work out as cost price will be an interesting exercise in accounting in a year or two.



> Signing up to the contracts enabled investment in supply chains; specifically a UK based supply chain first, then an EU based supply chain when (later) the EU signed up.


And yet, AZ offered to fulfil its EU contract from both EU and UK factories, so should one EU factory not performing optimally really produce a 66% reduction in Q1 supply and a >50% reduction in Q2? No wonder Italy thought it smelt a rat and blocked an export from EU factories to Australia.

But we discussed this many pages ago. I doubt I will convince you that this is an AZ screwup as much as an EC one: it seems the EC signed a contract without enough remedies for the situation they are now suffering, but it also seems like AZ effectively included in the sale UK production that was really zero because it was all already sold to the UK, seeing a way to handle any shortfall by sending letters.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> _"If the situation does not change, we will have to reflect on how to make exports to *vaccine-producing countries * [...] And the second point that is of importance for us: We will reflect on whether exports to countries, *who have higher vaccination rates than us,* are still proportionate." _
> 
> Now who could she have been talking about, I wonder?


Do you really wonder? As of 15 March, according to Our World In Data:
EU vaccinated: 3.5%
UK vaccinated: 2.5%
USA vaccinated: 11.5%


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> And yet, reportedly, the EU is paying about €2/dose, the UK €3/dose and SA €5.50/dose. How all of those work out as cost price will be an interesting exercise in accounting in a year or two.



Upfront payments were, I believe, made to enable those supply chain investments, hence lower prices, total cost the same. SA didn't do that.



mjr said:


> it also seems like AZ effectively included in the sale UK production that was really zero because it was all already sold to the UK, seeing a way to handle any shortfall by sending letters.



Your repeated attempts to insinuate AZ are somehow screwing people over prices are bizarre and ridiculous, given their prices are small fractions of the other pharmas here. In fact downright obsessive.

It seems far more likely that AZ are in the situation they say they are - that it's proved harder than expected to get the volumes, but they're making all efforts they can to sort it out.


----------



## mjr (17 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Your repeated attempts to insinuate AZ are somehow screwing people over prices are bizarre and ridiculous, given their prices are small fractions of the other pharmas here. In fact downright obsessive.


No insinuations. Your attempts to absolve them and blame it on signing date seem strange to me. Also, while the others are charging more, they are also delivering as contracted.



> It seems far more likely that AZ are in the situation they say they are - that it's proved harder than expected to get the volumes, but they're making all efforts they can to sort it out.


I don't dispute that, but it doesn't explain why the EU seems to bear the brunt of the shortfall, at the same time as AZ attempts to export doses from the EU to elsewhere and doesn't ship any doses from the EU-contracted UK factories, not even as a Boris-co-opted grandstanding move.

AZ fans can bleat about 16 or whatever EU countries suspending use for a few days, but that vaccine reportedly has a six month shelf life and 11 countries there are still using it, but they're getting on average just a third of their AZ order this quarter.


----------



## Unkraut (17 Mar 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Von der Leyen is now threatening to restrict vaccine supplies to the UK from the EU because we (Oxford AZ) are not being fair with our delivery of vaccines to them.


Interestingly this was not on tonight's news! Mind you, the BBC got the news of the fall of the Berlin wall out before the German broadcasters, which severely rankled the Germans and highly amused me.

I can well understand the frustration at AZ having not met its contractual agreement on time, although we all know things might have been better if ... . I wish someone would get a thicker and tighter mask to cover von der Leyen's mouth. 

The reason for Germany suspending the use of AZ vaccine is due to a mentality that pre-dates the pandemic. An obsession on the part of politicians and the state they run to try to remove as much risk as possible, whatever the cost. Almost pointless fire regulations would be a good example. They are right to investigate the new possible side effect - I believe this has hardly occurred in Britain as older people were injected with AZ and the blood clots are occurring in younger mostly females. 

Suspending use seems silly to me - the rate of injection yesterday was down 30% from the day before. AZ for whatever reason has a bad reputation anyway, this won't improve it and the infection rate is rising. Vaccination is the way out of this and the health minister has listened to experts worrying about a small risk and has lost sight of the greater risk to lives and livelihoods by not keeping on with it.

For all its failings, there is a danger of overdoing the 'catastrophe' 'disaster' rhetoric regarding the EU procurement. America is restricting all output to inject Americans only (it's still _America First_), Canada and Mexico are being supplied by (geographical) Europe, though I don't know if this includes the UK. This is bound to delay the rate of injection in Europe, and at least the supply side is now improving. Curevac might be on the market by June. Providing the EMA gets on with it!

A German investigative journalist has just published a book covering the first year of the pandemic in Europe. I wasn't going to get it, but I think I might as I really would like to know exactly what has gone on regarding EU procurement. This might decide who I vote for in the general election in September. Failures - mainly in actually getting things done - since last autumn might yet cost the conservatives the election, there is particular anger at the vaccine implementation. Severe losses in two State elections on Sunday. I voted for the first time, and not conservative!!


----------



## PK99 (17 Mar 2021)

Unkraut said:


> They are right to investigate the new possible side effect - I believe this has hardly occurred in Britain as older people were injected with AZ and *the blood clots are occurring in younger mostly females.*



Do you have a source for that please.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (17 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> No insinuations.



Right. If you say so.



mjr said:


> Indeed but there is no evidence that jabs are allocated on who signed first, rather than (say) who is paying more.


----------



## Unkraut (17 Mar 2021)

PK99 said:


> Do you have a source for that please.


I think it was an interview I saw yesterday with Karl Lauterbach a German SPD MP and Prof Dr etc etc in epidemiology. He was strongly arguing the vaccinations should continue at the same time as the investigation, and also worried by the damage to AZ's fragile reputation. 

If not him then it was the news, but I'm pretty sure it was Lauterbach. There is so much of this at the moment it is difficult not to get maxed out on it!


----------



## lane (17 Mar 2021)

PK99 said:


> Do you have a source for that please.



The link below suggests it is people between 20 and 50. Don't know how authoritive the article Is but appears balanced and contains some interesting information. We have of course vaccinated many people under 50 in the UK and we do not appear have any reported cases. 

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...ety-experts-put-brakes-astrazeneca-s-covid-19


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> The link below suggests it is people between 20 and 50. Don't know how authoritive the article Is but appears balanced and contains some interesting information. We have of course vaccinated many people under 50 in the UK and we do not appear have any reported cases.
> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...ety-experts-put-brakes-astrazeneca-s-covid-19


I think a telling sentence is right at the end of the article you link (well done for finding - I commend others to read it):
"[Professor] Paul Hunter, an infectious disease expert at the University of East Anglia, noted in a statement that even if the risk of CVT is raised by the vaccine to five or more cases per million people vaccinated, the COVID-19 infection fatality rate for men in their mid-40s is 0.1%, or 1000 deaths per million infected."
Edit: I would still like to hear what incidence there is of these sorts of cases in the period after administration of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.


----------



## midlife (17 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> She shouldn't need to be if using this link in England
> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/



Had another go tonight using your link, worked . Nearest was local boots but no slots, nearest offered was Middlesbrough but others hundreds of miles away. School would not give time off for that I guess so will try again...


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Had another go tonight using your link, worked . Nearest was local boots but no slots, nearest offered was Middlesbrough but others hundreds of miles away. School would not give time off for that I guess so will try again...


There’s probably been a rush since the news that supply might be disrupted


----------



## lane (17 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I think a telling sentence is right at the end of the article you link (well done for finding - I commend others to read it):
> "[Professor] Paul Hunter, an infectious disease expert at the University of East Anglia, noted in a statement that even if the risk of CVT is raised by the vaccine to five or more cases per million people vaccinated, the COVID-19 infection fatality rate for men in their mid-40s is 0.1%, or 1000 deaths per million infected."
> Edit: I would still like to hear what incidence there is of these sorts of cases in the period after administration of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.



The article seems to suggest that the cases identified after receiving the other vaccines (in the US) aren't exactly the same.


----------



## Unkraut (18 Mar 2021)

I have just seen an interview with Lauterbach. He made the following comments. 

There have been 8 cases of blood clots following AZ in Germany, 6 of these were female, and there have been 3 deaths. The majority being female might because the occupations such as nursing who have received AZ are overwhelmingly female.

He also made the comment that it is possible that those susceptible blood clotting through the vaccine would also be susceptible to similar damage if they are infected by corona, though this obviously needs further investigation. If this proves to be the case then the vaccine can hardly be considered an added danger.

His prognosis for the future following next Monday's meeting of central and state governments is that the third wave is here and cannot be stopped, and either a strict lockdown will be reimposed hopefully for four weeks, or the politicians can succumb to the popular pressure to open more things up, and towards the end of April have to impose a longer, worse lockdown that will achieve less. It's the 50 to 80 year olds this is going to hit hardest. Up to 2% mortality rate.

Not a very cheerful prospect but he has proved right often enough now to deserve to be taken seriously.

The situation would not be as bad if the quick tests were more in evidence (what on earth are they doing that this is _still_ lagging behind?), and of course the lack of vaccine that still goes back to the EU.


----------



## Julia9054 (18 Mar 2021)

It's worth noting that the contraceptive pill triples your risk of blood clots for the non obese and those without a family history (and more than triples with additional risk factors) and yet both patients and doctors see this as an acceptable risk for the benefits it brings.


----------



## newts (18 Mar 2021)

From Dr Campbell's recent podcast he suggests that the number of thromboelic events reported post AZ Vaccination are much lower than than normally expected across the general population (data fron 3 million tests). Once investigated further it may prove that risk of clotting is slightly reduced by the AZ vaccine.


----------



## Bazzer (18 Mar 2021)

Some Health Authorities are ahead of plans, or at least were until the shortage announcement. Bury where my sister lives, yesterday invited those 45 and older to make appointments. Brother in law, who is 50, has his first jab on Monday and has had the appointment for at least a week.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> All over 50s should be offered vaccine two weeks ahead of timetable. Surprisingly made possible by a large shipment of vaccine from India.
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56407251





Ajax Bay said:


> You would have thought there'd be better, closer places for India to send batches of Ox-AZ vaccine than here.
> My estimate is that sufficient first jabs for JCVI Gps 1-9 (over 50s plus plus) - 32M - will be delivered into arms by Easter Sunday (4 April).
> The 32M assumes high 100% acceptance, btw. Every 3% below that is a million less (with which we can start the high 40s).


Bump in the UK dual carriageway, I fear. Should still get to first jabs for JCVI Gps 1-9 (over 50s plus plus) - 32M by mid April; and enough for the second jabs for those who had their first jab in January. 529,000+ jabs reported yesterday, including 95k second doses.


----------



## Pale Rider (18 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> and enough for the second jabs for those who had their first jab in January.



I shall be cross if the poxy EU messes up my second jab, although I tend to think the second one is not so important.

I also support the policy of giving as many people as possible a jab, so wouldn't be bothered if my second was cancelled in order for someone else to get their first.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Mar 2021)

I speculated, back in the New Year when the JCVI revision increased the gap to the second dose to 12 weeks, that consideration would be given to extending the gap still further once more data became available on the effectiveness of one dose (after 21 days, say) and the extent to which that effectiveness waned.
Extending the first dose/second dose gap would allow many millions more people to receive a first dose in April and May to complement and align with the relaxation of restrictions (allowed by: even lower daily case and prevalence levels, very low C19 hospital bed occupancy and no emergence of VoC in UK).
I concluded back then that although we might be 'led by the science', that factor would be trumped by the communications issue and the adverse effect such dislocation of expectation would generate both in those waiting for their second jab and more widely in the UK's population - in terms of vaccine positivity. There would be criticism along the lines of order, counter-order and 'disorder' too at political cost.
The prime rationale for vaccination so far has been to protect the vulnerable half of the population (serious illness or worse from C19) and allow the NHS to cope. In contrast , the primary purpose of vaccination of the under 50s is to reduce (to the point of herd immunity) the rate of infection in the community rather than protecting them from serious illness.
JCVI (30 Dec): "the first priorities for the current COVID-19 vaccination programme should be the prevention of COVID-19 mortality and the protection of health and social care staff and systems. Secondary priorities could include vaccination of those at increased risk of hospitalisation and at increased risk of exposure, and to maintain resilience in essential public services."


----------



## newfhouse (18 Mar 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I shall be cross if the poxy EU messes up my second jab, although I tend to think the second one is not so important.


My understanding is that the second is more about longevity of protection than resistance to infection. Do any of the experts here have a view?


----------



## fossyant (18 Mar 2021)

Just in a meeting with colleagues, and it looks like over half of us are being vaccinated in the next few days, including one that's 30, but she has some auto-immune conditions.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Mar 2021)

newfhouse said:


> My understanding is that the second is more about longevity of protection than resistance to infection. Do any of the experts here have a view?


I think this BMJ article (6 January) gives a good overview. A single dose of Pfizer vaccine has been estimated to achieve 89% effectiveness after 21 days and the Oxford-AZ vaccine 70% (although later data suggest better than that (over 90% iirc)). I extract one comment:
"Andrew Pollard, the head of the Oxford Vaccine Group and chief investigator into the trial of [the Oxford-AZ] vaccine, said that extending the gap between vaccines made biological sense. “Generally, a longer gap between vaccine doses leads to a better immune response, with the second dose causing a better boost. (With HPV vaccine for girls, for example, the gap is a year and gives better responses than a one month gap.) From the Oxford vaccine trials, there is 70% protection after the first dose up to the second dose, and the immune response was about three times greater after the second dose when the second dose was delayed, comparing second dose after four weeks versus second dose after 2-3 months,"
Experts in vaccinology have better things to do than post on CycleChat, I hope!


----------



## dodgy (18 Mar 2021)

newfhouse said:


> Do any of the experts here have a view?


 Enthusiastic amateurs, perhaps 🤷‍♂️


----------



## PK99 (18 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I think this BMJ article (6 January) gives a good overview. A single dose of Pfizer vaccine has been estimated to achieve 89% effectiveness after 21 days and the Oxford-AZ vaccine 70% (although later data suggest better than that (over 90% iirc)). I extract one comment:
> "Andrew Pollard, the head of the Oxford Vaccine Group and chief investigator into the trial of [the Oxford-AZ] vaccine, said that extending the gap between vaccines made biological sense. *“Generally, a longer gap between vaccine doses leads to a better immune response, with the second dose causing a better boost. *(With HPV vaccine for girls, for example, the gap is a year and gives better responses than a one month gap.) From the Oxford vaccine trials, there is 70% protection after the first dose up to the second dose, and the immune response was about three times greater after the second dose when the second dose was delayed, comparing second dose after four weeks versus second dose after 2-3 months,"
> Experts in vaccinology have better things to do than post on CycleChat, I hope!



The Zoe Webinar last week made that exact point.
The decision to increase the gap was not a gamble it was based on sound science.


----------



## mjr (18 Mar 2021)

PK99 said:


> The decision to increase the gap was not a gamble it was based on sound science.


It was both. It was a gamble but that one looked like a good bet.


----------



## Buck (18 Mar 2021)

We’ve been given assurance that second dose supplies are ok and to plan these in (both Pfizer and AZ). We have sight of deliveries for the first two weeks in April which hopefully will remain valid!



Pale Rider said:


> I shall be cross if the poxy EU messes up my second jab, although I tend to think the second one is not so important.
> 
> I also support the policy of giving as many people as possible a jab, so wouldn't be bothered if my second was cancelled in order for someone else to get their first.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Mar 2021)

Second highest ever number of doses administered on 17 March: 581k (first and second doses combined). 609k doses were given on 30 Jan.
Here is the NHS England "COVID-19-vaccination-deployment-next-steps-on-uptake-and-supply-letter"
Shedloads of vaccine for anyone over 50 (or UHC/CEV) with the aim to complete by end of the month. From 29 Mar (for 4 weeks), all jabs (more or less) will be second doses, for those (over 80s, care home residents and staff, and health and social care workers - JCVI Gp 1-2) who got their first dose in January.


----------



## Chislenko (18 Mar 2021)

Which ever way you look at it, it is a remarkable effort.

Just a shame that some kn--heads still feel the need to flount lockdown rules whilst others are working their butts off to try and make the population safe.


----------



## dodgy (19 Mar 2021)

Chislenko said:


> Just a shame that some kn--heads still feel the need to flount lockdown rules whilst others are working their butts off to try and make the population safe.



like the large group of pensioners stopped to fix a puncture at a pinch point on ncn568 [burton marsh greenway] yesterday, forcing people to squeeze through them to get past. I gave them my compliments. Support bubble my arse.


----------



## Pale Rider (19 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> like the large group of pensioners stopped to fix a puncture at a pinch point on ncn568 [burton marsh greenway] yesterday, forcing people to squeeze through them to get past. I gave them my compliments. Support bubble my arse.



They'll all be vaccinated by now so consider themselves invincible.


----------



## dodgy (19 Mar 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> They'll all be vaccinated by now so consider themselves invincible.


That’s what I was thinking at the time. They will have no idea that they are only protected from symptoms.


----------



## Chislenko (19 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> like the large group of pensioners stopped to fix a puncture at a pinch point on ncn568 [burton marsh greenway] yesterday, forcing people to squeeze through them to get past. I gave them my compliments. Support bubble my arse.




Was on there myself yesterday dodgy, about 10 a.m. it was brutal going against the wind towards the Wirral. 
Like you I am constantly amazed when cyclists decide to stop, for a chat, food etc and leave their bikes across the path, the Greenway is not lacking in grass verges to get out of the way!


----------



## Pale Rider (19 Mar 2021)

Chislenko said:


> Was on there myself yesterday dodgy, about 10 a.m. it was brutal going against the wind towards the Wirral.
> Like you I am constantly amazed when cyclists decide to stop, for a chat, food etc and leave their bikes across the path, the Greenway is not lacking in grass verges to get out of the way!



My cycling group does the same, not least because if we were lined out we wouldn't all be able to talk crap to each other.

Verges are risky around here because they tend to be suppositories for dog poo.

Too many owners only clear it up when they think they may be observed.


----------



## newfhouse (19 Mar 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> suppositories for dog poo.


I don’t think faecal transplants are supposed to be cross-species.


----------



## mjr (19 Mar 2021)

France, Germany, Italy and Spain restart OxAZ use, but France restricts it to 55+. Ireland expected to restart soon. Canada also restarting, but that's not much to do with the EMA review.

The French PM takes it up the arm: https://www.france24.com/en/france/...neca-shot-in-bid-to-restore-public-confidence


----------



## johnnyb47 (19 Mar 2021)

I had my first Jab yesterday at around 1pm.
It all went smoothly, but this morning i felt like I'd spent 6 rounds in the boxing ring with Mike Tyson. Aching from head to tow all day. 🤣


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Mar 2021)

You managed to last 6 rounds? Bravo! Ears OK?


----------



## fossyant (19 Mar 2021)

All done - very efficient process at the Tennis Centre at Etihad. Waved through to park the bike up at proper bike stands - two other bikes there when I came out. Nice 20 mile off road return ride.

Slight ache on the inside of my upper arm, but that could have been the ride


----------



## SpokeyDokey (19 Mar 2021)

A whopping 660000 vaccinations yesterday - terrific effort from all involved.


----------



## dodgy (19 Mar 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> My cycling group does the same, not least because if we were lined out we wouldn't all be able to talk crap to each other.
> 
> Verges are risky around here because they tend to be suppositories for dog poo.
> 
> Too many owners only clear it up when they think they may be observed.



Just try to be considerate, that's all. I get the social cycle of cycling I really do. But there's this bug going around and just a little bit of consideration goes a long way. Go on massive group rides for all I care, but don't inconvenience or even worse, put others at risk.

Re verges: if you knew the route, you probably wouldn't even have mentioned this point.

Re dogs: Dogs are to be on leads at all times on this route, by law. I've been using this route about 4 times a week for as long as it's been open, dog poo is not an issue whatsoever, even if it was, it would blend in quite nicely with the typical inch of sheep shoot on part of the most used bit anyway.


----------



## lane (19 Mar 2021)

I recon a group of vaccinated people outside is very very low risk. It wouldn't worry me.

Two positive cases in my daughters school already - a teacher and a pupil. This is where the risk is not on a cycle track. 

Although i still try to follow all the rules despite having had my jab.


----------



## dodgy (19 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> I recon a group of vaccinated people outside is very very low risk. It wouldn't worry me.



Why?
And even if the risk is low, it's still bloody inconsiderate. My understanding is that the vaccinated can still become infected and pass it on, though perhaps less likely, I don't know. What I do know is that people feel uncomfortable trying to get through what is essentially a large bus stop of people staring at someone's bike. I'm vaccinated, but I will still wear a mask going into a shop, and I would still keep my distance from others because it's courtesy and respect.


----------



## lane (19 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> Why?



1. People outside are inherently low risk. Risk of transmission outside is low. 
2. Lots of evidence that vaccination reduces risk of transmission quite significantly. So risk of transmission from vaccinated people is lower.

Put 1 and 2 together and that is why.

Plus if only passing them on the cycle track then any risk is going to be more or less zero anyway.


----------



## lane (19 Mar 2021)

I had a puncture on the cycle track yesterday and repaired it on the verge - it was bloody muddy! Still wouldn't have done it on the track covid notwithstanding.


----------



## dodgy (19 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> 1. People outside are inherently low risk. Risk of transmission outside is low.
> 2. Lots of evidence that vaccination reduces risk of transmission quite significantly. So risk of transmission from vaccinated people is lower.
> 
> Put 1 and 2 together and that is why.
> ...



Still lacking in consideration, regardless. They were in the bloody way. Bloody hi vis noobs...


----------



## dodgy (19 Mar 2021)

What's the latest in Europe, have they had an epiphany yet?


----------



## vickster (19 Mar 2021)

Germany...
Covid: Germany warns of 'exponential' rise in coronavirus cases https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56460696

EU vaccination rollout
Covid-19: EU states to resume AstraZeneca vaccine rollout https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56440139


----------



## lane (19 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> What's the latest in Europe, have they had an epiphany yet?



No they have a third wave instead.


----------



## Mo1959 (19 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> Just try to be considerate, that's all. I get the social cycle of cycling I really do. But there's this bug going around and just a little bit of consideration goes a long way. Go on massive group rides for all I care, but don't inconvenience or even worse, put others at risk.


This is what worries me. There will always be people out there that are not vaccinated whether by personal choice or a medical reason. It isn’t fair if everyone gets overly blaze about things now.


----------



## Chislenko (19 Mar 2021)

I'm with @dodgy . On the particular route he is discussing you not only have to work your way past the usual assortment of headphone wearing phone engrossed walkers you also have sheep to dodge, dry rutted or sloppy wet sheep droppings depending on the weather, bird watchers who are only focussed on their binoculars, occasionally gates to open and cattle grids.

Quite way fellow cyclists would want to add to the list of obstructions is beyond me.

Edit. Personally I hate it but it is a route to the Wirral for me.


----------



## dodgy (19 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> This is what worries me. There will always be people out there that are not vaccinated whether by personal choice or a medical reason. It isn’t fair if everyone gets overly blaze about things now.



I didn't bother adding in my original post that it wasn't just inconsiderate, it's in direct conflict with the current rules. But hey, I guess we're all at that point that we know how to balance the risk since we're all epidemiologists now 🤷‍♂️

Quote= UK Gov

You can leave your home for exercise or recreation in a public outdoor place:


by yourself
with the people you live with
with your support bubble (if you are legally permitted to form one)
in a childcare bubble where providing childcare
or, when on your own, with 1 person from another household


----------



## rockyroller (19 Mar 2021)

Monday I become eligible. will be interesting to see how well I make out with the "pre-registration" in my state


----------



## lane (19 Mar 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> This is what worries me. There will always be people out there that are not vaccinated whether by personal choice or a medical reason. It isn’t fair if everyone gets overly blaze about things now.



I agree now is not the time to get blaze. However we are slowly going back to normal - schools going back is by far the biggest risk st the moment. Eventually we will have to go back to normal fully - currently scheduled for the 21st June. There will be people not vaccinated and some for whom unfortunately the vaccine doesn't work. In all probability some will catch covid and some will die - unless covid is eliminated which won't happen in the next few years if at all.


----------



## dodgy (19 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> I agree now is not the time to get blaze



As long as that doesn't include large group rides outside, as you proclaim that safe. Or something.

Such hypocrisy. Follow the guidance, or don't. But don't pretend you know better.


----------



## mjr (19 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> Such hypocrisy. Follow the guidance, or don't. But don't pretend you know better.


We do know better than the guidance, as some of that was nonsense when it was published two months ago. Just obey the law and beyond that follow WHO but what's this to do with vaccines?


----------



## Edwardoka (19 Mar 2021)

Done and done. Doddle. AZ as predicted. Whole thing took about 2 minutes. Very efficient. Felt a bit odd on the ride home but made it back ok.

As someone who has been to the SECC a fair amount in happier times, it was eerie seeing it in its emergency overflow hospital configuration.
Very glad that in the end it never got used.


----------



## lane (19 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> As long as that doesn't include large group rides outside, as you proclaim that safe. Or something.
> 
> Such hypocrisy. Follow the guidance, or don't. But don't pretend you know better.



What I said is I personally wouldn't be concerned passing close to such a group and I wouldn't - as it is very low risk. That's not hypocrisy it's a reasonable approach to risk based on everything we have learned about Covid from the experts over to the past 12 months.

My cycling consists of solo or with one other person. As it happens I also mended my puncture on the grass beside the cycle track yesterday - not due to covid risk it wouldn't occur to me to block the track to do so.

In 10 days or so I expect to be cycling with a larger group of 6 to 15.


----------



## Bollo (19 Mar 2021)

Edwardoka said:


> Done and done. Doddle. AZ as predicted. Whole thing took about 2 minutes. Very efficient. Felt a bit odd on the ride home but made it back ok.
> 
> As someone who has been to the SECC a fair amount in happier times, it was eerie seeing it in its emergency overflow hospital configuration.
> Very glad that in the end it never got used.


We share the rare privilege of being vaccinated on the same day as glorious leader. I politely thanked the people at the clinic. At no point did I feel the urge to...







“You might feel a little prick”


----------



## slowmotion (20 Mar 2021)

Can somebody explain (or post a link to an explanation) why Ursula von der Leyden is getting shirty about vaccine availability? Isn't it a contractual issue with AZ rather than the UK government?


----------



## lane (20 Mar 2021)

I think she is blaming anyone but herself and the EU procurement process.


----------



## slowmotion (20 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> I think she is blaming anyone but herself and the EU procurement process.


Yes, I did wonder if she was just "making smoke" to cover up incompetence but thought there might be another explanation.


----------



## lane (20 Mar 2021)

Someone will come along with a more technical explanation but as the EU have less than expected they think they should get some of the UK supply. They haven't got any and hold both AZ and the UK to blame for this. When infact the teal culprit was slow procurement by the EU.


----------



## PK99 (20 Mar 2021)

slowmotion said:


> Can somebody explain (or post a link to an explanation) why Ursula von der Leyden is getting shirty about vaccine availability? Isn't it a contractual issue with AZ rather than the UK government?



The UK recognised that Civil Service procedural bureaucracy was not best suited to fleet of foot procurement, contract negotiation and financing in an uncertain, dynamic and everchanging pandemic response and co-opted Private Sector expertise and experience in those plus a biomedical finance expert to lead the process. They got the job done.

Von der Leyden gave the job to the existing EU beureacracy. They farked up. She is embarrassed.


----------



## slowmotion (20 Mar 2021)

PK99 said:


> The UK recognised that Civil Service procedural bureaucracy was not best suited to fleet of foot procurement, contract negotiation and financing in an uncertain, dynamic and everchanging pandemic response and co-opted Private Sector expertise and experience in those plus a biomedical finance expert to lead the process. They got the job done.
> 
> Von der Leyden gave the job to the existing EU beureacracy. They farked up. She is embarrassed.


Hmmmm. So on the principle of "a level playing field" and " reciprocity" the idea is to hobble the UK's vaccination programme as well????


----------



## PK99 (20 Mar 2021)

slowmotion said:


> Hmmmm. So on the principle of "a level playing field" and " reciprocity" the idea is to hobble the UK's vaccination programme as well????



You may think that. I could not possibly comment.


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Mar 2021)

slowmotion said:


> Can somebody explain (or post a link to an explanation) why Ursula von der Leyden is getting shirty about vaccine availability? Isn't it a *contractual issue with AZ* rather than the UK government?


Early doors, a few million Oxford-AZ vaccines were manufactured in Belgium and exported to the UK - this was before the EU EMA authorised the use of Ox-AZ vaccine (?29 Jan). All the UK's Pfizer vaccine supply comes from Europe but some of the vaccines' constituents come from UK (Snaith, Yorkshire).
It was AZ's intent to supply the EU with Ox-AZ vaccine from plants in the EU and in December said that they'd supply 80M doses in Q1 2021. Then they had manufacturing problems in the EU plants so (as the AZ-EU advance purchase agreement (APA) required) they quickly told the EU (in mid Jan) that it wouldn't be 80M it'd be 31M. Unhappiness all round and EU instituting a law of vaccine export control where permission had to be achieved (eg used by Italy to prevent export of the batch due for Oz).
The EU would like AZ to divert some vaccine supply from its UK factories to the EU. The UK manufactured Ox-AZ vaccine is earmarked (?contractually) for supply to the UK. The EU won't get any joy trying to take on AZ in the courts, and they know this, so this grandstanding is an effort to put other forms of pressure on AZ - perhaps the assumption is that if the UK says 'oh go easy on them, give them some that was due to come to us' then that will increase the EU Ox-AZ vaccine supply.
I am guessing but I suspect that if the 4?M supply had come in from India, that would have allowed some export of Ox-AZ vaccine to the EU - note that the EU-AZ APA specifies that the vaccines must be made in either EU or the UK. Anywhere else (India say) and the contract requires EU permission (holding breath practice, commence).
Clear as mud.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (20 Mar 2021)

slowmotion said:


> Can somebody explain (or post a link to an explanation) why Ursula von der Leyden is getting shirty about vaccine availability? Isn't it a contractual issue with AZ rather than the UK government?




View: https://mobile.twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1372897635577761803


----------



## mjr (20 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> Someone will come along with a more technical explanation but as the EU have less than expected they think they should get some of the UK supply. They haven't got any and hold both AZ and the UK to blame for this. When infact the teal culprit was slow procurement by the EU.


That is the UK press interpretation but there is little evidence that AZ wouldn't have shortfalled the EU even if it had signed up on its current terms before the UK. The EU-AZ contract does not seem to be what the EU wants. It would be interesting to see the UK-AZ contract wording.

Some of vdL's comments are surely aimed at the US which is restricting everything vacciney using their defence procurement laws, which reportedly is also part of the cause of AZ delays to the UK because US-made vials have had to be replaced by ones made elsewhere. With AZ delivering only 35ish% of the order, the EU is very reliant on Pfizer and Moderna at the moment and key ingredients come from the US.


----------



## lane (20 Mar 2021)

dodgy said:


> As long as that doesn't include large group rides outside, as you proclaim that safe. Or something.
> 
> Such hypocrisy. Follow the guidance, or don't. But don't pretend you know better.



Although in other news MPs call for the right to protest. If that happens I will no longer be able to understand why I need to follow rules re number in a group cycling together and my inclination to comply with the rules will be much reduced. Maybe if in a large cycling group could just say we are protesting about the right to protest.


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> With AZ delivering only 35ish% of the order, the EU is very reliant on Pfizer and Moderna at the moment


In the EU the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine makes up the vast majority of delivered doses to date: about three quarters; and 7% Moderna. The rest is Oxford-AZ. About 10% have had a first jab and of those 4% have had both: perhaps 78M doses in all.
Moderna will supply the EU with 10M doses in Q1 2021, followed by 35M in both Q2 and Q3, according to their 'Estimated Delivery Schedule' for the first 80M. Reports suggest they were behind schedule at the end of February. More (at least another 80M) have been ordered for Q4 and in 2022. The mRNA (modeRNA



) vaccine is made in the USA (Massachusets) and is costing the EU $18 a dose (cf $15 for Pfizer and $2 for the 'cheap' Oxford-AZ).
The EU has received about 60M doses of the Pfizer vaccine: the EU has ordered two lots of 300M (total 600M) all manufactured in the EU (ie not in the USA). Pfizer have exported about 11M from EU factories to the UK since late November.


----------



## dodgy (20 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> Although in other news MPs call for the right to protest. If that happens I will no longer be able to understand why I need to follow rules re number in a group cycling together and my inclination to comply with the rules will be much reduced. Maybe if in a large cycling group could just say we are protesting about the right to protest.



Yeah, go you.


----------



## srw (21 Mar 2021)

slowmotion said:


> hobble the UK's vaccination programme as well????


I think you mean "ensure that all Europeans at serious risk of death are protected, whether they live in the EU or the UK."

Nobody is protected fully until all are protected fully. It is in Britain's interest to divert resources to our nearest neighbours and closest trading partners - unless you want your 2022 holiday to be in Blackpool again because there's an outbreak of the Berlin Covid variant in Benidorm.


----------



## nickyboy (21 Mar 2021)

srw said:


> I think you mean "ensure that all Europeans at serious risk of death are protected, whether they live in the EU or the UK."
> 
> Nobody is protected fully until all are protected fully. It is in Britain's interest to divert resources to our nearest neighbours and closest trading partners - unless you want your 2022 holiday to be in Blackpool again because there's an outbreak of the Berlin Covid variant in Benidorm.


It's in UKs interests to divert resources elsewhere ultimately. The only question is "when?"

I think the answer today is "not now". But I'm not sure when that response changes. I suspect regarless of the scientific advice there would be virtually zero political capital in diverting. So it will be later rather than sooner. And we may all be in Skegness as a result


----------



## C R (21 Mar 2021)

Despite the high level of vaccination, the number of positives has been steady for at least two weeks. Part of that may be related to the increase in the number of LF tests in schools, but concerning nonetheless.


----------



## Rusty Nails (21 Mar 2021)

I agree with @srw that is in our interests that the rollout in the EU is increased, but, in reality I think that any sign that our government is sending vaccines contractually planned for us to the EU would cause short-term political internal problems given the desire of the great British public to end restrictions asap.

The EU has mightily cocked up the vaccine rollout and they are on a political damage limitation exercise and it does not help that the EU has made it clear since our decision to leave the EU that we get no special treatment e.g. the NI border issue.

Despite this I believe our politicians should be looking to help the EU in this, particularly Ireland because of the close geographical ties, given our stated aim to be strong allies of the EU.


----------



## slowmotion (21 Mar 2021)

srw said:


> I think you mean "ensure that all Europeans at serious risk of death are protected, whether they live in the EU or the UK."
> 
> Nobody is protected fully until all are protected fully. It is in Britain's interest to divert resources to our nearest neighbours and closest trading partners - unless you want your 2022 holiday to be in Blackpool again because there's an outbreak of the Berlin Covid variant in Benidorm.


There's nothing there for me to disagree with. I can't see any of us escaping from the delights of Blackpool or Skegness for a very long time.

BTW, don't France and Germany have a stack of unused, unwanted vaccines to give away?
https://www.euractiv.com/section/co...strazeneca-vaccine-pile-up-in-france-germany/


----------



## lane (21 Mar 2021)

nickyboy said:


> It's in UKs interests to divert resources elsewhere ultimately. The only question is "when?"
> 
> I think the answer today is "not now". But I'm not sure when that response changes. I suspect regarless of the scientific advice there would be virtually zero political capital in diverting. So it will be later rather than sooner. And we may all be in Skegness as a result



I think you are definitely correct regarding political aspects. Probably more people would have lives saved in EU than UK which is an important consideration - but you can't blame people in thier 40s in the UK wanting the vaccine. Plus the EU repeatedly rubishing the AZ vaccine then complaining they haven't got enough hardly engenders sympathy.


----------



## lane (21 Mar 2021)

C R said:


> Despite the high level of vaccination, the number of positives has been steady for at least two weeks. Part of that may be related to the increase in the number of LF tests in schools, but concerning nonetheless.



Not surprising once schools opened. I would expect an increase but vaccination is probably keeping a bit of a lid on things. Two positives at my daughter's school this week plus heard of someone else testing positive. Two positives a week at the school was fairly typical at the end of last year so was a bit surprised to be back to the level so quickly - might be the impact of LF tests as you say. Which reminds me it's time to check the result of my daughter's LF test now.......


----------



## lane (21 Mar 2021)

Daughter's LF test negative and result reported on both NHS and school website. Next test on Wednesday.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Mar 2021)

Vaccination and non-pharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19: a mathematical modelling study
University of Warwick study dated 18 Mar (I have precised the summary and drawn some key bits from the paper.)
"Under plausible assumptions for efficacy and uptake, the UK is unlikely to reach the herd immunity threshold through vaccination. We predict that only gradual release of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) coupled with high uptake of a high-efficacy vaccine can prevent subsequent waves of infection."






*Predicted daily deaths from COVID-19 in the UK after the start of an immunisation programme and relaxation or removal of NPIs*
Shading indicates the level of NPIs implemented. (A, B) The effect of relaxing current NPI measures down to those implemented in early Sep 20. The dashed line indicates the point of partial NPI relaxation—Feb 21, in panel A and Apr 21, in panel B. 
Protection against infection [and hence onward transmission] was varied from 0% to 85% in model input.

Study used epidemiological data from the UK together with estimates of vaccine effectiveness to predict the possible long-term dynamics of COVID-19 under the planned vaccine rollout.
*Method*
Mathematical model structured by age and UK region, fitted to a range of epidemiological data in the UK, 
Assumes:

Vaccination programme as planned: all adults by end July.
Vaccine uptake of 95% in 80+, and assumed 85% in 50–79 and 75% in 18–49s.
Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease was assumed to be 88%
No change in dominant SARS-COV-2 variant transmissibility or mortality.
Considered the combined interaction of the UK vaccination programme with relaxations of NPIs, to predict the contemporary reproduction number (_R_) and pattern of daily deaths and hospital admissions due to COVID-19 from Jan 2021 to end 2023.
*Findings*
Though efficacy against disease is of specific individual benefit (protecting against severe symptoms), it is the *vaccine protection against infection [and hence onward transmission] that leads to a reduction in the intrinsic growth rate and *_*R*._
But vaccination alone is insufficient to contain the outbreak.
With no NPIs and optimistic assumption of 85% prevention of infections, _R_ is estimated to be 1·58 (plus 0.26 or minus 0.22) even with all adults vaccinated. [Vaccination of 12-17s (if trials are successful) makes little difference, maybe 0.05 to _R_.] Removal of all NPIs in late 2021, once the vaccination programme is complete, is predicted to lead to 21,400 COVID-19 assigned deaths over 2 years (2022 and 2023) (very low confidence - wide range: 1,400–55,100) - much worse (quadruple) if vaccine only prevents 60% of infections.
Although vaccination substantially reduces total deaths, it only provides partial protection for the individual. For the default scenario and only 60% protection against infection, 16% of the deaths will be individuals who had been vaccinated (with 2 doses).

Several key vaccine parameters within the model are based on (study's words) parsimonious assumptions: 3 limitations:

determining whether the vaccine prevents infection is key for the development of population immunity and the potential for the vaccine to further reduce viral shedding from vaccinated individuals, reducing onward transmission,
determining if the vaccine offers greater protection against the most severe disease: this will reduce predictions for hospital admissions and deaths.
efficacy estimates are emerging, with the estimated ranges of efficacy for each vaccine subject to revision as new data emerge.
Maintaining low levels of infection is likely to be key to the success of test, trace, and isolate strategies and in reducing the risk of vaccine escape.


----------



## Landsurfer (21 Mar 2021)

Is it a Vaccine ...?
Or a genetically modified mRNA Invasive Treatment ....
I’ve had Covid recently (16th Feb) and 30 days later, my first jab ..... but i’m starting to wonder why ??
If all the vulnerable groups have been jabbed .... why are we bothering to jab the rest .... it’s a question thats popping up in the MSM again and again ....
The latest CON SPIRE is that its a Placebo ..... keep the masses quiet ...
But i don’t think the band would sell out this easy to Boris ... Come on Brian and Stefan .... tell us the truth .... 😄


----------



## DaveReading (21 Mar 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> If all the vulnerable groups have been jabbed .... why are we bothering to jab the rest



Because it's not only the vulnerable who die ?


----------



## Landsurfer (21 Mar 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Because it's not only the vulnerable who die ?


Says who ? Pick a lying Professor or Politician .... great choice .... so looking forward to the inquiry ......


----------



## Unkraut (21 Mar 2021)

slowmotion said:


> BTW, don't France and Germany have a stack of unused, unwanted vaccines to give away?


I can't speak for France, but the reported surplus of AZ vaccine came about in DE due to reserving doses for the second vaccination, as it was initially decided to vaccinate in accordance with the manufacture's instructions. That policy is now being changed for AZ to speed things up. (Just spoken to friends in England who had this impression.)



Rusty Nails said:


> The EU has mightily cocked up the vaccine rollout and they are on a political damage limitation exercise and it does not help that the EU has made it clear since our decision to leave the EU that we get no special treatment e.g. the NI border issue.


I'm not sure the EU has much discretion on the N I border, it's a matter of the laws setting it up. But that's for another thread ... 

I was aware of the EU supplying other countries around the world, like Mexico and Canada where the US until a couple of days ago had been refusing. As of about 10 days ago:

_The EU continues to be the leading provider of vaccines around the world. 

... a total of 34,090,267 doses, as they did not threaten the contractual engagements between the EU and the vaccine producers. ... The main export destinations include the United Kingdom (with approximately 9.1 million doses), Canada (3.9 million), Mexico (3.1 million), Japan (2.7 million), Saudi Arabia (1.4 million), Hong Kong (1.3 million), Singapore (1 million), United States (1 million), Chile (0.9 million) and Malaysia (0.8 million)._

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_1121

I would still like to know exactly what effect on supply the procurement policy had, but the policy of fair distribution to the member states still seems to me to be better than letting the rich countries hog the supplies, even if they were more involved in their development. It's also right that supplies are not all being retained for EU only usage but are finding their way to other parts of the world, even if at present this is still largely richer countries.

With all the vaccine point scoring going on I think we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that we should be grateful for having any vaccine at all considering how long they often take to develop, and that most of the world with very much less healthcare provision don't really have any access to vaccines at all, and won't for many months


----------



## Unkraut (21 Mar 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> If all the vulnerable groups have been jabbed .... why are we bothering to jab the rest


For the same reason you have lockdowns and hygiene measures - to stop those who get infected and require non-intensive care treatment to see them through the illness from overwhelming the healthcare system. If the NHS barely copes with 18000 cases of flu every year, how would it cope with a couple of hundred thousand cases of covid that might well be the case even amongst younger and fitter people?


----------



## classic33 (21 Mar 2021)

Figures from Ireland for today, 21st March 2021
_"Of the 769 cases notified today:
381 are men and 378 are women
75% are under 45 years of age
The median age is 32 years old
284 in Dublin, 
67 in Donegal, 
47 in Offaly, 
45 in Meath, 
44 in Kildare, 
the remaining 282 cases are spread across 20 other counties."_


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Mar 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> If all the vulnerable groups have been jabbed .... why are we bothering to jab the rest ..


Have a read of my post which may shed light into your darkness.




_Scheduling and impact of pessimistic vaccine uptake._
Predicted daily deaths in the UK following the start of an immunisation program and relaxation or removal of NPIs.
Assumes the pessimistic vaccine uptake levels used to generate Figures c and d (90% in the over 80’s, 80% in those 50-79, and 70% in those 18-49).
Figure c is the one which best models the 'stop once we've done the over 50s' cunning plan - look at that.
So even if vaccine effectiveness against infection is as good as 85%, if under 50s aren't vaccinated (April-June ish) we'll be following a line above the red line with daily deaths peaking in August, this wave a long wide base, and a death toll Apr - Oct 21 of more than 50,000. Most of the deaths would tragically be from those who are not the unvaccinated.
If you so wish, you can compare this with the 48,000 deaths recorded as involving COVID-19 in the 50 days from Christmas onwards.
Vaccination is of specific individual benefit (protecting against severe symptoms and in extremis, death) but for the community the vaccine protects against infection [and hence onward transmission] and that leads to a reduction in _R _and reduced community spread_. _The alternative is continued onerous restrictions.


----------



## PK99 (22 Mar 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> If all the vulnerable groups have been jabbed .... why are we bothering to jab the rest ....




My 32 year old nephew is in hospital in South Africa with covid involving blood clots in both lungs.


----------



## Rocky (22 Mar 2021)

PK99 said:


> My 32 year old nephew is in hospital in South Africa with covid involving blood clots in both lungs.


Oh goodness, that's awful. I do hope he recovers.


----------



## vickster (22 Mar 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Because it's not only the vulnerable who die ?


Don’t feed the troll...
Who was hospitalised with Covid related symptoms not long ago? So it’s clearly a conspiracy


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Mar 2021)

US trial of the Oxford-AZ vaccine results seem very promising (surprise, surprise). Hurrah! But it will apparently take several weeks for the case for authorisation for use to be assembled and presented by AZ and considered by the FDA before its use can start. Meanwhile there are 30M doses sitting in USA cold storage, not in arms.
Edit: (as per Tuesday post) The EU's supply of the Oxford-AZ vaccine is currently only produced at the Novasep plant in Seneffe (Belgium - SW of Brussels). The Halix plant outside Leiden (also Belgium) is waiting on EMA regulatory approval and if it gets it (no hurry!) could produce 5M doses a week: destination up in the air!
Edit: In UK the Croda plant outside Snaith (Yorkshire) is producing/supplying four component excipients/lipids vital for production of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.


----------



## LarryDuff (22 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Figures from Ireland for today, 21st March 2021
> _"Of the 769 cases notified today:
> 381 are men and 378 are women
> 75% are under 45 years of age
> ...


Time to close the border??


----------



## classic33 (22 Mar 2021)

LarryDuff said:


> Time to close the border??


Inter-county travel isn't allowed at present, and there's a limit on travelling distance, exceptions provided. 
Expect to get stopped.

The lower age range is the reason for posting, 75% of reported cases under the age of 45.


----------



## Rusty Nails (22 Mar 2021)

LarryDuff said:


> Time to close the border??


Or to sell them some vaccine.


----------



## rualexander (22 Mar 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Because it's not only the vulnerable who die ?



It is only the vulnerable who die, by definition if you die you were vulnerable. 
The problem is in identifying the vulnerable on an individual basis rather than the fairly crude but generally applicable age groups and pre-existing conditions groups.
There may be some, as yet undiscovered, genetic or scientifically testable identifiers which could accurately predict vulnerability to severe disease or death.


----------



## BrumJim (23 Mar 2021)

BrumJim said:


> Not yet 50 (only months away, though), and I've been invited in for a jab.


Didn't happen. 
This is me.


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Mar 2021)

BrumJim said:


> Didn't happen. This is me.


As I shared last week:
Here is the NHS England "COVID-19-vaccination-deployment-next-steps-on-uptake-and-supply-letter"
". . . over this next period [this month] it is vital we focus on vaccinating those in JCVI cohorts 1 –9, who are most vulnerable to COVID-19, as well as delivering to the agreed schedule significantly increased numbers of second doses, which double from the beginning of April.
"Inviting patients outside of [JCVI] cohorts 1–9 is only permissible in exceptional circumstances. Those aged 49 years or younger should not be offered vaccination unless they are eligible via a higher cohort. To ensure prioritisation compliance with minimum wastage, vaccination services must:
•Work with local authorities, voluntary community and faith sector organisations, to put in place reserve lists of people from eligible cohorts;"
I suspect filling these reserve lists will be a challenge. Most over 55s have had their jab and the programme is now catching up the final 'difficult to reach' Gp 6 (Underlying Health Conditions) and making inroads into Gp 9 (50-54). In total 28M have had their first dose. It has been suggested for months that 32M is the number in JCVI Gps 1-9 so at 400k first doses this week we should get there. Over 60% of over 80s have had their second dose.
From 29 Mar (for 4 weeks), all jabs (more or less) will be second doses, for those (mainly over 80s, care home residents and staff, and health and social care workers - JCVI Gps 1-2) who got their first dose in January: about 7M second doses are required between yesterday and 26 Apr.


----------



## Pale Rider (24 Mar 2021)

I've just been contacted by my GP surgery to tell me not to contact them about my second dose.


----------



## lazybloke (24 Mar 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I've just been contacted by my GP surgery to tell me not to contact them about my second dose.


Harsh. I disagree with you sometimes (often), but I wouldn't deny you a vaccine. 
Did they want you to sign a DNR?


----------



## C R (24 Mar 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I've just been contacted by my GP surgery to tell me not to contact them about my second dose.


Was that off their own bat or because you asked?


----------



## Pale Rider (24 Mar 2021)

lazybloke said:


> Harsh. I disagree with you sometimes (often), but I wouldn't deny you a vaccine.
> Did they want you to sign a DNR?



I should explain I'm not being denied anything.

The text was to tell me to wait for the local vaccine hub to contact me about the second vaccine, as they did the first.



C R said:


> Was that off their own bat or because you asked?



Unsolicited.

It was only a text, but I'm surprised there are so many people asking about the second vaccine as to cause them a problem, particularly as they aren't doing any vaccines.

Were I minded to ask about the second, which I'm not, I would ask the mob who gave me the first.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (24 Mar 2021)

Meanwhile the eu is twisting words an definition to self declare is not a export ban.. you known the reasons for eu's joint approach.. to prevent vaccine wars.. right. Instead of making sure all those vaccines in stock in the eu are really being used. And or make sure to aid production facilities like the uk did so they might be in a better place in a few months


----------



## mjr (24 Mar 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> And or make sure to aid production facilities like the uk did so they might be in a better place in a few months


But Boris says "capitalism" is the reason for our vaccine success, not state aid (or even luck).


----------



## Rocky (24 Mar 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I should explain I'm not being denied anything.
> 
> The text was to tell me to wait for the local vaccine hub to contact me about the second vaccine, as they did the first.
> 
> ...


Absolutely - and I think practices are notifying their patients about this because of the problems that they've had with blocked phone lines

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-56456342

This Stockton practice apparently had 126,000 calls in one day - many (all?) asking about the vaccine. The worry is that people needing to contact their GP can't get through.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (24 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> But Boris says "capitalism" is the reason for our vaccine success, not state aid (or even luck).


Which is technically true yet the EU could use the same method but they choose to blame everyone else instead..


----------



## fossyant (24 Mar 2021)

Well, because of the EU playing shenanigans, all you under 50's can't go to the pub. Leaves space for us oldies.


----------



## mjr (24 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> Well, because of the EU playing shenanigans, all you under 50's can't go to the pub. Leaves space for us oldies.


I thought the current delay in UK AZ supply was mainly due to the US restricting shipments of useful glassware to India?


----------



## mjr (24 Mar 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> Which is technically true yet the EU could use the same method but they choose to blame everyone else instead..


But why should the EU's Conservative leader use state aid if the UK's Conservative leader says it did not help? Are you suggesting the EU should not learn from the UK PM's assessment of his own vaccine purchasing?


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (24 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> But why should the EU's Conservative leader use state aid if the UK's Conservative leader says it did not help? Are you suggesting the EU should not learn from the UK PM's assessment of his own vaccine purchasing?


I say the EU should stop playing an blame game and trying to make their problem everyone's problem by banning exports and then adding a layer of BS on top so they don't call it banning export.
I say they should copy the uk in terms of how the uk has now been able to vaccinate half the population. I know i have linked and there are many articles explaining exactly what the uk did and what the eu did not(in terms as to why the uk has millions or vaccines and the eu has not), so maybe they should go and read those, i'm really not interested if the pm or the eu uberlord is conservative, liberal, or something in between because that's really not that relevant.


----------



## mjr (24 Mar 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> I say the EU should stop playing an blame game and trying to make their problem everyone's problem


It's already everyone's problem, like how Boris allowing breeding space for B.1.1.7 to emerge has become everyone's problem. No one is safe until we are all safe, like the WHO keeps saying.



> by banning exports and then adding a layer of BS on top so they don't call it banning export.
> I say they should copy the uk in terms of how the uk has now been able to vaccinate half the population.


So buy the entire production of all vaccines finished in the EU and then claim not to be banning exports? That's what the UK has done so far.



> I know i have linked and there are many articles explaining exactly what the uk did and what the eu did not(in terms as to why the uk has millions or vaccines and the eu has not), so maybe they should go and read those, i'm really not interested if the pm or the eu uberlord is conservative, liberal, or something in between because that's really not that relevant.


Most of those links have just been directly contradicted by the UK PM and the rest require time travel (as well as being unconfirmed), don't they?


----------



## Julia9054 (24 Mar 2021)

Rocky said:


> Absolutely - and I think practices are notifying their patients about this because of the problems that they've had with blocked phone lines
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-56456342
> 
> This Stockton practice apparently had 126,000 calls in one day - many (all?) asking about the vaccine. The worry is that people needing to contact their GP can't get through.


It would seem that if you are contacted via the NHS centrally, you can book dates at the same time for both vaccines but if you are contacted via a text from your GP, you can only book the first one. Amongst my friends, some have got the GP text first (me) and some the NHS central one.


----------



## Pale Rider (24 Mar 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> It would seem that if you are contacted via the NHS centrally, you can book dates at the same time for both vaccines but if you are contacted via a text from your GP, you can only book the first one. Amongst my friends, some have got the GP text first (me) and some the NHS central one.



It seems there are some local differences.

The original text from my surgery said 'we are not dealing with vaccines directly, but we have passed your details to the vaccine centre who will contact you'.

That's what happened, and I was told by the centre they would be in touch nearer the time to arrange dose two.

My brother in Shropshire was invited to make two appointments at the same time, but I don't know who did his jab.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (24 Mar 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> It would seem that if you are contacted via the NHS centrally, you can book dates at the same time for both vaccines but if you are contacted via a text from your GP, you can only book the first one. Amongst my friends, some have got the GP text first (me) and some the NHS central one.



Same here (SE Lakes) - I booked online without GP invite and made both appointments. Wife booked following GP invite and was only able to book the first one with the 2nd on a TBA basis.

Both of us have had our firsts at the Kendal shopping centre.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (24 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> It's already everyone's problem, like how Boris allowing breeding space for B.1.1.7 to emerge has become everyone's problem. No one is safe until we are all safe, like the WHO keeps saying.


Jup Boris allowed B.1.1.7 to emerge, and Bill Gates and 4g ar the secret agenda right? I get it you might not like Boris but blaming him for a new variant is a new low.
Sure no-one is safe until where all safe but lets do a fact check, almost all eu countries have quite a sctockpile of vaccines laying around it's not that they are at uk speed but lack the amount af vaccines it's quite the opposite so what use does it have to slow down the countires that has is sh*t (for once) in order? Isn't it better to stop, look what the uk did different and develop a strategy to vaccinate at the same speed.


mjr said:


> So buy the entire production of all vaccines finished in the EU and then claim not to be banning exports? That's what the UK has done so far.


No that is not true the uk placed orders just as the eu,(the eu was late but what else is new?) in case of pfizer the uk is just a costumer just as the eu is, in case of Astrazeneca the UK just the knowledge and flexibility of no longer being an eu member to use their own way of testing and authorising an vaccine. Now it turned out way the eu is saying ''you evil uk you have stolen all the vaccines'' if it turned out the other way they would be on top of all the newspapers the blast the uk.for it's gamble.



mjr said:


> Most of those links have just been directly contradicted by the UK PM and the rest require time travel (as well as being unconfirmed), don't they?


This one is from November: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-...sitive-british-success-story-projecting-soft/
a few quotes

'' Unlike the Pfzer and Moderna jabs that have announced successful phase three results, the team behind the British vaccination intended from the start that their product would be capable of being used across the globe. ''

'' The project has been part-funded from the start by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (Cepi), and AstraZeneca has committed to making the jab available at cost for low and middle income countries in perpetuity. ''

In other words the oxford vaccine was never developed for the uk only, surely the uk wanting to prove itself other political things are part behind it but it was a gloabal project from the very beginning, and instead of scaring compoanies away with chinense/russian like export controls/ company raids etc. they would do better just asking astrazeneca or any other viccine supplies what they need to speed up vaccination in the EU which is exactly what the UK did about a year ago.


----------



## fossyant (24 Mar 2021)

Both mine booked at same time, come end June (vaccination 7th June) PARTY !


----------



## mjr (24 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> Both mine booked at same time,


You're meant to leave at least three weeks between them!


----------



## vickster (24 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> Well, because of the EU playing shenanigans, all you under 50's can't go to the pub. Leaves space for us oldies.


Why not? I went to the pub last summer and wasn't vaccinated.

It just means that you vaccinated old men may not get really sick or die if you do catch Covid


----------



## fossyant (24 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Why not? I went to the pub last summer and wasn't vaccinated.
> 
> It just means that you vaccinated old men may not get really sick or die if you do catch Covid



Not having you dirty youngsters about - all banned !


----------



## Bazzer (24 Mar 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Same here (SE Lakes) - I booked online without GP invite and made both appointments. Wife booked following GP invite and was only able to book the first one with the 2nd on a TBA basis.
> 
> Both of us have had our firsts at the Kendal shopping centre.


Ditto for NW Cheshire. 
Both myself and Mrs B booked through the mass vaccination system and both got two appointments. Mrs B has also, in error, been picked up in the GP vaccination system. The latter were only providing the first jab appointment.


----------



## vickster (24 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> Not having you dirty youngsters about - all banned !


I don’t want to drink with a load of stinky old blokes anyhow (hence avoiding Wetherspoons and other old men’s pubs  )


----------



## Grant Fondo (24 Mar 2021)

Had mine at Chester Racecourse today, the guys down there are doing an incredible job as everywhere


----------



## Rusty Nails (24 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Why not? I went to the pub last summer and wasn't vaccinated.
> 
> It just means that you vaccinated old men may not get really sick or die if you do catch Covid


And vaccinated old women, plus many middle-aged men and women.


----------



## vickster (24 Mar 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> And vaccinated old women, plus many middle-aged men and women.


50+ vaccinated are old...according to @fossyant we under 50s are dirty youngsters 
At 50, the vast majority are past middle age (as am I at 48)


----------



## C R (24 Mar 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> It would seem that if you are contacted via the NHS centrally, you can book dates at the same time for both vaccines but if you are contacted via a text from your GP, you can only book the first one. Amongst my friends, some have got the GP text first (me) and some the NHS central one.


That seems to have been the case. I was contacted by my GP via text and have had no news about the second dose. Our neighbour booked via the general NHS website and was given two bookings, one for the first dose and one for the second.


----------



## fossyant (24 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> I don’t want to drink with a load of stinky old blokes anyhow (hence avoiding Wetherspoons and other old men’s pubs  )



You might not be allowed to - I was joking, then found this..

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/pub-landlords-can-bar-unvaccinated-23789700


----------



## vickster (24 Mar 2021)

I’m not clicking on a Mirror link


----------



## Unkraut (25 Mar 2021)

Some potential good news in my news feed this morning. Curevac of Tübingen fame who are currently developing an mRNA vaccine have tried it out on mice to see if it works against the South African variant. They had to fool the mice's immune system into believing it had been infected with the virus, and they then injected with the vaccine.

All of the mice survived corona, giving grounds for optimism that the same effect can be realised in humans.

The EMA is continuously following these developments so that eventual authorisation will be quicker. This is expect to be in June, and 25 million doses have been ordered for Germany, and production in 2022 should run up to 1 billion doses. Big and little pharma are cooperating to ensure this is possible.


----------



## PK99 (25 Mar 2021)

From the Grauniad:

Very sensible stuff from Mr Junker & Macron

*Jean-Claude Juncker criticises EU over Covid vaccine spat with UK*

_The EU has been overly cautious and budget conscious over Covid vaccines and should step back from waging a “stupid vaccine war” with Britain, the former European commission president Jean-Claude Juncker has said.

Juncker, who was replaced by Ursula von der Leyen in 2019, compared the EU’s approach to vaccination unfavourably with that of Britain where the rollout has been speedier.

He also said he was “not a fan” of the commission’s export authorisation mechanism under which officials have been empowered to prohibit shipments.

“This could create major reputation damage to the European Union, who used to be the world’s free trade champion,” Juncker told the BBC’s HARDtalk programme. “And so I don’t think that this is the right way to do it.

“I do think that we have to pull back from a vaccine war. I think that there is room for dialogue, for discussions, for developing arguments on both sides of the Channel. Nobody in Britain, nobody in Europe understands why we are witnessing, according to the news, a stupid vaccine war … We are not in war, and we are not enemies. We are allies.”

####

“I would like the member states and the commission to speed up the efforts to provide vaccines for each and every one in the European Union,” he said. “Britain is in advance for different reasons, because Britain took the decision to have an emergency decision-based approach whereas the European Union, the commission and the member of states, were more budget conscious … We were too cautious.”

France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, told the Greek television channel ERT that he believed the EU had been too tentative in procuring and distributing vaccines.

“Everybody, all the experts said: Never in the history of mankind was a vaccine developed in less than a year. We didn’t shoot for the stars. That should be a lesson for all of us. We were wrong to lack ambition, to lack the madness, I would say, to say: It’s possible, let’s do it,” he said

“We didn’t think it would happen that quickly... You can give that to the Americans, as early as the summer of 2020 they said: let’s pull out all the stops and do it. As far as we’re concerned, we didn’t go fast enough, strong enough on this. We thought the vaccines would take time to take off.”
_


----------



## Blue Hills (25 Mar 2021)

I was half watching that when it went out very early today.
Seemed fairly reasonable from what I picked up.
There was a french MEP on channel 4 news a few days ago who said:
paraphrase:
that the EU signed identical contracts simultaneously with the UK.
Unless I am very much mistaken there is at least one total lie there.
When challenged she seemed somewhat tight lipped.
In my view the EU is looking extremely shoddy over all this.

I rather worry what some folk/citizens in the EU are being fed,


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Mar 2021)

Huge number of second doses administered yesterday: 242 642. Compare that with an average 87k only a week ago.
I suspect that the vaccination centres are straining to get enough residual JCVI Gp 6(UHC) and Gp9: 50-54s on the lists so are now pulling forward those due a second dose in early April. Supply is still good (580k doses administered overall yesterday) and will be like this for a few more days.
The very clear direction from NHS England NOT to offer any more vaccines to under 50s, has meant filling the lists is difficult so the solution is to call in (fair proportion of NHS/health workers maybe, in JCVI Gp 2) those who were given their first jab 10-17 Jan (1.8M) so are due their second jab by 3-10 Apr.
More than half of people aged 11 years and over in the UK have received their first jab.


----------



## Julia9054 (25 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The very clear direction from NHS England NOT to offer any more vaccines to under 50


Harrogate seems to be ignoring that. Several 40 something friends have had texts from their GP and are booked in in the next few days


----------



## mjr (25 Mar 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> I was half watching that when it went out very early today.
> Seemed fairly reasonable from what I picked up.


The reporting of it above seems bunk. The "vaccine war" is mainly a UK press invention. The EU is cross with AZ. You could read the above comments differently in that light. Juncker always seems to be saying different things to different audiences at once.



> There was a french MEP on channel 4 news a few days ago who said:
> paraphrase:
> that the EU signed identical contracts simultaneously with the UK.
> Unless I am very much mistaken there is at least one total lie there.
> When challenged she seemed somewhat tight lipped.


Well, the UK AZ contract is not public, so we do not know for sure if it is a lie... Or she may be tight lipped because someone leaked the UK contract.



> In my view the EU is looking extremely shoddy over all this.


No one is looking great out of this.



> I rather worry what some folk/citizens in the EU are being fed,


Nothing worse than the shoot the UK press spews, mostly.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (25 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> The reporting of it above seems bunk. The "vaccine war" is mainly a UK press invention.



So when Juncker said "_I do think that we have to pull back from a vaccine war." _- that was because he had been reading the Daily Mail too much?


----------



## mjr (25 Mar 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> So when Juncker said "_I do think that we have to pull back from a vaccine war." _- that was because he had been reading the Daily Mail too much?


It depends who you think he is saying we should be pulling back!


----------



## Blue Hills (26 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Well, the UK AZ contract is not public, so we do not know for sure if it is a lie...


Well unless I am very much mistaken, the "simultaneous" was an outright lie.

Are you saying it wasn't?

On the "identical", if it would support its claim, and that AZ didn't just commit to "best efforts", why doesn't the EU quote the relevant bit of their contract?

And if AZ has broken a contractual agreement one would expect the EU would take legal steps open to them to remedy this, not threaten retaliatory measures against third parties.

This all smells to me, and apart from the EU's mistakes and sluggishness in procurement rather smells of politicos trying to protect themselves by briefing against others and spreading rumour. 

So it's doubly bad.

Britain doesn't have any monopoly on lying wriggling shyster politicos, despite what some folk would have you believe.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (26 Mar 2021)

Wife has been volunteer marshalling at Grasmere (Lake District) this week and they have been jabbing patients (?) from Carlisle (over an hour away), some from Yorkshire, Lancashire and as far away as Northumberland!


----------



## Pale Rider (26 Mar 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Wife has been volunteer marshalling at Grasmere (Lake District) this week and they have been jabbing patients (?) from Carlisle (over an hour away), some from Yorkshire, Lancashire and as far away as Northumberland!



Vaccine tourism?

Priti Patel will be outraged.


----------



## Kajjal (26 Mar 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> I was half watching that when it went out very early today.
> Seemed fairly reasonable from what I picked up.
> There was a french MEP on channel 4 news a few days ago who said:
> paraphrase:
> ...


The position is some countries like with PPE etc. put an explicit export ban on vaccines in place quickly.
some simply haven’t exported vaccines.
some initially exported vaccines but have now stopped.
Others exported 40,000,000+ vaccines from various producers
Where is becomes more complicated is the later have not received the vaccine imports they were due from a specific manufacturer while simultaneously been accused of vaccine nationalism while exporting significant amounts and failure while not extensively blocking vaccine exports which could have improved their vaccination rates.


----------



## Kajjal (26 Mar 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Wife has been volunteer marshalling at Grasmere (Lake District) this week and they have been jabbing patients (?) from Carlisle (over an hour away), some from Yorkshire, Lancashire and as far away as Northumberland!


The take up by people has been great and my wife was very pleased how well run the vaccination centre she went to was. This is a great credit to all involved


----------



## Blue Hills (26 Mar 2021)

Kajjal said:


> The position is some countries like with PPE etc. put an explicit export ban on vaccines in place quickly.
> some simply haven’t exported vaccines.
> some initially exported vaccines but have now stopped.
> Others exported 40,000,000+ vaccines from various producers
> Where is becomes more complicated is the later have not received the vaccine imports they were due from a specific manufacturer while simultaneously been accused of vaccine nationalism while exporting significant amounts and failure while not extensively blocking vaccine exports which could have improved their vaccination rates.


You haven't actually addressed the question of the contracts though.
And seem to be following some in the EU who would have you believe/be happy for you to have the idea that the EU makes vaccine. The EU does not as far as I know make vaccines, companies like AZ do.
Halting deliveries of stuff which isn't yours and then redirecting it, if this what is threatened, strikes me as a form of piracy.


----------



## Kajjal (26 Mar 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> You haven't actually addressed the question of the contracts though.
> And seem to be following some in the EU who would have you believe/be happy for you to have the idea that the EU makes vaccine. The EU does not as far as I know make vaccines, companies like AZ do.
> Halting deliveries of stuff which isn't yours and then redirecting it, if this what is threatened, strikes me as a form of piracy.


The contracts are unknown, the only public information was the EU got a better price from AZ and like many has not recieved what it was promised from AZ. I am not sure I would go as far as your view the UK not exporting vaccines is a form of piracy but it is hardly along the lines of working together internationally.


----------



## Blue Hills (26 Mar 2021)

Kajjal said:


> The contracts are unknown, the only public information was the EU got a better price from AZ and like many has not recieved what it was promised from AZ. I am not sure I would go as far as your view the UK not exporting vaccines is a form of piracy but it is hardly along the lines of working together internationally.


But can't the contracts be revealed by the apparently aggrieved party, the EU? In support of their case? If not, why not?
What I'd also like to know is what is the EU theory for why AZ is supposedly unfairly favouring the UK? How do they explain it? Some sort of weird anglophilia, a residual fondness for James Bond films and the Beatles? Their apparent lack of an explanation for this also seems odd/suspicious to me.
I wasn't referring to possibly piracy with regard to the UK but with regard to the EU and member states - the Italian move against stuff destined for Australia, the vague EU threats about possible future action against stuff destined for places outside the EU.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (26 Mar 2021)

Kajjal said:


> The contracts are unknown, the only public information was the EU got a better price from AZ and like many has not recieved what it was promised from AZ. I am not sure I would go as far as your view the UK not exporting vaccines is a form of piracy but it is hardly along the lines of working together internationally.



They are not unknown, the AZ CEO is on record (Republicca article) as stating that the EU contract was signed 3 months after the UK contract and has less binding commitments.


----------



## Blue Hills (26 Mar 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> They are not unknown, the AZ CEO is on record (Republicca article) as stating that the EU contract was signed 3 months after the UK contract and has less binding commitments.


ah, this rings a bell - i may even have read the article - hell this covid and this row has been going on a long time - if you or anyone else has a link for the article, please post.


----------



## Unkraut (26 Mar 2021)

The head of the German ethics council, who was party to government and EU policy on vaccines, made the following comment last night.

The American and British policy on procurement was like playing rugby, the EU like playing chess. The former in effect barged everyone else out of the way a (policy that clearly has had advantages to those countries).

Should the EU now put an export stop on deliveries to the UK, this would mean the EU is now playing rugby - doing what the British have done from the beginning. (Juncker is right to advise against going down this road though imo.)

She said the EU signed a contract with AZ one day before the British - I know the EU date was 27th August 2020. (Edit - just found a link stating ... _even though the U.K. contract was signed just a day after the one with the EU_. https://www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/ Curiosity satisfied!)

I think there are various reasons for the increase in temperature over the vaccine programme.

AZ has _massively_ failed to supply the EU with the vaccines contracted for the first quarter of 2021. Deliveries to the UK were maintained. This may have been in accordance with the UK contract with AZ, but if so the UK shouldn't now complain about vaccine nationalism on the part of the EU.

Both the EU and the UK have agreed to supply third world countries. Apart from this, both the US and the UK have exported no doses of vaccines to other countries around the world. Zilch. The EU has exported 40 million doses, and I think last night they said this was now 70 million, and they showed a map of them including Canada Australia and New Zealand!

Almost a third of all doses injected in the UK were manufactured and exported from the territory of the EU. Whilst the British have been admired for getting on with the vaccination, this fact ought to reduce British boasting about it. The trade off for the faster rate in Britain has been a slower rate on the continent and other parts of the world.

The EU policy still deserves criticism - the Americans signed up for 600 million doses for a population of 330 million in July, the EU for 300 million doses for a population of 450 million at the end of November. This must have been for BionTech.

The slowness to order was in part due to some member states worrying about price and liability. vdL couldn't simply ignore this. Agreement across all 27 had to be achieved, and for the EU it actually went fairly quickly, but we now know not quickly enough.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (26 Mar 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> ah, this rings a bell - i may even have read the article - hell this covid and this row has been going on a long time - if you or anyone else has a link for the article, please post.



https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2...azeneca_coronavirus_covid_vaccines-284349628/

"Anyway, we didn't commit with the EU, by the way. It's not a commitment we have to Europe: it’s a best effort, we said we are going to make our best effort. The reason why we said that is because Europe at the time wanted to be supplied more or less at the same time as the UK, even though the contract was signed three months later. So we said, “ok, we're going to do our best, we’re going to try, but we cannot commit contractually because we are three months behind UK”. We knew it was a super stretch goal and we know it's a big issue, this pandemic. But our contract is not a contractual commitment. It's a best effort. Basically we said we're going to try our best, but we can't guarantee we're going to succeed. In fact, getting there, we are a little bit delayed"


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Mar 2021)

Unkraut said:


> AZ has _massively_ failed to supply the EU with the vaccines contracted for the first quarter of 2021. Deliveries to the UK were maintained. This may have been in accordance with the UK contract with AZ, but if so the UK shouldn't now complain about vaccine nationalism on the part of the EU.



Lots of focus on contracted volumes. They're near irrelevant in reality. AFAICT:

AZ set up a UK supply chain, in the UK, paid for by the UK govt. 

AZ then set up an EU supply chain, essentially paid for by the EU.

The UK supply chain is more limited in scale, and has operated pretty much as hoped (though started later than planned).
The EU supply chain has proved much harder to get up to speed. This is very unsurprising; that so many vaccines have been delivered so quickly is more surprising.

The contract is for "best efforts" to meet a "schedule". There is no "contracted volume" and AZ has not failed to meet their contract. Unless AZ isn't trying (seems rather unlikely, to put it mildly), they are fulfilling their contract.


----------



## Pale Rider (26 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Lots of focus on contracted volumes. They're near irrelevant in reality.



Lots of words from the EU which are certainly irrelevant.

They don't, and have never, understood the concept of 'get the job done'.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Mar 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Lots of words from the EU which are certainly irrelevant.
> 
> They don't, and have never, understood the concept of 'get the job done'.



I have no clue what you're on about.

And I suspect, other than a vague desire to say nasty things about bad EU, do you.


----------



## Unkraut (26 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The contract is for "best efforts" to meet a "schedule".


I take your point, and I am sure this is going to rumble on for a long time yet.


Pale Rider said:


> Lots of words from the EU which are certainly irrelevant.
> 
> They don't, and have never, understood the concept of 'get the job done'.


My objection to this approach is that 'getting the job done' should not be at the expense of others. If the German government had followed the British nationalist approach, then I think it possible by now a similar proportion of the population might have been vaccinated as is the case in Britain. The country has the money, though the infrastructure is a bit dodgy. This would have meant though that fit and young German footballers would have been vaccinated before some of the poorer EU countries would have finished doing their over-80's or healthcare professionals.

I still think the collective approach was right, but the way it was conducted is deserving of severe criticism. The British, though, having rejected the collective approach (as is their right) are not in much of a position to criticise without being thoroughly hypocritical. By _British_ here I mean its nationalist government and right-wing tabloid press.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (26 Mar 2021)

Unkraut said:


> My objection to this approach is that 'getting the job done' should not be at the expense of others. If the German government had followed the British nationalist approach, then I think it possible by now a similar proportion of the population might have been vaccinated as is the case in Britain. The country has the money, though the infrastructure is a bit dodgy. This would have meant though that fit and young German footballers would have been vaccinated before some of the poorer EU countries would have finished doing their over-80's or healthcare professionals.
> 
> I still think the collective approach was right, but the way it was conducted is deserving of severe criticism. The British, though, having rejected the collective approach (as is their right) are not in much of a position to criticise without being thoroughly hypocritical. By _British_ here I mean its nationalist government and right-wing tabloid press.



The EU is not following a collective approach. It still wants to vaccinate the young and healthy of the EU before the elderly of Brazil or Ghana or Bangladesh. It's just a different kind of 'nationalism'.


----------



## Kajjal (26 Mar 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> The EU is not following a collective approach. It still wants to vaccinate the young and healthy of the EU before the elderly of Brazil or Ghana or Bangladesh. It's just a different kind of 'nationalism'.


It is by degree, the US has been very open about its nationalistic approach, the UK has taken the exact same approach but glosses over this inconvenient fact while criticising others for even suggesting to do the same, India has for a country with great poverty been exporting Vaccines readily and the EU has also been exporting vaccines readily including to the UK which accepts then but won’t export any from it’s own production. In fairness it was naive of the EU to expect anything from the populist government the UK has currently leading to the current situation.


----------



## Milkfloat (26 Mar 2021)

Kajjal said:


> It is by degree, the US has been very open about its nationalistic approach, the UK has taken the exact same approach but glosses over this inconvenient fact while criticising others for even suggesting to do the same, India has for a country with great poverty been exporting Vaccines readily and the EU has also been exporting vaccines readily including to the UK which accepts then but won’t export any from it’s own production. In fairness it was naive of the EU to expect anything from the populist government the UK has currently leading to the current situation.


As pointed out above - the EU does not export anything. Multinational companies who happen to have some production facilities in the EU are doing the exporting. These companies are trying to stick to the contracts they signed. Whilst vaccine nationalism is probably not the right way to go about things we have to consider the following;
1.) EU countries were not even using the vaccines they ordered, particularly in the AZ case as they had not approved them.
2.) The UK was fully committed to pumping as much vaccine into as many people as possible with very fast approval, certain EU governments were somewhat the opposite. They also have gone for a 12 week gap, which seems to be paying off.
3.) The UK put their money where they mouth is, not only investing over 5 times per capita in companies like AZ as start up costs, but also paying more per vaccine. Whilst that is somewhat distasteful, without that investment they may not even be an AZ vaccine
4.) The UK needed the vaccine more than the EU. Just look at the infection and death rates due mainly to the Kent variant. 

So, now we have the majority of our vulnerable population vaccination should we back off and share more, I believe yes, but not just with the EU, but the whole world. Let's get the vaccine in the arms of the people that need it first, ones at risk due to prevalence of Covid in their areas, old people and those with a medical need.


----------



## Blue Hills (26 Mar 2021)

Kajjal said:


> It is by degree, the US has been very open about its nationalistic approach, the UK has taken the exact same approach but glosses over this inconvenient fact while criticising others for even suggesting to do the same, India has for a country with great poverty been exporting Vaccines readily and the EU has also been exporting vaccines readily including to the UK which accepts then but won’t export any from it’s own production. In fairness it was naive of the EU to expect anything from the populist government the UK has currently leading to the current situation.


You persist in not answering the points about the ownership of these vaccines and who has contracted to receive them under what contractual terms. I'd also be careful about chucking terms like nationalistic and populist around. 
I'm no fan of boris but I haven't really noticed much in the way of triumphalism over the UK's performance vis a vis europe.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Mar 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> You persist in not answering the points about the ownership of these vaccines and who has contracted to receive them under what contractual terms



Well, we haven't seen all the relevant contracts.

But to expand on my point above, focussing on contracts is missing the point. 

There's a third wave in Europe and tens or hundreds of thousands will die. 

Meanwhile, the UK has largely vaccinated to some degree its most vulnerable. 

Yet the EU is short of vaccines which will save lives, and has and will continue to show export of those live saving vaccines to the UK where they are far less acutely needed, without action. 

Regardless of commercial contracts, there's absolutely no way the EU will just stand by and allow that to happen. And they have the legal means to stop it.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (26 Mar 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Well, we haven't seen all the relevant contracts.
> 
> But to expand on my point above, focussing on contracts is missing the point.
> 
> ...



Just like the UK has the legal means to stop the export of lipids from the UK, without which the Pfizer plants in the EU will grind to a halt. 

I do have sympathy with the argument that the UK should come to an accommodation with the EU given their respective positions, but the EU's crass approach to the whole issue is unlikely to facilitate that.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Mar 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Just like the UK has the legal means to stop the export of lipids from the UK, without which the Pfizer plants in the EU will grind to a halt.



Absolutely. Of course, there's no benefit to the uk from that...


Eric Olthwaite said:


> the EU's crass approach to the whole issue is unlikely to facilitate that.



Agree - equally just allowing the situation to continue wasn't working either.


----------



## Bazzer (26 Mar 2021)

Unkraut said:


> Both the EU and the UK have agreed to supply third world countries. Apart from this, both the US and the UK have exported no doses of vaccines to other countries around the world. Zilch. The EU has exported 40 million doses, and I think last night they said this was now 70 million, and they showed a map of them including Canada Australia and New Zealand!
> 
> *Almost a third of all doses injected in the UK were manufactured and exported from the territory of the EU.* Whilst the British have been admired for getting on with the vaccination, this fact ought to reduce British boasting about it. The trade off for the faster rate in Britain has been a slower rate on the continent and other parts of the world.
> 
> ly ignore this. Agreement across all 27 had to be achieved, and for the EU it actually went fairly quickly, but we now know not quickly enough.



The BBC, at least up to a report updated 23 hours ago, says _AstraZeneca confirmed the UK had not received any vaccines or components from the EU - apart from one "tiny" batch from the Leiden plant._

The same report says that half of the vaccines received by France and Germany are unused.

BTW, I don't say this to pick a fight with you. Perhaps the sources in Germany contradict the BBC.
I also accept that a mass vaccination process might be difficult to put into place, if you know stocks are limited.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Mar 2021)

On the 'contract stuff' that


Yellow Fang said:


> From the Torygraph:
> _However the redacted contract, which does not reveal how much was paid, states that "AstraZeneca has committed to use its Best Reasonable Efforts... to build capacity to manufacture 300 million Doses of the Vaccine, at no profit and no loss to AstraZeneca, at the total cost currently estimated to be [redacted] Euros for distribution within the EU, . . . ."
> This morning the Spectator reports that when ministers saw a similar offer in the UK contract, Alok Sharma and Matt Hancock "insisted on a legally binding promise to serve Britain first", which they later received._


@roubaixtuesday was "glad it's that simple":
*Oxford/AstraZeneca will rely on European plants for initial supplies after UK supply chain holdup
https://www.irishtimes.com/business...ses-held-up-by-manufacturing-delays-1.4430676*
@slowmotion shared:
I think that this article from Politico is quite good. It's a level-headed description of the EU/UK vaccine procurement saga.
https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-coronavirus-vaccine-struggle-pfizer-biontech-astrazeneca/
[/QUOTE]
@Smokin Joe said: From the Guardian -
https://www.theguardian.com/society...ow-the-uk-got-ahead-in-the-covid-vaccine-race


----------



## Unkraut (26 Mar 2021)

Bazzer said:


> The BBC, at least up to a report updated 23 ours ago, says _AstraZeneca confirmed the UK had not received any vaccines or components from the EU - apart from one "tiny" batch from the Leiden plant._
> 
> The same report says that half of the vaccines received by France and Germany are unused.
> 
> BTW, I don't say this to pick a fight with you. Perhaps the sources in Germany contradict the BBC.


I think this is a classic case of where confusion doesn't help. It's the BionTech/Pfizer vaccine that has been exported to the UK, over 10 million doses. 

The 'three month delay' on the part of the EU must have been in dealing with Pfizer, not AZ. It is that that has caused the most criticism on the continent, on the assumption that it might have been possible to vaccinate in numbers comparable to the US.

It's perfectly in order to criticise the EU - it might have done better with the AZ contract, and certainly with the Pfizer contract.

I don't know about French practice but the unused AZ vaccine in Germany originally came about due to reserving the doses needed for the second jab. That has now been changed. Doses also mounted up during the halt in injections with AZ whilst its safety was looked into - a mistaken approach imo. This is now being sorted.

I only hope that when the supply of vaccine really gets going from April the infrastructure here can cope with it. 60 million doses in the second quarter. Once the centres are at full capacity, the plan is for local doctors to vaccinate in addition, and with more discretion as they know which patients will benefit most. It will require the logistics to be in place, and this time the govt really has got to deliver.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Mar 2021)

Unkraut said:


> I only hope that when the supply of vaccine really gets going from April



Good news on that front

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ites-to-boost-inoculation-drive-idUSKBN2BI1Z2

I'm not sure, but I think there are already manufactured finished doses queued up waiting this approval for release.

I think the destination for those doses (EU/UK) is particularly at issue in current negotiation.

But that's all pretty speculative.


----------



## midlife (26 Mar 2021)

Slightly different topic but this just came through. Seems like we have run out (are running out) of Pfizer vaccine and second jabs will be AZ.....

*Covid vaccinations *
Please note that the *last second doses* of the Pfizer vaccination will be given out at XXXon Friday 2 April and at XXX on Sunday 4 April. If you had the Pfizer vaccination as your first dose and do not yet have an appointment for your second dose, please contact the vaccination team using the contact details below. If you book for a second dose after those dates, you can still receive the Oxford Astra-Zeneca vaccine.​


----------



## Venod (26 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Slightly different topic but this just came through



May I ask, came through from where ?


----------



## midlife (26 Mar 2021)

Venod said:


> May I ask, came through from where ?



Came via email from my employer (the NHS)


----------



## Venod (26 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Came via email from my employer (the NHS)



So i wonder if this is only for NHS staff, there will be a lot of people (the wife and I included) who have had the first Pfizer jab, our 12 weeks are not up until May.


----------



## midlife (26 Mar 2021)

Venod said:


> So i wonder if this is only for NHS staff, there will be a lot of people (the wife and I included) who have had the first Pfizer jab, our 12 weeks are not up until May.



I'm not sure. The plan was to hold enough Pfizer vaccine behind so all could get their second Pfizer jabs while moving over to AZ. Don't know if the Pfizer vaccine has a sell by date even stored at minus 70 and that is the reason for stopping?


----------



## bitsandbobs (26 Mar 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> You persist in not answering the points about the ownership of these vaccines and who has contracted to receive them under what contractual terms. I'd also be careful about chucking terms like nationalistic and populist around.
> *I'm no fan of boris but I haven't really noticed much in the way of triumphalism over the UK's performance vis a vis europe.*



You haven't been paying attention then!


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Slightly different topic but this just came through. Seems like we have run out (are running out) of Pfizer vaccine and second jabs will be AZ.....
> *Covid vaccinations *
> Please note that the *last second doses* of the Pfizer vaccination will be given out at XXXon Friday 2 April and at XXX on Sunday 4 April. If you had the Pfizer vaccination as your first dose and do not yet have an appointment for your second dose, please contact the vaccination team using the contact details below. If you book for a second dose after those dates, you can still receive the Oxford Astra-Zeneca vaccine.​





Venod said:


> So I wonder if this is only for NHS staff, there will be a lot of people (the wife and I included) who have had the first Pfizer jab, our 12 weeks are not up until May.


Last month they started a trial to see whether mixing doses made a difference to effectiveness, called the Com-COV study, but it was not due to report (interim findings) till June iirc: *Comparing COVID-19 Vaccine Schedule Combinations – Com-COV*
@Venod - @midlife (in JCVI Gp 2 - Healthcare worker) had his first jab on 7 Jan and his second on 11 Mar (9 week gap). Hospitals will differ but most of the NHS in JCVI Gp 2 will have had their first jab by 25 Jan. If his 'gap' experience is typical, 9 weeks from there is 29 Mar.
Of course it may just be a 'hurry up' communication in his hospital.
It may be this is just for NHS frontline staff and the great unwashed will be given the same make of vaccine for their second dose [Edit:] (and giving NHS staff Oxford-AZ as the second dose whatever is husbanding the Pfizer stock for that and mitigating anticipated supply fluctuations).
The Pfizer supply will have stabilised by May, @Venod . The Oxford-AZ vaccine supply is more secure in the face of EU shenanigans as it's coming from UK (Keele, Oxford and Wrexham). The UK took a calculated risk to not leave millions of Pfizer doses on the shelf for the second jab, and is feeling that squeeze. The supply of Pfizer (total 40M) was spread across Q1 and Q2, and aiui, into Q3.
Interesting to see that, implicitly, the (presumably very well informed, by science if not data/evidence) judgement is that it's better to go with a different second dose (at 12 weeks) rather than extending the 12 week gap, or that supply of Pfizer is uncertain in April.


----------



## mjr (27 Mar 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Just like the UK has the legal means to stop the export of lipids from the UK, without which the Pfizer plants in the EU will grind to a halt.


Great plan, in as far as mutual destruction ever is, except that Pfizer also buy lipids from Canada (and the US but that goes to US plants) and there are two more licensed producers being built in Germany which should be ready soon, and the Janssen vaccine is expected in a few weeks.



> I do have sympathy with the argument that the UK should come to an accommodation with the EU given their respective positions, but the EU's crass approach to the whole issue is unlikely to facilitate that.


Nor is the UK's. No one comes out of this well.


----------



## mjr (27 Mar 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> The EU is not following a collective approach. It still wants to vaccinate the young and healthy of the EU before the elderly of Brazil or Ghana or Bangladesh. It's just a different kind of 'nationalism'.


I suspect you would have objected even more if the EU started vaccinating people abroad before Europeans!


----------



## classic33 (27 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> I suspect you would have objected even more if the EU started vaccinating people abroad before Europeans!


This is something not limited to one country or even countries. It's global. The sooner all those that can be vaccinated, are vaccinated, the better.

I realise you feel as though you've not been included, under 50 years old. But what about those who look at the countries where production is taking place, wondering _"Will we ever see any of it?"_

There's even countries stopping them getting the help they need, solely to make a political statement. Countries aren't producing the vaccine. Companies within those countries are.

Pfizer are seeing final testing and packing done done at one of it's plants in ireland. It's either passing through the UK, 62 corridor, or passing over the UK, twice.


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Mar 2021)

I still find the idea that the SII (Pune, India) is shipping vaccines to the UK oddly odd. Surely these supplies are needed not just in India but in adjacent countries.
I have previously speculated that AZ may wish to send its vaccines from India to the UK so that it can send batches produced in UK factories to the EU. Note that the AZ-EU contract prohibits supply from factories other than those in the EU or in the UK (Clause 5.4 in the contract) so this would be neat (if inefficient) arrangement but would likely be acceptable to the UK, effectively satisfying the terms of the AZ-UK contract (no, I have not seen it).


----------



## midlife (27 Mar 2021)

That's my wife's AZ first jab done at local practice. Went super smooth, camper van with awning in middle of the car park with cars going round it on a one way system. Arrived for appointment on time and a few minutes later all done


----------



## potsy (27 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> That's my wife's AZ first jab done at local practice. Went super smooth, camper van with awning in middle of the car park with cars going round it on a one way system. Arrived for appointment on time and a few minutes later all done


Just back from having mine too, 3 mile walk there and back, all very efficient and friendly.


----------



## MrGrumpy (28 Mar 2021)

Looks like Moderna for me !


----------



## mjr (28 Mar 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Looks like Moderna for me !


Ooh get you, designer drugs(!) Oxford's not good enough for you?


----------



## MrGrumpy (28 Mar 2021)

Well....... more a case of all you older folks have snaffled the AZ !! Btw I’m only assuming as the second doses are now being pushed out now


----------



## AuroraSaab (29 Mar 2021)

Had ours the other day. OH had no side effects, though we both felt tired in the evening. Next day he was ok, I had a slight headache all day. Queued for 5 minutes and asked to wait in the car for 15 minutes afterwards. Had the AZ one.


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Mar 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Looks like Moderna for me !


A couple of moons ago I posted the (carelessly published) Scottish supply graph: https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/page-152#post-6311862 We can assume the other nations' supply profile mirrors it.
That shows small amounts of Moderna supply from W2 April for 4 weeks and then double (bitd to allow second jabs at the 28 day point) til the graph's end date. But I assume that the 12 week gap will be used for the mRNA Moderna vaccine as well, so that will allow double the number to receive earlier first doses, with second doses not required till early July. The UK ordered 17M doses of this the most expensive vaccine and supply is spread Q2-Q4 2021.
The EU has had Moderna supplies since mid January.


----------



## BrumJim (29 Mar 2021)

BrumJim said:


> Didn't happen.
> This is me.



Got jabbed last Saturday, even though I'm still not 50. Got another invite from my GP, so I booked the first available time to reduce the risk of them changing their mind again.

Mine came from Liverpool.


----------



## rockyroller (29 Mar 2021)

every day, sometimes twice a day get a text saying that I am still pre-registered for the vaccine. this is starting to piss me off


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Mar 2021)

rockyroller said:


> [Daily I] get a text saying that I am still pre-registered for the vaccine.


Stop procrastinating: just give them your bank details. You know it makes sense.


----------



## Johnno260 (29 Mar 2021)

My mother finally got her jab, now her sister won't speak to her as my mother has chosen her side! like wtf


----------



## mjr (29 Mar 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> My mother finally got her jab, now her sister won't speak to her as my mother has chosen her side! like wtf


Maybe your sister is worried she will blue-screen?


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Mar 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> My mother finally got her jab, now her sister won't speak to her as my mother has chosen her side! like wtf


So people can appreciate your post, I've found the background:


Johnno260 said:


> I have family members who a diehard anti vax, they say everything from it causes issues to its big pharma using us all as cash cows.
> since Covid they have spewed every possible theory out there now, from nano trackers in the vaccine which I said what makes you so special or any of us that our location must be known 24/7 to 5q causes the virus.
> I did point out they own smart phones and fitness GPS trackers so if being tracked is an issue there is some huge contradictions there.
> They follow David Icke and Piers Corbyn, and are huge QAnon followers.
> ...


----------



## lane (29 Mar 2021)

There are some really stupid people in the world. Luckily also some really clever ones who can develop a number of highly successful vaccines in less than 12 months. I guess the advantages of one far outweighs the disadvantages of the other, however annoying they may be.


----------



## Johnno260 (29 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Maybe your sister is worried she will blue-screen?



haha who knows, it's kinda so sad it's funny in a way, I'm intrigued to see how far down the rabbit hole these people can go.


----------



## Johnno260 (29 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> There are some really stupid people in the world. Luckily also some really clever ones who can develop a number of highly successful vaccines in less than 12 months. I guess the advantages of one far outweighs the disadvantages of the other, however annoying they may be.



I know something that should be celebrated as a feat of modern medicine, yet the response is people like this.

it’s like when I watched the Perseverance live stream with flat earthers in live chat remarking that yes a remote control car on Mars.


----------



## Kajjal (29 Mar 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> I know something that should be celebrated as a feat of modern medicine, yet the response is people like this.
> 
> it’s like when I watched the Perseverance live stream with flat earthers in live chat remarking that yes a remote control car on Mars.


The earth isn’t flat ?

Next you will proclaim 5G masts don’t cause COVID.


----------



## Johnno260 (29 Mar 2021)

Kajjal said:


> The earth isn’t flat ?
> 
> Next you will proclaim 5G masts don’t cause COVID.



Sorry you mean Scamdemic right? 🙃


----------



## vickster (29 Mar 2021)

Aged 48, I’ve had a message from my surgery asking me to book vaccination. I’ll need to have it ASAP as I have to have a 2 week gap to my knee op which is 3 weeks today!


----------



## Bazzer (30 Mar 2021)

I see the BBC and Sky are reporting that up to 60m doses of Novavax are to be produced near the site of the infamous eye test, Barnard Castle. And if regulatory approval given, supplies could be available by June.
It also looks like the recent rows with the EU have introduced some protectionism. Filling was going to be in the EU, but will now be in the North East.


----------



## Ajax Bay (30 Mar 2021)

Why is that protectionism?
GSK's plant at Barnard Castle would have been used in the Sanofi (Translate Bio)/GSK vaccine production (from the French plant outside Lyon) but that candidate vaccine performed poorly and whether it gets further is in doubt. Great that GSK have made sure that their resources are effectively mobilised to produce a vaccine (Novovax) the efficacy of which has been proven in RCTs.
This time last year GSK (plants in Barnard Castle and elsewhere) was a potential partner for Oxford University (Merck the front runner till April but that foundered).


----------



## fossyant (30 Mar 2021)

You only get 4G with Novovax.


----------



## vickster (30 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Aged 48, I’ve had a message from my surgery asking me to book vaccination. I’ll need to have it ASAP as I have to have a 2 week gap to my knee op which is 3 weeks today!


That was all extremely complicated but I've managed to get booked for tomorrow evening (otherwise I was either going to have to move the op or wait until May)


----------



## Johnno260 (30 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> That was all extremely complicated but I've managed to get booked for tomorrow evening (otherwise I was either going to have to move the op or wait until May)



My wife had to do the same, she had an op scheduled for May and needed her 2nd jab, the surgery that's handling the jab wasn't impressed she called to arrange it, as it say on a pre-recorded message don't call regarding this we will contact you.


----------



## classic33 (30 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> That was all extremely complicated but I've managed to get booked for tomorrow evening (otherwise I was either going to have to move the op or wait until May)


Hopefully you get both sorted out, without having to delay either.


----------



## Ajax Bay (30 Mar 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> she had an op scheduled for May and needed her 2nd jab


When was her first jab, Johnno?


----------



## Johnno260 (30 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> When was her first jab, Johnno?



It was late Jan, she had to wait as the Pfizer jab wasn't allowed as she had anaphylaxis and the cause was never diagnosed.

She is a nurse, so I would think they need to get healthcare workers as protected as possible.


----------



## JBGooner (30 Mar 2021)

Bazzer said:


> It also looks like the recent rows with the EU have introduced some protectionism. Filling was going to be in the EU, but will now be in the North East.



Good move. AIUI some of the OAZ vaccine produced in the UK is filled and packaged in the EU, which the EU counts as their exports when returned to the UK, so will be liable for this export ban they are boasting about.


----------



## vickster (30 Mar 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> My wife had to do the same, she had an op scheduled for May and needed her 2nd jab, the surgery that's handling the jab wasn't impressed she called to arrange it, as it say on a pre-recorded message don't call regarding this we will contact you.


The message I got specifically asked me to call the GP surgery with their number (just took ages to get through as probably every 40-49 year old on the list was trying to get through!)


----------



## Bazzer (30 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Why is that protectionism?
> GSK's plant at Barnard Castle would have been used in the Sanofi (Translate Bio)/GSK vaccine production (from the French plant outside Lyon) but that candidate vaccine performed poorly and whether it gets further is in doubt. Great that GSK have made sure that their resources are effectively mobilised to produce a vaccine (Novovax) the efficacy of which has been proven in RCTs.
> This time last year GSK (plants in Barnard Castle and elsewhere) was a potential partner for Oxford University (Merck the front runner till April but that foundered).


Whilst strictly protectionism is applying tariffs or other means to restrict economic damage by imports from foreign industry, in this instance the allocation of resources by GSK has prevented potential damage by guaranteeing manufacture and fill and finishing is all conducted in the UK and that the UK is not a potential hostage in any part of the process. I would be surprised if the recent spats with the EU have done nothing but engender distrust about where any part of the vaccine process takes place and concentrated minds further about putting the citizens of UK PLC first. 
As to what was going to happen at the plant, certainly there seem to be mixed messages. From the reports I have read, it was anticipated that only manufacture would take place in the UK, with fill and finish being undertaken within the EU.


----------



## matticus (30 Mar 2021)

I have a colleague from eastern europe, with family in Italy, Germany, Romania, and err ... Wiltshire.
He regularly gets irate about the amount of anti-vax madness on Facebook from back home. Now he is angry that the EU is demanding more vaccine doses when their citizens are so unwilling to get jabbed <compared to UK>, and the government don't seem to be in a hurry to do the jabs.


----------



## Johnno260 (30 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> The message I got specifically asked me to call the GP surgery with their number (just took ages to get through as probably every 40-49 year old on the list was trying to get through!)



ah ok different circumstances, like you said everyone on the list was no doubt hitting  the phone line hard! haha least you got through


----------



## vickster (30 Mar 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> ah ok different circumstances, like you said everyone on the list was no doubt hitting  the phone line hard! haha least you got through


Well I did but couldn’t book through GP as the dates were too close to the op. 119 couldn’t help but I found an alternate option


----------



## rockyroller (30 Mar 2021)

my phone actually buzzed at me to make an appointment! I did so at a mass-vaccination site, day after tomorrow. I can hardly believe it! I believe I am super happy! 

Can't remember the last time anything made be super happy ... the birth of my kids 24 & 25 yrs ago?


----------



## rockyroller (30 Mar 2021)

rockyroller said:


> every day, sometimes twice a day get a text saying that I am still pre-registered for the vaccine. this is starting to piss me off


oh shut up cranky pants & wait your turn! ;-)


----------



## classic33 (30 Mar 2021)

Question for those who have the first, possibly both, jabs.
Has the fact you've had one jab changed the way you feel what you're allowed to do?

Asked because there seems to be more people who have made holiday plans for the 12th of April. Some have changed the way in which they feel they need to act.


----------



## Bazzer (31 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Question for those who have the first, possibly both, jabs.
> Has the fact you've had one jab changed the way you feel what you're allowed to do?
> 
> Asked because there seems to be more people who have made holiday plans for the 12th of April. Some have changed the way in which they feel they need to act.


1 jab here for myself and Mrs B. The only thing which has changed is that once a week, weather permitting, Mrs B now goes for walks of a couple of miles or so with two of her closest friends. But no indoors meeting. They held off until three had been vaccinated. 
Holiday plans have been made for the end of May, when I was expecting to be in Egypt. - A cottage in a sparsely populated part of Scotland. It will just be the two of us and was deliberately booked for after both of us will have had both jabs.


----------



## Julia9054 (31 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Has the fact you've had one jab changed the way you feel what you're allowed to do?


I certainly feel safer at work. We are supposed to stay at the front of the classroom behind a line that is 2m away from the front row of pupils. Sometimes it is not possible to stick to this eg when a pupil fainted and I had to assist. I now feel less worried for my own safety


----------



## C R (31 Mar 2021)

@classic33 

I've had one dose, AZ about a month ago, but haven't really changed my behaviour. Still feel wary around people I don't know.


----------



## midlife (31 Mar 2021)

Everyone around me has been vaccinated as have most people who come into the building. Nothing has changed, same precautions, same PPE, same distancing. Nothing changed at home either. Just feel happier that if I do catch it the chances of ending up in hospital are way less.


----------



## steve292 (31 Mar 2021)

midlife said:


> Everyone around me has been vaccinated as have most people who come into the building. Nothing has changed, same precautions, same PPE, same distancing. Nothing changed at home either. Just feel happier that if I do catch it the chances of ending up in hospital are way less.


Very much the same here. My Mum. Father in law, wife and most of the people I work with have had it, so I feel much happier that the impact of someone in my family circle catches the lurgy it will have a reduced impact.


----------



## fossyant (31 Mar 2021)

Still socially distancing here. MrsF's sisters came round to discuss 'family' issues yesterday, but they were in the garden - all of us jabbed though. 

I am seeing more and more people not socially distancing, or like yesterday, woman in the post office next to me, no mask - possibly in her 30's but it would have messed up the tonne of make up and I don't think her daffy duck lips would have fitted in the mask. There was me all masked up.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Mar 2021)

I shall be out cycling in our Wednesday Ride to the Pub (up to 6 of us) today for the first time since October. Only the destination will be a private garden for this week and next; and then to external tables of local pubs various. In the south west there are about 200 cases reported daily, in a population of >5M. In Devon it's 2 cases per 100,000 people: higher (as much as 8!!) towns/cities (Plymouth, Bristol, Poole-Bournemouth). The fact that I have had my first jab may affect my decision as to how soon (after 12 April) next month I go to visit my (SW-based) nonogenarian mother (who had had both doses by early January).


----------



## mjr (31 Mar 2021)

fossyant said:


> woman in the post office next to me


Wow, you live in a land of giant post offices that allow more than one person inside them(!) 

Some stuff in local news here in Norfolk this morning that people are not showing up for their second jabs and it's suspected that people are foolishly thinking that one is protective enough for them, or that they fear worse side-effects from the second after having mild side-effects the first time. Doctor interviewed on the news stressing the importance of completing the vaccination for the best and longest protection possible. I can't see this reported online yet, though, with it only appearing in interviews about other topics like "I would also like to take this opportunity to remind people that are due to have their second dose to make sure they attend their appointment."


----------



## rockyroller (31 Mar 2021)

classic33 said:


> Question for those who have the first, possibly both, jabs.Has the fact you've had one jab changed the way you feel what you're allowed to do?
> Asked because there seems to be more people who have made holiday plans for the 12th of April. Some have changed the way in which they feel they need to act.


been eyeballing the guys in the office who have been fully vaccinated being less diligent w/ their masks w/ disdain. however now that I'm scheduled for jab#1 I worry about my own behavior


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Mar 2021)

PaulB said:


> This vaccine thing is becoming worrying. Countries don't stop vaccination to inconvenience people but have an obvious concern for them. I think the compliant press in this country are making us look stupid. I hope it doesn't come back to bite us but I'm not certain it won't.


Dragged this across. Paul - not quite sure what the 'vaccine thing' is. Are you referring to yesterday's German decision with regard to confining Ox-AZ vaccine use to over 60s? Not sure what you mean by a 'compliant press'. WHO, EMA and UK MRHA all say that there are no safety concerns. Do you think the UK press should make some up? How will "we" be made to "look stupid"? What do you think will "come back and bite us"? The threats to an individual from catching COVID-19 are far greater than any chance of an adverse reaction to vaccination.
Is the linkage of these adverse events after vaccination relying on the _post hoc ergo propter hoc_ fallacy?
I think @vickster has already pointed out that some contraceptive medications increase the very very low chance of these thromboses(CVT) by 200%. I note that the post-vaccination adverse reaction reports are (6/7) in younger (than 50?) women.
Update: "The Paul Ehrlich Institute said a total of 31 sinus vein thrombosis (SVT) events were reported by March 29 out of some 2.7M doses of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine that have been administered across Germany. Nine of the people died and all but two of the cases involved women, who were aged 20 to 63."
BMJ: The condition [CVT] is about three times as common in women [of child-bearing age].
ETA: Add in overweight (BMI >25 so not fat at all) and taking the pill and the chance of condition increases about 11 times! Ref link and 29 times more if woman is obese (BMI > 30).
The International Study on Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis8 found that up to 85% of adult patients have at least one risk factor; the most common was use of oral contraceptives, followed by a prothrombotic condition (more often genetic than acquired).
Do you recommend that women stop taking the pill? Do you think there's the remotest chance of Germany suggesting that to their 16-50 female cohort? Germany is nowhere near vaccinating under 60s (except for health workers or CEV perhaps) so this recent restriction will not affect the vaccine programme logistically for a month (by which time they'll have had time to do more 'investigation'). But it does risk increasing vaccine hesitancy more generally, to the detriment of the wider population's protection, as well as each individual. @Unkraut may have a perspective.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Mar 2021)

Teenagers
Pfizer/BioNTech have said today (31 Mar) that their COVID-19 vaccine was safe and effective and produced robust antibody responses in an RCT trial of 12- to 15-year olds (it's already authorized for use in people over 16). In the trial of 2260 aged 12 to 15, there were 18 cases of symptomatic COVID-19 in the group that got a placebo jab and zero in the group that got the vaccine: =100% efficacy in preventing COVID-19 (press release).


----------



## vickster (31 Mar 2021)

@Ajax Bay 
I think it was @Julia9054


----------



## matticus (31 Mar 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Teenagers
> Pfizer/BioNTech have said today (31 Mar) that their COVID-19 vaccine was safe and effective and produced robust antibody responses in an RCT trial of 12- to 15-year olds (it's already authorized for use in people over 16). In the trial of 2260 aged 12 to 15, there were 18 cases of symptomatic COVID-19 in the group that got a placebo jab and zero in the group that got the vaccine: =100% efficacy in preventing COVID-19 (press release).


I don't mean to drag discussion off-topic, but how on earth do you setup a study on 12-15 year olds (with a possibly fatal disease)?!?


----------



## vickster (31 Mar 2021)

matticus said:


> I don't mean to drag discussion off-topic, but how on earth do you setup a study on 12-15 year olds (with a possibly fatal disease)?!?


The same way you do any clinical trial for any drug or vaccine used in adolescents 
Covid is known to be far less fatal in children, but they are carriers and transmitters to vulnerable populations so protecting the little plague carriers is indeed a spiffing idea!


----------



## matticus (31 Mar 2021)

Thanks.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Mar 2021)

matticus said:


> I don't mean to drag discussion off-topic, but how on earth do you setup a study on 12-15 year olds (with a possibly fatal disease)?!?



Same as the adult study. 

Get a few thousand teenagers. 

Give half active and half placebo vaccines. 

See how many test positive for COVID over the next few months. 

Check how many of those were on active and how many on placebo.


----------



## matticus (31 Mar 2021)

OK, so far, so good, and very factual!
But are there no ethical considerations with risking the lives of 13 year olds?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Mar 2021)

matticus said:


> Thanks.



Main issue with children is ethics. 

It's not deemed ethical to give a child a treatment that cannot bring benefit beyond the risk of the treatment. Here covid is sufficiently nasty, and the vaccine proved sufficiently safe in adults. 

Almost all paediatric medicines are previously studied in adults for this reason.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (31 Mar 2021)

matticus said:


> OK, so far, so good, and very factual!
> But are there no ethical considerations with risking the lives of 13 year olds?



In what way are their lives being risked? Can you be more specific?


----------



## matticus (31 Mar 2021)

We cross-posted - I think you've already answered my question.
(I thought it didn't need saying that ethics was the key issue, but I accept I was wrong! :P )


----------



## Bazzer (31 Mar 2021)

@Unkraut or @Andy in Germany how does the decision of the German authorities seem to have gone down with the general public and media?


----------



## vickster (31 Mar 2021)

Duly Pfizerised


----------



## C R (31 Mar 2021)

vickster said:


> Duly Pfizerised


I take it you now have fantastic 5G reception anywhere you go,


----------



## vickster (31 Mar 2021)

Here’s hoping...I don’t want to have to pay for it


----------



## lane (31 Mar 2021)

Well I can't have been paying attention! Last I heard we were short of vaccines and sticking to making sure all the over 50s were complete. Today I am informed it is now over 40s (this by someone who works in a Doctors) and just seen on facebook that local mass vaccination centre has lowered age to over 38 for Easter due to unfilled appointments. Are we much further down the list than I thought - if so brilliant news.

Can't remember if I reported my Dad had his second dose of Pfizer last week - no issues.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Mar 2021)

The vaccination programme has kept ahead of the 12 week gap. Very few second doses at the '3 week gap' were given after 10 Jan - trickle for 2 months. The average gap since the 3 week regime was stopped is 10 weeks 3 days. So the slow roll out of first doses will continue in parallel, even with the restricted supply. There is still a proportion of 50-54s (JCVI Gp 9) who have not received their first jab.


----------



## mjr (31 Mar 2021)

lane said:


> Today I am informed it is now over 40s (this by someone who works in a Doctors) and just seen on facebook that local mass vaccination centre has lowered age to over 38 for Easter due to unfilled appointments.


Should have to send your spare vaccines over east where they've not finished the 50+ yet!


----------



## lane (31 Mar 2021)

mjr said:


> Should have to send your spare vaccines over east where they've not finished the 50+ yet!



Sorry we have imposed an export ban!


----------



## Unkraut (1 Apr 2021)

Bazzer said:


> @Unkraut or @Andy in Germany how does the decision of the German authorities seem to have gone down with the general public and media?


It can't have done the reputation of the vaccine much good. It will still be used for those over 60, and at least in Baden-Württemberg for those under 60 with a clear explanation of the risks. 

This time I think the caution more justified. There have been39 cases and 9 deaths, a position the usually over cautious MP Karl Lauterbach takes.

Frank-Walter Steinmeier was vaccinated with AZ almost certainly to reassure the public of the safety of the vaccine for the older population.

Some good news, if the anticipated supplies of vaccine actually materialize then it should be possible to vaccinate 3 million people per week by the end of this month.


----------



## rockyroller (1 Apr 2021)

been waiting a long time for this! finally got in at a mass-vaccination site, Gillette Stadium, Foxboro MA. wow, what a well oiled machine! got right into VIP parking, short rainy walk to a series of elevators. volunteers at every step to make sure you don't fall down & know where to go. there must have been 100-150ppl that I could see, including jabees & volunteer jab-ers. many firefighters, in regular uniforms. was easily directed where to sit, they looked me up, scheduled my next jab, gave me my jab, then I was free to sit in a 15 minute area & view the field & use the men's room. well done to everyone involved! there's a little blue sign that tells you what appointments may enter (in case you are wicked early & need to wait)





I was wearing a mask but they had me add another over it. gotta have a selfie, right?




this is where the rich ppl watch the games I guess, eh? nice to have a roof in the rain




VIP bathrooms were super clean w/ glass (not plastic) partitions between sinks




yeah I got a button, cuz well, why not?




waited my 15 minutes before leaving & parking couldn't have been easier. I'm right up front in the middle




got to the area early, so I checked out the local state forest for a pit-stop & bought some firewood




hang in there folks, we're getting there!


----------



## Yellow Fang (1 Apr 2021)

This thing with the blood clots is bothering me a bit, although I know the risk is small. One thing I wonder is what the risks are like with the other vaccines, in particular Sputnik, which I understand is a similar type of vaccine to the Oxford AstraZenica vaccine. I think European leaders have successfully eroded confidence in the AstraZenica vaccine, probably world wide.


----------



## lane (2 Apr 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> This thing with the blood clots is bothering me a bit, although I know the risk is small. One thing I wonder is what the risks are like with the other vaccines, in particular Sputnik, which I understand is a similar type of vaccine to the Oxford AstraZenica vaccine. I think European leaders have successfully eroded confidence in the AstraZenica vaccine, probably world wide.



Yes and now the EU are purchasing Sputnik and happy to use that it would seem.


----------



## PK99 (2 Apr 2021)

lane said:


> Yes and now the EU are purchasing Sputnik and happy to use that it would seem.



Clumps of cases are not evidence of causal link.

_"if you flip a coin a million times, 10 consecutive heads will show up several hundred times"_

https://www.oreilly.com/radar/the-inherent-clumpiness-of-randomness/

This is a fantastic compilation of spurious correlations:

http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> so, @dodgy the over 55s in Group 8 might hope for mid March onwards.





dodgy said:


> I'll take March @Ajax Bay





dodgy said:


> Had mine (AZ) at 14:00 on Tuesday 16th [March], same as my wife. Absolutely no symptoms whatsoever for both of us, not even sore arms.


My prediction from 21 Jan was pretty good then . The programme is winkling out the last over 50s, and spilling over into some under 50s, and ramping up the second jabs (ahead of the 12 week gap template) - over 400k on Thursday.


----------



## PK99 (2 Apr 2021)

Just booked my second jab for 16 April (on inivtiation from GP surgery to do so) - which will be just over 10 weeks after my first


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Apr 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> This thing with the blood clots is bothering me a bit, although I know the risk is small. One thing I wonder is what the risks are like with the other vaccines, in particular Sputnik, which I understand is a similar type of vaccine to the Oxford AstraZenica vaccine. I think European leaders have successfully eroded confidence in the AstraZenica vaccine, probably world wide.


On the risks, review my post from Wednesday: https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/page-224#post-6366282
I mused a fortnight ago whether there was similar experience of CVT with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (or Moderna). I agree that the damage of reacting with bans on the slightest concern misses the disproportionate impact on vaccine acceptance and therefore will result in thousands of lives lost and a significant delay to the return to social and economic 'life'. This is the sensible balance that the EMA considers in its continuance of temporary approval to use, disregarded by EU members, recognising that the threat to the individual from COVID-19 is an order of magnitude greater than any causality-unproven side effect. It's still possible that there is a causal link.

The vast majority of these adverse CVT experiences, some fatal, are reported in women of child bearing potential, a proportion of whom will be on the pill (non-Catholic countries). This younger female cohort will have mostly been vaccinated with Ox-AZ so you'd expect the miniscule number of CVT occurences after Pfizer to be even lower. In addition they will mostly be health care workers, at greater exposure to catching COVID-19, so it's possible that some were already infected (but asymptomatic) before they received the vaccine, which might have been the trigger for the event, as blood-clotting is a known clinical symptom of COVID-19.

Note that, because of the early uber-precautionary approach (there was insufficient evidence directly from the Phase 2 RCT trial that the vaccine is safe for over 65s) all the Ox-AZ vaccine in some countries (eg Germany) was used for health care workers and CEV under 65s - using Pfizer and a little Moderna for over 65s. In that younger cohort there is a preponderance of females. In Germany and France (say) only a minority in that cohort will have received Pfizer.

Earlier this month the UK reported some post vaccination events like this: they were evenly split between Pfizer and Ox-AZ vaccine recipients (11-13 iirc). The UK had not differentiated in age or cohort terms with the two vaccine makes. The incidence was at the same level that one would expect in normal times aiui.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (2 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I agree that the damage of reacting with bans on the slightest concern misses the disproportionate impact on vaccine acceptance and therefore will result in thousands of lives lost and a significant delay to the return to social and economic 'life'. This is the sensible balance that the EMA considers in its continuance of temporary approval to use, disregarded by EU members, recognising that the threat to the individual from COVID-19 is an order of magnitude greater than any causality-unproven side effect.



Refusing the vaccine on the basis of potential side effects is like refusing to let an ambulance take you to the hospital on the basis that it might crash on the way.


----------



## Andy in Germany (2 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Refusing the vaccine on the basis of potential side effects is like refusing to let an ambulance take you to the hospital on the basis that it might crash on the way.



Depends on the side effects and how likely they are. I have a colleague I thought was being silly until I found she's had some rather nasty side effects from previous vaccines and amongst other possible issues has a tendency to blood clotting.


----------



## mjr (2 Apr 2021)

Yellow Fang said:


> I think European leaders have successfully eroded confidence in the AstraZenica vaccine, probably world wide.


AZ have not covered themselves in glory either, letting too many results dribble out of regulators instead of announcing them in full themselves. There were always going to be doubtful eyes watching them due to their relatively limited recent involvement in vaccines. https://www.newyorker.com/news/dail...-much-confusion-about-the-astrazeneca-vaccine


----------



## classic33 (2 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Refusing the vaccine on the basis of potential side effects is like refusing to let an ambulance take you to the hospital on the basis that it might crash on the way.


I take it you've never suffered strong, adverse side effects to any medication making that comment.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (2 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> I take it you've never suffered strong, adverse side effects to any medication making that comment.



My comment was aimed at the vast majority of the sceptics, who have no such personal experience giving them reason to be wary of the Covid vaccine. Of course, I accept that those who do have such a reason to be wary, are in a very different position.


----------



## matticus (2 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Refusing the vaccine on the basis of potential side effects is like refusing to let an ambulance take you to the hospital on the basis that it might crash on the way.





classic33 said:


> I take it you've never suffered strong, adverse side effects to any medication making that comment.


I can say that I've been in an almost-fatal RTA*, and I agree with Eric s comment.
During treatment I let the experts make the decisions (despite millions of *potential* side-effects)

*Due to blood clots, mainly!


----------



## classic33 (2 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> My comment was aimed at the vast majority of the sceptics, who have no such personal experience giving them reason to be wary of the Covid vaccine. Of course, I accept that those who do have such a reason to be wary, are in a very different position.


How do you know who has genuine reason to be bothered and who may just be guided by the latest news.


----------



## dodgy (2 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> How do you know who has genuine reason to be bothered and who may just be guided by the latest news.



the people with genuine concerns are in a tiny minority. Are there any others apart from you on here who have suffered badly?


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (2 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> How do you know who has genuine reason to be bothered and who may just be guided by the latest news.



I'm struggling to believe that a significant proportion of the population has a history of strong adverse reaction to previous vaccines.

Because those previous vaccines made it through clinical trials programmes specifically designed to weed out vaccines that trigger strong adverse reactions in a significant proportion of those vaccinated.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Apr 2021)

Eric
Noone is suggesting that "a significant proportion of the population has a history of strong adverse reaction to vaccines."
But a very few people, like @classic33 , knows they have significant issues and the medical advice he received was equivocal. Nevertheless he bravely went for the first dose, with a strong adverse reaction. Vaccine acceptance is very strong in UK: vaccine hesitancy is not. But more work is still needed to help some communities push through their doubts. Not just in those communities' interest: in the whole population's interest.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (2 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Eric...



Well apologies we may be at cross purposes. I acknowledge that some people have a specific medical reason to be wary of the vaccine. My ambulance analogy was aimed not at them, but at the vast majority of the population, who do not.


----------



## matticus (2 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Well apologies we may be at cross purposes. I acknowledge that some people have a specific medical reason to be wary of the vaccine. My ambulance analogy was aimed not at them, but at the vast majority of the population, who do not.


It was a perfectly sensible analogy 👍


----------



## classic33 (2 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> the people with genuine concerns are in a tiny minority. Are there any others apart from you on here who have suffered badly?


I've not seen any, but very few people have said how they felt after having the jab. The most common complaint I've seen is "feeling crap for a few days after". A broad statement in much the same way as people react to temperature extremes, saying it's hot/freezing. It's to get a bit warmer/colder before I feel either as much as most folk. Marks me as "odd" again, so what.

My concern wasn't based on a one-off incident either. I was told that the Pfizer vaccine wasn't safe for me, and I'd have to wait for the AZ one and only that one.

This was the first vaccine ever given to me. The rest of the childhood vaccines being withheld on medical grounds. The last jab that could be classed as a vaccine I'd been given was the tetanus booster in March '88. Non of the previous full course usually given when at school, now ruled unsafe to be given to me. It's against this background, I and others had to make a decision.

Whilst posting an extreme reaction, what I haven't said is, that any of the vaccines is likely to end in a similar result for anyone else. Therefore it shouldn't be taken by anyone.

We all react differently to any medication, but does one person having a strong adverse reaction to any make it unsafe for the majority given it?


----------



## classic33 (2 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> I'm struggling to believe that a significant proportion of the population has a history of strong adverse reaction to previous vaccines.
> 
> Because those previous vaccines made it through clinical trials programmes specifically designed to weed out vaccines that trigger strong adverse reactions in a significant proportion of those vaccinated.


I'll ask you a direct, off-topic, question. Can you take painkillers, I can't. The last one given stopped the heart. Given/used in error in January 2012. I happened to be in A&E at the time.


----------



## fossyant (2 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Refusing the vaccine on the basis of potential side effects is like refusing to let an ambulance take you to the hospital on the basis that it might crash on the way.



I told my ambulance driver I could have ridden to the hospital faster - except I had a broken spine...


----------



## vickster (2 Apr 2021)

vickster said:


> Duly Pfizerised


No unpleasant side effects other than a sore arm
...I did however sleep for over 11 hours last night which really isn’t normal (but I have been super busy and work and sleeping poorly)!


----------



## fossyant (2 Apr 2021)

My parent's now fully jabbed - no side effects and both mid 70's. I appreciate folk like @classic33 who have had complex medical issues being wary, and he's had his first that didn't go well. The more the 'rest' of us get jabbed, the better it protects those that can't get jabbed, or will be very ill with a jab. MIL is 85, massive risk, had both jabs, no side effects - we didn't expect her to get away without getting covid and it killing her - she'd die with a chest infection normally. She is still here and stuck in a nursing home....

We're doing good now in the UK with the Vaccines and the NHS rollout and the army of volunteers. It's the deaths we need to avoid.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (2 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> I'll ask you a direct, off-topic, question. Can you take painkillers, I can't. The last one given stopped the heart. Given/used in error in January 2012. I happened to be in A&E at the time.



Well I'm sorry that you are vulnerable in that way and wish you all the best, but I really don't understand how that is relevant to the suggestion that I am putting forward which, as I have said a number of times, is only aimed at the majority of people.


----------



## classic33 (2 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Well I'm sorry that you are vulnerable in that way and wish you all the best, but I really don't understand how that is relevant to the suggestion that I am putting forward which, as I have said a number of times, is only aimed at the majority of people.


Because even before a vaccine was announced, I knew I'd be in a minority. I accepted that and never tried to push what happened to me as being likely to happen to the majority.

I'd say you'd only require one incident, in the current situation(Are they really safe?), to increase folk's fears of them not being safe, stalling the program. Is that fair, I'd say not. 

Nor is it fair, personal opinion here, to the person who administered the injection to have to defend their actions.


----------



## lane (3 Apr 2021)

This is good news. Of course if you look at the number of people who have either died or suffered long term impacts from covid versus the number who "may" have had clots and died then it's a no brainer but people aren't always logical. 

https://www.theguardian.com/society...b-remains-high-in-uk-despite-blood-clot-fears


----------



## nickyboy (3 Apr 2021)

Son #1 had second Pfizer this morning. Key difference from the first.......

First one you have to sit on a chair in a room for 15 minutes to ensure no adverse reaction. Second one you can sit in your car for 15 minutes to ensure no adverse reaction. Told to honk horn if adverse reaction


----------



## Bazzer (3 Apr 2021)

Today my Mum is the first of my immediate family to have the second jab. A big relief. 
Mrs B and I will be next, but that will be May.


----------



## rockyroller (4 Apr 2021)

been wearing my "I got my vaccine button" & been geting mixed reactions. a woman working at a Dunkins counter in CT asked me how I got vaxed. I said I was old & she exclaimed "I'm old too". but she was too busy for us to talk further. I remember the feeling of ppl telling me they got vaxxed but I had not yet. it's bothersome. this is gonna be a long haul & there is definitely a lot of access disparity


----------



## vickster (4 Apr 2021)

rockyroller said:


> been wearing my "I got my vaccine button" & been geeting mixed reactions. a woman working at a Dunkins counter in CT asked me how I got vaxed. I said I was old & she exclaimed "I'm old too". but she was too busy for us to talk further. I remember the feeling of ppl telling me they got vaxxed but I had not yet. it's bothersome. this is gonna be a long haul & there is definitely a lot of access disparity


If it’s bothersome, don’t wear the badge?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (5 Apr 2021)

PK99 said:


> Just booked my second jab for 16 April (on inivtiation from GP surgery to do so) - which will be just over 10 weeks after my first



Can I ask if you had the first dose at the GP or the mass vacs type centre?


----------



## PK99 (5 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Can I ask if you had the first dose at the GP or the mass vacs type centre?



GP linked centre, not the actual GP practice* & was told to book back at the same centre.

* We have a 24,000 mega practice working out of a mini-day-hospital like set up.


----------



## rockyroller (5 Apr 2021)

vickster said:


> If it’s bothersome, don’t wear the badge?


oh sorry, I meant it's bothersome when you haven't been vaxxed but want to & ppl around you are getting it

I feel bad telling ppl that I got it. not guilty, but like I like I'm causing them consternation. I'd rather they feel uplifted because more ppl are getting it & they will get theirs soon too


----------



## mjr (6 Apr 2021)

Bodge invokes the Streisand effect: visits AZ factory, asserts vaccine safe, several foreign TV channels headline it as Boris angrily defending AZ vaccine safety! https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...tes-vaccine-passports-third-wave-b927983.html 

Rumours circulate that MHRA may advise against use in under-30s https://www.itv.com/news/2021-04-06...dvice-on-astrazeneca-vaccine-for-young-people


----------



## Ajax Bay (6 Apr 2021)

The SAGE meeting (85) considered modelling (Warwick Uni) of the case levels (and worse) for England assuming relaxation of (most of) the restrictions. On the vaccination programme I thought the facts and assumptions in their brief worth sharing (i have put more in the 'main' thread:
"The uptake of vaccine has been far higher than anticipated; the brief was to assume that:

95% of those in JCVI Phase 1 will accept the vaccine, and
90% of those in JCVI Phase 2 [adults under 50], and
uptake of the second dose will be the same as the first [95%].
In many regions the number of over 70s already vaccinated reaches or exceeds the number of individuals from ONS population estimates; but in London the uptake has been lower and may fall below the 95% ideal, currently only vaccinating 91% of the [London] population over 70."


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (6 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Rumours circulate that MHRA may advise against use in under-30s



Rumours eh?


----------



## mjr (6 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Rumours eh?


Most reports seem to trace to Prof Ferguson, not the MHRA, so I say rumours.


----------



## mjr (6 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> "In many regions the number of over 70s already vaccinated reaches or exceeds the number of individuals from ONS population estimates; [...]"


So do we think ONS were wrong or that some people have been accepting both NHS Mass Vaccination Centre and GP invitations to get two doses quickly or something else?[/uwsl]

(edited to trim quote - and yet again, what are these UWSL tags appearing everywhere?)


----------



## Ajax Bay (6 Apr 2021)

I think the suggestion is that, at the regional level of detail, the ONS population estimates in a 5 year band of the population are inaccurate (higher than actual); nothing more.


----------



## mjr (6 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I think the suggestion is that, at the regional level of detail, the ONS population estimates in a 5 year band of the population are inaccurate (higher than actual); nothing more.


I assume you mean "lower than the actual" but it's a bit surprising and I hope ONS will investigate and explain how it happened, as those population estimates are used for a lot of public sector provision.


----------



## mjr (6 Apr 2021)

Teachers Unions ballotting in Ireland over being bumped down the vaccine priority list. https://www.thejournal.ie/teachers-vaccine-5401487-Apr2021/


----------



## mjr (6 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Bodge invokes the Streisand effect: visits AZ factory, asserts vaccine safe, several foreign TV channels headline it as Boris angrily defending AZ vaccine safety! https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...tes-vaccine-passports-third-wave-b927983.html
> 
> Rumours circulate that MHRA may advise against use in under-30s https://www.itv.com/news/2021-04-06...dvice-on-astrazeneca-vaccine-for-young-people


The curse of the chairman's vote of confidence strikes again, as AZ child trial paused: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56656356


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (6 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> The curse of the chairman's vote of confidence strikes again, as AZ child trial paused: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56656356



You seem very keen on letting us know about all these developments. I am confused though. Do you agree with the EMA's current guidance that "_the benefits of the AstraZeneca vaccine in preventing COVID-19, with its associated risk of hospitalisation and death, outweigh the risks of side effects_"? Or not?


----------



## classic33 (6 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Teachers Unions ballotting in Ireland over being bumped down the vaccine priority list. https://www.thejournal.ie/teachers-vaccine-5401487-Apr2021/


They went with a profession based vaccine program, we went with an age based program. They, Ireland, have since changed to an age based system.

Who's to say which is the right one?


----------



## Ajax Bay (6 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> AZ child trial paused: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56656356


From the BBC article:
The trial of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine on children, which started in February, is assessing whether the jab produces a strong immune response in those aged between six and 17 is being paused. Prof Pollard said: "Whilst there are no safety concerns in the paediatric clinical trial, we await additional information from the MHRA on its review of rare cases of thrombosis/thrombocytopaenia that have been reported in adults, before giving any further vaccinations in the trial."
Sensible cautious medic/scientist. Any cursing effect, by whoever, is as likely as these rare cases.
I'd further observe that the BBC article (plus Reuters) allowed a perspective on the report of interview of the Chair of EMA COVID vaccines strategy.
Dr Marco Cavaleri, Head of Office, Biological Health Threats and vaccines strategy, Chair of EMA COVID Task force and responsible for EMA activities for emergent pathogens, vaccines, and AMR, told Italian daily _Il Messagero _"In my opinion, we can now say it, it is clear that there is an association (of the brain blood clots) with the vaccine. However, we still do not know what causes this reaction." (Meaning or nuance may have been lost in translation.) Cavaleri provided no evidence to support his comment and admitted there was uncertainty how the vaccine would cause the complication. "The EMA has repeatedly said the benefits of the AstraZeneca shot outweigh the risks."
In response to Cavaleri's comments, the Amsterdam-based EMA said in a statement on Tuesday: "EMA’s Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) has not yet reached a conclusion and the review (of any possible link) is currently ongoing."
I suspect this Italian was 'grandstanding' with a newspaper from his home nation (Look at me: an Italian; I have a secret to share) - hence the "in a personal capacity". No right-minded scientist/EU servant / politician would responsibly say this, caveatting it with a 'I say this in a personal capacity; this is not the EMA assessment'. Is he deliberately trying to diminish the standing of the EMA?


----------



## mjr (6 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> You seem very keen on letting us know about all these developments. I am confused though. Do you agree with the EMA's current guidance that "_the benefits of the AstraZeneca vaccine in preventing COVID-19, with its associated risk of hospitalisation and death, outweigh the risks of side effects_"? Or not?


I agree, so far as it goes, for now, for all that matters.


----------



## johnblack (9 Apr 2021)

Well that was unexpected.

I had just finished a training session and was having a shower, wife asks me if I want a jab!

Spare capacity at the Northampton Bangladeshi Centre. Half hour drive, 2 minute wait, all done. 

All groovy.


----------



## dodgy (9 Apr 2021)

You got a like for using 'groovy'. Don't hear that enough these days.


----------



## vickster (13 Apr 2021)

Age 45+ now able to book vax online 
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/


----------



## MrGrumpy (13 Apr 2021)

vickster said:


> Age 45+ now able to book vax online
> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/


In England only !


----------



## vickster (13 Apr 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> In England only !


Ah indeed (which is where I am)

here’s the info for Scotland
https://www.nhsinform.scot/covid-19-vaccine

Wales
https://phw.nhs.wales/topics/immunisation-and-vaccines/covid-19-vaccination-information/

NI
https://www.publichealth.hscni.net/...rthern-ireland-covid-19-vaccination-programme


----------



## fossyant (13 Apr 2021)

vickster said:


> Age 45+ now able to book vax online
> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/



Great !


----------



## Kajjal (13 Apr 2021)

vickster said:


> Age 45+ now able to book vax online
> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/


Thanks booked in now


----------



## mjr (13 Apr 2021)

vickster said:


> Age 45+ now able to book vax online


So if my maths is right, that means all of this group, plus the end of the 50-60s and any future groups, won't get their second dose until weeks after Johnson's mid-June target date for complete derestriction. I hope he delays that a bit.


----------



## lane (13 Apr 2021)

He had noted today that number of deaths will go up as the economy is opened up - so I doubt there will be a delay. Plus one dose gives good protection, which for a low risk cohort is maybe acceptable. Biggest risk to opening is variants - which sooner or later will cause problems.


----------



## PK99 (13 Apr 2021)

Clinically vulnerable folk are now receiving NHS letters saying that any adult in their household can receive the vaccine as part of the priority groups.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (13 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> So if my maths is right, that means all of this group, plus the end of the 50-60s and any future groups, won't get their second dose until weeks after Johnson's mid-June target date for complete derestriction. I hope he delays that a bit.



At which point you can come back on here and say that by the new date of ?/?? the 35-40 years olds won't have had their first doses so he should delay, the end point of which you will be able to say, the 35-40 year olds won't have had their second doses so he should delay, at which point you will be able to say that the 30-35 years olds haven't had their first jabs and he should delay, at the end of which you will be able to say the 30-35 year olds haven't had their second jabs, after which you will be able to say the 25-30 years olds haven't had their first jabs...........oh you get the idea.

Just be clear with us, at what point would you open things up completely again?


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> So if my maths is right, that means all of this group, plus the end of the 50-60s and any future groups, won't get their second dose until weeks after Johnson's mid-June target date for complete derestriction. I hope he delays that a bit.


More importantly @mjr have you booked your jab yet?
If my maths is right and the 'system' sticks to its current interpretation of 12 weeks, the average gap will be about 10 weeks.
The effectiveness against disease of one dose of any of the three vaccines is over 80% (aiui). This effectiveness goes up and its effect is given an extended life by the second dose (and a longer gap has a beneficial effect).
10 weeks after 12 Apr is 21 Jun. Anything happening 'no earlier than' that day?
My estimates are that by 21 Jun 48M will have received their first dose and of those 31M will have received their second dose as well. There'll be about 5M adults (18-25s) left to 'do'.
If the effectiveness of the vaccine to prevent transmission is better than Warwick University modellers' pessimistic expectation, the UK should be very close to heard community (why does CycleChat do that to that expression?) by the end of June (21 Jun + 7 days). Assumes no significant impact from emerging VoC and continued sensible restraint on behaviour.


----------



## matticus (13 Apr 2021)

herd immunity ?
/test


----------



## classic33 (13 Apr 2021)

Pfizer vaccine good for at least six months.
https://www.clickorlando.com/news/l...covid-19-vaccine-works-for-at-least-6-months/

The Moderna vaccine is similar.
https://www.clickorlando.com/news/l...-effective-for-at-least-6-months-study-shows/

Does this mean that it'll be a yearly jab required?


----------



## C R (13 Apr 2021)

matticus said:


> herd immunity ?
> /test


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/health-56731430

Herd immunity is elusive, according to Fauci.


----------



## PK99 (13 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> Pfizer vaccine good for at least six months.
> https://www.clickorlando.com/news/l...covid-19-vaccine-works-for-at-least-6-months/
> 
> The Moderna vaccine is similar.
> ...



No, it means that there Is data for 6 months whis say it is still working in the people wo first received it.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (13 Apr 2021)

C R said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/health-56731430
> 
> Herd immunity is elusive, according to Fauci.



Herd immunity is maths. It's not an elusive concept.

The parameters required to achieve herd immunity may be hard to determine; that's an entirely different issue.

I think that's consistent with what he's saying, but his language is sloppy.


----------



## C R (13 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Herd immunity is maths. It's not an elusive concept.
> 
> The parameters required to achieve herd immunity may be hard to determine; that's an entirely different issue.
> 
> I think that's consistent with what he's saying, but his language is sloppy.


It depends, the issue is herd immunity with respect to what. There's no single variety of the virus that causes covid 19, so we are looking at a situation that may be more like the flu than like measles. We can achieve herd immunity through vaccination for the latter, but not for the former.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Apr 2021)

The issue of herd immunity that matters is the effect on the Rt number with NPIs reduced to an acceptable level - because if that is >1, cases will rise. Fauci posited a herd immunity percentage of between 70% and 85% but merely pointed out reaching it would not be a cliff edge thing. And without vaccinating under 18s, those figures will be difficult to achieve in UK (67M total, 14M under 18s, 3M unables, 50/67 is (only) 75%. Could increase that by including the number of under 18s who have post-infection antibodies.
In UK (and the USA) there'll be regional disparities - I hear that vaccine take-up in JCVI Gps 1-9 in the SW is 97% whereas in London it's 86% [Edit: but in London there'll be a much higher percentage of under 50s who have post-infection antibodies]
As the percentage of the population still susceptible (un-vaccinated or without sufficient antibodies from previous infection) decreases, the transmission chains should be obstructed.
The measles v flu similarity will depend on whether the various vaccines have sufficient effectiveness [v transmission] against emerging VoC (and the jury will need to sit a while longer for that). A tweaked set of vaccines for an autumn booster to protect the more vulnerable third of the population against disease severe enough to require hospitalisation will serve to minimise that outcome for them and allow the NHS to provide the treatments for all the other ailments, within resources.
But if the world's vaccine supply remains a limiting factor, giving 20M doses to those in UK in September will be at the expense of saving many more lives in countries where case rates of COVID-19 are still high. I don't know where the balance lies.


----------



## lane (14 Apr 2021)

C R said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/health-56731430
> 
> Herd immunity is elusive, according to Fauci.



Yes but he also said it will be achieved between 70 and 85 percent. Elusive was a poor choice of word - when what he meant was that it was difficult to be precise about when it will be achieved. It is impacted be other things such as how much people are mixing.


----------



## lane (14 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The issue of herd immunity that matters is the effect on the Rt number with NPIs reduced to an acceptable level - because if that is >1, cases will rise. Fauci posited a herd immunity percentage of between 70% and 85% but merely pointed out reaching it would not be a cliff edge thing. And without vaccinating under 18s, those figures will be difficult to achieve in UK (67M total, 14M under 18s, 3M unables, 50/67 is (only) 75%. Could increase that by including the number of under 18s who have post-infection antibodies.
> In UK (and the USA) there'll be regional disparities - I hear that vaccine take-up in JCVI Gps 1-9 in the SW is 97% whereas in London it's 86%.
> As the percentage of the population still susceptible (un-vaccinated or without sufficient antibodies from previous infection) decreases, the transmission chains should be obstructed.
> The measles v flu similarity will depend on whether the various vaccines have sufficient effectiveness against emerging VoC (and the jury will need to sit a while longer for that). A tweaked set of vaccines for an autumn booster to protect the more vulnerable third of the population against disease severe enough to require hospitalisation will serve to minimise that outcome for them and allow the NHS to provide the treatments for all the other ailments, within resources.
> But if the world's vaccine supply remains a limiting factor, giving 20M doses to those in UK in September will be at the expense of saving many more lives in countries where case rates of COVID-19 are still high. I don't know where the balance lies.



Surely we get to a point where vaccine supply is not a limiting factor - probably sooner rather than later.


----------



## mjr (14 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Just be clear with us, at what point would you open things up completely again?


I would have started opening up sooner based on the data, as I explained back in https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/post-6350422 — I would actually be ahead of England now.

But what I wouldn't do is make stupid date announcements and stick to them beyond all reason. I would not remove the final restrictions (face coverings, ventilation, spacing) on enclosed spaces (especially workplaces) before three weeks after full general availability of the vaccines. As you predicted, I say it is not fair to younger people who have waited patiently for the benefit of others, if we expose them to infection needlessly. Even after GA+21, I think I would wait for prevalence to be low enough so as not to over-expose the unvaccinable needlessly.

While you may have predicted my reasoning, I note that you did not argue against it and try to claim it is somehow fair to abandon younger people to covid just because most over-50s are protected and bored with taking precautions.


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Apr 2021)

Four weeks ago @mjr answering @shep's same Q, said:


mjr said:


> I would not remove the last restrictions until case numbers are within what can be traced. As for being "out", I would have removed the blanket "stay at home" restrictions for adults already and be allowing much outdoor activity and sales across thresholds, but I would also be doing much else differently, as posted previously.
> I'm happy to go out once cases are below 0.1%/week, if spaced and outdoors, so I would already be out if there was anywhere open! I probably would not go indoors or use a train or bus unless all areas en route were a bit lower than that, maybe down to 0.03%/week.


0.03% cases per week (across UK) is about 22k cases/week. UK is currently on ~19k cases/week, half what it was 20 days ago.
This backs up what @mjr has just said wrt data. If there were buses running in N Norfolk, he'd be on one (care when boarding, mind).
However in the real world, people who organise stuff need indicative dates so they can plan ahead, and 'no earlier than' is better than 'depends on the data, we'll give you a week's notice'. We've seen a perfectly justified reaction from the VC of York Uni, pointing out that giving unis short notice of an 'all students back' date is poor practice and contrasts with (as he put it) tattoo parlours who could plan to open on 12 Apr.
Giving the over 40s (about 7M) a first dose will take a fair while because nearly all the supply is being used for second jabs for the next 4 weeks. If the weekly supply increases, better progress will be made (on first doses).


----------



## roubaixtuesday (14 Apr 2021)

lane said:


> Surely we get to a point where vaccine supply is not a limiting factor - probably sooner rather than later.



I think even in the UK we're a long way from not being supply limited. Worldwide, even more so.


----------



## lane (14 Apr 2021)

The biggest risk to the UK now is variants. These are likely to be imported (although we can also produce our own!). The scientists seemed agreed that we can't keep them at bay forever - or even very long. some scientists are arguing for stricter lockdowns and travel restrictions in areas with variants - although I can't see that working for very long as the Tiers failed to do. The variant in Brazil seems to be putting a lot of under 40s in hospital. My own view is that it is inevitable that these will eventually cause more restrictions to be imposed on the UK. For the time being i am making the most of being vaccinated and the lower rates to get out and about and meet people in case it doesn't last (I don't expect it will).


----------



## roubaixtuesday (14 Apr 2021)

lane said:


> My own view is that it is inevitable that these will eventually cause more restrictions to be imposed on the UK



You think?

Unless there's a near complete immunity escapee variant, which most people seem to think unlikely, I don't see it. I don't think people would comply, as it could happen again and again and again, year after year. 

We'd just live with it like a bad flu season I think. 

We might run annual booster jabs with latest variant(s) of concern. 

Of course, no one can be certain of any of this.


----------



## matticus (14 Apr 2021)

lane said:


> The scientists seemed agreed that we can't keep them at bay forever - or even very long. *some scientists are arguing for stricter lockdowns and travel restrictions in areas with variants* - although I can't see that working for very long as the Tiers failed to do


Seems to me that for us to reach a sustainable "new normal" that gets us through the next 2-3 years, we need to find the right way to manage this stuff.


----------



## lane (14 Apr 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> You think?
> 
> Unless there's a near complete immunity escapee variant, which most people seem to think unlikely, I don't see it. I don't think people would comply, as it could happen again and again and again, year after year.
> 
> ...



Annual booster jabs will be the answer I expect but we might not be able to deploy them just yet. People have a tendency to comply if things get bad and deaths and hospitalizations dramatically increase - well they have on the whole so far. Obviously hope I am wrong.


----------



## mjr (14 Apr 2021)

lane said:


> The biggest risk to the UK now is variants. These are likely to be imported (although we can also produce our own!).


If gov.uk remove the final precautions too early because of foolish pride in sticking to Boris's premature specification and infections soar among younger people then we will have more chance of producing a variant, won't we?


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> If gov.uk remove the final precautions too early because of foolish pride in sticking to Boris's premature specification and infections soar among younger people then we will have more chance of producing a variant, won't we?


Yes, but relaxing the restrictions "too early" is not going to happen. This is a key benefit of offering 'not earlier than' dates (specification?), which you seem to have decried in the past (the other key benefit is allowing industries and companies to plan ahead with a modicum of assurance). Infections are not going to "soar" (define 'soar' please - cases per day peak ten times current level?) among "younger people". Bear in mind a good percentage of 18-29s have antibodies from previous infection.
The more prevalent the disease is the more chance a VoC will emerge. But the UK's superb genomic capability and one million plus testing capacity means the systems are in place to identify emerging VoC (and current VoC not B.1.1.7) and we are seeing surge testing and tracing applied in some London boroughs (and elsewhere last week).
Finally I confess growing a little bored by your constant irrelevant introduction of the Prime Minister's leadership responsibility to these 'chats'. it detracts and distracts from the nuggets of quality info you share with us.


----------



## fossyant (15 Apr 2021)

Get jib jabbed and carry on. 

Had some 'normality' this evening. Finally got to our caravan, and sat in the garden with my mum and dad, sister and her husband. Mum was getting a little cold, so shoved on a little camping heater for her. We didn't get as far as the gazebo going up. Not been able to see my family like this since last summer. Mum and dad fully jabbed, me half done, sister and hubby getting first soon.


----------



## mjr (15 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Yes, but relaxing the restrictions "too early" is not going to happen. This is a key benefit of offering 'not earlier than' dates (specification?), which you seem to have decried in the past


I "decried" setting dates up to June back in February, not the "not earlier than". I just doubt the "not earlier than" is real. As you know, I do not share your confidence in this government.



> Bear in mind a good percentage of 18-29s have antibodies from previous infection.


I do and I think it's rather poor form to use "good" to describe the level of infection that 18-29s have been subjected to.



> The more prevalent the disease is the more chance a VoC will emerge. But the UK's superb genomic capability and one million plus testing capacity means the systems are in place to identify emerging VoC (and current VoC not B.1.1.7) and we are seeing surge testing and tracing applied in some London boroughs (and elsewhere last week).


That's unproven surge testing, which experts say is "not yet clear whether the testing of hundreds of thousands of people in the capital will stop a cluster of dozens of cases growing."

Or more bluntly and seriously, but with a note of caution because of the party-political source:

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/DrRosena/status/1382361040046989316

and the rest of the thread, where it's said the Tooting "surge testing" apparently has a capacity of under 700 tests/day for a population of 105'000, testees have to call a complicated phone menu system to register their test and appointments were made for 4.30pm at a test station that closes at 4pm.

As I wrote earlier, I feel the final restrictions should not be lifted until the number of cases is within the capacity of test and trace, as well as vaccination being generally available, but it's looking like test and trace is still not working. The vaccination programme seeming to work fairly well (except for the shambolic booking postcode lottery) does not compensate for the continuing T&T failure: we need both.



> Finally I confess growing a little bored by your constant irrelevant introduction of the Prime Minister's leadership responsibility to these 'chats'. it detracts and distracts from the nuggets of quality info you share with us.


I think everyone knows that you'd rather not see any criticism of your glorious leader... but it ain't irrelevant: it's Boris who stood at the lectern and set out dates, not data, for unlocking which seem to be being followed slavishly with little regard for the vaccination programme. The desire to be seen as the nice guy handing out unlocking sweeties is a risk.


----------



## matticus (15 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> testees


<snigger>


----------



## classic33 (15 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> I do and I think it's rather poor form to use "good" to describe the level of infection that 18-29s have been subjected to.
> 
> 
> The vaccination programme seeming to work fairly well (except for the shambolic booking postcode lottery) does not compensate for the continuing T&T failure: we need both.


On the first, maybe we should have used the profession based system to decide. Similar to Ireland, who have just changed to an age bases system. And some think that changing the method of deciding when they got the jab unfair. They required it first, the rest could and should have to wait.

You keep harping on about the postcode lottery in deciding who gets the jab, can you back that up. Prove that the current groups, for vaccination, are being ignored in favour of where you live.

I realise that you feel the system, as it is, is unfair to those at the younger end. Ideally below the fifty mark. But any large scheme like this must have a system in place and not a free for all/first come first served. Perhaps you've allowed this to shape your views on this matter. I don't know, you might.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> I do and I think it's rather poor form to use "good" to describe the level of infection that 18-29s have been subjected to.



Subjected to? Do you think they were held down and injected with live Covid? The behaviour of younger age groups has not been so robust in terms of isolating and social distancing, they are also one of the groups which are most reluctant to take the vaccine.

The tweet from Khan, is frankly, a joke. Just a Labour MP having a political pop at the Government, it means nothing.


----------



## Ajax Bay (15 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> As I wrote earlier, I feel the final restrictions should not be lifted until the number of cases is within the capacity of test and trace, as well as vaccination being generally available, but it's looking like test and trace is still not working. The vaccination programme seeming to work fairly well (except for the shambolic booking postcode lottery) does not compensate for the continuing T&T failure: we need both.
> I think everyone knows that you'd rather not see any criticism of your glorious leader... but it ain't irrelevant: it's Boris who stood at the lectern and set out dates, not data, for unlocking which seem to be being followed slavishly with little regard for the vaccination programme. The desire to be seen as the nice guy handing out unlocking sweeties is a risk.


I have shared my thoughts on the non-vaccine elements of your comment on the main thread.
Have you a suggested measure for "vaccination being generally available"? All adults? All over 11s? There will still be restrictions after (no earlier than) 21 June. Are these your "final restrictions"?
Little idea what reference you are making to 'postcode lottery' let alone the added suggestion of 'shambolic'. Is this some ill-informed commentary from 3 months ago? Edit: You have explained what you meant in your post below - thank you.)
The data not dates plan has 'vaccination programme going OK?' as one of the 'tests'. In what way is the UK (and other home nations for devolved matters) government having "little regard for the vaccination programme"?


----------



## mjr (15 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> You keep harping on about the postcode lottery in deciding who gets the jab, can you back that up.


Sure. Firstly, your chance of getting through the booking app before it crashed is a function of many things, including your broadband speed, which is linked to your location.

Secondly, the chance of appointments that I could reach is a function of many things, including how many vaccination centres I can access, which again is linked to location (because they are not completely proportionately distributed) and transport links definitely aren't uniform yet either.

Now, I benefit from the setup of this lottery because I live next to an industrial park (so fast broadband), on a main road with cycleway (so good transport links), between four medium-sized market towns (so good choice of vaccination centres), but I can still see that this is a postcode lottery, not fair and wasting resources. While I just went to my nearest town, there was an over-50 in the queue near me who had travelled hours from the other side of a city for an available appointment.



> Prove that the current groups, for vaccination, are being ignored in favour of where you live.


That is not necessary for it to be a postcode lottery.



> I realise that you feel the system, as it is, is unfair to those at the younger end. Ideally below the fifty mark. But any large scheme like this must have a system in place and not a free for all/first come first served. [...]


I think the vaccination booking app unfairness is not particularly age-related. I know we need a system but it seems to be basically first come first served once opened to each age group and your chance of being "first come" is linked to where you live in at least two ways. It feels like another dud NHS app.

I'm surprised someone didn't contract it out to something like meetup or eventbrite! But if they had, maybe we would have got unlucky and it would have been contracted to the operator of one of those dreadful sportive booking apps. At least the NHS one was simple enough it was possible to get through quickly...


----------



## matticus (15 Apr 2021)

We just booked through our normal GP surgery (which meant we were jabbed at "their" centre i.e. a short distance from our home). Is this not normal in some parts of the country?

(I'm aware of other people who - for some reason - used the central booking thing and had to travel to the nearest city!  )


----------



## vickster (15 Apr 2021)

You don’t have to use the website (it’s not an app).
Call 119 to book (as my parents did for example) or wait for the letter/ an invite from your GP (I’m 48, had an invite 2 weeks ago, I know of others elsewhere similarly invited before the general opening up).
Everyone will get offered a vaccination even if the website happens to be down


----------



## Ajax Bay (15 Apr 2021)

Yes - I had a choice: text from the surgery, followed a day later by a letter from 'NHS Central'. Chose the former: the town's Tennis Centre was entirely civilised (about 24 hours after booking a slot), and I could ride there (and back). The fact that you have to go back to the same place for the second dose was also significant.
I think the strength of the English system is the variety of opportunity, still with a measure of control - NHS (national and local and volunteers) take a bow. 90% uptake is just extraordinary. Dragged down slightly by low London figures and low care home workers percentage.


----------



## PK99 (15 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Sure. Firstly, your chance of getting through the booking app before it crashed is a function of many things, including your broadband speed, which is linked to your location.
> 
> Secondly, the chance of appointments that I could reach is a function of many things, including how many vaccination centres I can access, which again is linked to location (because they are not completely proportionately distributed) and transport links definitely aren't uniform yet either.
> 
> ...


 
You really do come across as obsessed with fault finding at every turn of every stage.

If there had been an uber fair, ordered and regimented system based on defined priorities, I sense you would be complaing about beaurocratic slowness and inefficiency - saying just get the stuff in people's arms.


----------



## mjr (15 Apr 2021)

vickster said:


> You don’t have to use the website (it’s not an app).
> Call 119 to book (as my parents did for example) or wait for the letter/ an invite from your GP (I’m 48, had an invite 2 weeks ago, I know of others elsewhere similarly invited before the general opening up).
> Everyone will get offered a vaccination even if the website happens to be down


It's a web app. Some of the crash screens even referred to it as such.

Calling 119 doesn't seem to be mentioned on https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/ and yes, people can wait for GP invites (great that you got one early but who knows how long I'd wait?), but they still have more chance of earlier vaccination if they can get through the website. 

I'm sure it'll be offered to all adults (at least) eventually and the vaccination centre I used was working very smoothly (including six cycle parking spaces), so indeed thanks and well done to all involved there, but the centralised booking was pretty poor. I'm sure the uncertainty means some people are travelling great distances, taking time off work and paying for travel, possibly including slightly increased covid risk due to the longer journey there, to get their vaccination.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (15 Apr 2021)

PK99 said:


> You really do come across as obsessed with fault finding at every turn of every stage.



When you take it upon yourself to prove the demonstrably absurd - that your beloved EU is outperforming the UK when it comes to vaccine rollout - you can leave no stone unturned.


----------



## Rocky (15 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> When you take it upon yourself to prove the demonstrably absurd - that your beloved EU is outperforming the UK when it comes to vaccine rollout - you can leave no stone unturned.


The only thing I'd say is that this is a long game and it is probably too soon to say which country is doing best in the Covid stakes. The wider picture isn't looking good for the UK, death-wise. There is also an issue about variants and how much protection the vaccine will provide later on down the line. 

My view is that the jury is out on the UK vs EU performance. There's a few more twists of the plot to come, I fear.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (15 Apr 2021)

Rocky said:


> The only thing I'd say is that this is a long game and it is probably too soon to say which country is doing best in the Covid stakes. The wider picture isn't looking good for the UK, death-wise. There is also an issue about variants and how much protection the vaccine will provide later on down the line.
> 
> My view is that the jury is out on the UK vs EU performance. There's a few more twists of the plot to come, I fear.



I agree. It's too soon to say for Covid overall; but I don't think it's too soon for Covid vaccination, which is what I was aiming at.


----------



## classic33 (15 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Sure. Firstly, your chance of getting through the booking app before it crashed is a function of many things, including your broadband speed, which is linked to your location.


Is it? I, and many others waited on being told we were now eligible for the jab, via a letter. No booking through the site or 119.


> Secondly, the chance of appointments that I could reach is a function of many things, including how many vaccination centres I can access, which again is linked to location (because they are not completely proportionately distributed) and transport links definitely aren't uniform yet either.


I was given the choice of five time slots, but only the nearest location. Earlier problems meant I was expecting anywhere. Still reached via public transport, taking the better part of an hour and more than one service. Direct link was removed ten years ago.


> Now, I benefit from the setup of this lottery because I live next to an industrial park (so fast broadband), on a main road with cycleway (so good transport links), between four medium-sized market towns (so good choice of vaccination centres), but I can still see that this is a postcode lottery, not fair and wasting resources. While I just went to my nearest town, there was an over-50 in the queue near me who had travelled hours from the other side of a city for an available appointment.


Whose resources?
From what little I know, safe storage, of the vaccine, is the important part.

You benefited from the setup, but the setup is wrong.


> That is not necessary for it to be a postcode lottery.


Why not. You're saying it's location based(postcode), not aged based.


> I think the vaccination booking app unfairness is not particularly age-related. I know we need a system but it seems to be basically first come first served once opened to each age group and your chance of being "first come" is linked to where you live in at least two ways. It feels like another dud NHS app.


Why didn't you just wait to be informed. The same as a few million others had to.
Just checked and it gives you two options, via the site, not app, or via 119.


> I'm surprised someone didn't contract it out to something like meetup or eventbrite! But if they had, maybe we would have got unlucky and it would have been contracted to the operator of one of those dreadful sportive booking apps. At least the NHS one was simple enough it was possible to get through quickly...


Why this obsession with apps. 
In this case it's a website of a telephone call. Or wait until you receive the letter. Suppose you still had to wait for that letter, no booking and being told where you'd to turn up. 


And yes, I am aware of what I posted earlier with regards myself. But it started and ended there for me. The risks outweigh the benefits in my view. I'll not be wasting the time of those in an A&E department or the ambulance service again.


----------



## IaninSheffield (15 Apr 2021)




----------



## Ajax Bay (15 Apr 2021)

Having checked back a couple of days, we didn't seem to celebrate the UK's vaccination programme hitting its second major target: offering [and 19 out of 20 giving] a jab to all those in JCVI Groups 1-9, which includes all adults over 50 as well as those under 50 but clinically extremely vulnerable, those with underlying health conditions (and their carers), and health and social care workers. Hurrah!
The PM said: "We have now passed another hugely significant milestone in our vaccine programme by offering jabs to everyone in the nine highest risk groups. That means more than 32 million people have been given the precious protection vaccines provide against Covid-19.
I want to thank everyone involved in the vaccine rollout, which has already saved many thousands of lives*. We will now move forward with completing essential second doses and making progress towards our target of offering all adults a vaccine by the end of July."
* Although not nearly as many thousands as the Jan -Mar lockdown.
Next target is to give a first jab to all adults by the end of July. By my calculations this is a 'soft' target, but I guess it allows room to cater for bumps on the road.


----------



## PK99 (16 Apr 2021)

Second Tizer jab this am.

Arm now red and strangely fizzy.


----------



## mjr (16 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> Is it? I, and many others waited on being told we were now eligible for the jab, via a letter. No booking through the site or 119.


Maybe that's how it worked then. The announcement on the news this week was quite clear that we should now go to www.nhs.uk and book, if we didn't already have a GP invitation. I guess that's where the capacity was now, which seems backed up by them having appointments available for yesterday.



> Whose resources?


Does it matter? It's all avoidable economic damage.



> You benefited from the setup, but the setup is wrong.


I'm glad we agree.



> Why not. You're saying it's location based(postcode), not aged based.


No, I was saying it's location-based as well.



> Why didn't you just wait to be informed. The same as a few million others had to.


Because that wasn't the announcement I heard. I do often do what I'm told by the NHS!



> Just checked and it gives you two options, via the site, not app, or via 119.


There is an app powering the booking site. Really, the distinction between websites and apps these days is not as significant as a few posters here seem to think.



> In this case it's a website of a telephone call. Or wait until you receive the letter. Suppose you still had to wait for that letter, no booking and being told where you'd to turn up.


Then I suppose I would have continued waiting and it would be more difficult to spot any location-based unfairness.



> [...] The risks outweigh the benefits in my view. I'll not be wasting the time of those in an A&E department or the ambulance service again.


No necessary use of A&E or ambulance is wasting their time, including yours. I do salute you for your decision despite how it turned out and I hope medics learned something from it so they can better advise people in future.


----------



## mjr (16 Apr 2021)

Pfizer vaccine likely to need third dose and then yearly boosters: https://www.thejournal.ie/global-covid-19-5411811-Apr2021/

Of course, while this is a problem for the UK (it's been about 25% of our vaccine supply to date), it's a much bigger problem for the EU (around 70%).

There is also an interesting report of 18-29 attitudes to vaccination: https://www.theguardian.com/society...unsure-how-do-uk-under-30s-view-the-covid-jab


----------



## classic33 (16 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Pfizer vaccine likely to need third dose and then yearly boosters: https://www.thejournal.ie/global-covid-19-5411811-Apr2021/
> 
> Of course, while this is a problem for the UK (it's been about 25% of our vaccine supply to date), it's a much bigger problem for the EU (around 70%).
> 
> There is also an interesting report of 18-29 attitudes to vaccination: https://www.theguardian.com/society...unsure-how-do-uk-under-30s-view-the-covid-jab


"Announced" quietly earlier this month by Pfizer.


classic33 said:


> Pfizer vaccine good for at least six months.
> https://www.clickorlando.com/news/l...covid-19-vaccine-works-for-at-least-6-months/
> 
> The Moderna vaccine is similar.
> ...


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Pfizer vaccine likely to need third dose and then yearly boosters: https://www.thejournal.ie/global-covid-19-5411811-Apr2021/
> Of course, while this is a problem for the UK (it's been about 25% of our vaccine supply to date), it's a much bigger problem for the EU (around 70%).


It's entirely likely that a pre-winter booster jab will be required, in particular for the more vulnerable section of the population (ie JCVI Gps 1-9). The need will be driven by viral-escape/vaccine-resist variants and/or immunity waning after x months. Also depends on the 'protection against disease' and the 'protection against infection/transmission' effect of the vaccine (evidence not yet mature).
There's been a maximum of 7 weeks since the second jab of the 10+ weeks apart cohort so we don't yet know what the protection longevity is. And the number who had two Pfizer doses 3 weeks apart was low: about 400k all double dosed by mid Jan (my mother among them). In July sampling will give an idea of how their protection is holding up. An additional complication is that 'waning' rate, at least post-infection, seems to be an individual thing with a wide range (from a study pre-published in October).
By the time an 'annual booster' is needed (indeed supply availability rather drives the timeline) (September perhaps in UK, before the October flu jab programme) we'll have evidence to confirm that using a vaccine of a different make (and edition) as a second or subsequent dose presents no jeopardy. And those doses will have been edited to be as effective as possible against the dominant virus variant (could be different for different countries/continents).
So this will neither be a problem for the EU nor the UK: I don't know where you deduce that from?
Report from your link: Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said that, after being fully vaccinated with a second dose . . . “A likely scenario is that there will be a need for a third dose, somewhere between six and 12 months and then from there, there will be an annual revaccination, but all of that needs to be confirmed."
This is a perfectly likely scenario - and the 'third dose' will be styled an annual booster to avoid FOMO in the section not offered a booster.
Can you link to the science/evidence which Pfizer's CEO bases his caveated deduction that a third dose is 'likely' (6-12 months)? I assume that the 30+k people in the Pfizer RCT Phase 3 trial last autumn will have been followed up so that will offer data. The two links @classic33 shared say "effective for at least 6 months" not 'becomes ineffective after 6 months'.
He did not suggest the booster vaccines needed to be the same make (although Pfizer is selling their vaccine at superb profit, unlike AZ (?and others) so there is commercial interest to create a demand for as many million doses as possible, preferably Pfizer!). The UK VTF have pre-ordered enough vaccines for 3 plus doses for all its 67M population.


----------



## mjr (16 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> So this will neither be a problem for the EU nor the UK: I don't know where you deduce that from?


1. This shoot (not only the vaccines but all the venues and volunteers and people taking time off to get vaccinated) ain't free.
2. With each extra round of vaccination, take-up drops, for a variety of reasons. I thought it was you posting doubts about whether we reach herd immunity but I don't have time to look back just now.



> Can you link to the science/evidence which Pfizer's CEO bases his caveated deduction that a third dose is 'likely' (6-12 months)? I assume that the 30+k people in the Pfizer RCT Phase 3 trial last autumn will have been followed up so that will offer data.


Not now. Maybe you can ask him, or persuade one of the journalists to ask him.



> The UK VTF have pre-ordered enough vaccines for 3 plus doses for all its 67M population.


And donated the surplus to COVAX, so each extra dose to UK residents is one less for COVAX.


----------



## cookiemonster (17 Apr 2021)

Just received my first BioNtech jab.

How long before I glow green?


----------



## vickster (17 Apr 2021)

cookiemonster said:


> Just received my first BioNtech jab.
> 
> How long before I glow green?


Clearly you won’t, that’s just stupid


----------



## cookiemonster (17 Apr 2021)

vickster said:


> Clearly you won’t, that’s just stupid



Phew! Thank goodness.


----------



## Andy in Germany (17 Apr 2021)

cookiemonster said:


> Just received my first BioNtech jab.
> 
> How long before I glow green?



I've managed a week so far with the BioNtech vaccine and I've not taken on a fresh green hue as yet.


----------



## cookiemonster (17 Apr 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> I've managed a week so far with the BioNtech vaccine and I've not taken on a fresh green hue as yet.



I have to admit, Bill Gates’ microchip’s a good fit.


----------



## Andy in Germany (17 Apr 2021)

cookiemonster said:


> I have to admit, Bill Gates’ microchip’s a good fit.



I do have a strange desire to open windows, now you mention it.

Makes the apartment a bit draughty.


----------



## mjr (17 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Maybe that's how it worked then. The announcement on the news this week was quite clear that we should now go to www.nhs.uk and book, if we didn't already have a GP invitation. I guess that's where the capacity was now, which seems backed up by them having appointments available for yesterday.


And this morning I received a text telling me to book on the website if I had not already.


----------



## C R (17 Apr 2021)

cookiemonster said:


> Just received my first BioNtech jab.
> 
> How long before I glow green?


It will be blue, blue screen of death, courtesy of Bill Gates,


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> And this morning I received a text telling me to book on the website if I had not already.


You are a very lucky boy! The system is looking out for you. Think of all that resource going into sending out texts. Does a bit of duplication really matter?


----------



## shep (17 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> And this morning I received a text telling me to book on the website if I had not already.


Another 3 mths you might be happy going out then. 👍


----------



## IanSmithCSE (17 Apr 2021)

Good evening,


Ajax Bay said:


> You are a very lucky boy! The system is looking out for you. Think of all that resource going into sending out texts. Does a bit of duplication really matter?


This is meant as a serious question.

This year sees my 60th birthday and I have never been registered with a GP as an adult and it seems that vaccine appointments are based on being registered with a GP.

I signed up for on-line self assessment for tax way back, pretty much as soon as it was possible and that database doesn't seem to be being used.

So I tried the online Book A Vaccine system but I got nowhere with it as it circles around enter your NHS number, you can find this on your correspondence with your GP or register with a GP.

I did try to register with a GP practice a while back and was told that as they couldn't find my non-existent previous GP records they couldn't register me.

Eventually I lost interest and I wonder just how rare people like me are? 

The NHS seems to struggle with the concept of people not being registered with it and needing it on a regular basis. :-) This isn't a dig, as when I was lying unconscious in the middle of the road and blocking both lanes they sent out an ambulance and picked me and put me in an A&E department.

They didn't care about the number and gave me some wonderful drugs and I do feel sorry for the staff that had to clean up as I really, really didn't like something that they had given me. :-) 

But equally they confirmed my reluctance to get further involved, as I had had a full body MRI scan they found a lesion on a lung and wanted to schedule/require me to take days of work for precautionary further scans. But it was not worth explaining why, I am the doctor so you will do as you are told.

As it stands the system won't offer me a jab, but it will tax me. 

Bye

Ian


----------



## mjr (17 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> You are a very lucky boy! The system is looking out for you. Think of all that resource going into sending out texts. Does a bit of duplication really matter?



Not to me. I hope they've a bulk buyer rate and it's probably better value for money than fewer people getting vaccinated and this all going on longer.

I post it mainly to illustrate that if I hadn't already booked with the central service based on the news report, I would have now, rather than waiting for a GP invite.

And when I got home, there was a paper letter from the NHS 

I wonder if a GP invitation will arrive before they're notified that I've already been.


----------



## mjr (17 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> As it stands the system won't offer me a jab, but it will tax me.


Maybe phone 119 or walk in to a vaccination centre?


----------



## midlife (17 Apr 2021)

The NHS will send you your number if requested, usually by letter to your address. Or write to the hospital you were at asking for a copy of your discharge letter, that will have your number on it.


----------



## IanSmithCSE (17 Apr 2021)

Good evening,


mjr said:


> Maybe phone 119 or walk in to a vaccination centre?


This is a very reasonable sounding answer.

Smile; The system is perfect so anyone who has issues with it must be at fault not the system.

https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/online-services/find-nhs-number/
Your NHS number is a 10 digit number, like 485 777 3456. It is on any letter you receive from the NHS.

As an adult I have never had a letter from the NHS.

https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/online-services/find-nhs-number/
https://www.nhs.uk/find-nhs-number/what-is-your-home-postcode
*What is your home postcode?*
You must enter the home postcode you registered with your GP surgery. For example EN1 1BE.

Doh, I am on the NHS site because I am not registered with a GP

Bye

Ian


----------



## mjr (17 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good evening,
> 
> This is a very reasonable sounding answer.
> 
> Smile; The system is perfect so anyone who has issues with it must be at fault not the system.


I never wrote that. I just think people are better at handling unexpected situations than web forms. I'm pretty sure the web forms won't help you more than a person.


----------



## classic33 (17 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good evening,
> 
> This is meant as a serious question.
> 
> ...


Try the hospital where you had the MRI, or since you were given medication check with the hospital that gave you the prescription and the chemists that dispensed it. Hospital number and from there your NHS number.

Dial 111 and explain why you need it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> I did try to register with a GP practice a while back and was told that as they couldn't find my non-existent previous GP records they couldn't register me.





midlife said:


> The NHS will send you your number if requested, usually by letter to your address. Or write to the hospital you were at asking for a copy of your discharge letter, that will have your number on it.


Ian - when you were young like some of us, you were able to truck along without needing to call on the nationwide primary care health service. Now you are nearly 60, it's more likely that you'll need help and stuff. And also that any medical records are accessible to the health professional on whom you'll call.
I recommend you endeavour to register with a local surgery and offer this link:
https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/gps/how-to-register-with-a-gp-surgery/
You'll need to fill out a GMS1 (link/download from that link). Immigrants are in a similar boat to you.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (17 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good evening,
> 
> This is meant as a serious question.
> 
> ...



You don't need an NHS number to get the jab.

You really haven't tried very hard have you? It's on page 2 of the booking system.

https://www.nhs.uk/book-a-coronavirus-vaccination/do-you-have-an-nhs-number

There, that has made it simple for you.

Your NHS number is allocated at birth, you do not get it from your GP, it will be associated with any previous NHS treatment you have had.

Unless you were not registered at birth (unlikely) then you have a number, this sounds like you just don't want to not find it!

Oh, and the NHS Constitution says you should register with a GP, page 7 https://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/aboutnhs/Documents/NHS_Constitution_interactive_9Mar09.pdf


----------



## mjr (18 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> You really haven't tried very hard have you? It's on page 2 of the booking system.
> 
> https://www.nhs.uk/book-a-coronavirus-vaccination/do-you-have-an-nhs-number
> 
> There, that has made it simple for you.


Now try answering no and enjoy the next questions that Ian can't answer, as not registered with a gp.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (18 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good evening,
> 
> This is a very reasonable sounding answer.
> 
> ...



https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/online-services/find-nhs-number/

Just get your NHS number texted to you.


----------



## mjr (18 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/online-services/find-nhs-number/
> 
> Just get your NHS number texted to you.


First question is "enter the names you registered with your GP surgery" and Ian is not registered... Do you see the problem yet?


----------



## vickster (18 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good evening,
> 
> This is meant as a serious question.
> 
> ...


Were you also never registered as a child? Those practices should have your records?
If not, were you not born here/did you not spend your childhood in the U.K.?
Presumably you won’t get the routine screen for bowel cancer at 60? If so, Covid vaccine aside, you really should try to register again so you can get age related screens at least. As you get older, you’re more likely to need the NHS unless you plan to pay for everything privately


----------



## Craig the cyclist (18 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Now try answering no and enjoy the next questions that Ian can't answer, as not registered with a gp.





@IanSmithCSE , follow my link, and just type in your name. *You do not need the name of your GP*.

I am going to take a punt here, and a massive leap, but I simply do not believe you have never been registered with a GP. So the name you put in will be the name you were registered with a GP with at some point in your life. Now, unless you are going to tell us you have never had a name and have no date of birth you should be sorted.

I also do not believe that you have lived your life with no contact with the NHS, so you have an NHS number. Actually, didn't you say that you have been treated in A&E? In that case you have an NHS number.

If that doesn't work, there is another way to find it out, don't worry.

I am thinking though that you are making this deliberately difficult. At least now you have the full backing of @mjr , who a couple of weeks ago was bemoaning how he had been thrown under the bus with regard to vaccination, now is moaning that the NHS is trying too hard to contact him.

Go through that form, see what happens. Just one other question, why have you waited so long to point all this out? You could have done all this and been jabbed sometime around early March.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Apr 2021)

Glad you're firing on all cylinders @Craig the cyclist . Hope the cadence is well up too.


----------



## Pale Rider (18 Apr 2021)

I didn't have a GP from being a child to when I was about 50.

If I recall, my original records from the 1960s, quite reasonably, could not be found, so when I approached my current GP I may have had to 're-register'.

No idea if my current NHS number is a new one, but either way, the process with my current GP was not difficult.

However, as with all officialdom you do have to work with them to achieve the result you want.


----------



## IanSmithCSE (18 Apr 2021)

Good morning

Thanks for the thoughts.


midlife said:


> The NHS will send you your number if requested, usually by letter to your address. Or write to the hospital you were at asking for a copy of your discharge letter, that will have your number on it.


Nope, they were quite happy with recording no gp, although they did tag me as an armed forces patient.





@IanSmithCSE......I am going to take a punt here, and a massive leap, but I simply do not believe you have never been registered with a GP...............

I also do not believe that you have lived your life with no contact with the NHS,..........

Go through that form, see what happens. Just one other question, why have you waited so long to point all this out? You could have done all this and been jabbed sometime around early March.
[/QUOTE]
This is the point that I mentioned earlier, whether you believe it or not doesn't alter the fact that it is true.

I am not terribly stressed about receiving the vaccine and was just waiting for my turn. It's only nowish that it has become clear that the vaccine program is using only the GP registrations and not merging it with the Inland Revenue records which seemed to me to be an obvious thing to do.



Pale Rider said:


> .......However, as with all officialdom you do have to work with them to achieve the result you want.


I am one of those who is not bothered either way about having or not having the vaccine so I did the easy bits, found that they didn't work for me and haven't gotten around to the more time consuming steps and maybe never will.



vickster said:


> Were you also never registered as a child? Those practices should have your records?
> If not, were you not born here/did you not spend your childhood in the U.K.?
> Presumably you won’t get the routine screen for bowel cancer at 60? If so, Covid vaccine aside, you really should try to register again so you can get age related screens at least. As you get older, you’re more likely to need the NHS unless you plan to pay for everything privately


I am not sure if I was registered as a child as my parents had jobs that moved them and me around a lot up until secondary school.

My plan has always been to stay well away from the NHS (and private providers) in terms of screening programs, the full body MRI the hospital did as a precautionary measure convinced me of this, it showed what turned out to be a benign cyst and a spiculated lesion on a lung.

Once you get into their system it is easy to become trapped in a cycle of tests and more tests. :-)

Bye

Ian


----------



## midlife (18 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good morning
> 
> Thanks for the thoughts.
> 
> ...


This is the point that I mentioned earlier, whether you believe it or not doesn't alter the fact that it is true.

I am not terribly stressed about receiving the vaccine and was just waiting for my turn. It's only nowish that it has become clear that the vaccine program is using only the GP registrations and not merging it with the Inland Revenue records which seemed to me to be an obvious thing to do.


I am one of those who is not bothered either way about having or not having the vaccine so I did the easy bits, found that they didn't work for me and haven't gotten around to the more time consuming steps and maybe never will.

Bye

Ian
[/QUOTE]

Odd that on your discharge letter there is no hospital ID number for you? The NHS uses a database called "SPINE" in England an it's usual for letters to have both hospital ID and NHS number on them.


----------



## vickster (18 Apr 2021)

So you wouldn’t want to know if you have early signs of bowel cancer, and that getting treatment could prevent a more serious and potentially deadly disease?
Really would you not rather have tests and nothing serious to be shown than not know until it’s too late to treat?


----------



## IanSmithCSE (18 Apr 2021)

Good morning


midlife said:


> ....... Odd that on your discharge letter there is no hospital ID number for you? The NHS uses a database called "SPINE" in England an it's usual for letters to have both hospital ID and NHS number on them.


The discharge letter does indeed have a hospital number, it is 10 digits long, are any of those digits meaningful or is it just a sequence number? 

And an empty space with a *NHS number * label, this is probably why I am going round in circles.



vickster said:


> So you wouldn’t want to know if you have early signs of bowel cancer, and that getting treatment could prevent a more serious and potentially deadly disease?
> Really would you not rather have tests and nothing serious to be shown than not know until it’s too late to treat?


It depends upon the cost, I don't mean financial I mean lifestyle and the cost of the all the testing programs on offer is too high for me.

Bye

Ian


----------



## Craig the cyclist (18 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> The discharge letter does indeed have a hospital number, it is 10 digits long, are any of those digits meaningful or is it just a sequence number?



That is your NHS number!

Is it 123 456 7890?


----------



## classic33 (18 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good morning
> 
> The discharge letter does indeed have a hospital number, it is 10 digits long, are any of those digits meaningful or is it just a sequence number?
> 
> ...


It's all 10 digits.

A bit like your bank account number. All of it is normally required.


----------



## vickster (18 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good morning
> 
> The discharge letter does indeed have a hospital number, it is 10 digits long, are any of those digits meaningful or is it just a sequence number?
> 
> ...


Putting some poo on a card and sending it back Is a too high cost on your lifestyle? It’ll take far less time than all your long posts on CycleChat


----------



## Bazzer (18 Apr 2021)

midlife said:


> This is the point that I mentioned earlier, whether you believe it or not doesn't alter the fact that it is true.
> 
> I am not terribly stressed about receiving the vaccine and was just waiting for my turn. It's only nowish that it has become clear that the vaccine program is using only the GP registrations and not merging it with the Inland Revenue records which seemed to me to be an obvious thing to do.
> 
> ...



Odd that on your discharge letter there is no hospital ID number for you? The NHS uses a database called "SPINE" in England an it's usual for letters to have both hospital ID and NHS number on them.
[/QUOTE]
There is no reason for HMRC to use an NHS number. A National Insurance number, which HMRC does use, links to your national insurance record.


----------



## mjr (18 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> At least now you have the full backing of @mjr , who a couple of weeks ago was bemoaning how he had been thrown under the bus with regard to vaccination, now is moaning that the NHS is trying too hard to contact him.


1. Reporting is not moaning. Try not to infer emotions that aren't there when reading words.

2. I say that the plan still seems to be for all under-50s to be thrown under the lying red bus mid-June, not just me. Sorry if you can't cope with someone who cares about people other than themselves.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> the plan still seems to be for all under-50s to be thrown under the lying red bus mid-June, not just me.


Specifically NOT you.
The UK Government's plan is that by 21 Jun 30 million of UK's population will have received both doses and, in addition, 14 million will have had at least 10 days since their first dose (maybe a bit pessimistic with these figures). The 44M total is roughly all those over 35, plus those under 35 with underlying conditions or are clinically extremely vulnerable. It's also 66% of the population, to which add 4M (say) in the U/35 cohort who have antibodies from previous infection = 48M and that's 72%.
The COVID-19 IFR for those under-35s is extremely low: and by June the prevalence will be low which will act to reduce the OR still further. Not to under-the-bus chances, mind: that's about one a week in UK (includes all bus related collision deaths, however caused).
I had to google 'lying red bus'. Assumed it was a typo, not an enthusiasm to provide more funds 'weekly' to 'Our NHS'.
PS: Nearly a million second doses given over the last 2 days and an average of 3M a week (first and second doses) given in the last week.


----------



## mjr (18 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I had to google 'lying red bus'. Assumed it was a typo, not an enthusiasm to provide more funds 'weekly' to 'Our NHS'.


Yep, that's this government's vehicle. As noted over in the other thread, somewhat ironically, the no-detectable-effect-yet test and trace is costing roughly £350m a week for 2 years to have no published capacity so we still can't tell what vaccination level would be sufficient to be within tracing capacity.


----------



## MrGrumpy (19 Apr 2021)

So two work colleagues have had the Phizer vaccine this weekend, one 51 the other 41. Hearing stories of others also getting the Phizer one and also Moderna  . Existing stocks of AZ being held back for 2nd jabs ?


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Apr 2021)

If anything other way round. Most of the Pfizer supply at present mostly needed for second jabs (from deductions I've made on late Jan / early Feb first dose proportion).


----------



## Buck (19 Apr 2021)

AZ and Pfizer are both being used for second doses now but there is a dip in supply of AZ at present and expected to come back to "normal" after next week so limited availability for first doses.

Pfizer stocks are increasing and more volume has been secured so we will see more first doses of this in the coming weeks.

Moderna is in limited initial supply and only being administered from c30-40 sites across England (mainly linked to hospitals) and not in GP or other local vaccination centres at present.


----------



## Pale Rider (20 Apr 2021)

I've just been Pfizered for the second time.

Another seamless experience.

Despite @mjr's increasingly desperate attempts to criticise the programme, it continues to work wonderfully well.

My only regret is there wasn't a nice big red bus parked outside the vaccination centre.


----------



## mjr (20 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I've just been Pfizered for the second time.
> 
> Another seamless experience.
> 
> Despite @mjr's increasingly desperate attempts to criticise the programme, it continues to work wonderfully well.


Do not lie about what I wrote, please. The vac centres seem to run well. The booking website is a mess. I see that they have now changed the criteria on the booking website to exclude people who turn 45 this month! Anyone know why?


----------



## Pale Rider (20 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Do not lie about what I wrote, please.



No lies - your many attempts to criticise the vaccination programme appear unjustified to me, several others on here, and I suspect would do to the millions who have had the same seamless experience I've had.

No doubt you will continue in the same vein, just don't be surprised if someone can be bothered to point out you are spouting nonsense.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (20 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> I see that they have now changed the criteria on the booking website to exclude people who turn 45 this month! Anyone know why?



Possibly they realise you turn 45 this month, and they want you dead?

Can I be so bold as to ask what it is you do for a job?


----------



## vickster (20 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Do not lie about what I wrote, please. The vac centres seem to run well. The booking website is a mess. I see that they have now changed the criteria on the booking website to exclude people who turn 45 this month! Anyone know why?


Because they’re not yet 45 and so don’t qualify as 45-49 year olds 
Just book when have birthday


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Apr 2021)

Some are now 45 but can't book @vickster . Suspect the system took a cut of the database on 30 Mar to allow a go/no go for applicants. This age limit will drop to over 40s after the public holiday weekend. @mjr I don't think you're increasingly desperate btw.


----------



## vickster (20 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Some are now 45 but can't book @vickster . Suspect the system took a cut of the database on 30 Mar to allow a go/no go for applicants. This age limit will drop to over 40s after the public holiday weekend. I don't think you're increasingly desperate btw.


That wasn’t clear. Book through 119 If already 45


----------



## mjr (20 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> No lies - your many attempts to criticise the vaccination programme appear unjustified to me, several others on here, and I suspect would do to the millions who have had the same seamless experience I've had.


Yes, lies. You may have had a seamless experience. My booking certaily wasn't and some friends had it worse. You seem to be in denial.



> No doubt you will continue in the same vein, just don't be surprised if someone can be bothered to point out you are spouting nonsense.


Good luck finding any nonsense. You have not yet.



Craig the cyclist said:


> Possibly they realise you turn 45 this month, and they want you dead?


What are you on about?


----------



## fossyant (20 Apr 2021)

Everyone I know has had a good booking/vaccination experience. It's slower at your GP - i.e. sometimes a physical queue to get jabbed. Website worked fine for me and others I know. Cycled down to Etihad, volunteers were fabulously helpful, showing me to the bike parking. People helping everywhere. Process inside was seamless and you were constantly moving through the check in, to nurses asking the various health questions, to straight onto a cubicle and jib jabbed. No complaints here. The local Trusts and volunteers are doing a fabulous job.


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> This year sees my 60th birthday and I have never been registered with a GP as an adult and it seems that vaccine appointments are based on being registered with a GP.
> So I tried the online Book A Vaccine system but I got nowhere with it as it circles around enter your NHS number, you can find this on your correspondence with your GP or register with a GP. I did try to register with a GP practice a while back and was told that as they couldn't find my non-existent previous GP records they couldn't register me.
> Eventually I lost interest and I wonder just how rare people like me are?


Ian - you have been given advice upthread about how to break your way in to this and book a vaccination but I thought I'd look to see "how rare you are" ie how many people in UK are not registered with a GP (and therefore haven't got a current NHS number).
The NHS Digital site offers an insight.
Reducing this to England (total population of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales is about 11M)
60,744,002 patients registered at GP practices in England as at 1 April 2021.
The population of England (2019) is about 56M.
So there must be duplicates or NHS Digital is still counting people who've emigrated or died (latter about 600k a year).
Of interest, 93,262 registered in March. @IanSmithCSE - You can be one of those who registers in April (though likely somewhere there is a number associated with you and your date of birth).
How many Ian Smiths can there be who are 60 this year? I'll leave our resident mathematician to work out the chances of two Ian Smiths aged 60 this year having the same birthday. There are about 393k males (Ian - assumed) any name who'll have their 60th birthday this year, god willing.


----------



## classic33 (20 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Ian - you have been given advice upthread about how to break your way in to this and book a vaccination but I thought I'd look to see "how rare you are" ie how many people in UK are not registered with a GP (and therefore haven't got a current NHS number).
> The NHS Digital site offers an insight.
> Reducing this to England (total population of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales is about 11M)
> 60,744,002 patients registered at GP practices in England as at 1 April 2021.
> ...


271


----------



## Craig the cyclist (21 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> 271



Not even one a day then.


----------



## MrGrumpy (21 Apr 2021)

My letter arrived !! Next Wednesday is jab day ! No GP or community hospital for me !! Nope I’ve to go to an old Marks and Sparks store n the high street ! Well there’s CoVid vaccine and then their M&S vaccine .


----------



## vickster (21 Apr 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> My letter arrived !! Next Wednesday is jab day ! No GP or community hospital for me !! Nope I’ve to go to an old Marks and Sparks store n the high street ! Well there’s CoVid vaccine and then their M&S vaccine .


Will you get a Colin mini roll as well as a sticker upon leaving?


----------



## MrGrumpy (21 Apr 2021)

Colon the Caterpillar more like


----------



## Unkraut (21 Apr 2021)

Appointments for my age bracket were released at the beginning of this week, so I thought I'd give it a go despite the initial rush. After several attempts last night and this morning it finally worked and I have an appointment for BioNTech in Mannheim at a centre on 9th May, second jab 20th June.

Came through quicker than I thought, the campaign has started to gain some momentum.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Apr 2021)

@classic33 said "271"


Craig the cyclist said:


> Not even one a day then.


I think probability calculations suggest you only 23 Ian Smiths 'in a room' to have a better than evens chance that two will have the same birthday. So NHS Digital won't find it completely straightforward to match @IanSmithCSE with his original NHS number.
Though presumably nearly every one of those 271 'Ian Smiths' will have had interaction with the NHS this century so they can be excluded.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Apr 2021)

Unkraut said:


> I have an appointment for BioNTech in Mannheim at a centre on 9th May, second jab 20th June.


So has Germany pushed out the 'gap' to 6 weeks generally?


----------



## classic33 (21 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @classic33 said "271"
> 
> I think probability calculations suggest you only 23 Ian Smiths 'in a room' to have a better than evens chance that two will have the same birthday. So NHS Digital won't find it completely straightforward to match @IanSmithCSE with his original NHS number.
> Though presumably nearly every one of those 271 'Ian Smiths' will have had interaction with the NHS this century so they can be excluded.


The figure was for those aged sixty at present, in the UK. Narrow the area, even by country, and you'll reduce that figure further.


----------



## Unkraut (22 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> So has Germany pushed out the 'gap' to 6 weeks generally?


I was a bit surprised at the gap, but the general policy has changed to getting at least one injection done more quickly in order to deal with the more infectious and dangerous British mutation that has virtually taken over. I suspect the gap for AZ is even wider.

The graph showing first and second vaccinations which originally always had second doses as half the number of first doses is showing an ever greater divergence as first doses take priority.

https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Daten/Impfquoten-Tab.html

The map shows the percentage for first injection (left) and both injections (right) for each _Land_.

The second gives the total to date at nearly 23 million.

The third which relates to what you asked shows percentage first dose in light blue and both doses in darker blue, and first doses are now 3 times the figure for both.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (25 Apr 2021)

Wife had J2 at 8.30am this Sunday morning and then straight into emergency hair surgery at 9am. 

1 x achy arm which suggests I am on cooking duties tonight - bless her!


----------



## newts (25 Apr 2021)

I had my 2nd AZ jab on Wednesday. Our local health centre is very well organised & there were alot of people who appeared to 40-50 age group also getting jabs. Pleased to say the that the symptoms were very minimal this time, only very mild aches for about 48 hrs.


----------



## mjr (26 Apr 2021)

UK vaccination opened to 44+ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/who-can-get-the-vaccine/


----------



## Rezillo (26 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> I've just been Pfizered for the second time.
> 
> Another seamless experience.
> 
> ...



Everything worked for me as well. Our local Facebook page is full of praise for the centre and the booking process. 

I did have one problem booking an appointment but that was my fault, not the system. It wouldn't recognise my NHS number, which was out of date. I didn't know the numbers had changed to 10 digit ones years ago: I still had a NHS card from the 80s with my (shorter) number on it but it didn't work. I then found out why. 

I downloaded the NHS app (not the covid one) and there was a straightforward process to retrieve my current NHS number, which then worked on the booking site. I don't think it needed a GP registration - the app only asked for one when I later linked my GP records to it. After all that, I found my "new" NHS number on a routine bowel cancer screening letter so I should have checked that in the first place.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 Apr 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> The discharge letter does indeed have a hospital number, it is 10 digits long, are any of those digits meaningful or is it just a sequence number?
> And an empty space with a *NHS number * label, this is probably why I am going round in circles.


Have you been vaccinated, Ian? That 10 digit number on the hospital discharge letter seems just what you need. The "NHS Number" label is to have a specific space on the letter in case 'they' have to write the number in in manuscript, btw.


----------



## mjr (26 Apr 2021)

Nurse-cyclists now doing house calls vaccinating shielding patients in Belgium.


----------



## rockyroller (26 Apr 2021)

getting my 2nd Moderna jab Thursday, 4 weeks after the 1st jab


----------



## mjr (26 Apr 2021)

Hi ho hi ho it's off to court they go... https://www.thejournal.ie/eu-launch...neca-over-vaccine-deliveries-5420296-Apr2021/

The key question is still: was shipping nothing from two factories listed in the contract really AZ's best efforts?


----------



## classic33 (26 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Hi ho hi ho it's off to court they go... https://www.thejournal.ie/eu-launch...neca-over-vaccine-deliveries-5420296-Apr2021/
> 
> The key question is still: was shipping nothing from two factories listed in the contract really AZ's best efforts?


Given the fact that some countries seem hesitant to use it, why are they trying that route. What's been done with the doses supplied, but never used.


----------



## mjr (26 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> Given the fact that some countries seem hesitant to use it, why are they trying that route. What's been done with the doses supplied, but never used.


Because some countries are happy to use it but supplies are short, leading some to sign deals with Russia or China.

I suspect any unused supplied doses are being held for use in second doses in case mix and match turns out not to be generally permitted and AZ continue to fall short. Oh and on another site, a mistake was spotted on the BBC website where it overestimated the stockpile, in case you saw that too.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (26 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> Given the fact that some countries seem hesitant to use it, why are they trying that route.



Face saving - it's worth them launching the claim even if it's entirely without merit, because it kicks the can down the road.


----------



## mjr (26 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Face saving - it's worth them launching the claim even if it's entirely without merit


So you never claim compensation from a supplier who's late and just let them keep the money until they can get around to delivering?

Kicking the can down the road? Why would they want to? Next EU election is 2 years away and this probably ensures it remains a live issue then. Face saving would be to fire AZ and draw a line under it, but that won't get them as much vaccine.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Apr 2021)

I think the "AZ stocks not being used in the EU" appears to be largely false. 

Here's the French data for all vaccines:







They're basically dosing as fast as vials arrive. 

https://covidtracker.fr/vaccintracker/

There's a breakdown by vaccine type in the link. 

Much more open than the UK... not surprising the EU is paranoid about UK supplies given our lack of transparency I guess.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Apr 2021)

The EU legal action is ridiculous. 

Do they really think AZ is not busting a gut to get supplies out of the door?

It's exactly the sort of thing that disrupts activity - AZ efforts will be distracted into covering their arses legally rather than moving heaven and earth logistically. 

Half wits.


----------



## classic33 (26 Apr 2021)

Of the twenty countries who stopped using Vaxzevria, how many have started using it again?

France is seeking to have enough vaccinations to see it through the next two years. But it may not be the Vaxzevria vaccine. And let's not forget Italy's piracy, where did that lot disappear to given they'd ceased using it at the time.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (26 Apr 2021)

Given the comments from Macron and Merkel, the EU are liable to be building their defence against the compensation claims from people that have lost loved ones due to their incompetence. I think a fair few member states have binned the EU supply and gone for the Russian one after getting fed up of waiting.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> And let's not forget Italy's piracy



Get a grip.


----------



## rualexander (26 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> UK vaccination opened to 44+ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/who-can-get-the-vaccine/


Not UK vaccination, England maybe.


----------



## mjr (26 Apr 2021)

rualexander said:


> Not UK vaccination, England maybe.


Yeah, why does NHS England use a .uk?


----------



## mjr (26 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> Of the twenty countries who stopped using Vaxzevria, how many have started using it again?


All except Denmark, I think. Some restrict it by age or by medic decision.


----------



## mjr (26 Apr 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The EU legal action is ridiculous.
> 
> Do they really think AZ is not busting a gut to get supplies out of the door?


That doesn't matter. It's that they think AZ aren't busting guts to get any to the EU.



> It's exactly the sort of thing that disrupts activity - AZ efforts will be distracted into covering their arses legally rather than moving heaven and earth logistically.
> 
> Half wits.


Only a half wit would think the lawyers are currently making vaccines! I'm pretty sure they're separate staff.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> I'm pretty sure they're separate staff.



I've been involved in similar, and I can assure you, you're unequivocally wrong.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (26 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> It's that they think AZ aren't busting guts to get any to the EU.



No they don't. That's obviously bollix.


----------



## mjr (26 Apr 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I've been involved in similar, and I can assure you, you're unequivocally wrong.


So the AZ vaccine is made by its legal team?


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (27 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> So the AZ vaccine is made by its legal team?



Anybody with experience of major litigation will know that the effort required goes far beyond the legal team and takes up a great deal of time from line managers and executives (in this case, those in charge of production) who must act as factual witnesses. So yes, the case will have a material impact on AZ's speed of production. And as a result, people will die.


----------



## mjr (27 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Anybody with experience of major litigation


Just to authenticate your point, what is your experience of being sued for millions of euros for breach of contract?

If, as some here suggest, it's so clear cut why "best efforts" doesn't include shipping any vaccine from two production sites listed in the contract, then I'm sure the case will collapse or be dismissed before witnesses are needed.


----------



## Pale Rider (27 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> then I'm sure the case will collapse or be dismissed before witnesses are needed.



The distraction impact is AZ need to prepare their defence whether the case ultimately proceeds to a full hearing or not.

AZ shouldn't be excused compliance with contract law just because they are making a vaccine, but I'd like to think the EU thought very carefully before embarking on this course of action.

The cynic in me tells me this is yet another example of the EU spending vast sums of public money on irrelevant side issues rather than concentrating on the job in hand.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (27 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Just to authenticate your point, what is your experience of being sued for millions of euros for breach of contract?
> 
> If, as some here suggest, it's so clear cut why "best efforts" doesn't include shipping any vaccine from two production sites listed in the contract, then I'm sure the case will collapse or be dismissed before witnesses are needed.



I have extensive experience of litigation of this nature.

And no, witnesses can't wait until they know whether they are "needed" or not, before preparing their evidence.


----------



## vickster (27 Apr 2021)

Bookings online now open to 42+ In England

although I’m not sure if any CCers are that young  (their kids might be though )


----------



## mjr (27 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> I have extensive experience of litigation of this nature.


Can you share any specifics or are people expected to trust a pseudonym taken from Ripping Yarns?



> And no, witnesses can't wait until they know whether they are "needed" or not, before preparing their evidence.


Surely any legitimate evidence exists and would be preserved regardless of whether a court case is live or not. It shouldn't need to be prepared or manufactured. If even AZ's supporters think otherwise, then...!!!


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (27 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Can you share any specifics or are people expected to trust a pseudonym taken from Ripping Yarns?



I let the first suggestion that I am a liar pass. Not doing the same again. Bye.


----------



## C R (27 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Can you share any specifics or are people expected to trust a pseudonym taken from Ripping Yarns?
> 
> 
> Surely the evidence exists and would be preserved regardless of whether a court case is live or not. It shouldn't need to be prepared or manufactured.


Two people here have told you the same thing, my experience is the same as a tech body being involved in litigation, so that makes three. You may choose to believe what you think happens with this kind of suits, it doesn't change what actually happens.


----------



## mjr (27 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> I let the first suggestion that I am a liar pass. Not doing the same again. Bye.


There was no such suggestion. You posted a so called appeal to authority rather than reasoning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

It seems justified to ask the basis for that authoritativeness.


----------



## PK99 (27 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Surely any legitimate evidence exists and would be preserved regardless of whether a court case is live or not. It shouldn't need to be prepared or manufactured. If even AZ's supporters think otherwise, then...!!!



You clearly do not have relevant experience. Listen to people who do.


----------



## Milkfloat (27 Apr 2021)

C R said:


> Two people here have told you the same thing, my experience is the same as a tech body being involved in litigation, so that makes three. You may choose to believe what you think happens with this kind of suits, it doesn't change what actually happens.



I can make that four. I am in a very technical role a world apart from the legal bods, but over the years have spent many, many hours gathering information and compiling evidence to be used whilst defending and pursuing legal claims for the company.


----------



## mjr (27 Apr 2021)

PK99 said:


> You clearly do not have relevant experience. Listen to people who do.


Just as soon as any more than pseudonyms making vague claims show up...

Also, I'm rather disappointed if many scientists aren't keeping log books anyway that are good enough evidence already, without significant extra time spent on them.


----------



## dodgy (27 Apr 2021)

Make me 5. I have ran a department within computer forensics division that was responsible for ‘discovery’ of evidence in a very large company . This stuff is not left until the day before just in case we don’t need it.


----------



## classic33 (27 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Just as soon as any more than pseudonyms making vague claims show up...
> 
> Also, I'm rather disappointed if many scientists aren't keeping log books anyway that are good enough evidence already, without significant extra time spent on them.


And they've to "translate" their records into something that can be read by others, who may not have had similar training. Whilst keeping the originals intact.

Edited to correct
"Whilst keeping the originalals intact."
To
Whilst keeping the originals intact.


----------



## fossyant (27 Apr 2021)

vickster said:


> Bookings online now open to 42+ In England
> 
> although I’m not sure if any CCers are that young  (their kids might be though )



Ooof !


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Apr 2021)

(Aol 'news'): Great Western Hospital in Swindon has apologised after a woman was given the wrong vaccine when she went for her second jab - in the first error of its kind in the UK. The woman received the Pfizer vaccine instead of the AstraZeneca version that she was supposed to have and had been given first time around at the same hospital. The hospital said it was carrying out a review to ensure lessons are learned from the incident and it doesn't happen again.

Despite the mix-up the woman reportedly felt OK afterwards, but she and her husband, who want to remain anonymous, said they were still furious at the error. They said when she booked her appointment at the hospital she made it clear she had already been given the AstraZeneca vaccine. Her husband said: "I couldn’t believe it, it’s a huge error and very concerning. “They told us this is the first time it’s happened - not just in Swindon but in the UK.” _(Comment: cf Subpostmasters?)_

The husband, who himself was going for his first jab at the same time, said: “The call handler asked her which vaccine she had last time so we assumed that would be written down and passed on to the medics. “We split up into different rooms and when we came out, she told me what happened." His wife said that at no point during the appointment did the healthcare staff ask to see the card given to her after her first vaccine although she put it face-up on the table in clear view. He added: "Afterwards a doctor came out and said sorry and said we think you will be OK. "It does not make sense, there should be a number of fail safes in place to ensure this does not happen. We couldn’t understand how or why this had occurred.”

A Great Western Hospital spokesman said: “We have offered our sincere apologies for giving her a different Covid-19 vaccine as her second dose. We have taken advice from the South West Clinical Advice and Response Service, an external service that provides vaccination centres with expert advice and guidance. It advised that both of the currently authorised vaccines in this situation are based on the spike protein and so the second dose will work as it should to boost the response to the first dose. For this reason, no further doses are required, and we do not anticipate any ill effects arising from this. We are reviewing the current pathways within our vaccination hub to learn from this incident and make sure similar incidents are avoided in the future.”
_Comment: In UK's 13,201,811 second doses, I'd say that one in 13 million would be an astounding programme performance, acknowledging it shouldn't happen and also that there's no evidence of dissimilar doses being less or more safe; or less or more effective. I think the husband being 'furious' almost reminds me of someone, but I can't recall who. _


----------



## fossyant (27 Apr 2021)

The second boosts your immunity, so does it really matter which - might be better mixing TBH. Who knows. I'd not be bothered.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (27 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Comment: In UK's 13,201,811 second doses, I'd say that one in 13 million would be an astounding programme performance, acknowledging it shouldn't happen and also that there's no evidence of dissimilar doses being less or more safe; or less or more effective. I think the husband being 'furious' almost reminds me of someone, but I can't recall who


----------



## Pale Rider (27 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> but she and her husband, who want to remain anonymous, said they were still furious at the error. T



Two things.

If she wants to slag people off she ought to have the integrity to put her name to the comments.

But more importantly, take some personal responsibility.

I was given a card with the first dose to say I'd been Pfizered.

Before getting the second, I checked with the nurse to make sure it was Pfizer again.

Basic stuff.

This woman needs to grow up.


----------



## shep (27 Apr 2021)

Always someone else's fault with some people, would you accept Brown Sauce if you'd asked for Ketchup?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (27 Apr 2021)

A completely untrue story too.

This has happened hundreds of times! Whoever wrote that story should be struck off as journalist, taken outside and shot with a ball of their own urine.


----------



## dodgy (27 Apr 2021)

shep said:


> Always someone else's fault with some people, would you accept Brown Sauce if you'd asked for Ketchup?



Not saying the couple haven't over-reacted. But much has been made in the press and in general the last few months about the importance of having the same jab twice. Otherwise the messaging would have just been "get 2 jabs, whatever's available" But no, the rigid approach has been that it's important to follow up the second jab with the same as the first. This is why the hospital have apologised.

I agree with others that the fact this appears to have only happened once is amazing. 

tl;dr not a lot to worry about, but it's not the same as the wrong sauce on your bangers.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (27 Apr 2021)

fossyant said:


> The second boosts your immunity, so does it really matter which - might be better mixing TBH. Who knows. I'd not be bothered.



Yeah, but where is the compo opportunity in that attitude?


----------



## dodgy (27 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> A completely untrue story too.
> 
> This has happened hundreds of times! Whoever wrote that story should be struck off as journalist, taken outside and shot with a ball of their own urine.



Sauce (sic) please?


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> the compo opportunity
> . . . A completely untrue story too.


Edit: Yes, I thought the likelihood of the 'world first' - you lucky lady!' was nil. If the journo had gone to NHS England, I wonder whether they'd have got a 'yes, has happened loads of times' answer?
The COVID-19 Heterologous Prime Boost study aka ‘Com-Cov’ study to examine whether different vaccines can safely be used for 2-dose regimes in the future was initiated on 4 Feb.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...alternating-dose-vaccine-study-launches-in-uk


----------



## Craig the cyclist (27 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> Sauce (sic) please?



I can't tell you, but it isn't!


----------



## Craig the cyclist (27 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> The COVID-19 Heterologous Prime Boost study aka ‘Com-Cov’ study to examine whether different vaccines can safely be used for 2-dose regimes in the future was initiated on 4 Feb.
> https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...alternating-dose-vaccine-study-launches-in-uk



And that got extended a few days ago to cover all 4 vaccines in various combinations. There are now all sorts of combinations in Com-Cov. I tried to get on, but there was no study site near me, so I get my second AZ on Saturday as planned


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> I get my second AZ on Saturday as planned


Mind me asking how many days short of 12 weeks that will be? The average is trucking along at 10 weeks 6 days (sauce: my agricultural calculation).


----------



## shep (27 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> Not saying the couple haven't over-reacted. But much has been made in the press and in general the last few months about the importance of having the same jab twice. Otherwise the messaging would have just been "get 2 jabs, whatever's available" But no, the rigid approach has been that it's important to follow up the second jab with the same as the first. This is why the hospital have apologised.
> 
> I agree with others that the fact this appears to have only happened once is amazing.
> 
> tl;dr not a lot to worry about, but it's not the same as the wrong sauce on your bangers.


Well make sure you're getting the correct one then!


----------



## dodgy (27 Apr 2021)

shep said:


> Well make sure you're getting the correct one then!



I rather think the correct administration of medication lies with the trained staff administering it, just like any other drug or medication given by a trained professional. Yes, there's a safety net in this case, the matter is simple enough to understand by the patient and a right thinking individual can raise a concern, but that depends on how clear the staff were about the to-be injected serum for the recipient.


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Apr 2021)

Vaccine identification parade:











(Middle one is the Oxford-AZ one, for the avoidance of doubt)


----------



## Craig the cyclist (27 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Mind me asking how many days short of 12 weeks that will be? The average is trucking along at 10 weeks 6 days (sauce: my agricultural calculation).



Dose one was on 13/2, dose 2 will be 1/5, so 77 days apart. Perfect timing


----------



## Bazzer (27 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> Make me 5. I have ran a department within computer forensics division that was responsible for ‘discovery’ of evidence in a very large company . This stuff is not left until the day before just in case we don’t need it.


Make me 6.
Having been at the sharp end of a claim for a Judicial Review and several court hearings, including the Scottish Court of Session, the extra work involved and who it affects is enormous. Barristers and solicitors, quite often putting in long hours themselves, demanding all involved have an intimate and instant recall knowledge of what they did, when they did it, why they did it and provide all supporting documentation, very often asking for responses Now!
This stuff takes over your daily work life to the detriment of anything else you want to do.


----------



## Julia9054 (27 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Mind me asking how many days short of 12 weeks that will be? The average is trucking along at 10 weeks 6 days (sauce: my agricultural calculation).


My second is booked for 11 weeks and 6 days after my first. Just in under the wire


----------



## fossyant (27 Apr 2021)

I'm a couple of days over as I was booking both, then MrsF said second wasn't good (day before her birthday) so it's three days later now.

Even my awkward BIL is desparate to get his jabs (not 40 yet) ! And he's been working throughout in construction.


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (27 Apr 2021)

An interesting decision by a school in Florida

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/florida-coronavirus-vaccine-teacher-b1838356.html


I tried to get onto the school's website but it seems to be having problems - I suspect loads of people are doing the same!

I do wonder if this is a case of loonies who believe in all sorts of rubbish
Or hyper religious stuff - but there i snot mention of that and it doesn't seem to be likely
or just the people running the school haveing been fed some information and believing it in good faith - I have no idea what qualifies you to be able to run a private school in Florida !!


----------



## IaninSheffield (27 Apr 2021)

Called for my 2nd this week, which will be 11 weeks and four days after 1st. I'll give that a 👍


----------



## Pale Rider (27 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Mind me asking how many days short of 12 weeks that will be? The average is trucking along at 10 weeks 6 days (sauce: my agricultural calculation).



Think I was a few days above Mr Average just to add a tiny bit more data to your ketchup poll.

I wasn't invited to book both jabs at the same time, but I suppose those that are could skew your results a little.


----------



## Zanelad (27 Apr 2021)

I've got my 2nd jab this Friday, exactly 10 weeks to the day from my first jab. Mrs Z's got hers at the same time. Hers is 11 weeks after her first one.


----------



## matticus (28 Apr 2021)

Luckily no-one on Cyclechat would overreact to someone else's mistake ...



Craig the cyclist said:


> Whoever wrote that story should be struck off as journalist, taken outside and shot with a ball of their own urine.


----------



## chriswoody (28 Apr 2021)

Interesting to read the story above about the vaccine mix up.

At the end of March, myself and 30 odd work colleagues were booked into receive our first shots at our local vaccination centre. (Before the OK was given for some GP's to also administer doses.) We were split into three groups over three days and there were also teachers from other local schools present as well. The first group were vaccinated on the Tuesday with Astra Zenica, then that evening, the German Authorities announced they were suspending the use of AZ for the under 60's. So the rest of us were given Moderna on our appointments.

The worrying thing is that now my colleagues from the Tuesday group have been left in Limbo. The official line at the moment is that when the 10 weeks are up, they will be given a different shot for their second dose, because AZ is still suspended and with no sign of that being rescinded. So the German government is happy to go ahead and mix up the doses rather than give AZ to those who received their first dose of it. As with everything here in Germany though, it's all a little unclear and confusing


----------



## shep (28 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> I rather think the correct administration of medication lies with the trained staff administering it, just like any other drug or medication given by a trained professional. Yes, there's a safety net in this case, the matter is simple enough to understand by the patient and a right thinking individual can raise a concern, but that depends on how clear the staff were about the to-be injected serum for the recipient.


It's the shop assistant's job to give you the correct change but I bet you check it before you put it in your pocket, or check if the barmaid has given you Lager and not Cider?

It's up to you though.


----------



## mjr (28 Apr 2021)

shep said:


> It's the shop assistant's job to give you the correct change but I bet you check it before you put it in your pocket, or check if the barmaid has given you Lager and not Cider?
> 
> It's up to you though.


Do you taste them all if you're getting a round in? Reduces the risk of being asked to buy another round ever, I guess!


----------



## dodgy (28 Apr 2021)

Yes, I completely understand that getting a mix up in your drink order is exactly the same as the correct administration of medication.


----------



## shep (28 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> Yes, I completely understand that getting a mix up in your drink order is exactly the same as the correct administration of medication.


I'm not going to argue the t**s with you but if you can't accept a bit of responsibility is required by the person having the jab then fine, the whole point is that you would be far more vigilant over something as petty as getting the expected change than you would over something that's as important as getting the expected vaccine?


----------



## shep (28 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Do you taste them all if you're getting a round in? Reduces the risk of being asked to buy another round ever, I guess!


Or..................point to the drink you think might be Cider and say "I thought I was getting Lager", strange concept I know.


----------



## dodgy (28 Apr 2021)

shep said:


> I'm not going to argue the t**s with you but if you can't accept a bit of responsibility is required by the person having the jab then fine, the whole point is that you would be far more vigilant over something as petty as getting the expected change than you would over something that's as important as getting the expected vaccine?


Yes, I completely understand that getting a mix up in your drink order is exactly the same as the correct administration of medication


----------



## shep (28 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> Yes, I completely understand that getting a mix up in your drink order is exactly the same as the correct administration of medication


You really do like the sound of your own voice, metaphorically speaking of course, you just keep repeating yourself?

Boring!


----------



## dodgy (28 Apr 2021)

shep said:


> You really do like the sound of your own voice, metaphorically speaking of course, you just keep repeating yourself?
> 
> Boring!



lol, and you like a bloody good moan. You've painted yourself truly into a corner with the notion that there is a similarity between getting the correct drinks order and being injected with the wrong medicine. It's a ridiculous thing to say and I've already made a reasonable point further up thread that I agree there's a safety net, but that's the thing with safety nets - it's the final control. The responsibility lies with the medical staff to get it right.,

Imagine if the end result of an incident like this and the patient died, do you think in court the judge would say "you should take more notice, it's your fault!".

No, that wouldn't happen, you know it. But now you're going to go on and on and on about it.

I'm done here!
/fondles ignore feature


----------



## Pale Rider (28 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> lol, and you like a bloody good moan. You've painted yourself truly into a corner with the notion that there is a similarity between getting the correct drinks order and being injected with the wrong medicine. It's a ridiculous thing to say and I've already made a reasonable point further up thread that I agree there's a safety net, but that's the thing with safety nets - it's the final control. The responsibility lies with the medical staff to get it right.,
> 
> Imagine if the end result of an incident like this and the patient died, do you think in court the judge would say "you should take more notice, it's your fault!".
> 
> ...



Buying a drink is a reasonable analogy.

Doesn't everyone check what's going to be put in their body?

If I get a prescription, I have a glance at the packet to make sure I'm taking what I think I'm taking.

As regards what a judge might say, only a fool makes a bold prediction about the outcome of any case.

The woman might say she's furious, but it's by no means certain a court would find she has suffered financial or medical loss, or hurt to her feelings.


----------



## mjr (28 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Buying a drink is a reasonable analogy.
> 
> Doesn't everyone check what's going to be put in their body?


 Clearly not, hence people getting roofied, slipped Mickeys, ...


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> The responsibility lies with the medical staff to get it right.,



Well, no actually. Part of the responsibility for the correct administration lies with the staff. Part lies with the patient.

I am sorry, I can't remember if you have had the jab yet, but if you have try to think how many times you were told at dose one what you were getting. 
On arrival- this is an AZ clinic today.
On assessment while the nurse was typing on a computer- You are getting the AZ today, are you allergic to .......
On administration- I am going to give you the AZ vaccine today
Post administration- here is the leaflet for the AZ vaccine I have just administered
Post administration- because you have had the AZ vaccine you should now read the leaflet and wait 15 minutes in your car

At least 5 times, and a leaflet. My guess is you then spoke to your friends, and maybe even on here and said "I got the AZ and I felt tired" etc etc

When you go for number two you will be told on arrival, during assessment, pre-injection, on administration, so at least another 4 times. Now, unless you are Nicola Sturgeon or have different needs, you will know what you are about to receive. If you choose not to say anything, part of the responsibility falls to you, as with all healthcare decisions.

Do you know where most drug errors occur, and who is the most likely person to make one?


----------



## mjr (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> At least 5 times, and a leaflet.


I was only told at check in because I asked. Otherwise, I think I would only have had the post administration leaflet. I was surprised the "are you allergic to..." sign didn't mention which vaccine. I don't know whether the same venue ever injects Moderna or BioNTech.

Still good enough IMO but don't assume all centres are operating exactly the same.


----------



## classic33 (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Well, no actually. Part of the responsibility for the correct administration lies with the staff. Part lies with the patient.
> 
> I am sorry, I can't remember if you have had the jab yet, but if you have try to think how many times you were told at dose one what you were getting.
> On arrival- this is an AZ clinic today.
> ...


Actually told only once, and then only because I'd to wait. And I don't drive.
The other vaccine available at the time considered unsafe for me.


----------



## Pale Rider (28 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Clearly not, hence people getting roofied, slipped Mickeys, ...



No sign of any date rapists hanging around my local vaccine centre, but hey, we should all be vigilant.


----------



## vickster (28 Apr 2021)

Roofies are given by stealth, whenever I’ve had an injection including every vaccination, I’ve been told when it’ll be done ...usually with the words ‘sharp scratch coming’ Or similar...not exactly stealthy
(or in the case of knee injections, I can see the Consultant wielding a bloody great needle above my leg having prepared the syringe and attached the needle in front of me).
to be fair, I wasn’t aware of the knee injection I had last week...but then I’d already consented to general anaesthetic and invasive surgery...not been roofied


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> I was only told at check in because I asked. Otherwise, I think I would only have had the post administration leaflet. I was surprised the "are you allergic to..." sign didn't mention which vaccine. I don't know whether the same venue ever injects Moderna or BioNTech.
> 
> Still good enough IMO but don't assume all centres are operating exactly the same.



Where did you get vaccinated?


----------



## Bazzer (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Well, no actually. Part of the responsibility for the correct administration lies with the staff. Part lies with the patient.
> 
> I am sorry, I can't remember if you have had the jab yet, but if you have try to think how many times you were told at dose one what you were getting.
> On arrival- this is an AZ clinic today.
> ...


Definitely not 5 times with my jab. The first I was made aware of which vaccine I was being injected with, was while my arm was being prep'd and out of curiosity I asked whether I was being given the Pfizer or the AZ vaccine.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

Bazzer said:


> Definitely not 5 times with my jab. The first I was made aware of which vaccine I was being injected with, was while my arm was being prep'd and out of curiosity I asked whether I was being given the Pfizer or the AZ vaccine.



Essentially for the first jab, it doesn't matter what you get. 

The second jab, at the moment should match the first. Everyone who has had the jab knows what they have been given.

If you rock up for the second and don't know what you had say that. If you know what you had and the one you are getting now doesn't match, say something.

You wouldn't sign up to have your appendix removed if you knew you had it removed 10 years ago would you?


----------



## mjr (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Where did you get vaccinated?


A town hall nearby that is operating as a NHS-led mass vaccination centre. I know from others locally that GP-led centres are operating slightly differently (which seems inevitable even if only because their buildings are lots of small rooms, not big halls with temporary screens) but I've not asked when people were told which vaccine was being used.



Craig the cyclist said:


> You wouldn't sign up to have your appendix removed if you knew you had it removed 10 years ago would you?


Can't you think of another procedure you have to have done twice the same way?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> Can't you think of another procedure you have to have done twice the same way?



If you banged your head and took two paracetamol for the pain, then thought 'I maybe should go to hospital' probably the first thing that will happen is that you will be offered two paracetamol by the triage nurse. They will ask you 'have you taken any pain killers in the last 4 hours?' 

If you you say no, knowing that you have, take the extra paracetamol and you get poorly whose fault is that? Yours for lying or the nurse for administering?


----------



## matticus (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> If you banged your head and took two paracetamol for the pain, then thought 'I maybe should go to hospital' probably the first thing that will happen is that you will be offered two paracetamol by the triage nurse. They will ask you 'have you taken any pain killers in the last 4 hours?'
> 
> If you you say no, knowing that you have, take the extra paracetamol and you get poorly whose fault is that? Yours for lying or the nurse for administering?


People that bang their heads sometimes forget things.


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (28 Apr 2021)

WHen I got my jab there was a big flat screen TV saying which one it was
followed by another a bit further down the queue
it also told you when your next jab was due
Then I was told which one it was at the table
then I was given a leaflet about it
and an appointment card with the name and date and time on it

Sounds like each area/centre does it their own way and some will be better than others


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

matticus said:


> People that bang their heads sometimes forget things.



Don't be an arse.

Who would you hold responsible?


----------



## matticus (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Don't be an arse.


That confirms my initial instinct - do NOT get involved in this heavy-weight discussion!!!


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

matticus said:


> That confirms my initial instinct - do NOT get involved in this heavy-weight discussion!!!



So you can't say who you would hold responsible?


----------



## classic33 (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> If you banged your head and took two paracetamol for the pain, then thought 'I maybe should go to hospital' *probably the first thing that will happen is that you will be offered two paracetamol by the triage nurse*. They will ask you 'have you taken any pain killers in the last 4 hours?'
> 
> If you you say no, knowing that you have, take the extra paracetamol and you get poorly whose fault is that? Yours for lying or the nurse for administering?


Triage nurse wouldn't offer any medication. It might mean a longer wait for the patient, as it slows down the treatment, and could hide further damage.

Been there and never been asked that by any triage nurse.


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Apr 2021)

dodgy said:


> I rather think the correct administration of medication lies with the trained staff administering it, just like any other drug or medication given by a trained professional. Yes, there's a safety net in this case, the matter is simple enough to understand by the patient and a right thinking individual can raise a concern, but that depends on how clear the staff were about the to-be injected serum for the recipient.


(I'm agreeing with you, @dodgy.) A patient in the very capable hands of the men and women of the NHS (and fellow travellers, many volunteers - thanks) will mostly tend to compliance. Relying on the individual at the point of vaccination (as in 'little prick'):
1) to comprehend (not just hear) the name of the vaccine waiting in its syringe,
2) recognise the vaccine is not the one they had first time round,
3) to know/remember 'anything', even the make of vaccine they received first time,
4) and to have the chutzpah/bottle/nerve to speak out /query in an obsequious vaccination centre (large or small) environment where efficiency (ie throughput) is the pervasive air
- is a weak control measure. The system does not rely on this. I have no doubt that CycleChatters are outliers in the spectrum I've implied.
There is an excellent NHS national protocol and the gatekeeper(s) for joining the queue must be medical professionals (many others are not).
As I tried to imply, the chances of getting this right all but 1 in 13 million vaccinations is vanishly small (and @Craig the cyclist has confirmed that - I would be surprised if the figure is less than 100). Added to that yet mitigating the risk, the hazard of an individual receiving a different make of vaccine for their second dose is low - there is no evidence that (safety/efficacy) is either better or worse.
The direction (from FAQs) remains that:
Q: Can different vaccines be used for first and second doses?
A: The Green Book states that the same vaccine used for the first dose must be used for the second, except in very exceptional circumstances. 
Q: Should we still give people who are under 30 their second dose of AstraZeneca?
A: As per JCVI advice for all those in cohorts 1-9 who have received a first dose of AstraZeneca and are due to receive their second dose, appointments should continue unless AstraZeneca is contraindicated.
A: (GB) Individuals who have received a first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine should complete the course with the same vaccine, with the exception of those who experience an episode of thrombosis combined with thrombocytopaenia (see contraindications and precautions).


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> Triage nurse wouldn't offer any medication. It might mean a longer wait for the patient, as it slows down the treatment, and could hide further damage.
> 
> Been there and never been asked that by any triage nurse.



Oh ok


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

So, just to get this straight, is the opinion on here that health professionals should not rely on the patient to know about their treatment, and they should be in total control of the whole process to ensure no cock-ups?


----------



## classic33 (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Oh ok


There twice earlier this year*, A&E's never once was there premedication offered by a triage nurse. Various injuries, one cause.

*18 times last year, where I walked in.


----------



## FishFright (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> So, just to get this straight, is the opinion on here that health professionals should not rely on the patient to know about their treatment, and they should be in total control of the whole process to ensure no cock-ups?



Well it is their job.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> There twice earlier this year*, A&E's never once was there premedication offered by a triage nurse. Various injuries, one cause.
> 
> *18 times last year, where I walked in.



Ah, ok. In a study where n=1 no triage nurses ever offer medication. I would also venture that they know you, and your idiosyncrasies with regards medication, so leave it as it isn't worth the hassle.

However in the real world, triage nurses work to PGDs or are even ANPs with a prescribing qualification allowing them to assess the patient and offer medication.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

FishFright said:


> Well it is their job.



If health professionals aren't to believe the patient about taking two paracetamol, why would they believe them about their symptoms?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

FishFright said:


> Well it is their job.



NHS Constitution, patients responsibilities........

_Please provide accurate information about your health, condition and status._


----------



## classic33 (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Ah, ok. In a study where n=1 no triage nurses ever offer medication. I would also venture that they know you, and your idiosyncrasies with regards medication, so leave it as it isn't worth the hassle.
> 
> However in the real world, triage nurses work to PGDs or are even ANPs with a prescribing qualification allowing them to assess the patient and offer medication.


You want to make fun of a persons health/disability, go ahead. I've to consider that first, and it causes conflict/problems.

Whilst the regions A&E's may be familiar to me, they don't all have immediate access to records.

And I have been on the wrong end of a "cock-up" in A&E, medication that the records clearly indicate not to be given, were. Result, the doctor in charge of the A&E finished their shift writing up the incident. I got a visit from management, asking if I wished to take the matter further. "Cock-up" caused by two seperate systems in use. I blamed the person who thought two seperate systems was a better idea than one. Not a good shift for the doctor.


https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/urgent-and-emergency-care-services/when-to-go-to-ae/


----------



## classic33 (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> NHS Constitution, patients responsibilities........
> 
> _Please provide accurate information about your health, condition and status._


I do if able, but a nonresponsive person on a trolley, in the middle of a grand-mal seizure can't be relied upon.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (28 Apr 2021)

classic33 said:


> ou want to make fun of a persons health/disability, go ahead.



Not taking the mickey, saying that you are very open about your response to many medicines, in an idiosyncratic way. You react to many many medicines how the overwhelming majority people don't, that is idiosyncratic.

How would you feel if when you arrived the HCP told you they were in charge and were not interested in your knowledge of your own condition and treatments?

That is what is being suggested here by others who say it is all about the HCP and not the patient


----------



## classic33 (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Not taking the mickey, saying that you are very open about your response to many medicines, in an idiosyncratic way. You react to many many medicines how the overwhelming majority people don't, that is idiosyncratic.
> 
> How would you feel if when you arrived the HCP told you they were in charge and were not interested in your knowledge of your own condition and treatments?
> 
> That is what is being suggested here by others who say it is all about the HCP and not the patient


If I'm open about the condition, epilepsy, it may just make someone else feel they can talk about it. It's nothing I, or anyone else, did or didn't do. I was born with it.

I've had the professional tell me they were in charge, and ended up having a "return visit". Sometimes within minutes of leaving. Medications interact, not always in a good way, that's when problems start.

To try and get this thread back on topic, how many other cases has there been of anaphylactic shock to any of the vaccines in use has there been? Then consider that just 37 cases(UK only) of blood clotting has had doubt cast over the safety of the vaccines. How many have been vaccinated/received a vaccine, in the UK? I'm in a minority and well aware of it.

I've not tried to scare anyone with what happened to me, with the first vaccine given to date. Every other that most on here will have had, are considered as the risks outweighing the benefits, for me, so were never given. It's no fun having people poking fun at the condition, or how I've to live with it.


----------



## C R (28 Apr 2021)

xkcd on a good reason for mass vaccination


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Everyone who has had the jab knows what they have been given.
> If you rock up for the second and don't know what you had say that. If you know what you had and the one you are getting now doesn't match, say something.
> 
> So, just to get this straight, is the opinion on here that health professionals should not rely on the patient to know about their treatment, and they should be in total control of the whole process to ensure no cock-ups?
> ...


Craig I suggest you are making too many assumptions about the woman on the Clapham omnibus heading for their second jab.
I assert that if you did a poll a fair proportion would not be able state which make of vaccine they'd received first time out.
"If you rock up for the second and don't know what you had you say that" IF the health care professional (HCP) who man the front desk (see below) asks the question.
"If you know what you had and [you realise, somehow] the one you are getting now doesn't match, say something." (But recall the issue of doctor knows best and many individuals' preference 'not to make a fuss' which I described ^^^. Also bear in mind that again a fair proportion of the population will not know that the direction is that the same make of vaccine be given for the second dose.
Don't know about others my opinion is that the system/protocol must have sufficient checks built in to allow the HCPs not to need to rely on the patient to know any more than they're going for their second vaccine. And yes they should be in total control of the whole process (which includes getting informed consent aiui) to ensure no cock-ups.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...covid-19-mrna-vaccine-bnt162b2-pfizerbiontech
*Table 1: Operational stages of activity under this protocol*


Stage 1​
Assessment of the individual presenting for vaccination
Provide information and obtain informed consent[1]
Provide advice to the individual
Registered Healthcare Professionals Only​


----------



## MrGrumpy (29 Apr 2021)

Got tizered yesterday! Sore arm but that’s all so far…… new vaccine centre opened up in the old Marks and Sparks store on Kirkcaldy high street . Disappointed no meal deal offered


----------



## Milkfloat (29 Apr 2021)

Anyone who has had even a few interactions with medical professionals should have worked out pretty damn quickly that "Doctor knows best" is total nonsense. It is a partnership between you and the medic. You have the history and experience the symptoms, the Doctor hopefully has the medical knowledge, but is usually overworked, stressed and is frankly not as invested in the outcome as you.


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Apr 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> Anyone who has had even a few interactions with medical professionals should have worked out pretty damn quickly that "Doctor knows best" is total nonsense. It is a partnership between you and the medic. You have the history and experience the symptoms, the Doctor hopefully has the medical knowledge, but is usually overworked, stressed and is frankly not as invested in the outcome as you.


Again, (I assert that) the vast majority of the population have not had "significant interactions with medical professionals" so will operate on 'doctor knows best' until experience suggests otherwise. Those that have, like you maybe and others on here, will take a special interest: but I suggest this is atypical.
Getting a second jab is not a history and symptoms encounter. The data are pretty simple and an individual attending an appointment that they've been invited to, might and should be able to assume that identity plus vaccine given at first dose and date are foundation stuff which the HCP at the desk possess. They'll be asked about 'previous' as a matter of course and can respond intelligently then. The average IQ within the population is, aiui, 100.
I saw minimal stress nor overwork in my first jab visit to our local (multi-surgery) vaccination centre and believe all those working there WERE fully "invested in the outcome". I will have the opportunity to check the ambiance there next week.


----------



## Pale Rider (29 Apr 2021)

I will use whatever knowledge I have to assist in me getting better treatment.

On many occasions, I lack the knowledge to be of much help to myself.

But checking I'm getting the same vaccine second time around is so simple and easy to do.

Why wouldn't everyone do it?


----------



## dodgy (29 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> NHS Constitution, patients responsibilities........
> 
> _Please provide accurate information about your health, condition and status._



Of course, so once fully informed of the patient's status/history, the health professional can administer the most appropriate and safe treatment/medication.

Why is this so hard for everyone to understand?


----------



## matticus (29 Apr 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> (Aol 'news'): Great Western Hospital in Swindon has apologised after a woman was given the wrong vaccine when she went for her second jab - in the first error of its kind in the UK.


After 2 days and 70 posts, we're _still _discussing this. Chapeau to Ajax B!


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Apr 2021)

Old roads are the ones best ridden, @matticus


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Apr 2021)

From a SPI-M 'ready reckoner':





Comment: This assumes a pedestrian 2.0M doses available per week from early Apr (but the image is still useful imo, just dates 'wrong'). Other SPI-M modelling uses the assumption directed by the Cabinet Office of 2.8M per week. Note that current weekly dose delivery (based on 7-day average) is 3.6M. This also gives an idea of the percentages in the younger age groups who were given a first jab in Jan-Mar (those in JCVI Gps 2, 4 or 6). Those percentages are not ones I've seen shared elsewhere.
Edit: I've found this (authority unknown) on percentages received second dose.
It's to one decimal place so it _must be accurate _
over-80s = 87.1%
75-79s = 91.8%
70-74s = 70.8%
All over 70s (average) = 82%
These JCVI Gps all had their first dose by 14 Feb ( + 84 days = 9 May).


----------



## Craig the cyclist (29 Apr 2021)

I have been busy today, it's a crazy time in my job.

But one thing has been bothering me about some of the comments around the HCP should know everything, while the victim patient should be responsible for nothing.

If the woman in the story that sparked all this, or clearly those members of the population who don't know which their first jab was, well how they can be so sure the second dose didn't match, they don't know what they are matching to


----------



## classic33 (29 Apr 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> I have been busy today, it's a crazy time in my job.
> 
> But one thing has been bothering me about some of the comments around the HCP should know everything, while the victim patient should be responsible for nothing.
> 
> If the woman in the story that sparked all this, or clearly those members of the population who don't know which their first jab was, well how they can be so sure the second dose didn't match, they don't know what they are matching to


The Pfizer one was considered unsafe, leaving only the Oxford-AstraZeneca one. The only two in use in the area at the time, simple elimination would give the same result.

The thing you have to take into consideration is that as good as you think your memory may be, it may well differ from what's in your records, which you hope are correct and in use. At the least, they've been checked before giving any treatment.


----------



## Ajax Bay (30 Apr 2021)

AstraZeneca reports COVID vaccine sales of $275 million
(Reuters) - AstraZeneca said its COVID-19 vaccine contributed $275 million to first-quarter sales and shaved three cents per share from its earnings, as it posted better-than-expected results and forecast growth in the second half.

AZ has given financial details of the distribution and sales of its vaccine, which it developed with Oxford University. It has said it will not make a profit from the shot during the pandemic. Vaccine revenue included delivery of about 68 million doses [as at what date not clear; 31 Mar?], AstraZeneca said today (Fri 30 Apr), adding that sales in Europe, where it faces a legal case, were $224 million, in emerging markets $43 million and $8 million in the rest of the world
Sales of $275 million for 68 million doses suggests around $4 per dose (averaged).


----------



## classic33 (30 Apr 2021)

For those who've had their second shot this week.

Has anyone had an appointment booked for a third in six months time?


----------



## lane (30 Apr 2021)

My second jab is booked for Tuesday in Derby Velodrome. However just seen a headline in the local paper that 3,000 appointments are being canceled for next Tuesday at the Velodrome due to vaccine shortage. We will see. Not heard anything yet but i guess it takes a while to contact 3,000 people.


----------



## vickster (1 May 2021)

lane said:


> My second jab is booked for Tuesday in Derby Velodrome. However just seen a headline in the local paper that 3,000 appointments are being canceled for next Tuesday at the Velodrome due to vaccine shortage. We will see. Not heard anything yet but i guess it takes a while to contact 3,000 people.


Did you book it online? Is there a mechanism to check through the website?
...apparently so, there’s a manage my appointment function
https://www.nhs.uk/book-a-coronavirus-vaccination/do-you-have-an-nhs-number


----------



## C R (1 May 2021)

Mrs CR got her first moderna dose this morning.


----------



## lane (1 May 2021)

vickster said:


> Did you book it online? Is there a mechanism to check through the website?
> ...apparently so, there’s a manage my appointment function
> https://www.nhs.uk/book-a-coronavirus-vaccination/do-you-have-an-nhs-number



Thanks I had a look at that but it just said I am not eligible to book for a second dose! I am not really very worried I will wait and see if it is cancelled - it said in the paper that anyone canceled would get re booked Saturday the 8th so no big deal.


----------



## vickster (1 May 2021)

lane said:


> The Doctors booked it for me. I can't look at the appointment on that system. I will wait and see no big deal.


Ah...I did ask if you’d booked online (I can’t see any details around my second either as the first was organised through a vaccination centre (GP) not online


----------



## Craig the cyclist (2 May 2021)

Second jab yesterday. 

I was told three times that I was getting AZ, before the needle got stuck in me, including being offered a leaflet tucked inside the SPC for the medicine I was getting explaining the changes that have been made recently, and being asked for my card with the batch details of the medicine stuck on to it, under the label which clearly stated AZ from the time before. The team checked that. 

Also on the computer were my details which had the dose on from before. I know it happens, trust me I know, but getting the wrong dose in a MV centre is not easy without some serious lying going on. It may be more likely in an LVS or a pharmacy, but the big centres have the checks in place. 

The smaller and less well resourced the site, the easier it is for a mistake to happen, so all those calling for nurses going round on bike jabbing anyone and everyone wherever they can be found, be careful what it is exactly you are wishing for. I can already hear the clamour for peoples heads if that roll out happens and the opposition say 'how could this have been allowed to happen?'


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 May 2021)

I had not seen this so share it (my precis).
More than 700,000 AstraZeneca doses 'secretly' flown to Australia from Britain
8 Apr 2021 (_The Sydney Morning Herald_)
Australia’s vaccine rollout was helped by 717,000 AZ doses manufactured in the UK rather than from factories in Europe as widely inferred. The need to source jabs from the UK underscores the difficulties Australia and AZ have faced in extracting supply from the EU under the bloc’s tough export controls. Not a single AZ dose has been exported to Australia from Europe (31 Mar). The first 300,000 UK-made doses landed at Sydney on 28 Feb. Another batch from UK arrived in March, after Italy and the European Union blocked the export of 250,000 doses.

UK has sent vaccines to its overseas territories such as Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands. Who knows which other countries, besides Australia, have received AZ vaccines made in British factories? The UK has domestic production capacity, but its early programme was reliant on vaccine imports from Europe. The UK also received 5M AZ doses from SII Puna, India in March.

Australia had received (Q1) more than one million doses of Pfizer vaccines from the EU. AZ had told Australia it could only provide 1.2M doses in Q1 instead of the expected 3.8M. However only 717,000 doses – the ones from the UK – had arrived (@31 Mar). AZ is producing the vaccine at no-profit for the duration of the pandemic.

More than 50 million AZ doses will be made 'domestically' in Melbourne ( CSL-Behring Australia and Seqirus) under licence from AZ in 2021 however only 1.3M of the forecast 2M doses were released by 31 March (expected 1M a week from April onwards). Most of the early vaccine supply (?1M but reports vary) was sent to Papua New Guinea (another ex-British colony).

Comments:
1) By 1 May Australia had given a first vaccine to about 2M people so this points to CSL production not ramping up as well as they'd hoped. This experience of difficulty reflects that of the plants in Europe and the UK.
2) I am surprised, given the reported capacity of the two AZ plants in UK, that the UK vaccination programme roll-out has been hampered by lack of supply, unless a proportion is being exported (not to the EU).


----------



## rockyroller (4 May 2021)

then there are these morons. went for my regular 6 month dental cleaning. when done I chatted briefly w/ the Hygenist & I said how happy I was to be fully vaccinated, & then the she told me she had no intention of getting vaccinated at which point I changed my appointment to someone she knew has been vaccinated. as I checked out at the reception desk, the other 2 ppl behind the desk, also told me the same thing. I said really? in a Doctor's office? after all we've been thru? then hiding behind a plastic divider & face mask one of them started to rant about how there are so many other ways to die & that even ppl that have been vaccinated will die & her religious faith ... I wished them luck. I will not be going back to that office. I think now I know why my favorite Dentist for the last 30 years had had enough with "the company" he sold his practice to: Mondovi Dental

be forewarned


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 May 2021)

rockyroller said:


> even ppl that have been vaccinated will die


While sympathising with your mini-rant I picked up on the quote above.
Modelling (considered by UK's SAGE fed in by SPI-M) suggests that in UK in the next hopefully suppressed wave# (wavelet ) of those who tragically succumb (having had a positive test within 28 days) there will be more who have received both doses of vaccine (+7 days before positive test) than deaths of people who have not been vaccinated. This is based on a function of the IFR for the older (fully vaccinated) cohort versus a much younger (no underlying conditions) cohort (eg under 30s) and the protection from disease afforded by the various vaccines (90% protected = 10% not protected). What's the take-away? People need to manage the (albeit low and decreasing in UK) risk to themselves and consider, for summer 2021 at this stage, whether there are situations/environments and social behaviours they could choose to eschew without much sacrifice.
#BBC, 30 Apr: Prof Van-Tam said while vaccines could reduce a third wave of coronavirus, it was "inconceivable" that there will not be further bumps in the road. "The modelling consensus is clear, we will have what's called a third wave," he said, but he added he was hopeful it "might just be a third upsurge and much less significant" due to the vaccine rollout.


----------



## rockyroller (4 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> and social behaviours they could choose to eschew without much sacrifice.


thanks. I was so stunned to hear this from 3 ppl in a *Doctor's* office. I find it incredibly selfish of these ppl. don't they wear seat belts? stop at traffic stops? how can they care so little about the ppl they live with, work with & maybe more importantly, the patients they serve? come on ppl, suck it up & take one for the team! if ever the world needed cooperation, it is now!


----------



## midlife (4 May 2021)

rockyroller said:


> thanks. I was so stunned to hear this from 3 ppl in a *Doctor's* office. I find it incredibly selfish of these ppl. don't they wear seat belts? stop at traffic stops? how can they care so little about the ppl they live with, work with & maybe more importantly, the patients they serve? come on ppl, suck it up & take one for the team! if ever the world needed cooperation, it is now!



Every doctor, dentist, nurse and dental hygienist I work with has been vaccinated. Is it free over there?


----------



## rockyroller (4 May 2021)

midlife said:


> Every doctor, dentist, nurse and dental hygienist I work with has been vaccinated. Is it free over there?


yes 100%


----------



## midlife (4 May 2021)

rockyroller said:


> yes 100%



They can't use the excuse that it's too expensive / can't afford it then.


----------



## lane (4 May 2021)

Hadn't heard anything about my vaccine being cancelled so went at the appointed time. Told they have no Pfizer go back on Saturday.


----------



## lane (4 May 2021)

https://www.itv.com/news/central/20...ments-cancelled-in-derby-due-to-supply-issues

Looks as though I did the right thing - says if you haven't been told your appointment has been cancelled keep it. It also says all those who have their appointment cancelled will be contacted which is clearly not the case. It didn't look like I was the only one being turned away. 

Still in the scheme of things I don't think i have anything to complain about.


----------



## Jenkins (4 May 2021)

Got the text message to book up for the 2nd jab this afternoon - both it and the booking system specifically mentioned the version to be given (Pfizer in my case) whereas the first booking didn't. Making sure the recipient checks what they received the first time matches what they're getting this time?

Booked for next Monday morning.


----------



## Johnno260 (4 May 2021)

I got a call from the GP saying was I interested if a local vaccination center had spare jabs, so said yes, got my 1st shot on Saturday night.


----------



## lane (5 May 2021)

mjr said:


> Careful! The usual suspects will start complaining about your "increasingly desperate attempts to criticise the programme" if you keep reporting current real experiences!
> 
> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/who-can-get-the-vaccine/ now open to 40+. Bit surprised no one posted that yet.



Not really. I suspect what has happened is that because mine was booked via the Doctor there wasn't a process to cancel it. My second dose has been delayed by three days which isn't a major concern for me. To have had both doses by early May is amazing and much better than I anticipated at one time.


----------



## classic33 (5 May 2021)

mjr said:


> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/who-can-get-the-vaccine/ now open to 40+. Bit surprised no one posted that yet.


They did, in the thread for it.


dodgy said:


> 40+ now able to book a jab, unless it's already been said here, apologies if so.
> https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-vaccine



Booster jabs being planned for the end of year.


----------



## mjr (5 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> They did, in the thread for it.
> 
> 
> Booster jabs being planned for the end of year.


Oh great, a duplicate thread in cafe.

Any details on who will be boosted? Everyone?


----------



## shep (5 May 2021)

mjr said:


> Careful! The usual suspects will start complaining about your "increasingly desperate attempts to criticise the programme" if you keep reporting current real experiences.



Unlike when someone says they haven't experienced something and are accused of either 'I'm alright Jack ' or 'It must be ok then because so and so hasn't had that problem'.

Unbelievable!


----------



## classic33 (5 May 2021)

mjr said:


> Oh great, a duplicate thread in cafe.
> 
> Any details on who will be boosted? Everyone?


It's not a duplicate thread, it's purpose was to let people know when the age group changed. Blue Hills started an earlier one.

I'd say those who've had their first two, otherwise it wouldn't be a booster jab. Mentioned earlier about people being notified of a third jab, at the end of October.


----------



## vickster (5 May 2021)

Boosters appear to be under discussion for 50+ at this point


----------



## rockyroller (5 May 2021)

our local news is reporting that so few ppl are requesting the vaccine that ppl can now go in to a CVS or Walgreens w/o an appointment & get a jab


----------



## steve292 (5 May 2021)

rockyroller said:


> our local news is reporting that so few ppl are requesting the vaccine that ppl can now go in to a CVS or Walgreens w/o an appointment & get a jab


Is that because of reluctance to have it ,or have so many been vacc'ed that they are just mopping up the remnants?


----------



## rockyroller (5 May 2021)

steve292 said:


> Is that because of reluctance to have it ,or have so many been vacc'ed that they are just mopping up the remnants?


lot's of morons opting not to get the jab


----------



## Johnno260 (5 May 2021)

rockyroller said:


> lot's of morons opting not to get the jab



I know plenty of those, and they're being very vocal about it.

Family members have been basically disowned by others for taking the vaccine, the same people then cry about this situation being divisive! like I said in another thread the words from a family member to my mother after being jabbed " You have chosen your side" 

So yea this situation has meant I cut some pretty toxic and selfish idiots from my life.


----------



## Profpointy (5 May 2021)

mjr said:


> So the AZ vaccine is made by its legal team?


 
The legal team need to talk to and get reports done by the guys doing the actual work. Thus the guys who would normally do the actual work are writing reports, trawling through old emails about who said what when, and why did they say x rather than y. All this is tiring and very stressful, and quite obviously reduces the time and brains available to produce more vaccine.

There's a Dilbert cartoon where "management" demands status reports every half hour until the project is back on track.


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 May 2021)

Public Health England’s Porton Down virus and vaccine testing facilities are getting a £29.3M boost to "further future-proof the country [aka mitigate the risks] from the threat of new variants," Health Secretary Matt Hancock said.

Dr Jenny Harries CE UKHSA said: "A new variant that can escape the current vaccines is the greatest risk of a third wave. This new investment will help us stay one step ahead of the virus by doubling our capacity to test vaccine effectiveness against emerging variants."

Vaccines minister Nadhim Zahawi again confirmed today that plans are being formed for autumn booster jabs for some people, possibly over-50s. "We want [GPs] to be able, if they need to, from September onwards to boost those that are most vulnerable."


----------



## dodgy (5 May 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> I know plenty of those, and they're being very vocal about it.
> 
> Family members have been basically disowned by others for taking the vaccine, the same people then cry about this situation being divisive! like I said in another thread the words from a family member to my mother after being jabbed " You have chosen your side"
> 
> So yea this situation has meant I cut some pretty toxic and selfish idiots from my life.



Such a bloody shame. I fear that over the next few years we'll hear lots of stories of people losing family members who refused to be vaccinated out of some conspiracy horsecack or misinformation.


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 May 2021)

'High Protection' From 2 Doses of Pfizer Vaccine 
Two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine provided more than 95% protection against infection, hospitalisation, severe illness, and death, according to a study in _The Lancet._ based on Israel's experience up to 3 April.
Israel was the first country to report national data on the Pfizer vaccine based on its nationwide vaccination campaign. Adjusted estimates of vaccine effectiveness at 7 days or longer after the second dose were:

95·3% against SARS-CoV-2 infection
91·5% against asymptomatic infection
97·0% against symptomatic COVID-19
97·2% against COVID-19-related hospitalisation
97·5% against severe or critical COVID-19-related hospitalisation
96·7% against COVID-19-related death
Vaccine effectiveness was seen across all age groups, and against the B.1.1.7 variant that was predominant at the time of the investigation.
Comment: The figures above seem very much in line with the corresponding results of the Phase 3 RCT trial for this vaccine. The 91% figure might suggest an estimate of the percentage effectiveness against transmission (on the basis that those without asymptomatic infection ab initio cannot transmit a virus with which they aren't infected). This figure is much higher than the assumptions in the SPI-M papers taken by SAGE, and would mean that:
1) The third wave peak is likely to be much lower than feared.
2) UK herd immunity is a realistic and achievable goal.
Both the above depend on no VoC emerging with either a higher transmissibility rate or vaccine evasion, or both.


----------



## KnittyNorah (7 May 2021)

Did anyone see that nutcase bunch in Nottingham who 'protested' a bus set up as a mobile vaccination centre, saying the vaccine would turn you _communist _if you had it? LOL! Honestly where do they get their ideas from?


----------



## lane (7 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> 'High Protection' From 2 Doses of Pfizer Vaccine
> Two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine provided more than 95% protection against infection, hospitalisation, severe illness, and death, according to a study in _The Lancet._ based on Israel's experience up to 3 April.
> Israel was the first country to report national data on the Pfizer vaccine based on its nationwide vaccination campaign. Adjusted estimates of vaccine effectiveness at 7 days or longer after the second dose were:
> 
> ...



All good news. However as shortly it will be one of the Indian variants that will form the majority of infection in the UK it will be good to know how it works against that.


----------



## Poacher (7 May 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> Did anyone see that nutcase bunch in Nottingham who 'protested' a bus set up as a mobile vaccination centre, saying the vaccine would turn you _communist _if you had it? LOL! Honestly where do they get their ideas from?


AFAIK that was just one nutcase; the rest of the bunch were the usual embryo extract feckwits.


----------



## mjr (7 May 2021)

The NHS vaccination booking site leaks people's vaccination status: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...jab-booking-site-leaks-peoples-vaccine-status

As I wrote before, the vaccination centres are running fine but the booking site is poo.


----------



## dodgy (7 May 2021)

mjr said:


> The NHS vaccination booking site leaks people's vaccination status: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...jab-booking-site-leaks-peoples-vaccine-status
> 
> As I wrote before, the vaccination centres are running fine but the booking site is poo.



Sounds like a SQL injection flaw, not seen the full write up on it. Anyway, SQLi is extremely (unfortunately) common and is not something that backs up your assertions on the booking site. I know you've made your thoughts on the matter clear and you spend most days trying to find information that backs it up.
It really is hard to correct a mistake one has made a long time making.

Edit: Probably not SQIi, just poor authentication, but the result is you can discover if someone you might know, has been vaccinated. That same person would probably tell you, I'm even happy to 'disclose' that I have had the vaccine, not bothered in the slightest - but the flaw should still be fixed.


----------



## mjr (7 May 2021)

dodgy said:


> I know [...] you spend most days trying to find information that backs it up.


You don't "know" that because it is not true. It is simply a lie you have written. This stuff just keeps popping up in my news feeds.

And it is not poor authentication. It is no authentication. Names and birth dates are not generally secrets so cannot be used to authenticate someone. While there is good reason to allow unauthenticated booking for vaccination, the server really should not release any data back to the user. While we may not care, we know there will be vaccinated people working or living among refuseniks and unvaccinatable people among zealots.


----------



## dodgy (7 May 2021)

If it's fixable, it will be fixed, but not at the cost of slowing the vaccine rollout. That's a pragmatic call imo.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (7 May 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> Did anyone see that nutcase bunch in Nottingham who 'protested' a bus set up as a mobile vaccination centre, saying the vaccine would turn you _communist _if you had it? LOL! Honestly where do they get their ideas from?



Yeah, and that is not all they said. Personally I would hang them from the gate and use their rotting corpses as a deterrent to others.


----------



## PK99 (7 May 2021)

rockyroller said:


> lot's of morons opting not to get the jab



Our local homeopath anti vaxxer seems to subscribe to the view that if you have the vaccine then over the next few weeks you are shedding virus, posts on her FB suggest avoiding anyone who has been jabbed to avoid getting the virus from them.

Morons!


----------



## C R (7 May 2021)

dodgy said:


> Edit: Probably not SQIi, just poor authentication, but the result is you can discover if someone you might know, has been vaccinated. That same person would probably tell you, I'm even happy to 'disclose' that I have had the vaccine, not bothered in the slightest - but the flaw should still be fixed.


No little Bobby Tables involved?


----------



## KnittyNorah (7 May 2021)

PK99 said:


> Our local homeopath anti vaxxer seems to subscribe to the view that if you have the vaccine then over the next few weeks you are shedding virus, posts on her FB suggest avoiding anyone who has been jabbed to avoid getting the virus from them.
> 
> Morons!


Perhaps they're a time-traveller and think that C-19 vaccines work on the same principle as the variolation of the 17thC and before?


----------



## Johnno260 (7 May 2021)

PK99 said:


> Our local homeopath anti vaxxer seems to subscribe to the view that if you have the vaccine then over the next few weeks you are shedding virus, posts on her FB suggest avoiding anyone who has been jabbed to avoid getting the virus from them.
> 
> Morons!



Unfortunately people like this are vocal and get followers repeating this nonsense, people like this I put in the same bracket as flat earthers, total idiots but more dangerous in the case of vaccines.


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 May 2021)

lane said:


> All good news [Pfizer vaccine effectiveness data from Israel]. However as shortly it will be one of the Indian variants that will form the majority of infection in the UK it will be good to know how it works against that.


It might be useful, but there will be no data so that'll remain an unrequited aspiration. In any case, I think the assertion that "one of the Indian variants will form the majority of infection in the UK" is wide of the mark, even if T&T foci (did I read London, Bradford and somewhere?) fail to bear down on it.
Reports yesterday suggested about 500 cases all up. Compare that with the UK-wide daily case reports currently at 2000pd, nearly all B.1.1.7. Each of those cases will remain an infection for say 20 days (ie will return a positive PCR test result) so that suggests 40,000 (still) tested infected on any day, cf 500 of the B.1.617 variant.


----------



## lane (7 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> It might be useful, but there will be no data so that'll remain an unrequited aspiration. In any case, I think the assertion that "one of the Indian variants will form the majority of infection in the UK" is wide of the mark, even if T&T foci (did I read London, Bradford and somewhere?) fail to bear down on it.
> Reports yesterday suggested about 500 cases all up. Compare that with the UK-wide daily case reports currently at 2000pd, nearly all B.1.1.7. Each of those cases will remain an infection for say 20 days (ie will return a positive PCR test result) so that suggests 40,000 (still) tested infected on any day, cf 500 of the B.1.617 variant.



Reported yesterday that at the current doubling rate one of the Indian variants will shortly (month or so) form the majority of infection in London.


----------



## lane (7 May 2021)

I can't find an exact source to what i have posted above. However it stands to reason if overall cases are reducing but the Indian mutation is doubling in the UK it will become the majority infection in the UK. It may be able to escape the vaccine to a greater extend. My view is while we are happily unlocking and patting ourselves on the back for the vaccine rollout and unlocking travel - this is going to come back and bite us in quite a bad way.

“That we have a new variant that is increasing so rapidly, even during a period when we are still in a pretty strict lockdown and have more than 50% of the UK population with at least one immunisation, is very depressing and suggests that as we come out of lockdown this variant could accelerate even more rapidly,” he said. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ovid-variant-in-uk-is-worrying-say-scientists

"The Indian coronavirus variant which has led to a surge of cases on the sub-continent is now rising faster in the UK than any other variant leading scientists to question whether the Government taking enough action to stop its spread.

Latest figures show the variant is doubling in number every week – there are now 182 cases of B1617 in the UK, according analysis of real-time data by the Covid-19 Genomics UK Consortium with the vast majority of them emerging in the last four weeks. Last week it was reported there were 77 cases. The number of UK confirmed cases is 103, Health Secretary Matt Hancock told the House of Commons on Monday."

https://inews.co.uk/news/health/indian-variant-cases-new-covid-strain-uk-figures-latest-news-963434

"Infectious disease experts said the Indian variant is doubling in size under much tighter restrictions and with far more people vaccinated than when the Kent variant emerged last October. It remains the dominant strain in the UK with 37,634 new cases over the last 28 days, according to latest figures."

“But by the time we do, B1617 is likely to be quite widespread and it might be too late to contain it,” she said. “At current rate of growth, we could be seeing 1,000 B1617 cases a week in 4-5 weeks. Still not massive but very hard to contain without more restrictions. It could be dominant by the end of June – 10-12 weeks away. It depends on what is driving its growth."


----------



## mjr (7 May 2021)

lane said:


> “That we have a new variant that is increasing so rapidly, even during a period when we are still in a pretty strict lockdown and have more than 50% of the UK population with at least one immunisation, is very depressing and suggests that as we come out of lockdown this variant could accelerate even more rapidly,” he said.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ovid-variant-in-uk-is-worrying-say-scientists


England hasn't been in lockdown for a month and has never been in a "pretty strict" one. Paul Hunter has usually seemed a pretty good pundit over the last few months, so I wonder if het Grauniad has misquoted him or recycled an old quote there.

Not saying you're wrong (time will tell) but I would be suspicious of that particular report.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (7 May 2021)

PK99 said:


> Our local homeopath anti vaxxer seems to subscribe to the view that if you have the vaccine then over the next few weeks you are shedding virus, posts on her FB suggest avoiding anyone who has been jabbed to avoid getting the virus from them.
> 
> Morons!



Homeopath pro-vaxxers would be much more useful. You could vaccinate the entire country with just a handful of doses, diluted with plenty of water.


----------



## pawl (7 May 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> Did anyone see that nutcase bunch in Nottingham who 'protested' a bus set up as a mobile vaccination centre, saying the vaccine would turn you _communist _if you had it? LOL! Honestly where do they get their ideas from?




was that the prat with green hair There actions were disgusting trying to prevent people to getting there jabs


----------



## lane (7 May 2021)

mjr said:


> England hasn't been in lockdown for a month and has never been in a "pretty strict" one. Paul Hunter has usually seemed a pretty good pundit over the last few months, so I wonder if het Grauniad has misquoted him or recycled an old quote there.
> 
> Not saying you're wrong (time will tell) but I would be suspicious of that particular report.



We have had fairly or very strict restrictions for the past month. If the variant is doubling in those conditions it is reasonable to assume it could double even faster when restrictions are lifted. Don't really know what your definition of a really strict one is. I have barely been able to meet up with people to cycle with for the past twelve months and even now I am limited to 6 and have to stay outdoors. Perhaps you have forgotten how things used to be. Our liberties are still very much curtailed.


----------



## mjr (7 May 2021)

lane said:


> We have had fairly or very strict restrictions for the past month. If the variant is doubling in those conditions it is reasonable to assume it could double even faster when restrictions are lifted.


The restrictions are pretty weak and almost completely unenforced. About the only serious cramp is restaurant/cafe/bar interiors are closed except for toilets and some places have chosen not to reopen until mid-May or later. Pretty much all shops are open again and only an honour system requires mask-wearing. There are small farking parties happening in parks and woodlands, and I suspect a fair few houses too. It is no way a lockdown. From the street, it's very difficult to differentiate it from normality.



> Don't really know what your definition of a really strict one is.


Part of a strict lockdown would be a requirement to stay within a set distance of home, or to swear a declaration to leave your home, for example. The selfish snowflakes in this country would melt with anger if it ever happens!



> I have barely been able to meet up with people to cycle with for the past twelve months and even now I am limited to 6 and have to stay outdoors.


There were only about 4½ months when we couldn't meet up at all to cycle IIRC, but I'm sorry if you didn't manage it the rest of the time. That does not mean it was restricted.

The limits on group size and lack of indoor hospitality have been challenging but do-able.



> Perhaps you have forgotten how things used to be. Our liberties are still very much curtailed.


I've not forgotten and I don't disagree that our liberties are still limited, but we have not been in anything that can reasonably be called a lockdown for more than a month now!


----------



## lane (7 May 2021)

The pubs here closed in March 2020 and opened early July. They closed again in November 2020 and did not open again until April 2021. During that over 1 year period the pubs were open for between 4 and 5 months. I have been in two large shops today and a garden centre yesterday and mask wearing was 100%. 

I don't really want to get involved in arguing semantics with you - because whatever you want to call things the substance of the argument still stands.


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 May 2021)

lane said:


> However it stands to reason if overall cases are reducing but the Indian mutation is doubling in the UK it will become the majority infection in the UK. It may be able to escape the vaccine to a greater extend. My view is while we are happily unlocking and patting ourselves on the back for the vaccine rollout and unlocking travel - this is going to come back and bite us in quite a bad way.


Well done for finding those reports. I note their dates (Guardian 29 Apr and iNews 19 Apr). I can't help guessing that the increase in numbers over those weeks was in good part caused by UK residents returning from visits to India (reason??) and testing positive after flying in, including the surge of arrivals in the 4 days before the air link went 'red' and enforced hotel quarantine was imposed. So we might expect the rate of increase not to be maintained though community transmission. As a VUI 'outbreaks' are not yet subject to surge testing aiui. (Edit: see posts below)
I sincerely hope every individual flying in self-quarantined 'at home' for ten days. @mjr has pointed out the reasons why people don't self-isolate, but presumably if you can afford a return air ticket to India, you can afford to self-isolate on return if required.


----------



## lane (7 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Well done for finding those reports. I note their dates (Guardian 29 Apr and iNews 19 Apr). I can't help guessing that the increase in numbers over those weeks was in good part caused by UK residents returning from visits to India (reason??) and testing positive after flying in, including the surge of arrivals in the 4 days before the air link went 'red' and enforced hotel quarantine was imposed. So we might expect the rate of increase not to be maintained though community transmission. As a VUI 'outbreaks' are not yet subject to surge testing aiui.
> I sincerely hope every individual flying in self-quarantined 'at home' for ten days. @mjr has pointed out the reasons why people don't self-isolate, but presumably if you can afford a return air ticket to India, you can afford to self-isolate on return if required.



It doesn't seem to be an improving situation we now have clusters in parts of England.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/07/indian-covid-variant-is-variant-of-concern-says-public-health-england


----------



## Ajax Bay (7 May 2021)

Designation as a VoC will allow surge testing resources to be deployed.
Edit: "_Public Health England (PHE) _have announced that, following a rise in cases in the UK and evidence of community transmission, they have reclassified VUI-21APR-02 (B.1.617.2, classified as a _Variant Under Investigation (VUI)_ on 28 April) as a _Variant of Concern (VOC)_, now known as VOC-21APR-02."
Medscape comment: "Interestingly this is not the so-called “double mutant” (B.1.617.1) although it does have several spike mutations that are concerning and could result in increased transmissibility (specifically L452R and P681R).
“The absolute numbers of cases in the UK remain small but the growth rate is quite high, although at this stage it is hard to say whether this is related to specific biological features of the variant. On the background of declining cases of B.1.1.7 in the UK the growth rate looks alarming when measured as a proportion of cases, however even a variant less or equally transmissible virus to B.1.1.7 could show this effect when there are large numbers of imports in a short period." [Comment: see my earlier post about how much of the increase in numbers is community transmitted versus 'imported'.]


----------



## lane (7 May 2021)

Better late than never


----------



## Poacher (8 May 2021)

Poacher said:


> Having followed the instructions in my invitation letter to the, er, letter, the nearest site offered was over 13 miles away as the crow flies, and a damp sight further by road. Others varied from 16 to more than 50 miles away. What was the official guidance about staying local?
> I know for a fact that there is a site within easy walking distance, and several more in Nottingham.
> The best advice I can give to anyone else who encounters this problem is to ignore the NHS letter and go on to the swiftqueue website instead. This showed loads of available appointments locally.


Bad form to reply to my own post, but due to unforeseen circumstances, viz. our car being caput, I couldn't easily attend the appointment for my second dose at the Newark showground. Mrs. Poacher reacted very negatively to my suggestion that I could take the train to Newark with my beloved Brommie and ride to the Newark showground site, citing the insanity of drivers on the A46 etc. What? It was fine fifty years ago!
I cancelled it, thinking I could use Swiftqueue to arrange a slot at our local Richard Herrod site. Major error! Apparently someone in the upper echelons has objected big time to Swiftqueue actually working and offering appointments locally, and put a stop to it.
The Swiftqueue site can no longer be used, despite it working fine previously.
The official site still had nowhere closer than >13 miles away, with options > 50 miles away. No change there, then. I know for an absolute fact that local sites, previously bookable via Swiftqueue, are still vaccinating people. Mrs. Poacher is an absolute master of the new-fangled talking-bone, and succeeded where I had failed miserably, managing to get me in for a 14:30 slot within walking distance (took me just over 20 mins despite a very painful left big toe - maybe I'll post pics on an appropriate thread; for those of a strong disposition; I dropped a 30+ Kg door on it from a height of ~25 cm. given the choice, I wouldn't repeat the experiment.) I'm now fully vaccinated, no thanks to official channels.
Richard Herrod is now mainly using Pfizer - about 16 tables compared to one for AZ. I had to wait about 10 mins for AZ doses to be found!

Tl;dr Swiftqueue worked well and was discontinued; the official NHS site is a total crock of crap, and someone in a very well-paid position needs to be sacked, denied any possible gongs, and really should serve some time at Her Maj's pleasure.


----------



## cookiemonster (8 May 2021)

Just had my second BionTech jab. All good so far.


----------



## Ajax Bay (8 May 2021)

NEMJ (5 May):
Report from Qatar:
The Pfizer vaccine was effective against infection and disease in the population of Qatar, despite the B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variants being predominant within the country; however, vaccine effectiveness against the B.1.351 variant was approximately 20 percentage points lower than the efficacy (>90%) reported in the Phase 3 RCT.
The estimated effectiveness (at > or = 14 days after second dose) of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine against any documented infection with the B.1.1.7 variant was 89.5%. The effectiveness against any documented infection with the B.1.351 variant was 75.0%. Vaccine effectiveness was 97.5% against severe, critical, or fatal disease due to infection with any SARS-CoV-2 (with either variant).


----------



## lane (8 May 2021)

Second Pfizer today after having a slight delay due to vaccine shortage on Tuesday.


----------



## cookiemonster (9 May 2021)

Well, over 24 hours since my second BioNtech jab and, apart from sleeping like a log last night, not a single side effect.

Feel like I've been conned.


----------



## byegad (9 May 2021)

Poacher said:


> Bad form to reply to my own post, but due to unforeseen circumstances, viz. our car being caput, I couldn't easily attend the appointment for my second dose at the Newark showground. Mrs. Poacher reacted very negatively to my suggestion that I could take the train to Newark with my beloved Brommie and ride to the Newark showground site, citing the insanity of drivers on the A46 etc. What? It was fine fifty years ago!
> I cancelled it, thinking I could use Swiftqueue to arrange a slot at our local Richard Herrod site. Major error! Apparently someone in the upper echelons has objected big time to Swiftqueue actually working and offering appointments locally, and put a stop to it.
> The Swiftqueue site can no longer be used, despite it working fine previously.
> The official site still had nowhere closer than >13 miles away, with options > 50 miles away. No change there, then. I know for an absolute fact that local sites, previously bookable via Swiftqueue, are still vaccinating people. Mrs. Poacher is an absolute master of the new-fangled talking-bone, and succeeded where I had failed miserably, managing to get me in for a 14:30 slot within walking distance (took me just over 20 mins despite a very painful left big toe - maybe I'll post pics on an appropriate thread; for those of a strong disposition; I dropped a 30+ Kg door on it from a height of ~25 cm. given the choice, I wouldn't repeat the experiment.) I'm now fully vaccinated, no thanks to official channels.
> ...


Just to politely point out that the 'NHS' site isn't actually run by the NHS, just for them by another body*.

*And we can all guess which school, university and posh boy's club** the owners attended/joined.

**It involves pigs!


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 May 2021)

byegad said:


> 'NHS' [vaccination national booking service] site isn't actually run by the NHS, just for them by another body*


I should hope not. The NHS should not be diverted into trying to run/deliver something it's not set up for.
Edit: Or are you just trying to say "don't blame the NHS for the minor weaknesses in its vaccine booking system".


----------



## Craig the cyclist (9 May 2021)

byegad said:


> Just to politely point out that the 'NHS' site isn't actually run by the NHS, just for them by another body*.
> 
> *And we can all guess which school, university and posh boy's club** the owners attended/joined.
> 
> ***It involves pigs!*



Porky's?


----------



## classic33 (9 May 2021)

Local vaccination figures, end of last month.


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 May 2021)

Might you comment on the reds @classic33 , given your local knowledge?
Has Skircoat Green (@ 56%) got a super-capable surgery serving it?
The "47% of total population" is well below the UK average of 51% (@ 30 Apr - same as your table).


----------



## vickster (9 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Might you comment on the reds @classic33 , given your local knowledge?
> Has Skircoat Green (@ 56%) got a super-capable surgery serving it?
> The "47% of total population" is well below the UK average of 51% (@ 30 Apr - same as your table).


Young population area?


----------



## classic33 (9 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Might you comment on the reds @classic33 , given your local knowledge?
> Has Skircoat Green (@ 56%) got a super-capable surgery serving it?
> The "47% of total population" is well below the UK average of 51% (@ 30 Apr - same as your table).


It's a council issued piece. It's not been done by local wards(There's only 21) either. Skircoat Green is a smaller area, that is home to the local hospital, which encroaches on three wards.

Cynical me has noted that the best performing areas are those where the local councillors live. 
Local figures have been given this way since they started. Making it hard to check any area.


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> Cynical me has noted that the best performing areas are those where the local councillors live.


Perhaps said councillors have been out and about canvassing and encouraging their neighbours to get a jab.


----------



## classic33 (9 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Perhaps said councillors have been out and about canvassing and encouraging their neighbours to get a jab.



Keeping it by electoral wards would make the figures easier understand. They are after all defined on a map, that can be checked, just as the first half of a postcode can.

I'm just cynical about the better performing "areas".


----------



## rockyroller (10 May 2021)

just heard that a local high school (grades 9-12 US) will be giving out the vaccine during school hours to anyone 16 & older


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> Keeping it by electoral wards would make the figures easier understand. They are after all defined on a map, that can be checked, just as the first half of a postcode can.


In the spirit of 'chat', why have electoral wards not been made the same as MSOAs (NHS)? It's a bit the same as the Ian (I'm not registered with a doctor) bloke saying that he's got a self assessment tax return number: why can't he use it to book a vaccine (as an NHS number).


----------



## Beebo (10 May 2021)

Any one else missed the 12 week deadline?
My first jab was on 22nd Feb. 
My GP told me to wait to be called for my second jab. No phone call was received so I called them last week, they told me to wait. I called them again today and they have told me to wait again. They admitted that I will not get an appointment within the 12 weeks deadline.


----------



## C R (10 May 2021)

Beebo said:


> Any one else missed the 12 week deadline?
> My first jab was on 22nd Feb.
> My GP told me to wait to be called for my second jab. No phone call was received so I called them last week, they told me to wait. I called them again today and they have told me to wait again. They admitted that I will not get an appointment within the 12 weeks deadline.


Same situation here, had first dose on the 27th of February, no call yet about the second dose.


----------



## Chromatic (10 May 2021)

Beebo said:


> Any one else missed the 12 week deadline?
> My first jab was on 22nd Feb.
> My GP told me to wait to be called for my second jab. No phone call was received so I called them last week, they told me to wait. I called them again today and they have told me to wait again. They admitted that I will not get an appointment within the 12 weeks deadline.




My first was Feb 24th, I got a text Wednesday 5th May inviting me to book my second, having it on 12th.


----------



## lane (10 May 2021)

I see the 7 day average of Covid cases has risen slightly for the first time in ages. We are starting to get cases at my daughter's school for the first time in a while. The Borough I live in has been elevated to the highest Covid cases in the country following 100+ pupils and teachers testing positive in just one school. We really can't get those vaccines out quick enough.


----------



## Venod (10 May 2021)

Beebo said:


> Any one else missed the 12 week deadline?



The wife and I had the first jab 12th Feb, she got a text for the second, I didn't hear anything so after 3 days I rang the surgery and managed to arrange them both for last Friday, 12 weeks to the day.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 May 2021)

lane said:


> I see the 7 day average of Covid cases has risen slightly for the first time in ages. We are starting to get cases at my daughter's school for the first time in a while. The Borough I live in has been elevated to the highest Covid cases in the country following 100+ pupils and teachers testing positive in just one school. We really can't get those vaccines out quick enough.



The Pfizer vaccine has been approved for use in 12 year olds and above in the US.

We should do the same here and get them immunised.


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 May 2021)

All the Pfizer supply is going to second jabs and the under 40s. Do you think the 12-18 year olds should receive jabs first? The story @lane shared does sound like the many mitigations imposed by that school's leadership and/or the willingness of parents to send their teenagers to school whatever have somehow failed. Easy for me to say this from afar.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Do you think the 12-18 year olds should receive jabs first?



Ah no, just arguing that they should be included as soon as supply allows. 

I don't have any view on priority - I think there are various arguments on that.


----------



## lane (10 May 2021)

I think it might be a bit unfair to the school and the staff and students. There were a number of positive flow tests reported by both students and staff over - I think - the bank holiday weekend. So at least the flow tests were being undertaken and they presumably gave an early warning and remedial action was taken otherwise it would have been worse. We should not forget that they might be dealing with the Kent variant which is a lot more contagious. Flow tests and marks reduce the chances of outbreaks but don't eliminate them.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (10 May 2021)

lane said:


> We should not forget that they might be dealing with the Kent variant which is a lot more contagious.



The various recent outbreaks in the NW have been mainly reported as being the Indian variant, which it's increasingly looking is yet more contagious.


----------



## lane (10 May 2021)

All three of us in this house who have been vaccinated had our second vaccine booked at the same time - albeit mine was then delayed three days and the other two have not got to the second appointment date yet.


----------



## lane (10 May 2021)

My son gets his second jab on Friday all being well and Mrs Lane later this month.


----------



## lane (11 May 2021)

Second increase in the number of cases (7 day average) for second day running, and a bigger jump today of 12%. I think the impact of the easing of restrictions is having an impact with more easing to come expect to see continued growth in cases.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (11 May 2021)

lane said:


> Second increase in the number of cases (7 day average) for second day running, and a bigger jump today of 12%. I think the impact of the easing of restrictions is having an impact with more easing to come expect to see continued growth in cases.



Lockdown 3, or the population get a grip and take responsibility?

I am afraid the people have to realise that the easing of restrictions is guidance to a new level of maximum interaction, not an instruction and minimum level of interaction.


----------



## lane (11 May 2021)

So long as the increase in cases doesn't lead to significantly higher hospitalization and death (or a nasty variant) it is not necessarily a problem. It does concern me though, after all we have been through to see cases rising. I do however definitely enjoy the increased freedoms.


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 May 2021)

lane said:


> Second increase in the number of cases (7 day average) for second day running,
> . . . I think the impact of the easing of restrictions is having an impact with more easing to come expect to see continued growth in cases.


I have commented on this in the main Coronavirus thread suggesting this is a data issue, not an 'actual' increase.


----------



## fossyant (12 May 2021)

MrsF now fully jabbed as of this morning. Another 4 weeks for me.


----------



## smokeysmoo (12 May 2021)

I've got jab 2 at 3pm this afternoon, just hope I only have the same side effects as jab 1, none 🙏


----------



## lane (12 May 2021)

Barely got out of bed today and have canceled tomorrow's ride!


----------



## C R (12 May 2021)

Got text from GP today, second dose booked for Sunday 23rd.


----------



## Chislenko (12 May 2021)

Second one done today.

Jab done!


----------



## Buck (12 May 2021)

37 and 38 year olds are eligible from tomorrow.

36 and 35 will just be a couple of days behind this as first dose stocks are coming through in pretty strong volumes now.


----------



## classic33 (12 May 2021)

Buck said:


> Hope you’re feeling better. Advice is second dose has to be administered in a hospital setting due to an adverse reaction so no mass vaccination centre or GPs (that’s if you want to have the second? )
> 
> Take care


No longer appears to be the case.
Nine weeks on and the "invite" for the second has been received. If I turn up for the second, at the same place, it's arrive early for a pre-asessment. Then stay under observation for 30 minutes* before being allowed to leave. Assuming no reaction like the first.

I didn't last 10 minutes before the call for the ambulance was made.

*Four hours in A&E before they were willing to let me go.


----------



## Buck (12 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> No longer appears to be the case.
> Nine weeks on and the "invite" for the second has been received. If I turn up for the second, at the same place, it's arrive early for a pre-asessment. Then stay under observation for 30 minutes* before being allowed to leave. Assuming no reaction like the first.
> 
> I didn't last 10 minutes before the call for the ambulance was made.
> ...



it must be different in Calderdale. In Bradford Airedale and Craven we have to refer into the hospitals for them to administer in the hospital setting. I’m sure you have already questioned this but if they say this is the case, then it may be prudent to evaluate whether the “70%+” protection that one dose offers is sufficient for you and whether the risk of that second dose is outweighed by the increased immunity.

Good luck whatever you decide and if you go ahead with the second dose, I hope you will be OK.


----------



## dodgy (12 May 2021)

Anyone watched ‘jabbed’ on channel 4? Watching it now, very good IMO.


----------



## classic33 (12 May 2021)

Buck said:


> it must be different in Calderdale. In Bradford Airedale and Craven we have to refer into the hospitals for them to administer in the hospital setting. I’m sure you have already questioned this but if they say this is the case, then it may be prudent to evaluate whether the “70%+” protection that one dose offers is sufficient for you and whether the risk of that second dose is outweighed by the increased immunity.
> 
> Good luck whatever you decide and if you go ahead with the second dose, I hope you will be OK.


Mind was made up after the first, there'll be no second.

The only thing I'm not able to get an answer on is how not having any further involvement will affect further medical treatment.

Thanks for the reply through.


----------



## Bazzer (12 May 2021)

Youngest daughter had her second jab yesterday morning and by mid afternoon was complaining of a sore arm. (Pfizer). I pointed out a respirator would be more uncomfortable. The complaining stopped.
Mrs B gets her second next Tuesday and that's this house sorted. 
I think it is another couple of weeks before eldest daughter gets her second.


----------



## Johnno260 (12 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Lockdown 3, or the population get a grip and take responsibility?
> 
> I am afraid the people have to realise that the easing of restrictions is guidance to a new level of maximum interaction, not an instruction and minimum level of interaction.



That’s been my issue all along, you hear the term common sense to be used, well that’s great if it’s a common occurrence these days.

People will ignore guidelines, then complain when something stricter is implemented, while ignoring their actions, and blame everyone and everything else.

I have seen some friends say on Facebook please respect my choice that I’m not ready to be hugged come the 17th, and that’s perfect that’s their choice, and others need to respect that choice.

My crack pot tinfoil relatives tried to invite themselves around to see the kids, when I rebuked them I got the classic oh you’re still a sheep then, my reply was this:






Now they said I’m the tinfoil hat wearer for believing what I do as they are right and their opinion means more than any sane persons.

In short entitled numpties will no doubt ruin many people’s hard work over the last few months.


----------



## midlife (12 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> Mind was made up after the first, there'll be no second.
> 
> The only thing I'm not able to get an answer on is how not having any further involvement will affect further medical treatment.
> 
> Thanks for the reply through.



Eldest son with type 1 diabetes had second jab today. Not sure what you mean by affecting further medical treatment?


----------



## classic33 (12 May 2021)

midlife said:


> Eldest son with type 1 diabetes had second jab today. Not sure what you mean by affecting further medical treatment?


Treatment for the epilepsy, cancer and heart.

Will the routine appointments for the last two restart?


----------



## vickster (12 May 2021)

Buck said:


> 37 and 38 year olds are eligible from tomorrow.
> 
> 36 and 35 will just be a couple of days behind this as first dose stocks are coming through in pretty strong volumes now.


The news said 38-39? 
is 37 the case and is it national as a friend who’s 37 is v keen to get jabbed ASAP?


----------



## vickster (12 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> Treatment for the epilepsy, cancer and heart.
> 
> Will the routine appointments for the last two restart?


Have you asked your GP or specialist?


----------



## classic33 (12 May 2021)

vickster said:


> Have you asked your GP or specialist?


It's what I can't get an answer for.


----------



## Buck (13 May 2021)

vickster said:


> The news said 38-39?
> is 37 the case and is it national as a friend who’s 37 is v keen to get jabbed ASAP?



its moving v quickly. As soon as 1 group is announced, the next group is brought on line.
It will very much depend on whether the local area has exhausted the earlier cohorts. 
We have done all 38 and 39 and now at 37. Your friends area should be only a day or so behind.


----------



## IaninSheffield (13 May 2021)

dodgy said:


> Anyone watched ‘jabbed’ on channel 4? Watching it now, very good IMO.


What struck me, and I'm willing to accept it might just have been good editing on the part of the filmmakers, was the ... the humanity of the Task Force key players. That is, in comparison with the weaseliness of their political counterparts.


----------



## shep (13 May 2021)

lane said:


> Second increase in the number of cases (7 day average) for second day running, and a bigger jump today of 12%. I think the impact of the easing of restrictions is having an impact with more easing to come expect to see continued growth in cases.


Does anyone know the figures for actual tests being carried out now though, surely if there are more tests then sense would dictate more positive results?

It seems anyone can get the DIY tests twice a week now whereas not that long ago only certain priority groups could have this.

The next phase will be the big test, pubs opening inside.


----------



## C R (13 May 2021)

shep said:


> Does anyone know the figures for actual tests being carried out now though, surely if there are more tests then sense would dictate more positive results?
> 
> It seems anyone can get the DIY tests twice a week now whereas not that long ago only certain priority groups could have this.
> 
> The next phase will be the big test, pubs opening inside.


The LFT for home use have been in place since schools went back in March, so the uptick in the last couple of days would be unrelated to that. Hopefully it's a statistical fluke, let's see what happens in the next few days, and if the uptick translates into more hospital admissions.


----------



## vickster (13 May 2021)

Buck said:


> its moving v quickly. As soon as 1 group is announced, the next group is brought on line.
> It will very much depend on whether the local area has exhausted the earlier cohorts.
> We have done all 38 and 39 and now at 37. Your friends area should be only a day or so behind.


The website is only booking 38-39s and she’s heard nothing from her GP. Hopefully 37s can book via website or online in the near future.


----------



## Johnno260 (13 May 2021)

vickster said:


> The website is only booking 38-39s and she’s heard nothing from her GP. Hopefully 37s can book via website or online in the near future.



the way I got mine fast is contacting the GP and asking if there was a list of people who they contact if they had spare jabs, they did so I asked them to add my name.

not sure if this is common practise or something others do.


----------



## vickster (13 May 2021)

She’s recently moved (about 2 miles), but hasn’t yet moved to a practice closer so may not be able to go down that route. 
I can suggest it but she does work so going to a centre at very short notice may be difficult (I have a friend who does lots of vacc centre volunteering and she did offer her a leftover at short notice but she couldn’t get there)


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 May 2021)

Impact of delaying second dose of Pfizer or Moderna vaccine: modelling study
Study (published 12 May): 'Is the longer gap between jabs better?' [Spoiler: Yes, within certain criteria, which the current vaccines used in UK meet] and deductions for Covid-19 vaccination world wide.

The autumn phase 3 RCT trial results suggested, beyond all reasonable expectation, that even single dose efficacy was good. The main constraint on the world (and national) vaccination programmes was and is vaccine availability. UK JCVI decided far more lives could be saved, and hospital and critical care admissions prevented, by providing one dose to as many people as possible, particularly those at highest risk of serious Covid-19 disease outcomes, before providing second doses. For UK this has proven highly effective: well done to the JCVI for having the necessary cojones (and equivalent for the female committee members). Reinforces my pride in UK.
This study demonstrates – using modelling – that the same is likely to apply, not just in-country, but globally; that delaying the second dose worldwide will most quickly control the disease as well as reducing covid-19 mortality, SARS-CoV-2 infections, and hospital admissions due to covid-19.

Concerns about the lack of evidence for effectiveness if a second dose is delayed (beyond the arbitary 3/4 week trial protocol) are misplaced. Knowledge drawn from previous vaccines suggests that a longer gap produces a better immune response, longer-lasting immunity and greater cross-protection against variant strains. The unavoidable paucity of data on Covid-19 vaccines has generated (in nearly all other nations) an uber-precautionary approach.

But one of the current main concerns about Covid-19 is that ‘_vaccine escape' _variants may arise. The more viral replication there is the more likely this is to happen. So it's important to control the disease as far as possible globally. If we vaccinate everybody in North America and Western Europe, but as vaccine escape variants arise in countries where vaccination levels are low, they will inevitably return to the vaccinated parts of the world, causing 'break-through' disease there. The international community has a vested interest in ensuring that the whole world is vaccinated as soon as possible (and this may be best achieved by a first jab and a second/booster later).

This study supports that view and raises questions about, for example, the proposed third dose (second booster) apparently planned for the UK in Autumn 2021. On balance it might be in the UK’s interests, as well as global interests, for those doses to be used in countries where they are needed more.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (13 May 2021)

vickster said:


> The website is only booking 38-39s and she’s heard nothing from her GP. Hopefully 37s can book via website or online in the near future.



Very very soon, honestly as @Buck says, this is moving at a scary pace!


----------



## mjr (13 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Very very soon, honestly as @Buck says, this is moving at a scary pace!


What are you scared of?


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 May 2021)

Just dragging this across here from 'Chat' (Archie had wondered why on earth his teacher daughter (30) had not been jabbed earlier).


Ajax Bay said:


> The rationale for not elevating various employment categories to a higher priority in the vaccination programme is based on data which show that, take primary school teachers, the risk of infection is minimally or no more than the risk in their local community generally, and that the IFR is best related to age (no UHC). Bus drivers, taxi drivers, security guards et al are far more vulnerable to infection compared with their peers.
> Then consider the male v female risk differential and the BAME v white one as well. There's a general vaccine thread in the NACA sub-forum where such discussion can go beyond 'general chat'.
> https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ups-for-covid-19-vaccination-30-december-2020
> https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.22.20109892v2





Archie_tect said:


> Ajax, while the Government can produce all the statistics to prove whatever it likes, the hassle and disruption that coping with Covid infections in schools has caused, and continues to cause every day, means that children's education is being severely compromised every day. Primary teachers have to send whole classes home if they have one infected person in contact- if that person has had contact throughout the school the whole place shuts down. Many teachers are also vulnerable due to age and pre-existing conditions, so it would have made prefect sense to have vaccinated all school staff, which would have allowed them to teach more freely and to have put educating the children on a more 'normal' footing at the start of the vaccination programme. I suppose better late than never...





Julia9054 said:


> There is data to show that the risk of infection for school staff is between 1.5x and 7x greater than the general public depending on role but that the risk of death or severe disease is no greater than the population as a whole.
> This is due to the severe consequences of covid being linked strongly to poverty and deprivation and not just to exposure.
> The government could have gone with public facing occupations (not just teachers) as their rationale for rolling out the vaccination programme after groups 1 - 9 but went with age due to ease and speed of administering.


"The government could have gone with public facing occupations (not just teachers) as their rationale for rolling out the vaccination programme after groups 1 - 9 but went with age due to ease and speed of administering."
This ^^^ - see pages back in early March.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (13 May 2021)

mjr said:


> What are you scared of?



Eh? Nothing at all.

I am just observing it is moving very very quickly, and that this shows they must have an amazing group of highly skilled, knowledgeable and dynamic individuals working tirelessly, 7 days a week, sorting this stuff out on a day to day basis to be able to contact and book and jab millions of people while ensuring everything is in the right place at the right time.

If nothing about the vaccine programme has excited you from a government perspective, you must surely agree that the people doing the do behind the programme have been absolutely awesome and deserve nothing but your un-tempered praise and gratitude?


----------



## vickster (13 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Very very soon, honestly as @Buck says, this is moving at a scary pace!


Yes but Buck is in Yorkshire not SW London. I just wished to confirm if 37s being vaccinated is regional or national. It seems regional as the England NHS site only open to 38/39s.
A 37 year old colleague in NE London/Essex border has been invited by GP surgery so hopefully SW London isn’t too far behind


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 May 2021)

dodgy said:


> Anyone watched ‘jabbed’ on channel 4? Watching it now, very good IMO.





IaninSheffield said:


> What struck me, and I'm willing to accept it might just have been good editing on the part of the filmmakers, was the ... the humanity of the Task Force key players. That is, in comparison with the weaseliness of their political counterparts.


@dodgy - thank you for highlighting. Recommended viewing for all those interested enough to open this thread, including @tom73
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/jabbed-inside-britains-vaccine-triumph


mjr said:


> How different things could have been if the vaccines had developed at different rates.





Craig the cyclist said:


> But they weren't. I am sure you agree that we are lucky as a population that our politicians and scientists were clever enough to back the right horse eh?


VTF reads as if both clever and lucky: see this late 2020 Lancet article (author Kate Bingham): _The UK Government’s Vaccine Taskforce: strategy for protecting the UK and the world_.


----------



## mjr (13 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Eh? Nothing at all.
> 
> I am just observing it is moving very very quickly, and that this shows [...]


No, you called the pace "scary", which implied that you expect something bad to result from the pace. I guess that was just a wrong word choice, rather than an attempt to line up an "I told you so" if someone makes a mistake in future.



> If nothing about the vaccine programme has excited you from a government perspective, you must surely agree that the people doing the do behind the programme have been absolutely awesome and deserve nothing but your un-tempered praise and gratitude?


As you would know if you read my posts, I have posted repeatedly (two random examples, probably not the best) that the vaccination centres I've seen have been running well, as have those I've heard about, and all thanks to the staff and volunteers working at those.

I still will not praise the booking systems which were a confused (and, as discovered later, medical-privacy-leaking) mess at the time I used them.


----------



## mjr (13 May 2021)

vickster said:


> The website is only booking 38-39s and she’s heard nothing from her GP. Hopefully 37s can book via website or online in the near future.


When I pointed out the website/online booking was unstable and its age limits differed from both what was announced and what GPs were doing, I was told by several people that I should have ignored the announcements in the media and waited for my GP to send me an invite, while others said I should have telephoned 119. One assured me that "Everyone will get offered a vaccination even if the website happens to be down".


----------



## vickster (13 May 2021)

The website is the same as what has been announced on the BBC. 
There have always been differences between the national and regional roll out. I was invited by my GP before the website opened up to under 50s.
@Buck didn't make it immediately clear that the 37s were being contacted in his region and that it was not the national standard, which is now clear (hopefully my 37 y/o friend will be able to book soon either via GP or the website/119)


----------



## shep (13 May 2021)

mjr said:


> When I pointed out the website/online booking was unstable and its age limits differed from both what was announced and what GPs were doing, I was told by several people that I should have ignored the announcements in the media and waited for my GP to send me an invite, while others said I should have telephoned 119. One assured me that "Everyone will get offered a vaccination even if the website happens to be down".


Do whatever suits the individual, I booked on line when it was my age group's turn and then I got a letter as others did, some just waited for a letter, text or call from what I can gather?

Can't see a problem doing any of them as long as you get done.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 May 2021)

mjr said:


> When I pointed out the website/online booking was unstable and its age limits differed from both what was announced and what GPs were doing, I was told by several people that I should have ignored the announcements in the media and waited for my GP to send me an invite, while others said I should have telephoned 119. One assured me that "Everyone will get offered a vaccination even if the website happens to be down".


Not sure what you mean by "unstable" but you are an IT guru so I'm sure that's true, same as I assume (unless it seems clearly at variance with intuition) the knowledge freely shared by our various health care worker contributors is 'true'. The age limit thing is merely temporal.
The advice from "several people" was all valid (119 bit only if a citizen can't use the website: clearly you can/could). And the final assurance was correct too, for all normal people who are registered with their local GP.
The system by design or happy accident had a push (citizen with initiative and a little knowledge books online), a pull (letter from NHS inviting citizen to book - various means including phone), and a local 'own GP' text pull invite to book (local centre)). The UK vaccination programme is a massive jigsaw (in 4 dimensions?) with pieces differing in size by a magnitude (or two). Generating a reliable but controlled 'demand' is but one small part.
Glass two thirds full. Until it's not.
"The NHS will let you know when it's your turn to have the coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination. The vaccine is being offered at larger vaccination centres, pharmacies and some local NHS services such as hospitals or GP surgeries."


----------



## mjr (13 May 2021)

Wallonia (Southern Belgium) today announced general availability of vaccines to anyone 18+ from Monday. Vaccination centres are lengthening opening times to 15 hours a day, 6 or 7 days a week. They are aiming to finish vaccinating adults by the start of July. https://www.rtbf.be/info/societe/on...vaccination-a-toute-la-population?id=10761318

This is one step further than France, which has announced a strange sort of availability-general-only-if-enough-vaccines-arrived-two-days-ahead that started yesterday. https://www.gouvernement.fr/info-coronavirus/vaccins

I didn't find out what Switzerland is doing.


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 May 2021)

A 'European' nation cases overview:
https://www.statista.com/statistics...ates-in-the-past-7-days-in-europe-by-country/
(Good bar chart)
"As of May 10, 2021 Sweden had the highest rate of COVID-19 cases reported in the previous seven days in Europe at 330 cases per 100,000. Cyprus, the Netherlands and Lithuania have recorded approximately 319, 300 and 292 cases per 100,000 people respectively in the last seven days. Since the pandemic outbreak, France has been the worst affected country in Europe with over 5.6 million cases as of May 2. The overall incidence of cases in every European country can be found here."
[Uk is on 22 per 100,000.]


----------



## classic33 (13 May 2021)

Told earlier today that I should have told them at the vaccination centre that I'd heart issues/problem, and that I shouldn't have had the vaccine due to this. In effect my fault for not informing them and not answering questions that were never asked.

Quick search, tonight, got me this

You must seek urgent medical attention immediately if you have any of the following symptoms in the weeks after your injection:

shortness of breath
chest pain
leg swelling
persistent abdominal (belly) pain
neurological symptoms, such as severe and persistent headaches or blurred vision
tiny blood spots under the skin beyond the site of the injection.

I've had all bar the last since the injection. Current chest pain means they may not want to chance a second jab. But I'm out of this now, having declined the injection.

Was anyone asked if they had heart issues, before they had the jab?

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/a...very-rare-cases-unusual-blood-clots-low-blood


I'll remind others of this part:
_The benefits of the vaccine continue to outweigh the risks for people who receive it. The vaccine is effective at preventing COVID-19 and reducing hospitalisations and deaths._


----------



## mjr (14 May 2021)

Euronews TV reports Hungary now vaccinating 16+

Worrying survey suggests more than a quarter of EU adults may refuse vaccination 
https://www.euronews.com/2021/05/14...ts-unlikely-to-get-covid-vaccine-survey-finds

Ireland's Health Service Executive has been shut down by ransomware  but vaccination not yet affected  https://www.thejournal.ie/hse-cyber-attack-5436981-May2021/


----------



## lane (15 May 2021)

Had my second Pfizer last Saturday and the past three days have been really quite unpleasant, struggling to get out of bed for much at all for a couple of days and while feeling quite a bit better today neck is still very painful. The symptoms are mainly the listed side effects but the severity has been a surprise. As bad a the proper flu I had s few years ago but just for a couple of days rather than two weeks. Didn't really have much in the way of side effects after first Jab. Still very glad to have had both jabs especially in view of today's news; also don't intend to put anyone off its obviously a good idea to get fully vaccinated even if a bit unlucky with side effects.


----------



## MrGrumpy (15 May 2021)

I’ve been hearing this as well with second jabs ?! I was fine with the first other than a sore arm obviously.


----------



## Landsurfer (15 May 2021)

Fine with the first jab, fine with the second, no sore arm after either. And i was diagnosed with covid 16th of February.
My biggest worry is being bitten by Count Dracula and other vampires after the antibodies in my blood .....


----------



## guitarpete247 (15 May 2021)

I've had both jabs and no side effects.
Only problem I had was having trouble getting a alternate date for blood doning after 1st jab.
Blood doning is a new experience but I've seen lots of changes over the years since '87.


----------



## Venod (15 May 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Fine with the first jab, fine with the second, no sore arm after either.



Pfizer Jab

The wife and I had a very mild sore arm after the first injection as the only side effects.

After the second the wife had the same mild sore arm but mine was painful, only lasted a day though.


----------



## guitarpete247 (15 May 2021)

I had Pfizer Mrs GP had AZ and gets 2nd at end of the month. She had 1st on a Sunday and felt a bit off on the Monday but OK by the Tuesday.


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

Apparently they are going to reduce the time between doses for over 50s from 12 weeks to 8 weeks.
Are they going to reschedule all the appointments already made or is it just another unworkable Boris platitude.


----------



## stoatsngroats (15 May 2021)

I just booked my 2nd dose, close to home, on NHS website, 8 weeks and 5 days after my first, without issue, and the website picking up that this would be my 2nd dose.
Unworkable Boris platitudes seems a bit judgemental to me, as the system appears to be working pretty well for a large number of people.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Apparently they are going to reduce the time between doses for over 50s from 12 weeks to 8 weeks.
> Are they going to reschedule all the appointments already made or is it just another unworkable Boris platitude.



Why is your assumption that this is a Boris thing. Christ, honestly the level of cynicism is bewildering.

I wish you could see what I am doing this morning.........


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

stoatsngroats said:


> just booked my 2nd dose, close to home, on NHS website, 8 weeks and 5 days after my first,


OK. So 8 week schedule only for those who don't already have their 2nd jab appointment. Mine - booked a while back - is for 11 weeks and 6 days after my first.
It would seem more sensible to me to prioritise younger people's first dose in hotspot areas.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> OK. So 8 week schedule only for those who don't already have their 2nd jab appointment. Mine - booked a while back - is for 11 weeks and 6 days after my first.
> It would seem more sensible to me to prioritise younger people's first dose in hotspot areas.



Do you think that they only plan for one thing at a time?

8 week schedule for those in the top 9 priority groups who have not yet had their second dose is the plan. Under 50s will continue at the moment at 12 weeks.


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Do you think that they only plan for one thing at a time?


They still need to prioritise. Hotspot areas would be my priority. 


Craig the cyclist said:


> 8 week schedule for those in the top 9 priority groups who have not yet had their second dose is the plan. Under 50s will continue at the moment at 12 weeks.


I'll be expecting a call bringing my appointment forward then?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> They still need to prioritise. Hotspot areas would be my priority.



It was announced yesterday that additional resources were being poured into hotspot areas. Here's todays BBC update:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57126318


----------



## fossyant (15 May 2021)

I'm another who should strictly have my second jab now, but I'm booked in for early June so I'll wait, unless someone calls me.


----------



## stoatsngroats (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> OK. So 8 week schedule only for those who don't already have their 2nd jab appointment. Mine - booked a while back - is for 11 weeks and 6 days after my first.
> It would seem more sensible to me to prioritise younger people's first dose in hotspot areas.


You don’t know my personal circumstance, so another judgement on your part.
And as others have posted, there isn’t one plan, and it should respond to changes, as it appears to be doing.
I couldn’t say whether you ‘should expect a call’ for a revised earlier booking.


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

stoatsngroats said:


> You don’t know my personal circumstance, so another judgement on your part.
> And as others have posted, there isn’t one plan, and it should respond to changes, as it appears to be doing.
> I couldn’t say whether you ‘should expect a call’ for a revised earlier booking.


My assumption based on what you said is that you fall into groups 1 - 9 and have just booked your second jab. If I am wrong, I apologise


----------



## fossyant (15 May 2021)

Direct from the NHS website:-


----------



## Pale Rider (15 May 2021)

I had some soreness from the second jab which I didn't have from the first.

I also felt the second go in, but not the first.

A nurse agreed with me the skill of the jabber may play some part.

Both Pfizer, but obviously from a different batch and possibly from a different manufacturer/factory.

I wonder if the once only syringes vary a tiny bit which impacts their effect on the jab site.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> They still need to prioritise. Hotspot areas would be my priority.


So you would prioritise fit younger age groups rather than vulnerable slightly older groups? Just to clarify, a clinically vulnerable 25 year old severe asthmatic in Bristol would fall behind fit and healthy 20 year olds in Bolton?



Julia9054 said:


> I'll be expecting a call bringing my appointment forward then?



If you are in groups 1-9, and your first jab was around 8 weeks ago, and you still have 4 weeks to wait, then yes, you can expect a call to bring you forward.


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> So you would prioritise fit younger age groups rather than vulnerable slightly older groups? Just to clarify, a clinically vulnerable 25 year old severe asthmatic in Bristol would fall behind fit and healthy 20 year olds in Bolton?


In an attempt to prevent spread to areas where rates are currently very low.


----------



## Pale Rider (15 May 2021)

Looks like the jab programme is being tweaked largely in an attempt to target the Indian variant.

Mutterings of a delayed unlocking of the lockdown if that one takes hold.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57126318


----------



## midlife (15 May 2021)

First jab doesn't do a whole lot to reduce transmission, that effect kicks in two weeks after second jab is how I read it. So not a lot of point in vaccinating Indian variant hot spots as that's a 12 week or so lead in. I would expect the best way at the moment is test, trace, isolate plus all the usual distancing etc. Should cut down on serious illness and hospitalisation though.


----------



## Pale Rider (15 May 2021)

midlife said:


> First jab doesn't do a whole lot to reduce transmission, that effect kicks in two weeks after second jab is how I read it. So not a lot of point in vaccinating Indian variant hot spots as that's a 12 week or so lead in. I would expect the best way at the moment is test, trace, isolate plus all the usual distancing etc. Should cut down on serious illness and hospitalisation though.



Makes sense, although the sooner you do jab one, the sooner you will get to jab two and a worthwhile decrease in transmission.


----------



## lane (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Apparently they are going to reduce the time between doses for over 50s from 12 weeks to 8 weeks.
> Are they going to reschedule all the appointments already made or is it just another unworkable Boris platitude.


 Largely unworkable I suspect. When they had a vaccine shortage here they were supposed to re schedule but didn't happend for me and others I saw. Plus where do you start - people with an appointment in a week, two weeks by which time you are only bringing very few forward because most over 50s will have had them . Probably would have been a better idea to have tried harder to stop the variant getting here - they were warned.


----------



## lane (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> OK. So 8 week schedule only for those who don't already have their 2nd jab appointment. Mine - booked a while back - is for 11 weeks and 6 days after my first.
> It would seem more sensible to me to prioritise younger people's first dose in hotspot areas.



Over 50s have all had first jab long ago so reducing time between jabs for over 50s booking first dose now is meaningless!


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> In an attempt to prevent spread to areas where rates are currently very low.



So you would prioritise less vulnerable groups, for the sake of more vulnerable groups? Then when the 25 year old Bristolian asthmatic who had their second dose cancelled dies you can come on here and announce that Boris is sacrificing the vulnerable, and no-one knows what they are doing 

The system is doing its absolute best right now, it is a shame that you can't feel the pressure it is under from all angles..........

From the media, did you hear some of the press conference questions yesterday? Seriously, idiots. 
From patient groups, it's not fair that my xxx can't have the jab, they have xxx disease, it's a scandal.
From people who are 35 because 36 year olds are getting it, and trust me, that has happened in every age group change all the way down from 50.
From anti-vaxxers, I know of a nurse being threatened with rape while she was alone in a car park because she was carrying out a genocide on people by injecting poison in to minority groups, after a 9 hour shift in a vaccination centre.
From people like yourself who handily point out that whatever the change made, you would have done something different and better, although you can't actually tell us what.
From people who just plain lie about themselves to get/not get the vaccine.
From more besides this lot.

One day, people working in the system will get to say what it was like dealing with this. It's not pretty at times, and everyone is just trying their absolute best, in a situation where not all the facts are known (and indeed fundamentally change on a terrifyingly regular basis) to deal with injecting 60 to 70 million people in a few months in places that were not designed to ever host a health intervention.

One day everyone will look back and realise this was actually a minor f**king miracle that any of this happened, from the very top to the very bottom, and they will look back and be bloody grateful for the effort that has been put in to it by a surprisingly small group of people who are working their f**king arses off 7 days a week.


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Then when the 25 year old Bristolian asthmatic who had their second dose cancelled dies you can come on here and announce that Boris is sacrificing the vulnerable, and no-one knows what they are doing


Conjecture on your part.


Craig the cyclist said:


> although you can't actually tell us what.


I just did.


Craig the cyclist said:


> working their f**king arses off 7 days a week.


It’s policy I am questioning, not the efforts of teams on the ground.


----------



## lane (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> So you would prioritise less vulnerable groups, for the sake of more vulnerable groups? Then when the 25 year old Bristolian asthmatic who had their second dose cancelled dies you can come on here and announce that Boris is sacrificing the vulnerable, and no-one knows what they are doing
> 
> The system is doing its absolute best right now, it is a shame that you can't feel the pressure it is under from all angles..........
> 
> ...



Everyone doing thier best then people right at the top undermining the whole thing by letting variants in despite ample warning.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Conjecture on your part


Well, not really, you are criticising already, no reason to think you wouldn't criticise in the future.



Julia9054 said:


> I just did


Oh is this your policy you just told us about?


Julia9054 said:


> It would seem more sensible to me to prioritise younger people's first dose in hotspot areas


What ages? What risk factors? Which ethnic group? Where would you vaccinate them? What is the time frame? How long before you start? Would you allow them to socialise in the meantime? How would you gain consent for some? Come on, you need to sort your policy and offering, not just say younger people in hotspot areas. If you are 80, then 35 years olds are younger, if you are 35, 18 is younger, if you are 18, 10 is younger....... 

Details please, spell out your policy to show us who and how you would implement your policy. Or continue to point out it is all wrong, but offer no solution. Specifics please, or admit you couldn't do it any better and let others get on with it.



Julia9054 said:


> It’s policy I am questioning, not the efforts of teams on the ground


Surely you can see that the teams on the ground are implementing the policy, so the criticism is of the teams on the ground?


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Well, not really, you are criticising already, no reason to think you wouldn't criticise in the future.


No, you are right Craig. One should accept every policy decision made by the government without question. One should never be questioning whether a policy decision is made because it is the most effective thing to do rather than because it is easier or politically expedient.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

lane said:


> Everyone doing thier best then people right at the top undermining the whole thing by letting variants in despite ample warning.



Let's stop all flights and boats from entering the UK, that will do it. Absolutely no-one in or out, ever, until Covid is eradicated from the rest of the world forever, that will nail it. 

But I will let you go with this, as I suggested to Julia, be very specific, how will you deal with another variant? 

We need you to be absolutely clear with your plan, and how each step will be implemented and by who and in what time frame. But you don't get to know how it will get in the UK, where it will come from or if it is more lethal or more transmissable. On you go please, the floor is yours..........


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> No, you are right Craig. One should accept every policy decision made by the government without question. One should never be questioning whether a policy decision is made because it is the most effective thing to do rather than because it is easier or politically expedient.



And the second bit of my post to you?



Craig the cyclist said:


> What ages? What risk factors? Which ethnic group? Where would you vaccinate them? What is the time frame? How long before you start? Would you allow them to socialise in the meantime? How would you gain consent for some? Come on, you need to sort your policy and offering, not just say younger people in hotspot areas. If you are 80, then 35 years olds are younger, if you are 35, 18 is younger, if you are 18, 10 is younger.......
> 
> Details please, spell out your policy to show us who and how you would implement your policy. Or continue to point out it is all wrong, but offer no solution. Specifics please, or admit you couldn't do it any better and let others get on with it.



What is your policy and plan exactly? Just so we can helpfully critique your plan, which will obviously be better than what we have already.

Or is your plan to keep saying 'That was rubbish, they shouldn't have done that' over and over again to every decision made?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (15 May 2021)

I'm with @Julia

The acceleration of doses in those already vaccinated makes no sense in the situation we're in. 

One dose gives good protection against infection and symptoms. 

A second dose makes a decent, but incremental improvement to that. 

But the risk here is a major 3rd spike. That risk is *massively* reduced in a highly non- linear fashion by vaccinating the unvaccinated, who have no immunity. 

I'd have a very simple policy at this point. 

Hang second doses, get them done later if need be. 

Open vaccinations to u40s across the board and get as many into arms as possible. Let local areas decide how to prioritise. 

It would get us as fast as possible to herd immunity, and actually protect the people denied second doses on time more, because they'd be far less likely to get exposed. 

Jab, jab, jab.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

midlife said:


> First jab doesn't do a whole lot to reduce transmission, that effect kicks in two weeks after second jab is how I read it





roubaixtuesday said:


> One dose gives good protection against infection and symptoms.


Tricky this eh?



roubaixtuesday said:


> Open vaccinations to u40s across the board and get as many into arms as possible. Let local areas decide how to prioritise.


Better attempt than Julia's. But, and you know have the advantage of knowing what I do for a job, if local areas are deciding, then who decides who gets the vaccine? If Yourtown decides to vaccinate everyone over 12, and has 750000 in that category, Mycity decides all over 18s and has 500000 of them, Thatville goes for everyone over 21 and has 250000 of them, what happens to Ourvillage who can't any vaccine for its over 30s because it has all been delivered to the other places? Then you have the logistics of getting the stuff everywhere.

Also, who decides? The council, the local health teams, the GPs? This has 'post-code lottery' and 'Boris makes local councils responsible for deaths of care-home residents' written all over it! What about the council who decide everyone over 16, except the residents of the local special needs home, who never leave the grounds of the home, after all, if the staff are all vaccinated, then they are relatively safe aren't they?



roubaixtuesday said:


> Hang second doses, get them done later if need be.



Of course, that isn't what the science says, as I know you are well aware.

At the end of the day, this is a moral, healthcare and logistical bloody nightmare with no answer that isn't able to be shown to be problematic, as @Julia9054 is realising.


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Tricky this eh?
> 
> 
> Better attempt than Julia's. But, and you know have the advantage of knowing what I do for a job, if local areas are deciding, then who decides who gets the vaccine? If Yourtown decides to vaccinate everyone over 12, and has 750000 in that category, Mycity decides all over 18s and has 500000 of them, Thatville goes for everyone over 21 and has 250000 of them, what happens to Ourvillage who can't any vaccine for its over 30s because it has all been delivered to the other places? Then you have the logistics of getting the stuff everywhere.
> ...


It's certainly easier logistically to just contact those already in the system than it is to go after the hard to reach, but that doesn't necessarily make it more effective at stopping the spread from hotspot areas to nationwide.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> It's certainly easier logistically to just contact those already in the system than it is to go after the hard to reach, but that doesn't necessarily make it more effective at stopping the spread from hotspot areas to nationwide.



So tell us your plan in detail then..........

Seriously, I started by clearly the pi55, but have a go. What would your proper plan look like?


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> So tell us your plan in detail then..........
> 
> Seriously, I started by clearly the pi55, but have a go. What would your proper plan look like?


As you are obviously aware, I am not qualified to outline a plan in detail. It is legitimate, though, for me to question whether it is the right policy decision to go for what is easy rather than what is effective. 
I don't know what you do for a living but if you have inside knowledge of why bringing forward 2nd vaccinations for over 50s nationally (bearing in mind that the very vulnerable groups 1 - 4 will already have had their 2nd dose) is more effective than concentrating resources into hotspots in order to contain spread, I would be interested to hear it.


----------



## midlife (15 May 2021)

AFAIK vaccination is still being primarily used to prevent hospitalisation and death not reduce transmission. Protecting in age order nationally probably top trumps vaccinating young people in hot spots.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> It is legitimate, though, for me to question whether it is the right policy decision to go for what is easy rather than what is effective.



So you presume that the bringing forward jabs from 12 weeks to 8 is easier than offering first jabs to people in lower age groups? Why would you think that? And why would you think that it would be less effective?

You see, you are not qualified to do this, but still feel you can criticise (not question) those that do. You haven't questioned, you have stated that the policy is wrong.


Julia9054 said:


> is it just another unworkable Boris platitude.





Julia9054 said:


> It would seem more sensible to me to prioritise younger people's first dose in hotspot areas.





Julia9054 said:


> They still need to prioritise. Hotspot areas would be my priority.





Julia9054 said:


> In an attempt to prevent spread to areas where rates are currently very low.





Julia9054 said:


> It's certainly easier logistically to just contact those already in the system than it is to go after the hard to reach,



But have no alternative as you aren't qualified to outline a plan apparently.


Julia9054 said:


> As you are obviously aware, I am not qualified to outline a plan in detail



Look, no-one is going to hold you to it, and Boris is certainly not going to revise it to @Julia9054 's plan. But have a go, tell us, in reasonable detail what you would do, and please try to avoid just saying _'not this'_.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Of course, that isn't what the science says, as I know you are well aware



I disagree actually. AFAIK there's no evidence that delaying affects efficacy. 




midlife said:


> AFAIK vaccination is still being primarily used to prevent hospitalisation and death not reduce transmission



I argue that now is the time to change that policy.



Craig the cyclist said:


> At the end of the day, this is a moral, healthcare and logistical bloody nightmare with no answer that isn't able to be shown to be problematic,



Absolutely. Given the change in circumstances, with transmission now critical to prevent spread of the new variant *and* likely relatively few first doses to get us to herd immunity, to focus on second doses seems nonsensical to me.

I'm very willing to change my mind if other arguments make more sense.

[Edited for typos]


----------



## roubaixtuesday (15 May 2021)

On transmission and protection from vaccinating. 

Latest real world evidence from PHE


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> So you presume that the bringing forward jabs from 12 weeks to 8 is easier than offering first jabs to people in lower age groups? Why would you think that?


Because those people are already in the system and in favour of being vaccinated and, for most I imagine, would welcome being fully vaccinated earlier. 
Are you qualified to say which approach would be more effective? Not which would be logistically easier.


----------



## classic33 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> So tell us your plan in detail then..........
> 
> Seriously, I started by clearly the pi55, but have a go. What would your proper plan look like?


I think we're all aware it's a David and goliath battle, with a Price to pay. As far as I'm aware, this hasn't been left to one person too sort out. Private companies have had a part to play. Both in getting their "product to market" and Regulating how their products are used. Some for profit.

Any plan on this scale, brought to bear by just the one person, would and should be open to questioning.


----------



## lane (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Let's stop all flights and boats from entering the UK, that will do it. Absolutely no-one in or out, ever, until Covid is eradicated from the rest of the world forever, that will nail it.
> 
> But I will let you go with this, as I suggested to Julia, be very specific, how will you deal with another variant?
> 
> We need you to be absolutely clear with your plan, and how each step will be implemented and by who and in what time frame. But you don't get to know how it will get in the UK, where it will come from or if it is more lethal or more transmissable. On you go please, the floor is yours..........



I would have done what Australia did. That is a nice simple answer to you long request for details.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

lane said:


> I would have done what Australia did. That is a nice simple answer to you long request for details.



What did Australia do?


----------



## lane (15 May 2021)

If you really want to know you can easily Google it.


----------



## lane (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> What did Australia do?


https://onemileatatime.com/australia-india-travel-ban/


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

And bearing in mind what has happened since even the quarantine hotels have come in to being, how do you think the public in the UK would have taken to that level of restriction?

Can I assume also, that your approach will now be to ban any travel inbound to the UK from any country that is showing a new variant immediately a case comes to light? No matter where, and even if it means UK citizens cannot return home?*

*Just to be clear, that isn't a trick question, I would absolutely do that, but...................


----------



## lane (15 May 2021)

So how does this play play out exactly? You keep on asking longer and longer questions in an increasingly aggressive manor and I keep answering them or alternatively I decide I have better things to do?

Just to be clear it's not a trick question....


----------



## Craig the cyclist (15 May 2021)

I am just trying, massively unsuccesfully, to get you or @Julia9054 to stop telling us how bad the whole thing is going and explain how you would do it. Neither have you have any idea what you would do, apart from 'not what this bunch of idiots are doing', or 'what Australia did'. 

Julia was very clear that she would do something different, but has no idea what as she isn't qualified to tell us (I only wondered about a plan that she would do, she doesn't have to be qualified, no-one has a degree in Covid 19 planning). Or maybe she is just another arm-chair critic of something that, because of it's very nature, is being made up as it goes along. "Vaccinate younger people" is as far as she has got, but has left herself plenty of room for being able to criticise. If the plan drops to 30s she can say it's not low enough, 25, still not low enough, 20, what about college students? Ok 18... what about 6th formers? 16.....what about school children? 12....where is the evidence for injecting children, where are the safety trials?

See, impossible for the people organising all this to win. And when I have asked for the alternative from Julia or yourself I get nothing at all apart from' what Australia did'. I asked you what you would do if a new variant emerged and you said 'what Australia did', but what if the variant was in, oh I don't know, let's say Kent. How would you stop international flights from Kent?

No ideas on how to fix and plan forward, just constant sniping that what has happened has been wrong.


----------



## classic33 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> I am just trying, massively unsuccesfully, to get you or @Julia9054 to stop telling us how bad the whole thing is going and explain how you would do it.* Neither have you have any idea what you would do*, apart from 'not what this bunch of idiots are doing', or 'what Australia did'.
> 
> Julia was very clear that she would do something different, but has no idea what as she isn't qualified to tell us (I only wondered about a plan that she would do, she doesn't have to be qualified, no-one has a degree in Covid 19 planning). Or maybe she is just another arm-chair critic of something that, because of it's very nature, is being made up as it goes along. "Vaccinate younger people" is as far as she has got, but has left herself plenty of room for being able to criticise. If the plan drops to 30s she can say it's not low enough, 25, still not low enough, 20, what about college students? Ok 18... what about 6th formers? 16.....what about school children? 12....where is the evidence for injecting children, where are the safety trials?
> 
> ...


Nor have you. You just repeat that the experts have got it in hand, and that the current way is the best way.

Ireland started with a profession based system, then changed partway through.
They also have a system whereby if you intend to travel there, you are required to have a negative test result before entering, no older than 72 hours. Don't have that, and you've very little chance of actually starting travelling to the country. Orders from higher up, to any carrier of passengers operating in the country.

Don't have that, and you're found, there's a €1,000 fine. Another €1,000 fine if you fail to isolate upon entering.


----------



## Julia9054 (15 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Julia was very clear that she would do something different, but has no idea what as she isn't qualified to tell us (I only wondered about a plan that she would do, she doesn't have to be qualified, no-one has a degree in Covid 19 planning).


My last comment on this subject since you seem to be getting yourself massively worked up and I fear for your blood pressure. 
I would concentrate vaccination resources on local containment. There are people who specialise in logistics and resource management who can work out the details of how. Is this your area of expertise - you still haven't said. 
It is a balance between how easily and quickly an intervention can be implemented, how popular that intervention sounds to the voting public and how effective that intervention actually would be.
Unlike you it would seem, I have no confidence that the government has that balance right.


----------



## PK99 (15 May 2021)

lane said:


> I would have done what Australia did. That is a nice simple answer to you long request for details.



Australia is 175% self sufficient in food production.

Uk is 50-60% self-sufficient overall and 16% self sufficient in fruit and veg

90 % of the Kenyan gerrn bean crop is air freighted to the UK.

Closing borders as Australia did would precipitate an almost immediate food crisis.


----------



## lane (15 May 2021)

PK99 said:


> Australia is 175% self sufficient in food production.
> 
> Uk is 50-60% self-sufficient overall and 16% self sufficient in fruit and veg
> 
> ...



I wasn't actually suggesting we closed the borders. What I was suggesting we should have done is - two or three weeks before we did red list India - when a number of scientists were calling for it - ban completely travel from India with serious penalties for breaching the ban. Certainly not implement a ban a week after announcing it so fights to the UK could increase. This wouldn't have been a magic bullet and the variant would come into the UK. But the extra delay would have been most beneficial in allowing more people to be vaccinated.


----------



## midlife (15 May 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> My last comment on this subject since you seem to be getting yourself massively worked up and I fear for your blood pressure.
> I would concentrate vaccination resources on local containment. There are people who specialise in logistics and resource management who can work out the details of how. Is this your area of expertise - you still haven't said.
> It is a balance between how easily and quickly an intervention can be implemented, how popular that intervention sounds to the voting public and how effective that intervention actually would be.
> Unlike you it would seem, I have no confidence that the government has that balance right.



I think its already been mentioned that vaccination is not the way to contain local outbreaks with exponential rise in cases. 

It just doesn't happen fast enough to stop transmission, the immune system takes time to kick into gear and even after 2 doses there is still significant transmission. It's valid to vaccinate locally those older and vulnerable who haven't stepped forward yet to cut hospitalisation and deaths.


----------



## lane (16 May 2021)

Sunday Times reports that 20,000 additional people flew into UK from India while BJ dithered and delayed on the travel band for several days.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 May 2021)

Sorry I missed all yesterday's fun on this thread. My excuse (were one needed) was: up at 5, train at 6 to Penzance and rode the 200+km back, in a small group and to bed by midnight. (Plan at bottom)
Would be interested to hear from @midlife the source for 'one dose doesn't reduce transmission'. My understanding is that the recent SPI-M modelling have made 'clear' and more positive assumptions in that respect in their latest work.
@Craig the cyclist asks for a plan.
I think the '12 week gap' was considered reasonable because getting more people vaccinated with just one dose was more likely to save lives, and I think that's been proven. I note that, around the world, the gap seems to have been extended generally, though not to 12 weeks. Why 12 weeks (not 8 or 16)? I'd observe that directing a 12 week gap allowed the UK to vaccinate (first dose) the more vulnerable half of its population at speed, without having to slow progress because the second doses would need rolling out. All those in JCVI 1-9 (the first phase, 32M) received their first dose by 11 Apr, and only 7M second doses had been expended by then. From then all the '12 week gap' second doses have consumed most of the supply.
By now (or in the next few days, too soon to muck around with second jab appointments) all those in JCVI 1-6 will have received their second jab, leaving under the 50-64 crowd with one jab in their deltoid.
I mused (here) back in January about the 12 week gap and whether direction might shift (increase) as it did on 30 Dec 2020 (JCVI). The problem is not medical but political. The government has told its electorate that the gap will be 12 weeks, and the political cost (see @Julia9054 post which started the current chat) is unattractive.
However, I reckon the government could play the B.1.617.2 variant card and use that to justify a slight change of policy.
From 23 May for 5 weeks the current plan is to give 12M doses as second jabs (and these are all for 64 and under): yes, many have appointments. The last 5 weeks have seen necessarily glacial progress in first jabs: maybe 5M in 5 weeks.
A possible alternative plan (and I appreciate there is resistance within the NHS to changing things) @Craig the cyclist is this:
1) Explain revision the policy clearly (blame new variant, hold out carrot of 'not earlier than 21 June' date)
2) Continue with all second dose appointments for the next 10 days (cumulative second doses = 23M)
3) Postpone all second doses (with appointments already or not) to 16 weeks, wef 10 days time.
4) Accelerate the rate of giving first jabs (assumes no increase in supply/rate) using the 10M doses 'freed up'. This amount would vaccinate (first dose) all those over 27 (by 21 June ) roughly. If a way could be found to weight those supplies on the areas which have high case levels, excellent, but this will be more presentational than based on science (as @midlife made clear).
5) Increased community/leader involvement to maximise vaccine uptake in those areas.
6) Provide new appointments effective delayed by 4 weeks, for all those affected.
I suspect that the supply of Pfizer (for under 40s) would make this difficult to implement, or at least lead to organisational complication and associated friction. Perhaps recognise the male/female ORs for CSVT and reserve the available Pfizer/Moderna for female under 40s.


----------



## midlife (16 May 2021)

Where did I say that one dose does not reduce transmission?

Are you quoting from this post?



midlife said:


> First jab doesn't do a whole lot to reduce transmission, that effect kicks in two weeks after second jab is how I read it. So not a lot of point in vaccinating Indian variant hot spots as that's a 12 week or so lead in. I would expect the best way at the moment is test, trace, isolate plus all the usual distancing etc. Should cut down on serious illness and hospitalisation though.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 May 2021)

Yes
You said: "First jab doesn't do a whole lot to reduce transmission, that effect kicks in two weeks after second jab is how I read it."
The SPI-M modelling has used 'accepted' assumptions on this, based on science (recent): the protective effect kicks in two weeks after first jab and the second jab enhances and prolongs such effect "is how I read it".
This variance in understanding is why I asked what you were drawing on for your reading. Massive respect for your insights so concerned I misunderstand.


----------



## midlife (16 May 2021)

I was listening to an expert on Radio 4 on the way home from work on Friday. Talking about why surge vaccination in Bolton would nto be the best way to tackle the outbreak in the first instance. And why the government is still planning to vaccinate older / vulnerable people before the youngest cohorts. Sorry if it came across differently.


----------



## Bazzer (16 May 2021)

Found out the other day, child 1 had her second at the beginning of the month which was around the 8 week stage. 
Mrs B gets her second on Tuesday. She has been getting repeated texts asking, for example, whether she needs support at the vaccination centre. Which seems odd as she didn't collapse etc., at the first jab and has no underlying health conditions which could be affected by the vaccine.


----------



## midlife (16 May 2021)

This is cut and paste from BBC,

He (Hancock) confirmed surge vaccinations would be going ahead in areas where there are spikes in the numbers of cases of the Indian variant

But Prof Adam Finn told Marr the JCVI had warned against surge vaccinations as they could do "more harm than good" by disrupting the rollout across the country

Prof Finn says: "You end up chasing the virus around and always arriving too late."

Seems like the government are going against advice?


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 May 2021)

midlife said:


> I was listening to an expert on Radio 4 on the way home from work on Friday. Talking about why surge vaccination in Bolton would not be the best way to tackle the outbreak in the first instance. And why the government is still planning to vaccinate older / vulnerable people before the youngest cohorts. Sorry if it came across differently.


Agree that 'surge vaccination' of the 20-35s in outbreak areas would seem unlikely to have beneficial effect in the short term. But such use of vaccination would have a different purpose than the current priority which is to save lives of the more vulnerable half of the population.
The rationale for surge vaccination bringing forward second doses (to, say, 8 weeks) is that the added protection against disease from the second jab will save the lives of the over 50s, and the IFR for under 50s is low, very low, so vaccinating more of them with their first dose would save fewer lives. (See graph in next post) This reads across to the unhappy reality that the majority of those who die (with a COVID-19 positive test) in the coming months will have been vaccinated (both doses)! Currently about 1000 people die in UK every week. Currently about 60 of those are recorded as down to COVID-19. https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths
Vaccination (first dose) in outbreak areas of the 25-39s (delaying second doses) would, after a fortnight/21 days delay, reduce the numbers susceptible (in those areas) and thus the rate of transmission. And this advantage may be needed if the B.1.617.2 variant is indeed more transmissible than the B.1.1.7 - the level of uncertainty on that is very high.
If vaccine supplies and generally the daily vaccination rate can be ramped up then we can do some of both, and that is the implication of the government's messaging - good news (though no doubt it can and will be judged 'wrong' in some way, by some).


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 May 2021)

The rationale for surge vaccination bringing forward second doses (to, say, 8 weeks) is that the added protection against disease from the second jab will save the lives of the over 50s, and the IFR for under 50s is low, very low, so vaccinating more of them with their first dose would save fewer lives.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33289900/#&gid=article-figures&pid=fig-4-uid-3





"exponential relationship between age and IFR for COVID-19. The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85."


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (16 May 2021)

midlife said:


> He (Hancock) confirmed surge vaccinations would be going ahead in areas where there are spikes in the numbers of cases of the Indian variant
> 
> But Prof Adam Finn told Marr the JCVI had warned against surge vaccinations as they could do "more harm than good" by disrupting the rollout across the country
> 
> ...



"Surge vaccinations" is a very imprecise term which can mean anything from accelerating second doses for over 50s to delivering a first dose to 18 year olds.


----------



## Pale Rider (16 May 2021)

midlife said:


> This is cut and paste from BBC,
> 
> He (Hancock) confirmed surge vaccinations would be going ahead in areas where there are spikes in the numbers of cases of the Indian variant
> 
> ...



I think they are doing what they've done from day one.

Balancing the economic and social imperative to reduce restrictions against the medical advice which itself can be conflicting.

A difficult task, not least because there is no right answer.


----------



## midlife (16 May 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> "Surge vaccinations" is a very imprecise term which can mean anything from accelerating second doses for over 50s to delivering a first dose to 18 year olds.




By surge vaccination the implication is that a mass vaccination hub is opened and everybody from age 18 is vaccinated. As has been announce for Blackburn

Edit. Just re read the BBC article, and maybe the phrase over 18 means the same as elsewhere but more pressure on individuals to vaccinate and more vaccine available.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 May 2021)

Pulling this across from the 'CC General Chat' sub-forum.
I said: "The rationale for not elevating various employment categories to a higher priority in the vaccination programme is based on data which show that, take primary school teachers, the risk of infection is minimally or no more than the risk in their local community generally, and that the IFR is best related to age (no UHC). Bus drivers, taxi drivers, security guards et al are far more vulnerable to infection compared with their peers.
Then consider the male v female risk differential and the BAME v white one as well."
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ups-for-covid-19-vaccination-30-december-2020
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.22.20109892v2


Julia9054 said:


> There is data to show that the risk of infection for school staff is between 1.5x and 7x greater than the general public depending on role but that the risk of death or severe disease is no greater than the population as a whole. This is due to the severe consequences of covid being linked strongly to poverty and deprivation and not just to exposure.
> The government could have gone with public facing occupations (not just teachers) as their rationale for rolling out the vaccination programme after groups 1 - 9 but went with age due to ease and speed of administering.


I recalled this: Full facts: https://fullfact.org/health/teacher-covid-transmission/ ONS published an analysis covering the period from 2 September to 16 October, showing that teachers were not significantly more likely to have tested positive than other workers. Although there was a high degree of uncertainty in the findings.
I also looked at this paper (perhaps there is more recent research with different conclusions - which I invite you to share) published by the Lancet: "
SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission in primary schools in England in June–December, 2020 (sKIDs): an active, prospective surveillance study"
Prof Woolhouse, Head of infectious disease epidemiology at Edinburgh University (and also a member of SPI-M btw), commented: "Even if this virus doesn’t spread easily among the children, it certainly will spread among staff if it gets the opportunity. The evidence so far is that the most dangerous room in the school is not the classroom, it’s the staff room. So schools need to pay attention to that, and not take their eye off the right ball."
If he's right the issue is that school teachers are 'forced' to socialise with other members of staff, and catch it from them. Perhaps there are measures that schools could take to minimise this risk?
We have seen no indicator in the case numbers of increased rates of infection when schools re-opened on 8 Mar, nor when pupils went back for the summer term.
Edit: @Archie_tect also commented pointed out the disruption infections and sending whole classes home for 10 days has on pupils schooling/learning.


----------



## midlife (16 May 2021)

Slightly related but it's likely the hospital staff room where infections are picked up and not the clinics / wards / ITU. We run staggered breaks and lunches to keep staff social contact to a minimum. 

Come Monday nothing changes.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 May 2021)

Multilateral social mixing really is best kept out of doors for the meantime, especially in areas where prevalence is high.
Maybe this 'surge vaccination' is a sophisticated () government plot to increase vaccine uptake in certain communities which other methods (beers) have not reached?
But it's all a balance and a judgement call, as Paley has said upthread (or on the main one: I've lost track).


----------



## RoadRider400 (16 May 2021)

Banning travel from India would only have been delaying the inevitable. Eventually it would have arrived from somewhere else in somebody who did not even know they had it. Due to the relative close proximity of our busy cities we are geographically and logistically an ideal petri dish.


----------



## DaveReading (16 May 2021)

RoadRider400 said:


> Banning travel from India would only have been delaying the inevitable.



"Delaying the inevitable" (while vaccinations proceeded apace) would have saved lives.


----------



## Ajax Bay (16 May 2021)

DaveReading said:


> "Delaying the inevitable [banning travel from India]" (while vaccinations proceeded apace) would have saved lives.


In what way, Dave? I thought noone had died with an infection from the B.1.617.2 variant. Very regrettably, with the number of cases, it's likely they will in due course /soon. Given that 99% of people likely to die of COVID-19 have been vaccinated with one jab, and the vulnerable JCVI Gps 1-6 with both, the numbers who die will be very small (acknowledge each one tragic). And unless this variant outcompetes the B.1.1.7 (no evidence of that), is more lethal (no evidence of that) or evades the vaccines (no evidence of that) the numbers saved will be very few.
What the introduction and limited spread in some communities of this VoC variant does create is uncertainty. In particular there is no evidence yet whether this variant partially evades the protection offered by vaccination or whether the OxfordAZ/Pfizer/Moderna vaccines will offer similar protection as they do against the now predominant for 6 months wild B.1.1.7 variety.
I don't agree with @RoadRider400 btw when they say: "Eventually it would have arrived from somewhere else." There are plenty of variants which have not gained a foothold. The relationship between India and Great Britain is very strong and hence the carriage and import of this variant. I do wonder why there were so many people from/resident in UK visiting India on business during the Easter holidays (ish). Anyone seen any commentary on this?


----------



## PK99 (17 May 2021)

My vaccine record is now visible on the NHS app.
Dates. Vaccine. Batch number


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (17 May 2021)

DaveReading said:


> "Delaying the inevitable" (while vaccinations proceeded apace) would have saved lives.



It would also have "saved lives" (Covid-wise) if everybody self-isolated at home from early January for 12 months to allow full rollout of vaccinations. Should we have done that?


----------



## mjr (17 May 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> And bearing in mind what has happened since even the quarantine hotels have come in to being, how do you think the public in the UK would have taken to that level of restriction?


Is there evidence that quarantine hotels are working for arrivals from India? That people were not simply going to stay with family immediately.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 May 2021)

mjr said:


> Is there evidence that quarantine hotels are working for arrivals from India?


Is there evidence that quarantine hotels are not working for arrivals from India since 23 Apr?
But this is the 'vaccine' thread, so 'off topic' imho.


----------



## mjr (17 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Is there evidence that quarantine hotels are not working for arrivals from India since 23 Apr?


It arises logically from previous posts and is not much of a topic drift.

I have heard anecdotes, from people I trust who I think have no reason to invent them, but I would prefer data. I don't know where the data on quarantine hotels is being published and I thought someone here might, because there seems a lot of confidence in them.


----------



## lane (17 May 2021)

Just back from seeing Doctor 10 days after second Pfizer dose, with various rashes and swellings. Placed on a short steroid course and high dose of antihistamines. Also told must consult surgery before any future jabs.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 May 2021)

PK99 said:


> My vaccine record is now visible on the NHS app.
> Dates. Vaccine. Batch number



My wife's is too - good app!

Get my second tonight so mine won't be live for 12 days acording to the app.


----------



## vickster (17 May 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> My wife's is too - good app!
> 
> Get my second tonight so mine won't be live for 12 days acording to the app.


Why does it take so long? My first one was documented on patient access the day after?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 May 2021)

vickster said:


> Why does it take so long? My first one was documented on patient access the day after?



Ditto.

Presume that is the time it is now being given to take effect?


----------



## potsy (17 May 2021)

Just got the invitation for my 2nd jab, will be 9 weeks since my 1st


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 May 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The acceleration of doses in those already vaccinated makes no sense in the situation we're in.
> One dose gives good protection against infection and symptoms.
> A second dose makes a decent, but incremental improvement to that.
> But the risk here is a major 3rd spike. That risk is *massively* reduced in a highly non- linear fashion by vaccinating the unvaccinated, who have no immunity.
> ...





midlife said:


> vaccination is not the way to contain local outbreaks with exponential rise in cases.
> [and]
> Talking about why surge vaccination in Bolton would not be the best way to tackle the outbreak in the first instance.


More on Surge vaccination
Advice by SPI-M-O to SAGE (taken 13 May) (My precis)
SPI-M-O have considered the merits of surge vaccination of younger age groups in areas with rapidly growing outbreaks of the B.1.617.2 variant, to dampen transmission.

It would be operationally challenging and has an opportunity cost of slowing the rollout of vaccines to other parts of the country. The marginal benefit of vaccines at present in areas of high variants of concern growth, however, is many times higher than it is in lower prevalence parts of the country. Would rely on/assume effectiveness of existing vaccines against this VoC.

"There is an inherent lag between vaccination and the establishment of protection of the vaccinated individual, and B.1.617.2 has the potential to spread very rapidly out of areas where it is currently present. It will take some time before surge vaccination starts to break chains of transmission, and thus the variant could spread beyond the targeted area. For that reason, for surge vaccination to be successful it would need to be:

Started as soon as possible, while the absolute number of cases B.1.617.2 remains relatively low
Targeted at a wider geographical area than that where the variant is prevalent
Combined with short term local NPIs"
"In summary, while the success of a surge vaccination programme is not guaranteed, from a non-operational epidemiological perspective alone, it has a large potential upside with relatively small potential drawbacks with regard to transmission."


----------



## DaveReading (17 May 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> It would also have "saved lives" (Covid-wise) if everybody self-isolated at home from early January for 12 months to allow full rollout of vaccinations. Should we have done that?



Of course not - what's your point ?

Yes, banning travel from India a couple of weeks earlier would have had a downside, but hardly comparable to that of putting the whole of the UK in quarantine for a year.


----------



## Buck (17 May 2021)

The EMA have approved the Pfizer vaccine to have a life of up to 31 days in 2-8C storage. 

it is currently 120 hours which is a logistical challenge for vaccine sitesand creates stress points of delivery to the patient. The MHRA Is reviewing the situation and will decide if It will follow suit or stick with the 5days (in reality this 5 days is actuall 4 days for vaccine sites which includes the day of delivery, so 3 days of vaccinating!!)


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 May 2021)

Second jab this evening - didn't feel a thing.

Hope I have no after effects as per the first jab in Feb.


----------



## midlife (17 May 2021)

potsy said:


> Just got the invitation for my 2nd jab, will be 9 weeks since my 1st



That's interesting, thanks. Was listening to the Public health person from Bolton on Radio 4 this morning on the way to work saying young people not eligible would be turned away. Some government spokesman was also saying that all areas should follow the official government guidelines. 

Then this afternoon it all seemed to change with jabs going into everybody in the queue.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 May 2021)

midlife said:


> this afternoon it all seemed to change with jabs going into everybody in the [Bolton] queue.


Prevalence in Bolton is twice that of the second worst!
You can see the marginal benefit (see SPI-M-O precis in my post above) of using doses in specific areas of high prevalence (with a more transmissible variant) as first doses for all adults accepting the opportunity cost of slightly slower (by a few days) second doses in areas (regions even) of the UK where prevalence is very low. There's clear merit in turning round vaccine hesitancy in those areas/communities too and getting first jab uptake into the high 90s. Look at the number in Bolton hospital who had been offered a vaccine and refused it (some may have for medical reasons, of course).

Send the relevant hubs some diverted supplies (at the expense of other regions whose second doses can stay at 11-12 weeks and who can pause the first jabs for 37+ year olds) and allow the local vaccine programme managers some freedom to achieve clear objectives (see below).
Surge vaccination (high prevalence areas) priorities:
1) *First jabs for the previously vaccine hesitant* (with the almost explicit threat of a local reversion to greater restrictions as the 'stick')
2) *Second jabs for all those over 55* (will be an 8 week gap at least) - note the enhancement of a second jab at 8 weeks is less than one after a gap at 12 weeks (but the next 4 weeks matter in high prevalence areas)
3) *First jabs for anyone over 18*
Vaccinating the third category is not in line with the direct saving of lives/from serious illness (the JCVI mantra) but, 14 days down the line, all adults will have first jab level of protection; thus the susceptible population will have shrunk and community spread of this highly transmissible virus variant will be curtailed. Indirectly this will save lives and importantly keep cases UK-wide lower than they would be if we (just) plough on down the ages. This is a better outcome for the UK population as a whole and for the vast majority in particular. This hopefully temporary diversion of effort is, I acknowledge, not without operational challenge.

I wonder if there is a SAGE/SPI-M-O versus JCVI battle going on? Politicians will be the arbiters, thank goodness: we've seen how these scientists love to argue (arguing is a good thing btw, though not so much when the enemy is firing at you).


----------



## PK99 (17 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> we've seen how these scientists love to argue (arguing is a good thing btw, though not so much when the enemy is firing at you).



That is of course how science works and progresses. Every published research paper is an invitation to challenge.


----------



## midlife (17 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Prevalence in Bolton is twice that of the second worst!
> You can see the marginal benefit (see SPI-M-O precis in my post above) of using doses in specific areas of high prevalence (with a more transmissible variant) as first doses for all adults accepting the opportunity cost of slightly slower (by a few days) second doses in areas (regions even) of the UK where prevalence is very low. There's clear merit in turning round vaccine hesitancy in those areas/communities too and getting first jab uptake into the high 90s. Look at the number in Bolton hospital who had been offered a vaccine and refused it (some may have for medical reasons, of course).
> 
> Send the relevant hubs some diverted supplies (at the expense of other regions whose second doses can stay at 11-12 weeks and who can pause the first jabs for 37+ year olds) and allow the local vaccine programme managers some freedom to achieve clear objectives (see below).
> ...



Have you come across OODA Loop in Government / NHS planning?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (18 May 2021)

Feeling great this morning and again not even a sore arm.

Probably because I am well 'ard although not as well 'ard as @Drago of course. 

Seriously though, I wonder if my immune system is a tad lazy. Is that possible?


----------



## Milkfloat (18 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Prevalence in Bolton is twice that of the second worst!
> You can see the marginal benefit (see SPI-M-O precis in my post above) of using doses in specific areas of high prevalence (with a more transmissible variant) as first doses for all adults accepting the opportunity cost of slightly slower (by a few days) second doses in areas (regions even) of the UK where prevalence is very low. There's clear merit in turning round vaccine hesitancy in those areas/communities too and getting first jab uptake into the high 90s. Look at the number in Bolton hospital who had been offered a vaccine and refused it (some may have for medical reasons, of course).
> 
> Send the relevant hubs some diverted supplies (at the expense of other regions whose second doses can stay at 11-12 weeks and who can pause the first jabs for 37+ year olds) and allow the local vaccine programme managers some freedom to achieve clear objectives (see below).
> ...



With this methodology surely you are just risking chasing the variant around the country? By the time you have diverted supplies, ramped up delivery into arms and then waited for the vaccine to work then you are too late. The peak in cases will be well over and moved on elsewhere, perhaps the areas that supplies got diverted from. I agree with getting first and second jabs in arms for high risk people, but not by diverting resources from elsewhere.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 May 2021)

I appreciate that's the argument against @Milkfloat , but the diversion of supply would be delaying second jabs, where the potential recipients have reasonable (?70%) protection already and the risk of infection is very low because prevalence is low in that area/region.
I don't think giving first doses in very high prevalence towns will, taking a one month view, be too late. Sure the jabs will take 14 days (ish) to give a decent level of protection, but then you'd almost get local 'flock' immunity to strangle community transmission.
"The peak in cases will be well over and moved on elsewhere" you suggest. I do hope the peak is soon 'well over'. If it moves "elsewhere" that elsewhere is likely not Scotland, Wales or SW England (for example).
It would be good to see modelling (@midlife to inform the O and D your OODA loop) which aims to show the range of outcomes with different temporary vaccination strategies. Up till now the emphasis has been on directly saving lives, and JCVI explained their rationale in their 30 Dec directive. But the current risk is not serious disease and in extremis death because all over 43s (less the vaccine hesitant) have good protection, and the lower age groups have a very low IFR. The risk to the community is ramped up prevalence which will then result in leakage and infection of the 10% (say) of the fully vaccinated over 65s whom the vaccine doesn't protect.
Any surge vaccination effort is subordinate to surge testing, effective tracing, intrinsically motivated isolation (after first symptom or a positive test) and community 'enforced' limitations on movement in and out of the community.
As an example (and an aside, and verging off topic) I fear that there'll be fans from Bolton going down to Old Trafford. Out in the open air is low risk, but there'll be public transport used and beers drunk, indoors before and after.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I appreciate that's the argument against @Milkfloat , but the diversion of supply is delaying second jabs, where the potential recipients have reasonable (?70%) protection already and the risk of infection is very low because prevalence is low in that area/region.
> I don't think giving first doses in very high prevalence towns will, taking a one month view, be too late. Sure the jabs will take 14 days (ish) to give a decent level of protection, but then you'd almost get local 'flock' immunity to strangle community transmission.
> "The peak in cases will be well over and moved on elsewhere" you suggest. I do hope the peak is soon 'well over'. If it moves "elsewhere" that elsewhere is likely not Scotland, Wales or SW England (for example).
> It would be good to see modelling which aims to show the range of outcomes with different temporary vaccination strategies. Up till now the emphasis has been on directly saving lives, and JCVI explained their rationale in ther 30 Dec directive. But the current risk is not serious disease and in extremis death because all over 43s (less the vaccine hesitant) have good protection, and the lower age groups have a very low IFR. The risk to the community is ramped up prevalence which will then result in leakage and infection of the 10% (say) of the fully vaccinated over 65s whom the vaccine doesn't protect.
> ...



If you look at the PHE data above (assuming I've interpreted it right) 

https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/covid-vaccine.267960/page-255#post-6411422

Then very roughly across the vaccines 1st dose protects against infection by ~60% *and* if infected, against onward transmission by a further ~50%

That means a single dose reduces transmission by 80%!

A second dose, even if 100% effective, can only add a max further 20%

So we get 4x more transmission benefit by prioritising first doses. Given a spike in infections is the worry, it seems unanswerable to me that we should be prioritising first doses now. Delay 2nd doses more if necessary. Obviously this is the opposite of what is happening, so I've probably missed something obvious!


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 May 2021)

I suspect that in the areas of outbreak, there are lots of 'clinical discussions and appraisals' going on and local medical professionals are taking a pragmatic approach (eg underlying conditions, one of the carers of an over 70?). It was noticable (to me) in this morning's radio interviews that probing questions on 'are you giving under 35s a first jab, then', were stylishly answered with a forward defensive square bat. I hope people, within the supplies of vaccine available, are taking a nuanced 'French' approach to de rulz as opposed to a Germanic stance.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 May 2021)

A useful plot of daily vaccine delivery (peaks are Wed/Thu, troughs are w/es (big one Easter)):





Data from: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
We can see the increased proportion of daily doses given as second ones, from about 1 Apr onwards.
The 11 week gap between doses is the distance from the end of the green region to the right edge of the data on the plot.
If weekly dose rates remain the same, we return to giving mostly first doses in about 5 weeks ~ about 21 Jun.


----------



## dodgy (18 May 2021)

Booked in for 2nd jab next Wednesday, 10 weeks and 1 day after the first.


----------



## Ajax Bay (18 May 2021)

Mongolia coming up on the rails for the 'win'!


----------



## classic33 (18 May 2021)

Why when the gap between injections in the UK, is 9 - 12 weeks, has America decided that 28 days is the better option. Should the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine be licensed for use in amerw.


----------



## vickster (18 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> Why when the gap between injections in the UK, is 9 - 12 weeks, has America decided that 28 days is the better option. Should the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine be licensed for use in amerw.


What does the FDA licence stipulate?


----------



## classic33 (18 May 2021)

vickster said:


> What does the FDA licence stipulate?


Not approved for use yet. If it is approved, they'll be using 28 days between injections. 
Less than half the approved time over here, between jabs.


----------



## vickster (18 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> Not approved for use yet. If it is approved, they'll be using 28 days between injections.
> Less than half the approved time over here, between jabs.


I don’t follow...you said jabs are being given 28 days apart?


----------



## classic33 (18 May 2021)

vickster said:


> I don’t follow...you said jabs are being given 28 days apart?


Should it be approved for use, the jabs will be given 28 days apart. 
Contrast that with the 12 weeks here.


----------



## vickster (18 May 2021)

Different vaccination strategy ?
Lots of countries are spacing differently


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> Why when the gap between injections in the UK, is 9 - 12 weeks, has America decided that 28 days is the better option should the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine be licensed for use in [the USA].


The RCT trial of the Oxford-AZ vaccine used a 4 week gap so there was no trial evidence that a longer gap would offer good protection.
Lancet article: Single-dose Oxford–AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine followed by a 12-week booster
"to achieve the greatest health benefit rapidly, the UK Government decided on a policy of administering as many first doses as possible and delaying the second dose of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine until 12 weeks after the first dose. Although this policy was criticised, the latest results reported by Voysey and colleagues provide a necessary evidence-based justification for the decision.1"
The USA FDA prefer to stick to the 4 week gap. They have vaccinated the vulnerable half of USA's population so the benefit of a delayed second dose to give as many people as possible a first jab doesn't apply. Their call. But somewhere I've seen science/evidence suggesting the protection enhancement from the second dose is greater with the longer gap. Many other countries have moved to an extended gap (ie >4 weeks).
Also this (early Jan):
"Andrew Pollard, the head of the Oxford Vaccine Group and chief investigator into the trial of [the Oxford-AZ] vaccine, said that extending the gap between vaccines made biological sense. “Generally, a longer gap between vaccine doses leads to a better immune response, with the second dose causing a better boost. (With HPV vaccine for girls, for example, the gap is a year and gives better responses than a one month gap.) From the Oxford vaccine trials, there is 70% protection after the first dose up to the second dose, and the immune response was about three times greater after the second dose when the second dose was delayed, comparing second dose after four weeks versus second dose after 2-3 months,"


----------



## classic33 (19 May 2021)

Awaiting approval before they start using the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.
In the meantime, they seem to be trying to get rid of what they did receive of this vaccine. Choosing to go with those produced in America.


----------



## lane (19 May 2021)

Vaccine supply no longer a limiting factor in USA so they don't need to worry too much about new approval s.


----------



## vickster (19 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> Awaiting approval before they start using the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.
> In the meantime, they seem to be trying to get rid of what they did receive of this vaccine. Choosing to go with those produced in America.


Good, they should donate FOC to Covax if they don’t want it for developing countries


----------



## C R (19 May 2021)

Second AZ dose this morning. All OK so far.


----------



## lane (19 May 2021)

vickster said:


> Good, they should donate FOC to Covax if they don’t want it for developing countries



Think they are proposing to donate to Canada and Mexico


----------



## vickster (19 May 2021)

lane said:


> Think they are proposing to donate to Canada and Mexico


Canada is hardly a developing country


----------



## roubaixtuesday (19 May 2021)

classic33 said:


> Awaiting approval before they start using the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.
> In the meantime, they seem to be trying to get rid of what they did receive of this vaccine. Choosing to go with those produced in America.



The US supply for the AZ vaccine is produced from a US supply chain.


----------



## lane (19 May 2021)

vickster said:


> Canada is hardly a developing country



No but they are short of vaccine as they don't have enough contracts in place.


----------



## lane (19 May 2021)

vickster said:


> Canada is hardly a developing country



Your right they probably should donate them to an Malawi instead:

Taken form the BBC News Website:

*"Health authorities in Malawi have incinerated 19,610 expired doses of the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine, saying it will reassure the public that any vaccines they do get are safe."*


----------



## midlife (19 May 2021)

lane said:


> No but they are short of vaccine as they don't have enough contracts in place.



I thought Canada had ordered more vaccines than any ther country?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (19 May 2021)

midlife said:


> I thought Canada had ordered more vaccines than any ther country?
> 
> View attachment 589557



I think that must be well out of date - just for instance, Saudi Arabia has already administered over 11 million doses (source: ourworldindata)


----------



## lane (19 May 2021)

My info seems a bit out of dale a quick google suggests that they are ramping up. 

"This ramp-up in Canada’s vaccine rollout has been a long time coming. On March 1, vaccine deliveries were so small that Canada wasn’t on pace to reach 75 per cent of its population having first doses until Nov. 24, 2022. Then, vaccine supply accelerated in April and May. Now, at our current pace, Tombe’s model suggests that Canada should reach 75 per cent by June 19. In addition, 75 per cent of all eligible Canadians 12 and up could have second doses by the second week in August."


----------



## classic33 (19 May 2021)

midlife said:


> I thought Canada had ordered more vaccines than any ther country?
> 
> View attachment 589557


And if they start giving a third in six months time?


----------



## Buck (20 May 2021)

Pfizer storage life increases from 5 days to 31

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...elf-life-extended-from-5-to-31-days-says-mhra

this is fantastic news as the stress was using this all in such a short window (reality being <84 hours) especially as it is now the primary 1st dose vaccine, at present.


----------



## classic33 (20 May 2021)

Pfizer are to start production of their vaccine in their facilities*, in Dublin later this year.

*I'm assuming this will be the Flynn Pharma doing the work.


----------



## mjr (21 May 2021)

Speaking of Ireland, it seems the "vaccine invalidates life insurance" lie and the earlier "driving masked invalidates motoring insurance" lie have resurfaced there in videos by a UC Dublin anti-vax professor: https://www.thejournal.ie/does-covid-vaccine-impact-insurance-premium-5439474-May2021/


----------



## fossyant (22 May 2021)

Well it looks like you can still test positive after both vaccines.

Daughter received a call last night from Track and Trace and has to isolate for 10 days. She's a bit miffed as she will miss college. Her boyfriend's dad had tested positive, and he'd dropped her home on Wednesday. He'd been out with a friend at weekend, wasn't ill at all, but his friend tested positive. He'd done a lateral flow at weekend that was negative, but on Thurs tested positive then had to get a PCR.

He's had both jabs and is not ill. So I can see vaccinated folk, who are testing regular, at some point coming up positive again, and having to isolate, even though not unwell. I think workplace sickness rates are going to take a hammering.


----------



## vickster (22 May 2021)

No manufacturer has ever claimed otherwise?


----------



## PK99 (22 May 2021)

fossyant said:


> *Well it looks like you can still test positive after both vaccines.*
> 
> Daughter received a call last night from Track and Trace and has to isolate for 10 days. She's a bit miffed as she will miss college. Her boyfriend's dad had tested positive, and he'd dropped her home on Wednesday. He'd been out with a friend at weeking, wasn't ill at all, but his friend tested positive. He'd done a lateral flow at weekend that was negative, but on Thurs tested positive then had to get a PCR.
> 
> He's had both jabs and is not ill. So I can see vaccinated folk, who are testing regular, at some point coming up positive again, and having to isolate, even though not unwell. I think workplace sickness rates are going to take a hammering.



As explained by Professor Van Tam in the briefing the other day, that is the issue wrt travel to Amber countries - the vaccinated traveller is unlikely to be ill but could be infected and bring back and spread the virus on their return.


----------



## Bromptonaut (22 May 2021)

I'm not surprised given the explanation of PCR testing at https://www.medicaldevice-network.com/features/types-of-covid-19-test-antibody-pcr-antigen/
_PCR tests are used to directly screen for the presence of viral RNA, which will be detectable in the body before antibodies form or symptoms of the disease are present. This means the tests can tell whether or not someone has the virus very early on in their illness._

The effect of the vaccine will be to allow the virus to be fought off but I don't thin anybody has ever said it prevents early infection.


----------



## midlife (22 May 2021)

Apparently on Wattsapp that over 16 can book a covid vaccine in Workington. Not on Wattsapp so can't check. Seems a bit odd.


----------



## Bromptonaut (22 May 2021)

Not seen Workington mentioned either re vaccine or a 'West Cumbria Hotspot'.

There has been something about a vaccination bus in Warrington though.


----------



## Buck (22 May 2021)

fossyant said:


> Well it looks like you can still test positive after both vaccines.
> 
> Daughter received a call last night from Track and Trace and has to isolate for 10 days. She's a bit miffed as she will miss college. Her boyfriend's dad had tested positive, and he'd dropped her home on Wednesday. He'd been out with a friend at weeking, wasn't ill at all, but his friend tested positive. He'd done a lateral flow at weekend that was negative, but on Thurs tested positive then had to get a PCR.
> 
> He's had both jabs and is not ill. So I can see vaccinated folk, who are testing regular, at some point coming up positive again, and having to isolate, even though not unwell. I think workplace sickness rates are going to take a hammering.



Its never been any different. The vaccine reduces transmission and symptoms but doesn’t prevent you “carrying” the virus and infecting others.


----------



## KnittyNorah (22 May 2021)

fossyant said:


> Well it looks like you can still test positive after both vaccines.



That is very, very old news. 
All that has ever been claimed with any degree of certainty is that the approved vaccines are _extremely_ effective at preventing serious illness and hospitalisation in most people who receive them, and at _reducing _(not eliminating) transmission from the vaccine recipient, should they happen to get infected.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 May 2021)

Buck said:


> Its never been any different. The vaccine reduces transmission and symptoms but doesn’t prevent you “carrying” the virus and infecting others.


Absolutely, 90%. But at some stage we need to adopt a few protocols which balance the need to minimise virus spread with the demands of 'everyday' living and recognise the benefits of the vaccination programme. Holiday in UK peeps. Where in UK haven't you been so far in your life?
For example are we going to continue to require a double vaccinated 'close contact' of someone who a few days later tests PCR positive to self-isolate? For example in the case above, the test and trace direction is that the daughter will need to (and be directed to) self-isolate. What if she'd been also fully vaccinated (+14 days)?
On the issue of 'vaccination' doesn't give full protection, the Warwick Uni modelling suggests that the majority of future deaths will be people who have been fully vaccinated. The deadly maths is reasonably straightforward. Take two individuals one 80, the other a vaccine hesitant 40.
Then multiply their chances of:
Exposure to infection - say 40 year old thrice as likely
Developing infection - 40 year old 10 times as likely (80yo has 90% protection from vaccinatation)
IFR: for the 40yo = 0.1% For the 80yo = 10%
The vaccinated 80yo is 3 times more likely to die of COVID-19 than the unvaccinated 40yo. (NB the vaccine hesitant 40yo can reduce their OR by a factor of 10 by getting vaccinated.
* All figures rough, but the messages are clear.
1) Sadly statistics suggests a few people will die having tested positive for COVID-19 within 28 days, even if they've been fully vaccinated: a few of the 900 who die in UK every summer week.
2) The higher percentage of the population who get vaccinated the less chance there is of either individual catching COVID-19 in the 'first place'.


----------



## fossyant (22 May 2021)

The problem I see is having to take time off work if you are regularly testing, but are fully vaccinated. Or potentially more awkward in a fully vaccinated house, is isolating, despite no-one being ill.

First case I've experienced.


----------



## Buck (22 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Absolutely, 90%. But at some stage we need to adopt a few protocols which balance the need to minimise virus spread with the demands of 'everyday' living and recognise the benefits of the vaccination programme. Holiday in UK peeps. Where in UK haven't you been so far in your life?
> For example are we going to continue to require a double vaccinated 'close contact' of someone who a few days later tests PCR positive to self-isolate? For example in the case above, the test and trace direction is that the daughter will need to (and be directed to) self-isolate. What if she'd been also fully vaccinated (+14 days)?
> On the issue of 'vaccination' doesn't give full protection, the Warwick Uni modelling suggests that the majority of future deaths will be people who have been fully vaccinated. The deadly maths is reasonably straightforward. Take two individuals one 80, the other a vaccine hesitant 40.
> Then multiply their chances of:
> ...



I would like to think that the rules of engagement will change once we have offered the vaccine to the adult population. At the rate it is going we are not too far away. 
2nd dose vaccinations are going well and uptake remains strong for these so it’s good to see only limited apathy in those with first dose. Vast majority are actively seeking it especially as it will give them the perceived freedom.

Once we have vaccinated the majority of those able to have the vaccine, the risks become lower and dare I say, more acceptable. 
The challenge will be if the current vaccination programme proves ineffective against new strains but that is another discussion!


----------



## Buck (22 May 2021)

fossyant said:


> The problem I see is having to take time off work if you are regularly testing, but are fully vaccinated. Or potentially more awkward in a fully vaccinated house, is isolating, despite no-one being ill.
> 
> First case I've experienced.



It’s a big impact no doubt about it. There are numerous trials underway at present that have people completing daily LFTs and do not have to isolate if negative. This may be a stepping stone to remove the isolation period. 

My son was sent home from school this week as someone in his bubble was positive. He is “unofficially” doing daily LFTs but still has to isolate For the 10 days. Thankfully our holiday doesn't start until day 11 - Phew!!


----------



## fossyant (22 May 2021)

Buck said:


> It’s a big impact no doubt about it. There are numerous trials underway at present that have people completing daily LFTs and do not have to isolate if negative. This may be a stepping stone to remove the isolation period.
> 
> My son was sent home from school this week as someone in his bubble was positive. He is “unofficially” doing daily LFTs but still has to isolate For the 10 days. Thankfully our holiday doesn't start until day 11 - Phew!!



Same here - daughter due to come with us to the caravan, day 11. Phew. We are down for about 8 days at the van.

She was going to do a LFT today.


----------



## fossyant (22 May 2021)

I've not had a test yet, might just order some.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (22 May 2021)

fossyant said:


> I've not had a test yet, might just order some.



Just walk in to a chemist and ask for them. They give them out for free right there and then.


----------



## neil_merseyside (22 May 2021)

fossyant said:


> I've not had a test yet, might just order some.


Make sure you gag when doing your throat (always 1st) then try and poke your brains out when bogey mining. 
Oh and rotate the swab and revolve it around the nostril too. 
Blow your nose first, well before you start, but do your throat first or your transferring a bogey


----------



## lane (22 May 2021)

Bromptonaut said:


> Not seen Workington mentioned either re vaccine or a 'West Cumbria Hotspot'.
> 
> There has been something about a vaccination bus in Warrington though.



Just refer back to where the hotspots were when we had the tier system prior to Xmas; exactly the same places now. Might be worth finding out why that is.


----------



## Bromptonaut (22 May 2021)

lane said:


> Just refer back to where the hotspots were when we had the tier system prior to Xmas; exactly the same places now. Might be worth finding out why that is.



Sorry, I think I've missed something. Can you remind me where these hotspots were and why?


----------



## lane (22 May 2021)

For example Leicester. It was the first hotspot identified when we came out of lockdown 1, remained a hotspot through the tier system up to Christmas. It is now a hotspot as we come out of lockdown 3 being in top 5 for the new variant.


----------



## neil_merseyside (22 May 2021)

lane said:


> For example Leicester. It was the first hotspot identified when we came out of lockdown 1, remained a hotspot through the tier system up to Christmas. It is now a hotspot as we come out of lockdown 3 being in top 5 for the new variant.


All that means is the working/housing pressures are unchanged?


----------



## mjr (22 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> 2) The higher percentage of the population who get vaccinated the less chance there is of either individual catching COVID-19 in the 'first place'.


I thought we are still likely to test PCR positive for the short window between getting a noseful of covid and it being expelled after getting killed by antibodies?


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 May 2021)

AZ and Pfizer as effective against Indian variant as it is against Kent variant *after two jabs* one study (Public Health England) suggests:

_The Pfizer and AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccines are highly effective against the variant identified in India after two doses, a study has found.

Two jabs of either vaccine give a similar level of protection against symptomatic disease from the Indian variant as they do for the Kent one.

However, both vaccines were only 33% effective against the Indian variant three weeks after the first dose.

This compared with 50% effectiveness against the Kent variant.

Public Health England, which ran the study, said the vaccines are likely to be even more effective at preventing hospital admission and deaths._

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57214596


----------



## Bromptonaut (23 May 2021)

How is the efficiency of a vaccine measured? 

If you're in the cohort where it's not effective are you unprotected or is just that you might get quite ill?


----------



## mjr (23 May 2021)

Effective, efficacious and efficient are all different.

https://www.who.int/influenza_vaccines_plan/resources/Session4_VEfficacy_VEffectiveness.PDF

Vaccine efficacy- % reduction in disease incidence in a vaccinated group compared to an unvaccinated group under optimal conditions.

But:

studies assess effectiveness by comparing the vaccination status of individuals who develop the disease (cases) with a group of individuals without the disease (controls) who are also representative of the population from which the cases arise. If the vaccine is effective, the cases are more likely to be the unvaccinated individuals.

Vaccines do not always need to have an exceptionally high effectiveness to be useful, for example the influenza vaccine is 40-60% effective yet saves thousands of lives every year.

https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/what-difference-between-efficacy-and-effectiveness


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 May 2021)

Effectiveness - if it's quoted at 95%, see below, from the USA, on the 5%
CDC report that 10,262 fully vaccinated residents of the USA experienced breakthrough* COVID-19 by 30 Apr (and think it likely the figure is under-reported). Within these, 27%, were asymptomatic and 2% (160 people) died.
995 people were hospitalized (12%), including 289 hospitalized for asymptomatic infection or for reasons unrelated to COVID-19,
Study was published online May 25 in _Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR)._
By end April USA had fully (ie double dose) vaccinated 101M. 5% of 101M is . . . .

* tested positive for COVID-19 more than two weeks after being fully vaccinated.


----------



## mjr (26 May 2021)

French vlogger whistle-blows on Russians pretending to be a UK PR firm trying to pay him to spread anti-vax myths https://www.euronews.com/2021/05/25...offered-cash-to-spread-vaccine-disinformation


----------



## mjr (26 May 2021)

Boris just repeated the lie that the vaccine rollout could not have happened while part of the EMA (even though it started under that regime during the transition period) at Prime Minister's Questions.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 May 2021)

Pretty sure the "vaccine roll out" could not have happened at the pace it has if the UK had agreed (NB with no seat at the EMA discussion/decision table) to go with the EMA procurement. So in those terms the PM's answer is not a 'lie'.
The "vaccine roll out" was enabled at pace by the early in quantity supply the VTF (UK) success enabled.
I appreciate you have pointed out that in theory, participants in an EMA led procurement programme could go and advance purchase more supply, but that freedom would not have included procurement of vaccines which were on the putative EMA 'buy'. So not Pfizer, not Oxford-AZ: massive delay in supply and we would be probably 20% less fully vaccinated.


----------



## mjr (26 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Pretty sure the "vaccine roll out" could not have happened at the pace it has if the UK had agreed (NB with no seat at the EMA discussion/decision table) to go with the EMA procurement. So in those terms the PM's answer is not a 'lie'.


I will wait for the transcript but I think he did not limit his answer to a procurement scheme, an omission which turns it into a lie.


----------



## KnittyNorah (26 May 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Effectiveness - if it's quoted at 95%, see below, from the USA, on the 5%
> CDC report that 10,262 fully vaccinated residents of the USA experienced breakthrough* COVID-19 by 30 Apr (and think it likely the figure is under-reported). Within these, 27%, were asymptomatic and 2% (160 people) died.
> 995 people were hospitalized (12%), including 289 hospitalized for asymptomatic infection or for reasons unrelated to COVID-19,
> Study was published online May 25 in _Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR)._
> ...



Using those figures, and an in-my head approximate calculation, it would seem that - over what, two/three months?- ~ 0.01% (probably more, as I assume asymptomatic infections are more likely to have been missed/gone unreported) of the fully vaccinated experienced breakthrough infection(either symptomatic or asymptomatic), significantly fewer than 0.01% were hospitalised with C-19 and about 0.00016% of the vaccinated population actually _died_ of C-19. We have no information on the ages and presence of co-morbidities in those for whom vaccination failed to provide full immunity, but nevertheless this is clearly an astonishingly-successful vaccine.


----------



## Buck (26 May 2021)

mjr said:


> Boris just repeated the lie that the vaccine rollout could not have happened while part of the EMA (even though it started under that regime during the transition period) at Prime Minister's Questions.



Was this in response to Keir Starmer Today?

The quote from today’s Hansard says :-

Boris Johnson
_”....When it comes to hindsight, I just remind him [Keir Starmer] that he actually—he denied this at the time and then had to correct it—voted to stay in the European Medicines Agency, which would have made it impossible for us to do the vaccine roll-out at the pace that we have.

.....We have delivered 60 million vaccinations across this country, more than—he loves these European comparisons—any other European country, including 22 million second doses. That, with great respect to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, is I believe the priority of the British people. That is really what they are focused on, while he voted to stay in the European Medicines Agency. The Opposition vacillate; we vaccinate. They deliberate; we deliver.”_

If so, I’m not so sure your replay is quite correct?


----------



## mjr (26 May 2021)

Buck said:


> If so, I’m not so sure your replay is quite correct?


Seems to confirm my accuracy: Johnson didn't limit it to procurement, making the claim incorrect!


----------



## Buck (26 May 2021)

mjr said:


> Boris just repeated the lie that the vaccine rollout could not have happened while part of the EMA (even though it started under that regime during the transition period) at Prime Minister's Questions.



But I don’t see how the above is correct from my reading of the transcript. He didn’t say any of the above.


----------



## Ajax Bay (26 May 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Boris and Handsoncock are Cnuts ....... !


Surely they have surreally pointed out that the tide will come in, whether they command it not to, or not.
I surmise that the PM decided that the trauma and political cost of sacking his Health Secretary outweighed the functional/efficiency benefits of a better replacement (who: Jeremy Hunt) and played to his preference for procrastination.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 May 2021)

Vaccines

The purple line is the 7-day rolling average of daily doses administered. At the data cut we were about to break the previous high (in March). I've also put the estimate of lag between doses on there: pretty steady at ~10.6 weeks. Given recent policy statements I expect that steadily to decrease. All the Oxford-AZ supply will be going to second doses now.
Requirement for second doses (driven by the peak you can see in second half of March) will drop off in 14 days, and first doses can surge ahead (the 20s). 
By 14 Jun, about 11M more first doses left to do by that point to complete the entire adult population. Decisions imminent on whether vaccines are to be authorised for older children as has happened recently in the USA.
It feels like focusing on gaps in coverage once the main process is complete will be the next logical step.


----------



## aferris2 (2 Jun 2021)

Had my second jab yesterday. This is what Whatsapp suggested...



Guess its true then.


----------



## dodgy (2 Jun 2021)

aferris2 said:


> Had my second jab yesterday. This is what Whatsapp suggested...
> View attachment 591873
> 
> 
> Guess its true then.


Brilliant  That's what happens when you crowdsource your auto-suggestions!


----------



## Landsurfer (2 Jun 2021)

Had Covid, hospitalised, ill for 2 weeks .... full recovery .. like 99+% of others, both jabs .... no side effects ......
No more restrictions, no more masks ... no more rule by the idiocracy ...( no more rule by Idiots) ....
Your freedom is your choice ...
Take it now, don't wait for Boris and his mates to “give” you your rights back ...

I’m the tall, big, bloke in Aldi without the mask .... Say hello ....


----------



## dodgy (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Had Covid, hospitalised, ill for 2 weeks .... full recovery .. like 99+% of others, both jabs .... no side effects ......
> No more restrictions, no more masks ... no more rule by the idiocracy ...( no more rule by Idiots) ....
> Your freedom is your choice ...
> Take it now, don't wait for Boris and his mates to “give” you your rights back ...
> ...



Let me guess, leave voter?
Welcome to the block zone, I can do without your kind of idiocy, including your 'cute' auto sig.


----------



## classic33 (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Had Covid, hospitalised, ill for 2 weeks .... full recovery .. like 99+% of others, *both jabs* *.... no side effects ......
> No more restrictions, no more masks ... no more rule by the idiocracy ...( no more rule by Idiots) ....
> Your freedom is your choice ...
> Take it now, don't wait for Boris and his mates to “give” you your rights back ...
> ...


*You may be having a third later this year.

https://www.bradfordhospitals.nhs.u...ovid-19-vaccine-booster-study-launches-in-uk/


----------



## Rocky (2 Jun 2021)

In response to an earlier post about Covid and the vaccine. My mother in law broke her leg just before Christmas and was admitted to hospital to have it fixed. She hadn't had the vaccine but was scheduled to. She caught Covid in hospital and died two days after Christmas. It was not a pleasant death.

My brother in law, who lived with his mother all his life, works in a local supermarket. He is harangued on a daily basis for reminding people it is policy to wear a mask when shopping. He finds it incredibly difficult being abused and knowing that his mother died of the same disease he is trying to stop others getting.

I find it absolutely appalling that someone should brag about not wearing a mask in Aldi, no matter how tall or big that person is.


----------



## KnittyNorah (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Had Covid, hospitalised, ill for 2 weeks .... full recovery .. like 99+% of others, both jabs .... no side effects ......
> No more restrictions, no more masks ... no more rule by the idiocracy ...( no more rule by Idiots) ....
> Your freedom is your choice ...
> Take it now, don't wait for Boris and his mates to “give” you your rights back ...
> ...



So you're not concerned _at all _that you might - while asymptomatic yourself - be passing on C-19 to a person who for some perfectly-legitimate reason can't be vaccinated, or who is one of the minority who develop no immune response to it. And if that person already has respiratory issues ...
Right, well at least we know a where we are, and with that description I'll know to keep away from anyone answering to it. 
I suppose you consider it's OK for asymptomatic carriers of typhoid to shoot in a paddling pool, too - and you'd let your kids play in it.


----------



## AndyRM (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Had Covid, hospitalised, ill for 2 weeks .... full recovery .. like 99+% of others, both jabs .... no side effects ......
> No more restrictions, no more masks ... no more rule by the idiocracy ...( no more rule by Idiots) ....
> Your freedom is your choice ...
> Take it now, don't wait for Boris and his mates to “give” you your rights back ...
> ...



Cool story bro.


----------



## KnittyNorah (2 Jun 2021)

Rocky said:


> In response to an earlier post about Covid and the vaccine. My mother in law broke her leg just before Christmas and was admitted to hospital to have it fixed. She hadn't had the vaccine but was scheduled to. She caught Covid in hospital and died two days after Christmas. It was not a pleasant death.
> 
> My brother in law, who lived with his mother all his life, works in a local supermarket. He is harangued on a daily basis for reminding people it is policy to wear a mask when shopping. He finds it incredibly difficult being abused and knowing that his mother died of the same disease he is trying to stop others getting.
> 
> I find it absolutely appalling that someone should brag about not wearing a mask in Aldi, no matter how tall or big that person is.



Please tell your brother-in-law that he has my support, sympathy and good wishes.


----------



## Rocky (2 Jun 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> Please tell your brother-in-law that he has my support, sympathy and good wishes.


Thank you


----------



## Gillstay (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Had Covid, hospitalised, ill for 2 weeks .... full recovery .. like 99+% of others, both jabs .... no side effects ......
> No more restrictions, no more masks ... no more rule by the idiocracy ...( no more rule by Idiots) ....
> Your freedom is your choice ...
> Take it now, don't wait for Boris and his mates to “give” you your rights back ...
> ...


So the caring sector of society looked after you for two weeks and you cannot pass any of that care to others on by wearing a simple mask ! Wow.


----------



## Rusty Nails (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Had Covid, hospitalised, ill for 2 weeks .... full recovery .. like 99+% of others, both jabs .... no side effects ......
> No more restrictions, no more masks ... no more rule by the idiocracy ...( no more rule by Idiots) ....
> Your freedom is your choice ...
> Take it now, don't wait for Boris and his mates to “give” you your rights back ...
> ...



You're also the tall, big bloke in Aldi without a clue.

At the start of the pandemic, if I remember correctly, you just said it was like flu and that it wouldn't kill many more than flu, and anyway they were not young or fit.
The only thing that has kept the deaths down to at least 128k to date are the restrictions and lockdowns, as demonstrated by the way deaths increase after restrictions are eased, or ignored.
But never mind, you are not letting that loss of that basic human right of going maskless in Aldi spoil your life.
I assume you don't work in Aldi and go in maskless.

I'm the short, skinny bloke in Aldi with a mask.....please don't say hello.


----------



## Adam4868 (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Had Covid, hospitalised, ill for 2 weeks .... full recovery .. like 99+% of others, both jabs .... no side effects ......
> No more restrictions, no more masks ... no more rule by the idiocracy ...( no more rule by Idiots) ....
> Your freedom is your choice ...
> Take it now, don't wait for Boris and his mates to “give” you your rights back ...
> ...


Solid.....


----------



## fossyant (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> I’m the tall, big, bloke in Aldi without the mask .... Say hello ....



Banker. 

You can still catch and carry the virus, that's what's happening in places like Bolton - infecting the lot that aren't vaccinated. People like you will get us restricted again. High chances Welsh will kick us out of Wales if rates go up, mainly because folk aren't following rules. Poss Tot


----------



## lane (2 Jun 2021)

dodgy said:


> Let me guess, leave voter?
> Welcome to the block zone, I can do without your kind of idiocy, including your 'cute' auto sig.



There are levels of idiocy - at least he is not anti vac.


----------



## fossyant (2 Jun 2021)

The young Aldi store worker could be getting high viral loads from any vaccinated folk who go in, especially the non-mask wearers. Have a bit of respect for those in service industry. My daughter has just had to do 10 days isolation due to a 10 minute contact with her boyfriend's dad in the car as he dropped her home. She missed 10 days college. The boyfriend's dad and family lost 10 days work, all vaccinated, but tested positive. Think about it, it's loss of income for many people. Me, I've a pretty damn good sick pay scheme, and can work from home still if I caught it, but will I go round being a selfish git, no. Stick to the rules, it's not a big deal.

Some other folk just get SSP - think about it. It's 'other' folk that suffer, especially low paid and young.


----------



## dodgy (2 Jun 2021)

My wife developed CFS (post viral chronic fatigue syndrome), which turned out to be a life-long debilitating condition after she had an extremely bad bout of the flu (proper flue, not the bloody sniffles) in the mid 90s. I worry that the kids enjoying their freedoms right now might go on to develop 'long covid'. Still, as long as Aldi Man is strong, who gives a feck, eh?


----------



## fossyant (2 Jun 2021)

Long covid is a big issue for many people, even cyclists - big thread on singletrack about it. You don't want it.


----------



## dodgy (2 Jun 2021)

fossyant said:


> Long covid is a big issue for many people, even cyclists - big thread on singletrack about it. You don't want it.



It's just one of the factors that has made me ultra cautious, cycling is a big part of my life and as I could retire soon, I don't want that ruined. That sounds selfish, but it's as much for me as it is for others benefit. I didn't, for instance, enjoy "eat out to help out", preferring to stay home for the benefit of me - and others.


----------



## lane (2 Jun 2021)

Also note he had Covid - probably because he didn't take sufficient care - was admitted to hospital for two weeks putting NHS staff at risk. Now not satisfied with that he feels the need to put shop workers at risk.


----------



## dodgy (2 Jun 2021)

I'll just leave this here, seems appropriate, I'd prefer not to keep tabs on this thread now.
https://www.news.com.au/world/coron...s/news-story/93302d97559f26c9387132b1ee6a0779


----------



## fossyant (2 Jun 2021)

dodgy said:


> It's just one of the factors that has made me ultra cautious, cycling is a big part of my life and as I could retire soon, I don't want that ruined. That sounds selfish, but it's as much for me as it is for others benefit. I didn't, for instance, enjoy "eat out to help out", preferring to stay home for the benefit of me - and others.



This, it doesn't sound pleasant. Service providers don't need the additional 'stress' at the moment, from small restaurant's to chains - it's manned by lower paid staff, refusing to wear a mask without a 'genuine' medical condition is selfish. I hate them, can't see due to steaming up my glasses, but stick to the rules.

I'm off to a nice little local restaurant (in Wales near our caravan) tomorrow as part of my wife's 50th birthday celebrations - I'll go in wearing my mask, hand sanitised etc until I'm at the table as required. The staff don't need this extra stress in these times -they have had enough stress trying to remain viable.

I got thanked at the local (at home) Iceland, as I'd brought my own hand sanitiser and did my hands and the basket - the chap working there said most people aren't bothering now (this was in February).


----------



## Landsurfer (2 Jun 2021)

*Mod Note: the statement below is juist an opinion, unless a link to prove it is produced.*


> Long Covid is Psychological .. not Physiological ...


I was hospitalised for one night in a Covid ward of 4 ... with staff of over 20 ... mostly chatting at the nurses station while the trainee nurses did the observations ...
Was ill for 2 weeks...
Unlike you lot hiding on furlough i was out working every day, travelling across the country to make sure you had light power and food, wearing a pointless muzzle, not hiding under the stairs on 80% salary.
Clap for the NHS .... Never .. ever ...
CLAP FOR THE STAFF IN ALDI, TESCO, MORRISONS ..et al..

Me, Jules and our Grandson all caught and where diagnosed with Covid after a visit to our DENTISTS ..
13TH FEBUARY ...
And i lay no blame at the Dentists ... they weren’t on furlough, not hiding under the stairs .... not sheep ...

But ..like 99%n of “covid victims” I made a full recovery ...
I’ve never been ill ... never ... no flu, never a cold, nothing .... My Wife .... INFLUENZA ... not man flu ... and lots of other stuff ... she made a full recovery in 5 days, grandson in 2 days ... my turn of the dice ...

There are a coterie of people on here that want to wallow in the fear porn that has washed across our nation ...
We are not .....

Shepherds or Sheep ....
Choose your place in life ...
We are Shepherds.

Bring on the Inquiry .....


----------



## fossyant (2 Jun 2021)

You are an idiot. YOU and YOUR family have been OK, I've not been poorly, may have had covid in December 19 due to colleagues coming back from Woohan, but tell that to all the folks that are dead. The virus won't/is unlikely to kill anyone in my family, other than MIL who a chest infection will kill, or my BIL whose heart is dicky after a viral infection a few years ago. 

Long covid isn't 'fake' - it can and does damage organs, like other viruses.

Selfish. Simple as.


----------



## fossyant (2 Jun 2021)

You'll also find most on here have been working, OK from home, but that ain't great fun for those not used to it. Wife and son lost jobs, fortunately got them again.


----------



## Rusty Nails (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Long Covid is Psychological .. not Physiological ...
> I was hospitalised for one night in a Covid ward of 4 ... with staff of over 20 ... mostly chatting at the nurses station while the trainee nurses did the observations ...
> Was ill for 2 weeks...
> Unlike you lot hiding on furlough i was out working every day, travelling across the country to make sure you had light power and food, wearing a pointless muzzle, not hiding under the stairs on 80% salary.
> ...



Unbelievable level of arrogance and ignorance in one post!!

Your expertise in Psychological and Physiological medicine is truly admirable.

Who exactly are you shepherding, or did you get that bit from a wall poster?


----------



## Landsurfer (2 Jun 2021)

fossyant said:


> You are an idiot. YOU and YOUR family have been OK, I've not been poorly, may have had covid in December 19 due to colleagues coming back from Woohan, but tell that to all the folks that are dead. The virus won't/is unlikely to kill anyone in my family, other than MIL who a chest infection will kill, or my BIL whose heart is dicky after a viral infection a few years ago.
> 
> Long covid isn't 'fake' - it can and does damage organs, like other viruses.
> 
> Selfish. Simple as.



Well i managed to survive with my imbedded cardiac device ..... My ex wife died in february ... Says covid on her death certificate ... but it wasn’t ...
The horror of those that died and the effect on their families is real and awful ....
But ..
They can’t die again ...
Who is going to die in a society that has been vaccinated ?
Who will die in the “third wave” so beloved of the scientists ....
You cant die twice ... Despite what Handonscock says ...


----------



## fossyant (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Well i managed to survive with my imbedded cardiac device ..... My ex wife died in february ... Says covid on her death certificate ... but it wasn’t ...
> The horror of those that died and the effect on their families is real and awful ....
> But ..
> They can’t die again ...
> ...



You are still being a selfish idiot though.


----------



## Landsurfer (2 Jun 2021)

Good ... Being a “selfish Idiot” is better .. in my opinion .. than being a cowardly sheep !
Stand up for you rights ... if you even know what they are ... 
Get out of hiding and join the rest of the population grasping our freedom from tyranny ..
There was a time and a place for restriction, control, hiding away ..It saved thousands of lives, possibly millions of lives ...

BUT ...

That time is over !


----------



## classic33 (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Long Covid is Psychological .. not Physiological ...
> I was hospitalised for one night in a Covid ward of 4 ... with staff of over 20 ... mostly chatting at the nurses station while the trainee nurses did the observations ...
> Was ill for 2 weeks...
> Unlike you lot hiding on furlough i was out working every day, travelling across the country to make sure you had light power and food, wearing a pointless muzzle, not hiding under the stairs on 80% salary.
> ...


I've been in hospital, more than I'd like, and I've witnessed similar behaviour from the nurses. The thing is they're not just sat there. They'll take their break on the ward, rather than leave it short-staffed.
They'll be filling in reports, catching up on paperwork.

There'll be a set number of staff assigned to an area and you're the first one I've heard say they're overstaffed.

As for driving around, there were and are people working in shops throughout. Ensuring that there was food on the shelves, getting abuse for not working quick enough, or not putting out what folk wanted. I "moaned" at them, I moaned with them. I never knocked them for their efforts though. I appreciated what they were doing.

A question for you.
Did you get the two jabs out of choice or was it a work requirement. If by choice, I'd say you are placing yourself in the same category as those you are having a go at.


----------



## MrGrumpy (2 Jun 2021)

Top troll award goes to Landsurfer.


----------



## classic33 (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Well i managed to survive with my imbedded cardiac device ..... My ex wife died in february ... Says covid on her death certificate ... but it wasn’t ...
> The horror of those that died and the effect on their families is real and awful ....
> But ..
> They can’t die again ...
> ...


I have, on the operating table, twice in the local A&E, and I'm still here.


Correction on the piece highlighted.


----------



## midlife (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Long Covid is Psychological .. not Physiological ...
> I was hospitalised for one night in a Covid ward of 4 ... with staff of over 20 ... mostly chatting at the nurses station while the trainee nurses did the observations ...
> Was ill for 2 weeks...
> Unlike you lot hiding on furlough i was out working every day, travelling across the country to make sure you had light power and food, wearing a pointless muzzle, not hiding under the stairs on 80% salary.
> ...



Aside from all that is wrong in this post, dentists were effectively furloughed as dental practices were closed and dentists hid under the stairs.... 

NHS dentists were told to answer a few phone calls from patients to qualify for their full contract pay, which is about £114 grand on average iirc. Not bad for half a days work a week. Bahhhh!


----------



## Profpointy (2 Jun 2021)

PK99 said:


> Our local homeopath anti vaxxer seems to subscribe to the view that if you have the vaccine then over the next few weeks you are shedding virus, posts on her FB suggest avoiding anyone who has been jabbed to avoid getting the virus from them.
> 
> Morons!



At least she seems to believe there is an actual virus, rather than it being cause by 5G radio signals or whatever the latest bollocks is


----------



## shep (2 Jun 2021)

If restrictions are lifted completely in less than 3 weeks what will people on here be doing then?

Will they be walking around Aldi mask free and hugging/kissing anyone they want or will they still be sh*t scared of catching the virus?

Is it a 'rule ' thing that gives people their opinions or their own fears?


----------



## Rusty Nails (2 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Good ... Being a “selfish Idiot” is better .. in my opinion .. than being a cowardly sheep !
> Stand up for you rights ... if you even know what they are ...
> Get out of hiding and join the rest of the population grasping our freedom from tyranny ..
> There was a time and a place for restriction, control, hiding away ..It saved thousands of lives, possibly millions of lives ...
> ...


Power to the people. You are Wolfie Smith AICMFP. 





Didn't you once believe there never was a time for restrictions and "hiding away"? You admit to being wrong then, why are you right now?


----------



## DaveReading (2 Jun 2021)

shep said:


> If restrictions are lifted completely in less than 3 weeks what will people on here be doing then?
> 
> Will they be walking around Aldi mask free and hugging/kissing anyone they want or will they still be sh*t scared of catching the virus?



I predict that, at the very least, the current requirement to wear masks in shops, public transport, etc will remain.


----------



## Bazzer (2 Jun 2021)

As a minor thread divert, Mrs B's first vaccination was not properly recorded. Fortunately she took her card with her to her second jab to demonstrate she had it. Up to her producing it, she was being refused the jab on the basis she hadn't had the first, (are they not both the same?) and even then she had to prove she was the person named on the card.
Getting the first jab recorded on the system is proving an absolute ball ache. Several calls to a help line, seemingly staffed with people incapable of understanding a simple conversation have been incredibly frustrating. The GP has now had to get involved and he is to instruct one of the office staff to try to sort it.


----------



## neil_merseyside (2 Jun 2021)

Stop feeding the deluded troll.


----------



## vickster (2 Jun 2021)

Indeed, that’s one extremely well fed troll tonight


----------



## lane (2 Jun 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Power to the people. You are Wolfie Smith AICMFP.
> 
> View attachment 591922
> 
> ...



Exactly. He has been opposed to restrictions throughout but now realises he was wrong.


----------



## classic33 (3 Jun 2021)

Bazzer said:


> As a minor thread divert, Mrs B's first vaccination was not properly recorded. Fortunately she took her card with her to her second jab to demonstrate she had it. Up to her producing it, she was being refused the jab on the basis she hadn't had the first, (are they not both the same?) and even then she had to prove she was the person named on the card.
> Getting the first jab recorded on the system is proving an absolute ball ache. Several calls to a help line, seemingly staffed with people incapable of understanding a simple conversation have been incredibly frustrating. The GP has now had to get involved and he is to instruct one of the office staff to try to sort it.


Hope they manage to get the mess sorted.

I had a card that simply gave the date and the type of vaccine given. No other details on it, nor were they asked for before the jab was given. Wonder how many more are in a similar situation to Mrs B.


----------



## MrGrumpy (3 Jun 2021)

DaveReading said:


> I predict that, at the very least, the current requirement to wear masks in shops, public transport, etc will remain.


100% agree.


----------



## shep (3 Jun 2021)

DaveReading said:


> I predict that, at the very least, the current requirement to wear masks in shops, public transport, etc will remain.


I think you may well be right but there must be a point when it all 'goes'?

People can continue to be cautious and wear a mask or avoid certain situations for as long as they feel the need but I’ll be interested in attitudes when there's no rule or law saying you have to.


----------



## shep (3 Jun 2021)

classic33 said:


> Hope they manage to get the mess sorted.
> 
> I had a card that simply gave the date and the type of vaccine given. No other details on it, nor were they asked for before the jab was given. Wonder how many more are in a similar situation to Mrs B.


Same here, no name.


----------



## C R (3 Jun 2021)

shep said:


> Same here, no name.


Same with me, no name in my card.


----------



## Bazzer (3 Jun 2021)

classic33 said:


> Hope they manage to get the mess sorted.
> 
> I had a card that simply gave the date and the type of vaccine given. No other details on it, nor were they asked for before the jab was given. Wonder how many more are in a similar situation to Mrs B.


I know her friend had the same problem at the same vaccination centre, but she didn't take her record card with her.  But unlike Mrs B she wasn't met with opposition about eligibility. I don't know what she has done about her NHS record. I suspect nothing as she is a bit scatty.


----------



## steve292 (3 Jun 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> *Mod Note: the statement below is juist an opinion, unless a link to prove it is produced.*
> 
> I was hospitalised for one night in a Covid ward of 4 ... with staff of over 20 ... mostly chatting at the nurses station while the trainee nurses did the observations ...
> Was ill for 2 weeks...
> ...


What a selfish, deluded moronic post that is. I, and my wife have worked all through this, not at home either. We have followed the rules and looked at the advice given by the scientists and gone further when we felt we needed to. Neither of us caught covid, nor did our kids. That may be a bit of the luck of the draw, but I would say following the advice and doing what we felt needed to be done helped to load the dice in our favour. i cannot believe why anyone who has a basic standard of education, and any understanding of risk V reward would take your attitude.


----------



## rualexander (3 Jun 2021)

C R said:


> Same with me, no name in my card.


Don't get anything in Scotland, no card, just the vaccine info leaflet.
All details are recorded on medical records as far as I know.


----------



## midlife (3 Jun 2021)

Checked my card, at the top is printed “name” and someone has written my name in pen, presumably the nurse who gave me the first jab.


----------



## MrGrumpy (3 Jun 2021)

steve292 said:


> What a selfish, deluded moronic post that is. I, and my wife have worked all through this, not at home either. We have followed the rules and looked at the advice given by the scientists and gone further when we felt we needed to. Neither of us caught covid, nor did our kids. That may be a bit of the luck of the draw, but I would say following the advice and doing what we felt needed to be done helped to load the dice in our favour. i cannot believe why anyone who has a basic standard of education, and any understanding of risk V reward would take your attitude.



Yep my wife working in private health also, gone far and beyond just to keep her business going and protecting her elderly clients. Some of her clients have not made it through this pandemic.


----------



## DCLane (3 Jun 2021)

*Ignore the troll.*

Evidence or data for long Covid stroke/neurology effects from the Lancet and BMJ, but SWMBO's had experience of working on live Covid and currently Covid rehab wards since March 2020 as a specialist care Dietitian.

She's having to work with patients who have had strokes and neurology issues as a result of Covid. And they're not old; she's got an 18 year-old who may never walk again after a major stroke plus someone in their 20's who'll not eat again because their swallow function has gone. And that's just two with all her wards currently full of similar patients.


----------



## Bazzer (3 Jun 2021)

Another one here who has worked through this mess, albeit at home.
As to the effects of Covid, perhaps the poster would like to speak with my wife's church minister? They both caught Covid, IIRC around the middle of last year. Both were hospitalised. The minister's recovery took time, but her husband's life has been wrecked. He has gone from a fit 50 something year old to barely able to get around the house.


----------



## KnittyNorah (3 Jun 2021)

DCLane said:


> She's having to work with patients who have had strokes and neurology issues as a result of Covid. And they're not old; she's got an 18 year-old who may never walk again after a major stroke plus someone in their 20's who'll not eat again because their swallow function has gone. And that's just two with all her wards currently full.



That, and more, and worse, and not _as _bad but still devastating for the future of an active adult with a career and a young family, are the sorts of things I'm hearing from former colleagues I've kept in touch with since I retired. CT and MRI scans which are _so bizarre _for formerly- fit, healthy youngsters who've 'just had a flu-like illness' (according to some laypeople, who probably believe a bit of a cold is 'flu') that they actually wonder for a flash if the machine's 'gone wrong' somehow ...

Looking at the records of post WW1 'Spanish flu' is interesting. 'Long flu' (although of course it wasn't called that) was a definite 'thing' and well-recognised by the medical personnel of the day - and of course greatly puzzled-over, although with less ability to do anything useful about it for most people., unless they were very wealthy. Not that we really have a whole lot more ability nowadays - not guaranteed, at any rate - but at least it's easier to _look _at things and decide what _might _be useful ...


----------



## C R (3 Jun 2021)

Our neighbours all had C19 at the end of last year. The husband, with a preexisting heart condition, black and early sixties was in bad shape, nearly admitted to hospital twice, but recovered OK and no lasting effects. The wife, early fifties and without underlying health conditions took over two months to get to some semblance of normality, and has developed a heart arrhythmia, which most likely is due to C19.

So yeah, it is obviously all psychological...


----------



## KnittyNorah (3 Jun 2021)

DCLane said:


> an 18 year-old who may never walk again after a major stroke





Bazzer said:


> barely able to get around the house





C R said:


> a heart arrhythmia,



<sarcasm font _on_> These are, clearly, all _entirely _psychological. It's very easily proven. Nowt to do with C-19 infection at all, anyone can see that. <sarcasm font _off>_

The problem is that an awful lot of people actually believe this nonsense, and worse. No, I'll change my wording there, it's not mere  'nonsense' any more, it's reached the point where it's evil, manipulative, insulting _lies. _


----------



## midlife (3 Jun 2021)

I’m confused by your post, are you saying long Covid is a lie ?


----------



## markemark (3 Jun 2021)

I have heard from good authority that there’s a strong link between mental health and long covid. It’s often being treated as neurological. That doesn’t mean it’s all in the mind. Nor does it mean it’s not very real. Nor does it mean this is true in all cases. 
But I have heard there’s often a link to people with previous mental health issues.


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Jun 2021)

All this is wildly off topic: this is the 'vaccine' thread. There's a perfectly good one for 'Coronavirus'. But @Landsurfer posted on this one, and rightly away we went.
Off topic: @markemark - it would be useful to support your hearsay with a reputable source. Your message associates Long Covid with "previous mental health issues", which may be both untrue and deeply unhelpful. May be true of course - in which case link to 'good authority' please.


----------



## markemark (3 Jun 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> All this is wildly off topic: this is the 'vaccine' thread. There's a perfectly good one for 'Coronavirus'. But @Landsurfer posted on this one, and rightly away we went.
> Off topic: @markemark - it would be useful to support your hearsay with a reputable source. Your message associates Long Covid with "previous mental health issues", which may be both untrue and deeply unhelpful. May be true of course - in which case link to 'good authority' please.


With difficulty. My wife is a service manager for an nhs trust. She doesn’t deal with long covid but works closely with a team that does. Also a good friend of mine is an nhs clinical psychologist and is getting referrals of new and existing service users. Nothing conclusive for sure but i take it as a good authority but that’s because they are known to me.

Worth pointing out again, I carefully did not call it psychological conditions but neurological. There’s a big difference.


----------



## mjr (3 Jun 2021)

fossyant said:


> I hate them, can't see due to steaming up my glasses,


Another big recommendation from me for No Fog or the unappealingly-named Cat Crap spray. 24 hours or so of steaming up less.


----------



## KnittyNorah (3 Jun 2021)

markemark said:


> I have heard from good authority that there’s a strong link between mental health and long covid. It’s often being treated as neurological. That doesn’t mean it’s all in the mind. Nor does it mean it’s not very real. Nor does it mean this is true in all cases.
> But I have heard there’s often a link to people with previous mental health issues.



Neurological does _not _mean the same as psychological.

Neurological conditions are conditions such as brain injury, spinal cord injury, epilepsy, motor neurone disease, Parkinson’s disease, cerebral palsy etc etc etc. Stroke, brain haemorrhage and encephalitis are just three of the many types of acquired brain injury. None of these are psychiatric or psychological conditions, although, as with _any _disease, injury or illness, psychiatric or psychological illness may - or may not - be associated with the physical one.


----------



## Milkfloat (3 Jun 2021)

On the neurological side this might be of interest https://www.healio.com/news/neurolo...ovid19-longhaulers-include-brain-fog-headache

However, it is nothing to do with the bollocks posted by @Landsurfer


----------



## markemark (3 Jun 2021)

ME is now regularly being treated by the NHS as neurological and my understanding is that some of the symptoms are similar to Long Covid. I wonder whether in the future ME might be discovered to be some sort of Long <Another Covid-like Virus>


----------



## vickster (3 Jun 2021)

I've just booked my second one for the 16th June (11 weeks after first)


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Jun 2021)

vickster said:


> I've just booked my second one for the 16th June (11 weeks after first)


You're just flaunting your youth, now


----------



## Pat "5mph" (3 Jun 2021)

*Mod Note:*
We seem to have gone off topic a wee bit: this thread is about the vaccine, please use the main coronavirus thread for posts about long corona.
Can I also please remind posters to add a reputable link if stating a fact about the corona virus topic?
If no reputable link is available, please add "this is my opinion" or similar, to your comment.
Cheers!


----------



## shep (3 Jun 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Top troll award goes to Landsurfer.


Can you please define 'Troll', it seems to me if you have a different opinion to others on here you're Trolling?


----------



## Rusty Nails (3 Jun 2021)

shep said:


> Can you please define 'Troll', it seems to me if you have a different opinion to others on here you're Trolling?


From the site rules:

*Trolling.*_ Posts that appear to be designed to cause argument or irritate rather than contribute to a constructive discussion are considered trolling and will be treated as such._

Seems to fit in this case.


----------



## shep (3 Jun 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> From the site rules:
> 
> *Trolling.*_ Posts that appear to be designed to cause argument or irritate rather than contribute to a constructive discussion are considered trolling and will be treated as such._
> 
> Seems to fit in this case.


So if I disagree with an opinion that then irritates the person that's posted it I'm a Troll?

Argument or Debate, that's the question?


----------



## DaveReading (3 Jun 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> From the site rules:
> 
> *Trolling.*_ Posts that appear to be designed to cause argument or irritate rather than contribute to a constructive discussion are considered trolling and will be treated as such._
> 
> Seems to fit in this case.



Another characteristic of trolling is a whole succession of posts repeating the same arguments over and over again while failing to acknowledge, far less attempting to answer, alternative points of view.

That's a pretty good fit, too.


----------



## Rusty Nails (3 Jun 2021)

shep said:


> So if I disagree with an opinion that then irritates the person that's posted it I'm a Troll?
> 
> Argument or Debate, that's the question?


If you think that use of such words as "shepherds", "sheep", "pointless muzzle", "hiding under the stairs" is designed to contribute to rational discussion of covid restrictions rather than to "cause argument or irritate" then I respectfully disagree.


----------



## Johnno260 (4 Jun 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> If you think that use of such words as "shepherds", "sheep", "pointless muzzle", "hiding under the stairs" is designed to contribute to rational discussion of covid restrictions rather than to "cause argument or irritate" then I respectfully disagree.



Those terms are used to get a reaction, I have been hearing those almost daily for months.


----------



## Johnno260 (4 Jun 2021)

C R said:


> Our neighbours all had C19 at the end of last year. The husband, with a preexisting heart condition, black and early sixties was in bad shape, nearly admitted to hospital twice, but recovered OK and no lasting effects. The wife, early fifties and without underlying health conditions took over two months to get to some semblance of normality, and has developed a heart arrhythmia, which most likely is due to C19.
> 
> So yeah, it is obviously all psychological...



Similar situation my wife and her sister have a local friend, early 40’s no pre-existing conditions, not over weight or falling into one of the at risk groups.

She had C-19 but quite mild, but her health has just deteriorated massively, she has heart valve damage and lung scarring, like you said these are diagnosed issues not psychological.


----------



## Johnno260 (4 Jun 2021)

Gillstay said:


> So the caring sector of society looked after you for two weeks and you cannot pass any of that care to others on by wearing a simple mask ! Wow.



unfortunately health care workers are starting to get stick from people with certain beliefs, my wife’s a nurse and has been called an actress for being pro vax etc and being in big pharmas pockets.

Certain people just don’t care anymore.


----------



## Johnno260 (4 Jun 2021)

shep said:


> So if I disagree with an opinion that then irritates the person that's posted it I'm a Troll?
> 
> Argument or Debate, that's the question?



No healthy debate isn’t trolling but using derogatory wording to get an agressive response is.

If you know any anti vax who are very vocal look at the language used, it’s so common across them all that this guy could be any of the anti vax in my family the words used and phrases are all almost a cut and paste, also down the the aggressive position they take as well, and it’s used mainly in a troll like manner.

I will debate anyone but as soon as I see slave muzzle, sheep, hiding under the stairs, it’s all phrases I know and recognise, logic and reason won’t work.


----------



## shep (4 Jun 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> No healthy debate isn’t trolling but using derogatory wording to get an agressive response is.
> 
> If you know any anti vax who are very vocal look at the language used, it’s so common across them all that this guy could be any of the anti vax in my family the words used and phrases are all almost a cut and paste, also down the the aggressive position they take as well, and it’s used mainly in a troll like manner.
> 
> I will debate anyone but as soon as I see slave muzzle, sheep, hiding under the stairs, it’s all phrases I know and recognise, logic and reason won’t work.


I've seen 'sheeple ' used numerous times on here to describe folk who went to the pub when they opened for example. 

It seems to be selective what's acceptable and what isn't.


----------



## Johnno260 (4 Jun 2021)

shep said:


> I've seen 'sheeple ' used numerous times on here to describe folk who went to the pub when they opened for example.
> 
> It seems to be selective what's acceptable and what isn't.



From either side it’s not acceptable.

I have said some pretty harsh things to relatives for calling my wife a paid actress a puppet of big pharma etc

I cut the line when I was asked by a relative if my health insurance was paid up as my kids would need it, but not to worry they will look after them as my slave muzzle and snake oil vaccine wasn’t working, my verbal response I can’t print here but it was a reaction, maybe not a troll but his comments are pretty toxic.

Just look up vax denial and family issues it’s rife, but the more toxic party tend to be the anti vax supporters.

Also the logic they apply is flawed, this is the only vaccine that doesn’t offer 100% immunity so you give them other examples of vaccines not being 100% and it’s flawed data as it’s not an independent but a official source so it’s can’t be trusted.

The latest pseudoscience is vaccinated people shed MRNA spike proteins, some vaccines shed, rotavirus does for a few weeks sure, but you can’t generalise every vaccine. 

But hey least I saw a hole in my will and spoke with the people who hold it to change it.


----------



## shep (4 Jun 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> From either side it’s not acceptable.
> 
> I have said some pretty harsh things to relatives for calling my wife a paid actress a puppet of big pharma etc
> 
> ...


I feel for you, sounds like you've got a big divide going on there.

The point on here though is people were slated and called sheeple for going to the pub on the first night and for wanting to go on holiday because it doesn't fit with what is seen as acceptable on this forum, if however someone says the same about people doing the opposite then they're accused of being Trolls!


----------



## Johnno260 (4 Jun 2021)

shep said:


> I feel for you, sounds like you've got a big divide going on there.
> 
> The point on here though is people were slated and called sheeple for going to the pub on the first night and for wanting to go on holiday because it doesn't fit with what is seen as acceptable on this forum, if however someone says the same about people doing the opposite then they're accused of being Trolls!



Well Landsurfer was kinda being really toxic as well, I would say he went a little above and beyond. 

But both parties should try and be more tolerant


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Jun 2021)

shep said:


> I've seen 'sheeple ' used numerous times on here to describe folk who went to the pub when they opened for example.
> It seems to be selective what's acceptable and what isn't.


@shep Perhaps you could quote who has used "sheeple" on this thread. I've had a search and the only results are . . . you. There's some use elsewhere but mostly used in a referential rather than an accusatory way (Piers Morgan et al).
Edit: The wider search is here: https://www.cyclechat.net/search/128880/?q=sheeple&o=relevance - no need to scroll through 'thousands of posts'.
Think 'sheeple' is fairly jocular really, compared to some of the trolling vernacular.
And yes, we rode down to the pub as soon as they opened in April, outside: it was bl***y freezing. Nicer yesterday though: good riding and good company and chat, and stayed mild even after sunset - we actually chose to move outside, when our number swelled to above 6. Someone had recently had their jab and was whimpering about it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Jun 2021)

MHRA have just (am Friday) extended approval of the Pfizer vaccine to be used on 12 up to 16 (it's already authorised for 16 year olds), as USA's FDA and EU's EMA had done previously.
They've looked at the trial data (12 to 15 yo subjects in the USA) and decided it's safe and effective in this age group and that the benefits outweigh the risk. 
It'll be up to the JCVI to decide whether this cohort would come under the vaccine deployment programme - at the beginning of the autumn term, say.
But immediately this will allow the many children with comorbidities (implicitly in JCVI Gp 4) who have been shielding all these months and are really at enhanced risk of serious illness if they caught COVID-19 to be offered vaccination without delay: I'm sure clinicians/GPs have the lists.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Jun 2021)

*Mod note:*

Previous post beat me to it.

Please stay on topic or we'll have to close the thread to clean it up etc.

If you want to discuss double standards or whatever re posting in NACA then feel free to start a new thread - just be nice and keep within the rules.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Jun 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> *Mod note: *If you want to discuss double standards or whatever re posting in NACA then feel free - just be nice and keep within the rules.


Feel free, but not in this thread. Apologies for nibbling like a 'sheeple'.


----------



## midlife (4 Jun 2021)

Has anybody seen any info as to when 85% of adults will have had their full 2 doses of vaccine?


----------



## sheddy (4 Jun 2021)

Profile on Kate Bingham - UK Vaccine Chair 
Warning: contains bicycle references 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000wjff


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Jun 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Feel free, but not in this thread. Apologies for nibbling like a 'sheeple'.



Thanks for that AB - I should've put 'start a new thread' in the post - now edited to that effect.

Must be too much sun...


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Jun 2021)

midlife said:


> Has anybody seen any info as to when 85% of adults will have had their full 2 doses of vaccine?


Not info, but here's my estimate, based on achievement at 5 Jun and assuming the maintenance of the current daily vaccination rate (500k doses/day) for the next 3 months.
Population of UK: 67M, adult 53M (O/16)
85% of 53M is 45M
We'll have given 45M first jabs by about 8 Jul (this takes into account diminishing second dose proportion this month). If we then assume we going to have moved to an 8 week gap by then, . . .
my *estimate is 2 Sep to get 85% of the adult (O/16) population fully vaccinated (both doses)*. Note that if we achieve an average 90% uptake then we'll get to 45M by double dosing all over 20s, but this relies on the same uptake for second doses as for first (emerging evidence of significant missed second dose appointments).
In August there will be sufficient supply to give a first jab to all over 14s. But I suspect for practical purposes this cohort might be 'done' on the first days of term and the supply used to give the second jab to the under 30s at a gap less than 8 weeks, on the basis that 2 doses give a significant multiplyer to protection to the delta variant (or whichever variant is the dominant by then).


----------



## midlife (4 Jun 2021)

Thanks, I overhead a conversation at work about 85% adult vaccination being a good target to aim for and was just curious when it might be. Quite a bit after June 21st then.....


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Jun 2021)

Since the Delta variant (B.1.617.2) has a higher basic R number than even the Alpha variant (B.1.1.7) - how much larger is not yet clear
- and against which the available vaccines' effectiveness after 2 doses against infection is less, . . .
85% of adults (O/16) seems an optimistic figure for significant flock immunity effects to drop the effective R number below 1, on the assumption that no earlier than 21 Jun (and surely by mid July) the NPIs will be relaxed.

Behavioural changes will endure across the country (UK) without legal force. Ironically the sections and cohorts of the population who are least likely to be spreaders will be the ones who are most careful and the spreading element are the ones who will forget the threat (not just to them but to their community and wider constituency). I think it's likely that the Government will decide to go with the 21 Jun date, judging that the tests have been passed (but we have another few days of data to inform that decision: SAGE meets mid next week (latest released minutes). On the table as a useful measure when the decision is made/announced (14 Jun) will be selective continued restraint on certain multi-person indoor activities likely to be high risk eg: night clubs and bars (standing: sitting and table service is lower risk), weddings larger than currently allowed. This sort of activity affects few, in practice, and the adverse effect on the economy of their continued proscription would be minimal.

On balance I reckon that this third wave (absolutely as predicted by the SPI-M modellers (I prefer the Warwick analysis and treatment - see below)) will endure to a peak in July and decay in August. As the vaccination percentage pushes up to 85% the decay gradient is likely to be steeper than the rise. Besides the (%) protection from vaccination, increasing numbers of the unvaccinated will catch COVID-19, mostly mild or asymptomatic, and their numbers can be added to the no longer susceptible total. Critically, the effect of mid-90% double vaccination of all over 50s and other vulnerable groups can be expected to delink case numbers with serious disease (proxy metric = hospital admissions) numbers.





This modelling was done in late March. One observation I'd make is that the model maintained (default) a higher linkage between cases and hospital admissions than I think the modelling presented to SAGE next week will use (we now have better data).


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 Jun 2021)

lane said:


> "Nearly six months after the government kicked off the country’s most ambitious vaccination campaign, almost one in four black people over the age of 70 were not vaccinated as of 26 May, compared with 97% of white people of the same age."
> "Among black people in their 50s, this figure rises to one in three, compared with 90% of white people, prompting calls for government to redouble efforts to tackle disparities as restrictions are lifted."
> https://www.theguardian.com/society...y-black-people-in-the-uk-still-not-vaccinated
> Likely to become a problem with lockdown easing and the Indian variant both more likely to result in hospitalisation and being between 60% and 100% more transmittable than the Kent variant.


Agree your concern and deduction.
This heat map shows the percentages (overall) vaccinated first dose, by 5-year age cohort, over time (I left the 45-49 figure there) for Bolton:




Total percentage (uptake) by age group by vaccination date.


----------



## midlife (5 Jun 2021)

Wife had second dose of AZ today, 50+ cohort. The local GP practice where she had it done are stopping as of today as that's the final doses for the 50+ they have on their lists. Anyone younger is having their vaccines at hubs.


----------



## vickster (7 Jun 2021)

Jab bookings open for 25-29 in England from tomorrow


----------



## mjr (9 Jun 2021)

vickster said:


> Jab bookings open for 25-29 in England from tomorrow


Higher than expected enthusiastic take-up, but every silver lining has a cloud, so the booking system fell over again. https://www.theguardian.com/society...vid-vaccine-by-25--to-29-year-olds-in-england


----------



## dodgy (9 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> Higher than expected enthusiastic take-up, but every silver lining has a cloud, so the booking system fell over again. https://www.theguardian.com/society...vid-vaccine-by-25--to-29-year-olds-in-england
> 
> So take that, old naysayers! Rational thought and science seems alive and well in younger adults!



Very encouraging.


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Jun 2021)

When an Oxford-AZ vaccine is combined with a Pfizer-BioNTech dose for the second vaccination, the vaccinated showed a significantly stronger immune response than in those with a double AZ vaccination. The body's defence reaction is even slightly higher than in those with a double Pfizer jab (Research team led by immunology professor Martina Sester at Saarland University, Germany).
https://www.dw.com/en/mix-and-match-vaccines-biontech-astrazeneca-better-than-one-shot/a-57819127
https://www.uni-saarland.de/en/university/news/news/news-article/nr/23581.html
The researchers compared the strength of participants' immune responses two weeks after the second jab. "We didn't just look at the number of antibodies against the coronavirus [the participants] developed, but also how effective the so-called neutralizing antibodies were," Sester explained. "That tells us how good the antibodies are at preventing the virus from entering our cells."
The _COVID-19 Heterologous Prime Boost_ or ‘Com-Cov’ study started in UK in February: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-02-0...ial-investigating-dosing-alternating-vaccines


----------



## Solocle (10 Jun 2021)

Booked in for my first jab on Sunday!


----------



## vickster (17 Jun 2021)

Both Pfizer now received, details all uploaded to NHS app (in about 12 hours after #2), can get the travel pass which I need when I go to Jersey in a couple of weeks


----------



## Andy in Germany (17 Jun 2021)

dodgy said:


> lol, and you like a bloody good moan. You've painted yourself truly into a corner with the notion that there is a similarity between getting the correct drinks order and being injected with the wrong medicine. It's a ridiculous thing to say and I've already made a reasonable point further up thread that I agree there's a safety net, but that's the thing with safety nets - it's the final control. The responsibility lies with the medical staff to get it right.,
> 
> Imagine if the end result of an incident like this and the patient died, do you think in court the judge would say "you should take more notice, it's your fault!".
> 
> ...



This is why I had to go back to my place of work, where the first vaccination was made, for the second. I was also given paperwork with the label from the vaccine and date, which arm was plugged, et c. 

On the second vaccination I had to bring that paperwork with me; no paper, no vaccination.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jun 2021)

All takes time and effort, Andy, and degrades efficiency in programme rollout. Paper is so 20th Century, and probably more prone to error in practice.
Need to keep in mind the level of hazard and associated risk of a different vaccine second time round.
(See post upthread).


----------



## Andy in Germany (17 Jun 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> All takes time and effort, Andy, and degrades efficiency in programme rollout. Paper is so 20th Century, and probably more prone to error in practice.
> Need to keep in mind the level of hazard and associated risk of a different vaccine second time round.
> (See post upthread).



Everything was entered on a database as well, the paperwork is the extra confirmation.

The normal system is to have a "vaccination pass" wghere everything is written down.

I've lost mine, so after Covid dies down I'll have to get a new one.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (17 Jun 2021)

classic33 said:


> Hope they manage to get the mess sorted.
> 
> I had a card that simply gave the date and the type of vaccine given. No other details on it, nor were they asked for before the jab was given. Wonder how many more are in a similar situation to Mrs B.



When were you not asked for the card? Before your second vaccine?


----------



## classic33 (17 Jun 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> When were you not asked for the card? Before your second vaccine?


There's going to be no second jab for me.

Added in edit
I'd been advised that the Pfizer vaccine was deemed to be unsafe for me, medical decision. I'd to wait until the safer of the two became available.

I'd a reaction that put me into A&E for four hours. Underlying health condition meant that this was the first jab ever given. Medical consensus over the years has been that it'd not be safe, for me.

Note this is personal to me, and I'm not trying to say that the vaccines are unsafe.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jun 2021)

@classic33 
Because most people will not know your 'back story' why not simply edit to explain briefly why, to preempt the 'why not' questions which will surely follow?


----------



## mjr (17 Jun 2021)

What do people feel about the "no jab means no job" idea for care workers? I have very mixed feelings on it.


----------



## Andy in Germany (17 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> What do people feel about the "no jab means no job" idea for care workers? I have very mixed feelings on it.



Hmm, what if they have an underlying medical condition that makes a jab potentially problematic?


----------



## Mo1959 (17 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> What do people feel about the "no jab means no job" idea for care workers? I have very mixed feelings on it.


Not sure I agree. Which group will be next!


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 Jun 2021)

It would be interesting to know what those on the receiving end of their care think - especially those who for some reason cannot themselves be vaccinated.


----------



## Ajax Bay (17 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> What do people feel about the "no jab means no job" idea for care workers? I have very mixed feelings on it.





Andy in Germany said:


> Hmm, what if they have an underlying medical condition that makes a jab potentially problematic?


If your granny or father was in a care home, would you want someone who was 400% more likely (100/(100-81)) to develop symptomatic illness and even more liable if you add in asymptomatic illness (both states infectious to different degrees) to have multiple close contact with your relative? Edit: Put yourself in the role of Care Home lead: how would the risk assessment go? What risk mitigation measures might you include to reduce the risk to ALARP?
Add to that:

the type of multiple person interactions (often moving from site to site) that a care worker typically has
the opportunity for/likelihood of above average transmission rate
the vulnerability of elderly 'cared for' even fully vaccinated
the weak control mechanisms in the 'industry' partly driven by marginal profitability
If a care worker has an underlying medical condition that makes vaccination against COVID-19 potentially problematic then their role and interface with those with vulnerable needs may not, on balance, be in the interest of the cared for individual (that interest, viewed in the round, is the paramount consideration). The challenge is going to be that society needs care workers, so do the individuals cared for, and if there aren't enough (because a proportion either can't (medical) or won't (by choice) get vaccinated) then the shortage will impact care quality.


Mo1959 said:


> Not sure I agree. Which group will be next!


One step at a time. The merits of a 'group' being placed into the mandatory vaccination category will be subject to wide and detailed public scrutiny, as this one has. The UK is a free country: no vaccination is mandatory (look at the damage caused by the MMR disinformation debacle, though) but for certain worker categories (eg HepB for surgeons) it is. People are free to 'just say no' but with that may come exclusion from certain employment.
ETA: Prof Wilkinson, Medical Ethics, University of Oxford, said: "There is a strong ethical case that care home workers (and NHS staff) who have not had the COVID vaccine should be redeployed to areas other than frontline care."


----------



## vickster (17 Jun 2021)

18+ can book from tomorrow


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 Jun 2021)

vickster said:


> 18+ can book from tomorrow



Very good news.


----------



## dodgy (17 Jun 2021)

Wonder what the take up is like amongst the youngest.


----------



## KnittyNorah (17 Jun 2021)

dodgy said:


> Wonder what the take up is like amongst the youngest.


There's been vaccine available for 18+yos in this part of Lancashire for a week or so now, and when I went into town last week, there was a constantly-moving queue of mainly very young (older teenager/young adult age group) outside the vaccination marquee at the bus station. When I went back to the bus station a couple of hours later, the moving queues were still there. There seemed a constant supply of youngsters! Having the tent there is really good and convenient for many people; if they're getting the bus to uni or college or a job, it takes only a very few minutes out of their day.


----------



## mjr (17 Jun 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> If your granny or father was in a care home, would you want someone who was 400% more likely (100/(100-81)) to develop symptomatic illness and even more liable if you add in asymptomatic illness (both states infectious to different degrees) to have multiple close contact with your relative? Edit: Put yourself in the role of Care Home lead: how would the risk assessment go? What risk mitigation measures might you include to reduce the risk to ALARP?


Not sure what Augmented Live Action Role Playing has to do with this, but the above is basically why I have mixed feelings about this: the freedom of carers to decide what risks they take with their own health versus the rights of those cared for to decide not to risk contact with them.

As for underlying medical condition that makes vaccination against COVID-19 potentially problematic: they deserve support if they have to change jobs, but it's not that unusual for people to be excluded from jobs due to medical conditions. Despite looking like a younger @Drago and fighting off numerous unwanted advances with a bicycle pump, it's never been likely that I would pass the medical to be an astronaut, for example.



> One step at a time. The merits of a 'group' being placed into the mandatory vaccination category will be subject to wide and detailed public scrutiny, as this one has.


We have next to naff all power to influence the decision, though. I hope the various reports are being made to parliament and MPs given a free vote on it.



> The UK is a free country: [...]



   but for other reasons off-topic here (I want my citizenship back). Really, the acid test will be whether MPs are given a free vote.



> ETA: Prof Wilkinson, Medical Ethics, University of Oxford, said: "There is a strong ethical case that care home workers (and NHS staff) who have not had the COVID vaccine should be redeployed to areas other than frontline care."


Someone from a care home association was on TV news yesterday pointing out that most care homes do not have vast arrays of backline care staff, with many services often contracted in, so redeployment opportunities are few. If they have more than a few frontline carers banned from the frontline, the choice will be firing them and/or closing down. I really hope an impact assessment is made before the decision is taken.


----------



## midlife (17 Jun 2021)

ALARP I presume means as low as reasonably possible, used to use it for taking xray, now replaced by ALARA, last word achievable.


----------



## PK99 (17 Jun 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Hmm, what if they have an underlying medical condition that makes a jab potentially problematic?



Airline flight staff and surgeons have long had "No jab, no job" rules.

The precedent is well established in practice.


----------



## lazybloke (18 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> What do people feel about the "no jab means no job" idea for care workers? I have very mixed feelings on it.


The JVCI placed some carers in the very highest of the vaccine priority groups. That's a full group higher than the initial recordings.
So difficult to argue that carers should be exempt from jabs.

Difficult for a carer to reduce contact with the vulnerable, or to work from home, so that leaves very few options.
Best option is probably that unvaccinated people have to take a regular lateral flow test, perhaps at the start of every shift. That way they can keep on doing their normal job.


----------



## mjr (18 Jun 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The EU legal action is ridiculous.
> 
> Do they really think AZ is not busting a gut to get supplies out of the door?


Contrary to the above, the EU won in court: AZ has been ordered to use the British factories to fulfil the order (and told that it should have), or suffer a €10 per dose late fee. However, the court refused the EU's request to impose a timetable on AZ for some still-unscheduled doses until/unless AZ fails to schedule them in good time. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_3090


----------



## Craig the cyclist (18 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> What do people feel about the "no jab means no job" idea for care workers? I have very mixed feelings on it.



Great idea, with exceptions for those allergic to the contents etc.

In general though, I am not opposed to no vaccine no job.


----------



## DCLane (18 Jun 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Great idea, with exceptions for those allergic to the contents etc.
> 
> In general though, I am not opposed to no vaccine no job.



SWMBO and myself were discussing this earlier; she had to have Hepatitis B plus a couple of others for her NHS role as a Dietitian. Without them she couldn't be employed.

However, that's a bit different to a minimum-wage care worker who could earn more stacking shelves.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> Contrary to the above, the EU won in court



Grief.

Not only do you have no clue about how legal action proceeds, the outcome requires AZ to schedule nothing different to what it is now anyway, and EU vaccination will be completed before any enforcement is possible!

It precisely vindicates my post, which was that the legal action was pointless.


----------



## Buck (18 Jun 2021)

The EU may feel that they have won but it is far from what they originally set out to achieve

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-57531064


----------



## Craig the cyclist (18 Jun 2021)

DCLane said:


> However, that's a bit different to a minimum-wage care worker who could earn more stacking shelves.



Why is that the case?

Couldn't your wife had said exactly the same when compared with a surgeon? Approximate starting pay for a surgeon, £82k, a starting Band 5 is £25k ish. A shop worker in Aldi is £15k ish. Or a difference of £10k between the Band 5 and Aldi, or a difference of £55k between the surgeon and the Band 5!


----------



## mjr (18 Jun 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> It precisely vindicates my post, which was that the legal action was pointless.


Strange how "pointless" was misspelt so ill in the previous post that it looked like "ridiculous"! Far from ridiculous, as it turns out. The previous post was inaccurate in saying that AZ were "busting a gut". They weren't even living up to the contract.

We can disagree about the point, which I suspect was more about future general adherence to contracts with the EU than getting AZ to deliver: luckily for the EU, they've many other viable vaccine options.


----------



## DCLane (18 Jun 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Why is that the case?
> 
> Couldn't your wife had said exactly the same when compared with a surgeon? Approximate starting pay for a surgeon, £82k, a starting Band 5 is £25k ish. A shop worker in Aldi is £15k ish. Or a difference of £10k between the Band 5 and Aldi, or a difference of £55k between the surgeon and the Band 5!



True. To her though she's OK with having the vaccine given her profession and salary, which is nowhere near a surgeon's. For someone who doesn't want to have the vaccine making it compulsory at the lowest-wage, when a shelf-stacker earns more, she has an issue with. I'm guessing it's because she's worked, and still does work, with Band 2 colleagues - some of whom really care about their role and others who see it just as a job to do.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (18 Jun 2021)

Sorry, I just don't get the link between salary and vaccine uptake. Nearly all of our nursing and AHP students have had the jab, and they are paying to be there effectively.

If you work in care, have the jab. End of. 'Care' is the word here, have a look on Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/here, and see how many people who work in care are happy to slag off the government for not doing enough. Then when the government say 'well here is something you can do, we will get you early jabs that may save your and your families and your patients lives' thousands of people are saying 'no, why should we?'

I don't get it.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> The previous post was inaccurate in saying that AZ were "busting a gut". They weren't even living up to the contract



Complete cobblers. 

They were living up to the contract, as directly evidenced that no remedy for lack of compliance to that contract was imposed by the court.


----------



## midlife (18 Jun 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Sorry, I just don't get the link between salary and vaccine uptake. Nearly all of our nursing and AHP students have had the jab, and they are paying to be there effectively.
> 
> If you work in care, have the jab. End of. 'Care' is the word here, have a look on Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/here, and see how many people who work in care are happy to slag off the government for not doing enough. Then when the government say 'well here is something you can do, we will get you early jabs that may save your and your families and your patients lives' thousands of people are saying 'no, why should we?'
> 
> I don't get it.



Same in our clinic, everybody been jabbed twice regardless of salary or rank. Can't think of anybody not vaccinated. 

Not sure it's the right word to use but it's a "duty" we have to ourselves, colleagues, our patients and the wider public.


----------



## mjr (18 Jun 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Complete cobblers.
> 
> They were living up to the contract, as directly evidenced that no remedy for lack of compliance to that contract was imposed by the court.


So you just ignore the bit about AZ having committed a "serious breach" because there isn't an immediate fine? Is speeding not a crime if you get to take an education session instead of given a fine?


----------



## Buck (18 Jun 2021)

The vaccine comes with the role It isn’t about protecting you, it’s protecting those that you’re apparently caring for.
im the same as @midlife - the team have been keen to get vaccinated to a person.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> So you just ignore the bit about AZ having committed a "serious breach" because there isn't an immediate fine? Is speeding not a crime if you get to take an education session instead of given a fine?



Exactly. No remedy, ridiculous lawsuit with no purpose, no change in outcome, makes zero difference to vaccine supply. 

Political posturing wasting everyone's time.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (18 Jun 2021)

@mjr note my view is shared by third parties. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57531064

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...ure-urgent-120m-doses-of-oxford-covid-vaccine


----------



## Rusty Nails (18 Jun 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> @mjr note my view is shared by third parties.
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57531064
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...ure-urgent-120m-doses-of-oxford-covid-vaccine



Afaics both sides feel vindicated by the judgement.

Nothing to see here, move on.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jun 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Exactly. No remedy, ridiculous lawsuit with no purpose, no change in outcome, makes zero difference to vaccine supply.
> Political posturing wasting everyone's time.


@mjr - bbc said:
*What exactly did the judge order?*
"The judge at the Court of First Instance in Brussels ordered that AstraZeneca should deliver a total of 80.2m doses by 27 September.
"If the company fails to do so, the order says, it must pay a penalty of €10 (£8.5; $12) per dose not delivered.
"The EU's demand for 120m doses by the end of this month was not accepted.
"Welcoming the court order, AstraZeneca said it had already supplied more than 70m doses to the EU and would "substantially exceed" 80.2m doses by the end of June."
As @rt said: "pointless": expensive (assumed) expenditure on lawyers (funded by the fine member states) and minimal political benefit.


----------



## C R (21 Jun 2021)

For what is worth, the newspapers in Spain reported the judgement as a victory for AZ.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jun 2021)

Entirely predictably, there were no 'victors', except the lawyers on both sides.


----------



## mjr (21 Jun 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @mjr - bbc said:
> *What exactly did the judge order?*


BBC are not objective on this, but I ask the same question to you: does only the order matter, not the ruling too? Is close-passing not a crime if you are offered an education session instead of penalty or prosecution?

I have some sympathy with the view that no-one except lawyers truly win if it ends up in court, but this debacle has clarified that selling the same production capacity to two buyers is not "best efforts".


----------



## classic33 (21 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> BBC are not objective on this, but I ask the same question to you: does only the order matter, not the ruling too? Is close-passing not a crime if you are offered an education session instead of penalty or prosecution?
> 
> I have some sympathy with the view that no-one except lawyers truly win if it ends up in court, but this debacle has clarified that selling the same production capacity to two buyers is not "best efforts".


Sticking with the close pass example.
If I were the party that had been the victim of a close pass, and with the case reaching court. I'd not consider it a victory if the offender were handed an education session, and not prosecuted.

I'd also consider it to have been a waste of time, and money, getting the case to court. There's no real winner.

If two orders are placed for the same product, a month apart, whose would you seek to fulfill first. Bearing in mind that one order may never be used before the shelf life has expired.


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Jun 2021)

No crimes were committed in AZ's best and continuing efforts to supply many different customers, notably at no net profit (cf Pfizer/Moderna). A predicted supply rate was given to the EU to allow them to plan their world-beating vaccination programme (for which I hope van de Leyen gets all due credit) but no rates of supply were in the contract (having read it in January, with redactions exposed).
The two contracts (AZ-UK VTF and AZ-EU EMA) did not "sell the same production capacity" to two buyers. As we discussed so long ago, the predicted supply rate (ie x by date ddmmyyy) to the EU was not achievable despite AZ's best efforts because the plants in the EU, on which the predicted supplies depended, had initial (and unpredictable) capacity generation issues.
Is close passing a crime?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (21 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> BBC are not objective on this



Lol. Anyone who disagrees with you is "not objective"




mjr said:


> this debacle has clarified that selling the same production capacity to two buyers is not "best efforts".



An assertion without the slightest justification. 

*If* the court had reached the conclusion that was what had happened, then it would surely have insisted the injured party were compensated. It did not.



mjr said:


> Is close-passing not a crime if you are offered an education session instead of penalty or prosecution?



You have no clue as to the difference between criminal and civil law, it seems.


----------



## mjr (22 Jun 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Lol. Anyone who disagrees with you is "not objective"


No, that's not it. Try finding many recent articles where the BBC takes a balanced view of a story involving the EU.



> *If* the court had reached the conclusion that was what had happened, then it would surely have insisted the injured party were compensated. It did not.


Never heard of pyrrhic victories, clearly.


----------



## classic33 (22 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> Never heard of pyrrhic victories, clearly.


Is that similar to a hollow victory, where the time and effort put into it negates any real victory. A victory that seems to have been won.


----------



## Rusty Nails (22 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> No, that's not it*. Try finding many recent articles where the BBC takes a balanced view of a story involving the EU*.
> 
> Never heard of pyrrhic victories, clearly.
> 
> More like you have no clue about analogies, it seems.



What exactly is a balanced view, and who judges on that ?

Do you take a balanced view of anything to do with potential differences betweeen the EU and the UK, because afaics you just about always take the view that ‘EU right/UK wrong’ ? 

This isn’t a directly Brexit or an antI-EU matter, just a contractual difference which has been sorted.


----------



## Andy in Germany (22 Jun 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> What exactly is a balanced view, and who judges on that ?
> 
> Do you take a balanced view of anything to do with potential differences betweeen the EU and the UK, because afaics you just about always take the view that ‘EU right/UK wrong’ ?
> 
> This isn’t a directly Brexit or an antI-EU matter, just a contractual difference which has been sorted.



You and your reasonable analysis...

Incidentally the EU is suing Germany at the moment. I'm not sure why.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (22 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> No, that's not it.



Oh, I think it is. Note it's not just the BBC, and your own objective view was... ...a press release from one side!




mjr said:


> Never heard of pyrrhic victories, clearly.



Irrelevant diversion.


----------



## mjr (22 Jun 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Oh, I think it is.


The problems in your mind are yours. Fixing those is not for me to do.



> Note it's not just the BBC, and your own objective view was... ...a press release from one side!


Unsurprisingly, the press releases appeared before the press coverage. I linked what I had. I still can't find an English translation of the full ruling and posting long passages of French is not allowed here.


----------



## mjr (22 Jun 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Do you take a balanced view of anything to do with potential differences betweeen the EU and the UK, because afaics you just about always take the view that ‘EU right/UK wrong’ ?


Generally, I find that points where I agree with the UK have already been made before I arrive. Also, this was EU vs AZ not vs UK, much as the UK press and fans are trying to spin it.



> This isn’t a directly Brexit or an antI-EU matter, just a contractual difference which has been sorted.


I'm pretty sure there's at least one more ruling to come on this.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (22 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> I linked what I had.



Err... no, you linked from one side only. And stated "the EU won in court", an analysis seemingly shared by literally no-one else.

Your conclusion from this? That the BBC is not objective. Go figure.


----------



## mjr (22 Jun 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Err... no, you linked from one side only. And stated "the EU won in court", an analysis seemingly shared by literally no-one else.


That's what I had then. And being accurate but unpopular here doesn't make it wrong.



> Your conclusion from this? That the BBC is not objective. Go figure.


No, that's the conclusion from the lopsided BBC headline. As noted in other reports linked in posts above, the judgment had things both parties liked and disliked.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (22 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> being accurate



If only you were.



mjr said:


> As noted in other reports linked in posts above, the judgment had things both parties liked and disliked.



Confirming, as I said, your "the EU won in court" was wrong.

You relied on only one side of the story, and have been entirely lacking any objectivity throughout this discussion.

Something, laughably, you now accuse the BBC of.


----------



## Ajax Bay (22 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> being accurate but unpopular here doesn't make it wrong.


But being inaccurate does make it wrong. Popularity butters no parsnips.


----------



## classic33 (22 Jun 2021)

*AstraZeneca welcomes Court ruling on supply of its COVID-19 vaccine to Europe*

fre, jun 18, 2021 14:01 CET 
AstraZeneca today welcomed the ruling by the Court of First Instance in Brussels. The European Commission had requested 120 million vaccine doses cumulatively by the end of June 2021, and a total of 300 million doses by the end of September 2021. The judge ordered delivery of 80.2 million doses by 27 September 2021. To date, the Company has supplied more than 70 million doses to the European Union and will substantially exceed 80.2 million doses by the end of June 2021.* All other measures sought by the European Commission have been dismissed, and in particular the Court found that the European Commission has no exclusivity or right of priority over all other contracting parties.**

The judgement also acknowledged that the difficulties experienced by AstraZeneca in this unprecedented situation had a substantial impact on the delay. AstraZeneca now looks forward to renewed collaboration with the European Commission to help combat the pandemic in Europe. The Company remains committed to broad and equitable distribution of the vaccine as laid out in the Advanced Purchase Agreement of August 2020.

In fewer than twelve months, AstraZeneca has worked extremely hard to develop an effective vaccine at no profit and is the second-largest supplier to the EU’s 27 member states.

The supply of the vaccine is estimated to have helped save tens of thousands of lives and to have significantly reduced hospitalisations.1,2 Real World Evidence has consistently shown a greater than 90% reduction in severe disease and hospitalisations caused by COVID-19,3-6 while recent data from England and Scotland demonstrated 92% vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation from the Delta (previously called “Indian”) variant.5,6

Jeffrey Pott, General Counsel, said: “We are pleased with the Court’s order. AstraZeneca has fully complied with its agreement with the European Commission and we will continue to focus on the urgent task of supplying an effective vaccine, which we are delivering at no profit to help protect people in Europe and around the world from the deadliest pandemic in a generation.”

The Company continues to engage with governments, international organisations and collaborators around the world to ensure broad and equitable access to this well-tolerated and effective vaccine at no profit during the pandemic period.

https://news.cision.com/se/astrazen...ly-of-its-covid-19-vaccine-to-europe,c3370392

*My bold


----------



## MrGrumpy (24 Jun 2021)

Back to Marks and Sparks Kirkcaldy High street for my 2nd jab this Saturday evening. ( just over the 8 weeks) Can relax a wee bit for my holidays . Also middle son 20 is getting his first next Sunday .


----------



## Milkfloat (24 Jun 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Back to Marks and Sparks Kirkcaldy High street for my 2nd jab this Saturday evening. ( just over the 8 weeks) Can relax a wee bit for my holidays . Also middle son 20 is getting his first next Sunday .


An M&S vaccine - how posh.


----------



## vickster (24 Jun 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> An M&S vaccine - how posh.


It's not just any vaccine...it's an M&S vaccine


----------



## MrGrumpy (24 Jun 2021)

vickster said:


> It's not just any vaccine...it's an M&S vaccine


Indeed !!  Unfortunately no meal deals as it’s closed as an M&S


----------



## Julia9054 (24 Jun 2021)

vickster said:


> It's not just any vaccine...it's an M&S vaccine


Mine was a Lidl vaccine. 
Vaccination station in the car park of a closed down Lidl!


----------



## vickster (24 Jun 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Mine was a Lidl vaccine.
> Vaccination station in the car park of a closed down Lidl!


You have my sympathies 

my second was done at a racecourse!


----------



## KnittyNorah (24 Jun 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Mine was a Lidl vaccine.
> Vaccination station in the car park of a closed down Lidl!



Mine was a very holy vaccine - in a Cathedral!


----------



## matticus (24 Jun 2021)

vickster said:


> You have my sympathies
> 
> my second was done at a racecourse!


Horses for courses.


----------



## Andy in Germany (24 Jun 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Mine was a Lidl vaccine.
> Vaccination station in the car park of a closed down Lidl!









At least ours is inside...

Fortunately I was vaccinated at work.


----------



## Unkraut (24 Jun 2021)

vickster said:


> my second was done at a racecourse!


How was the going?


KnittyNorah said:


> Mine was a very holy vaccine - in a Cathedral!


I hope no-one was incense-d as the use of a cathedral ...


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Jun 2021)

Vaccinating under 18s
If JCVI come out to say no recommendation either way, we do seem to have an odd approach to risk here. We won't vaccinate children because the reward to them individually is small and it would involve a small but non-zero risk of some suffering adverse reactions to the vaccine. Yet we need them to develop immunity to contribute to wider UK herd immunity - unstated by government for obvious reasons - so we let them catch and likely spread COVID-19 instead of accessing a vaccine that is safer. I guess it's more politically and morally (?) palatable for the virus to kill/long covid say 20 children for the greater good than the vaccine programme to maybe kill/maim 1 to the same end (20:1 made up; I very much doubt there is data).
However though this seems bonkers it probably does make some sense due to the risk of fueling wider vaccine hesitancy through the creation of a few highly emotive stories of tragedy.
Perhaps by the time we get there (to having available supply for under 18s) there will be sufficient data from under 18 vaccinations in the USA to quantify the risk.
18 year old son received his jab yesterday (Pfizer).


----------



## Buck (24 Jun 2021)

Professor Anthony Harnden, Deputy Chair JCVI said last week that whilst there is a benefit to vaccinating under 18s, this is not for their benefit but, like flu, for the benefit of their parents, grandparents etc who they will come into contact with and potentially infect.

The bigger and better solution is to target to get every adult vaccinated with at least once dose, ideally two. This will have a better, more direct impact and will also remove the emotive issue of vaccinating those under 18.

As of last night there hadn’t been a definitive decision on what they will do. My feeling is they will see effect what this weekend’s “Grab A Jab“ work will have on numbers vaccinated With lots of pop up clinics / walk-ins etc.


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Jun 2021)

Of course I understand who the prime beneficiaries are if we vaccinate under 18s. Don't think the 'like flu' comparison is valid: in the past, the UK hasn't vaccinated its school age population against flu, has it? Thought it was 60+ (and UHC +) and then any spare for first comers. I think that the teenagers of UK will be influenced/led by their parents; mostly for the good. The argument that those doses are better used for the direct benefit of the aged vulnerable around the world (say in the Commonwealth) won't go away.
The suggestion that getting every adult vaccinated is a "bigger and better solution" implies that we can't do both, or try to: a fallacy, imo - but maybe you are pointing up the priority. Certainly second doses are more valuable than first ones (first = 33%, second = (81-33)%).


----------



## Buck (24 Jun 2021)

Flu in schoolchildren. Absolutely. This has being going for quite a few years with the nasal flu vaccine so I would counter, yes it is valid and was what he said!


----------



## Buck (24 Jun 2021)

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinations/child-flu-vaccine/


----------



## midlife (24 Jun 2021)

Maybe extend to 16 and 17 year olds and that drops the presumed need for parental consent? 

And where do you slot in all that Gillick competence stuff for even younger people who want the vaccine, glad it's not me deciding....


----------



## classic33 (24 Jun 2021)

Canada are doing from 12 and up since earlier this month. Europe are looking at following suit.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (24 Jun 2021)

midlife said:


> Maybe extend to 16 and 17 year olds and that drops the presumed need for parental consent?
> 
> And where do you slot in all that Gillick competence stuff for even younger people who want the vaccine, glad it's not me deciding....



This being done in every senior school every year. HPV vaccines, meningitis jabs, seasonal flu etc, the process is there, let's use it.


----------



## midlife (24 Jun 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> This being done in every senior school every year. HPV vaccines, meningitis jabs, seasonal flu etc, the process is there, let's use it.



Yep, the rationale is that those medical interventions are for the child.... Covid vaccine is for the benefit of the population and not the individual child.

I paid hundreds and hundreds of pounds to get my boys vaccinated with Gardacil as the government decided it wasn't worth it going by the stats


----------



## Julia9054 (25 Jun 2021)

There may not be much benefit medically, but surely not having to miss school and self isolate every time a classmate tests positive is a huge benefit to vaccinating under 18s. 
We currently have 2 cases in year 9 (one definitely caught from the other) and 2 in year 10. Half of each year group are at home self isolating.


----------



## classic33 (25 Jun 2021)

Buck said:


> The vaccine comes with the role It isn’t about protecting you, it’s protecting those that you’re apparently caring for.
> im the same as @midlife - the team have been keen to get vaccinated to a person.


Not according to _NHSvaccine"_, who insist that I "require at least two doses to be fully protected against the virus".


----------



## Buck (25 Jun 2021)

classic33 said:


> Not according to _NHSvaccine"_, who insist that I "require at least two doses to be fully protected against the virus".



they are factually correct in that the 2nd dose provides an increase in immunity but one is still better than none!

I’m not clear on why you’ve quoted that response from me as I’m missing the link to your reply?


----------



## classic33 (25 Jun 2021)

Buck said:


> they are factually correct in that the 2nd dose provides an increase in immunity but one is still better than none!
> 
> I’m not clear on why you’ve quoted that response from me as I’m missing the link to your reply?


It was the part_ "The vaccine comes with the role It isn’t about protecting you"_. I thought I'd highlighted it. 
It's at odds with what NHS vaccine are saying.


----------



## vickster (25 Jun 2021)

Clearly it’s both when talking about adults who are most at risk from Covid.
The point was being made about vaccinating children where it is mostly about protecting others as morbidity and mortality from Covid is low in under 18s.
Obviously vaccinating children against childhood diseases is about protecting them


----------



## Craig the cyclist (25 Jun 2021)

It's a big weekend for us........

https://www.england.nhs.uk/2021/06/nhs-walk-in-vaccination-sites-open-up-in-grab-a-jab-weekend/

Grab a jab weekend, no need to be registered, rock up, roll up your sleeve and get protected. If you are over 18 (or live with/know anyone who is and who hasn't been jabbed already) and haven't had your first job less than 8 weeks ago, then you are in. Easy as


----------



## Buck (25 Jun 2021)

classic33 said:


> It was the part_ "The vaccine comes with the role It isn’t about protecting you"_. I thought I'd highlighted it.
> It's at odds with what NHS vaccine are saying.


Got you now. Well, the jab protects you and reduces you infecting others so It’s right IMO.


----------



## Buck (25 Jun 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> It's a big weekend for us........
> 
> https://www.england.nhs.uk/2021/06/nhs-walk-in-vaccination-sites-open-up-in-grab-a-jab-weekend/
> 
> Grab a jab weekend, no need to be registered, rock up, roll up your sleeve and get protected. If you are over 18 (or live with/know anyone who is and who hasn't been jabbed already) and haven't had your first job less than 8 weeks ago, then you are in. Easy as


Yep same here. Not sure if it’ll be a damp squib or off like a rocket…..

looks like all 2nd doses moving to 8 weeks too…


----------



## KnittyNorah (25 Jun 2021)

Buck said:


> Yep same here. Not sure if it’ll be a damp squib or off like a rocket…..
> 
> looks like all 2nd doses moving to 8 weeks too…



This was opened in my area of Lancashire a couple of weeks ago - walk-in first vax for all 18-pluses - and for the first week/10 days there were constant queues but it seems to have dropped off now (as would be expected). I suspect the great majority of those who want to be vaccinated, or who were easy to persuade with text messages and so on, are done and dusted, jut waiting for their second doses, and it's the recalcitrant remainder who are stubbornly refusing - vanishingly-few for good reason IMO.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jun 2021)

Buck said:


> Flu in schoolchildren. Absolutely. This has being going for quite a few years with the nasal flu vaccine so I would counter, yes it is valid and was what he said!


Was unaware - our children well beyond Year 8.


roubaixtuesday said:


> personally I'd like the 12-17 yo age range vaccinated ASAP as continued school disruption is the last thing they need, and the benefits for population herd immunity are huge. I *think* 16&17 yos aren't included in the current rollout plan (I have a 16yo)?


Agree.
Flu_vaccination_programme_briefing_for_school_team_and_headteachers
"The flu vaccination programme [for 2-11yo] will be going ahead in the autumn. Flu and COVID-19 will both be circulating at the same time which means that it is more important than ever this year to help protect against flu. This coming season (2020-2021) the Government is extending the programme to year 7 children. Flu kills thousands of people every year. It is an unpredictable virus and the vaccine is the best protection we have against it. *The main purpose of the** annual flu vaccination programme for children is to reduce **transmission in the community*. Children can pass flu on to others in their immediate family and wider community, many of whom may be at higher risk from the complications of flu. The flu vaccination won’t protect against COVID-19 but it is critical to protecting the general health of the population, particularly those at high risk from COVID-19. All children whose parents agree for them to have the vaccine, which is given by way of a nasal spray, also benefit from the protection it provides to them as individuals."
If this (emboldened above) is the rationale for vaccinating under 12s against flu, what are the different considerations JCVI will take into account when deliberating over whether to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for under 18s? Is the safety risk of mRNA vaccines (or other) significntly greater? Is the fatality rate of seasonal flu greater than that of COVID-19? The efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination (2 doses) against symptomatic illness is 72%: much better than the flu vaccine aiui. What am I missing? (Polite answers only please.)


----------



## Craig the cyclist (25 Jun 2021)

Buck said:


> Yep same here. Not sure if it’ll be a damp squib or off like a rocket…..
> 
> looks like all 2nd doses moving to 8 weeks too…



Yep anyone eligible can get the second dose at 8 weeks. The hope is that the 8-12 week thing will stagger itself.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Jun 2021)

Given that the percentage benefit of 'effectiveness' gain is greater for the second dose (74-32=)42% v 32% seem to be the 'latest' figures against the Delta VoC, there should be a gentle push to invite all those with a 12 week date to rebook a month earlier. Some NHS / vaccine programme messaging would be useful to reassure people that second dose vaccination date amendment is encouraged and involves no (appointment loss) 'risk'.


----------



## neil_merseyside (25 Jun 2021)

We had our second jab (using otherwise wasted vaccine doses) at week 9, the vaccination centre did this happily as we'd passed the week 8 mark, as that was 22nd May an 'early' second jab isn't a new thing.


----------



## midlife (25 Jun 2021)

I think I mentioned that the NHS moved to 9 weeks between jabs for staff quite a while ago as a good balance between getting the second dose in the arm and waiting longer for better protection


----------



## Buck (26 Jun 2021)

The challenge around moving to 8 week rather than 12 has been totally around vaccine supply.

If they promptly moved everyone ton8 weeks then the stock they have in the supply chain would not be there to also first dose the under 30s. There is enough overall stock we are told for everyone to get 2nd doses but in a phased manner.
Ultimately every jab counts and we’ll get as many done as we can this weekend and hopefully we’ll see a collective step change in the figures early next week


----------



## mjr (26 Jun 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> It's a big weekend for us........
> 
> https://www.england.nhs.uk/2021/06/nhs-walk-in-vaccination-sites-open-up-in-grab-a-jab-weekend/
> 
> Grab a jab weekend, no need to be registered, rock up, roll up your sleeve and get protected. If you are over 18 (or live with/know anyone who is and who hasn't been jabbed already) and haven't had your first job less than 8 weeks ago, then you are in. Easy as


Odd not to have a link to https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...alk-in-coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-site/

but that doesn't seem to be working correctly, as if I enter PE30 1AA for King's Lynn, the top result is Basildon! The second is "St James Medical Practice (SA Surgery)" which actually means it's St Augustine's, not St James, but they only do Pfizer first doses and only Friday afternoons, so no good this weekend. Third is Boston, 25 miles away but across sea.

Look, I know you all think the NHS vaccination website is wonderful, but this really is so bad you should wonder which of Hancok's kissing cousins got the contract to run it.

I'm glad I've had both doses already, even if the booking website did cock up for jab 2, leaving the great site volunteers and workers to fix the admin on the spot.


----------



## classic33 (26 Jun 2021)

mjr said:


> Odd not to have a link to https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...alk-in-coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-site/
> 
> but that doesn't seem to be working correctly, as if I enter PE30 1AA for King's Lynn, the top result is Basildon! The second is "St James Medical Practice (SA Surgery)" which actually means it's St Augustine's, not St James, but they only do Pfizer first doses and only Friday afternoons, so no good this weekend. Third is Boston, 25 miles away but across sea.
> 
> ...


It's not the website that's "wonderful" in this. For me it's the people on the ground, doing the actual work.

You've seemed intent on finding fault with the system from the word go. How about taking a step back and look at the work that's been done by those folk. And appreciate the effort they've made since this kicked off.


----------



## Andy in Germany (26 Jun 2021)

classic33 said:


> It's not the website that's "wonderful" in this. For me it's the people on the ground, doing the actual work.
> 
> You've seemed intent on finding fault with the system from the word go. How about taking a step back and look at the work that's been done by those folk. And appreciate the effort they've made since this kicked off.



I think that's the point being made: the people on the ground, as is so often the case, are working extremely hard to make this work, If the people running the next level of organisation like the website are ineffective, then they make it much more difficult for the volunteers they are supposed to support which wastes their time and disparages their efforts.


----------



## mjr (26 Jun 2021)

classic33 said:


> You've seemed intent on finding fault with the system from the word go. How about taking a step back and look at the work that's been done by those folk. And appreciate the effort they've made since this kicked off.


I've always credited the excellent people working in the centres and it's very dodgy of you to imply otherwise.

I've also not gone looking for faults. The ones I've posted have slapped me in the face during normal use: in this case, looking up where the centres are so I could promote them on local social network groups.


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Jun 2021)

kingrollo said:


> My son had his first jab in Wales. He has now finished uni and is back home in England. He doesn't have a date for a second jab.
> Sure he could go to a "grab a jab" - but he needs the Pfizer - any ideas how to proceed?





Craig the cyclist said:


> They are doing Pfizer at some sites, where do you live, why not look it up?





mjr said:


> Which vaccines are available at a site is listed on the "find a walk-in vaccination centre" website, but that's so broken I'd phone to verify before travelling far.





Craig the cyclist said:


> What is listed? We don't where we are talking about, so how can you possibly know whether or not is broken?


[Edit: Shifting this here (from main thread) because it's about vaccines)]
Because Craig had a struggle with that, here's the site: find-a-walk-in-coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-site See if you can make it work for you, Craig.
Doesn't seem broken now, to me (about 15 minutes after @mjr reported he was 'unable'. The second doses available at out local centre are only AZ for over 40s, as you'd expect. Few 'normal' (ie not JCVI 2/4/6) under 40s had their first dose before 20 April.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (27 Jun 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Because Craig had a struggle with that, here's the site: find-a-walk-in-coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-site See if you can make it work for you, Craig.



I refer you to my post on the other thread. I haven't struggled with anything by the way.


----------



## Ajax Bay (27 Jun 2021)

I assert you struggled (motivation deficit, perhaps) to find the site that @mjr was referring to, to check whether his 'fail' experience could be replicated.


----------



## MrGrumpy (27 Jun 2021)

2nd jab done and dusted last night. Arms a bit more sore this time around. Otherwise I’m ok apart from my already dodgy knee and back


----------



## Craig the cyclist (27 Jun 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I assert you struggled (motivation deficit, perhaps) to find the site that @mjr was referring to, to check whether his 'fail' experience could be replicated.



No, I simply gave the link to the events site that are happening this weekend. 

No motivation deficit or anything, just pointing something out. I didn't try and link to anything, which was deliberate. @mjr brought the other site in to it not me 🤷‍♂️


----------



## Johnno260 (28 Jun 2021)

I have my 2nd Pfizer booked for Thursday.


----------



## Cirrus (2 Jul 2021)

Vaccine map, shows % of adults who have had 1st and 2nd doses by area, quite interesting (I don't think it's been posted before but apologies if it has). https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map/vaccinations


----------



## Solocle (2 Jul 2021)

Striking, if unsurprising.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (2 Jul 2021)

Cirrus said:


> Vaccine map, shows % of adults who have had 1st and 2nd doses by area, quite interesting (I don't think it's been posted before but apologies if it has). https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map/vaccinations



Is there any correlation between the lighter blue areas on both maps and where the bulk of the current daily infections are occuring I wonder?


----------



## Bazzer (2 Jul 2021)

I posted earlier in this thread at #3974 about Mrs B having difficulties in getting her NHS record updated as her first jab was not properly recorded. 
An update. It was finally resolved a couple of days ago; almost a month after it was put into the hands of the GP's staff.
Mrs B dropped off a thank you card yesterday and in response, the member of staff concerned rang her to say the card had made her day. She added, possibly unwisely, that there had been numerous problems with the centre where both Mrs B and I had received our vaccinations and resolving them was becoming too time consuming, to the extent that the GP surgery was no longer dealing with corrections. If contacted they were simply passing on a telephone number of someone who apparently overseas the correction service.


----------



## Johnno260 (2 Jul 2021)

2nd Pfizer jab done, had anti vax people handing out leaflets at the exit!!! 🤣


----------



## Craig the cyclist (2 Jul 2021)

Interesting decision by the EU to not recognise any AZ jabs made in India. This will cause a bit of chaos as it is on batch numbers, and you won't know which batches affected as a patient.

What are they playing at now eh?


----------



## classic33 (3 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Interesting decision by the EU to not recognise any AZ jabs made in India. This will cause a bit of chaos as it is on batch numbers, and you won't know which batches affected as a patient.
> 
> What are they playing at now eh?


Simple in ways. 
Like many medications, identical in every way, bar the brand name its licensed under, Covishield hasn't been tested let alone approved for use in Europe.

It's not something that has just been sprung on them.


Batch numbers* are:
4120Z001, 4120Z002 and 4120Z003.

*And should be on the card they gave you, as well as on your records.


----------



## Seevio (3 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Interesting decision by the EU to not recognise any AZ jabs made in India. This will cause a bit of chaos as it is on batch numbers, and you won't know which batches affected as a patient.
> 
> What are they playing at now eh?


As I understand it, the EU hasn't made a decision to not approve the Indian made AV vaccine, it's just that this factory has not supplied to EU so there has been no reason for them to consider approval. 

The affected batch numbers are known and your NHS app (or vacc card) will tell you which batch you have received.


----------



## Bazzer (3 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Interesting decision by the EU to not recognise any AZ jabs made in India. This will cause a bit of chaos as it is on batch numbers, and you won't know which batches affected as a patient.
> 
> What are they playing at now eh?


As @classic33 said, it's on your card. But if you have the NHS app, (not the Covid one), you can see the batch number in your vaccination record.


----------



## lazybloke (3 Jul 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> 2nd Pfizer jab done, had anti vax people handing out leaflets at the exit!!! 🤣


----------



## Solocle (3 Jul 2021)

Seevio said:


> As I understand it, the EU hasn't made a decision to not approve the Indian made AV vaccine, it's just that this factory has not supplied to EU so there has been no reason for them to consider approval.
> 
> The affected batch numbers are known and your NHS app (or vacc card) will tell you which batch you have received.


Yep, easy enough to find.


----------



## midlife (3 Jul 2021)

I thought the work around was that the AZ vaccine is called Vaxzevria when used in the UK (even if made in India) so recognised under that name in thr EU. 

Or didn't that ruse work in the end?


----------



## rualexander (3 Jul 2021)

No batch numbers on my NHS Scotland record as far as I can see.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (3 Jul 2021)

midlife said:


> I thought the work around was that the AZ vaccine is called Vaxzevria when used in the UK (even if made in India) so recognised under that name in thr EU.
> 
> Or didn't that ruse work in the end?



It's all done on batch numbers, not the name of the product. There is work going on right now around this, despite how it seems from other posts, it isn't that easy!


----------



## midlife (3 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> It's all done on batch numbers, not the name of the product. There is work going on right now around this, despite how it seems from other posts, it isn't that easy!



Thanks.


----------



## classic33 (3 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> It's all done on batch numbers, not the name of the product. There is work going on right now around this, despite how it seems from other posts, it isn't that easy!


Thing is batch numbers are never tested prior to approval in the field. They test the actual medication, then either approve for use or not allow the use.

Batch numbers are on nearly all medications these days, for the end user to find.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (3 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> Thing is batch numbers are never tested prior to approval in the field. They test the actual medication, then either approve for use or not allow the use.
> 
> Batch numbers are on nearly all medications these days, for the end user to find.



Thanks for that.


----------



## classic33 (3 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Thanks for that.


Just to say, that a quick check of the nine medications to hand, eight of them have a clearly visible batch number on them.
The ninth was filled from a larger container, so doesn't carry a batch code.
For that one, it's a case of checking with those that dispensed it. Their records will show the batch number.


----------



## Bromptonaut (3 Jul 2021)

Pretty much anything for consumption will be traceable either by a batch number or date code - even if it's just the best before date.


----------



## winjim (5 Jul 2021)

So a year has passed since my first vaccine dose, the last swab has been taken and the trial's all done. Just a final clinic visit to go. It seems weird to think back to what was going on a year ago and realise just how far we've come.

However...

There's still more to be done so I'm back in later this month for the next study, which is a trial of a booster dose against the 'South Africa' variant. Here we go again...


----------



## winjim (5 Jul 2021)

Meanwhile I've just watched a clip of the PM's press conference and it's made me feel sick. Actually physically sick. Here I am doing what I can do, contributing in my own tiny way to try and improve the situation and he's going to rip it all away. People will die he says and we need to reconcile ourselves to that. He says he can lift restrictions because of the vaccine.

As a participant in the trial, admittedly a tiny cog in a very large machine, I'd like to say not in my name and not on my behalf. I did not volunteer for this trial to have it all taken away by him and I do not support his actions or the lifting of restrictions one tiny bit. Not at all.

Please everyone, no matter what the legal situation is, stay safe and stay sensible. For maybe the first time since this all began I'm scared. Properly scared. I don't want us to have squandered our chance to get on top of this.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (5 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Meanwhile I've just watched a clip of the PM's press conference and it's made me feel sick. Actually physically sick. Here I am doing what I can do, contributing in my own tiny way to try and improve the situation and he's going to rip it all away. People will die he says and we need to reconcile ourselves to that. He says he can lift restrictions because of the vaccine.
> 
> As a participant in the trial, admittedly a tiny cog in a very large machine, I'd like to say not in my name and not on my behalf. I did not volunteer for this trial to have it all taken away by him and I do not support his actions or the lifting of restrictions one tiny bit. Not at all.
> 
> Please everyone, no matter what the legal situation is, stay safe and stay sensible. For maybe the first time since this all began I'm scared. Properly scared. I don't want us to have squandered our chance to get on top of this.



Wow, that is quite a reaction you had there. I hope you feel better soon, and that the anxiety lifts.

I know we have had our run-ins, but seriously, I hope it calms for you soon.


However, I have to say that I missed the bit where he made face coverings illegal and told everyone to go round licking each other. We do have to regain a sense of some kind of return to 'normal', and we do have to begin to take responsibility for ourselves. On the radio last week a bloke phoned in who had gone to the football at Wembley. He was asked at the turnstile if he had done a negative test and he said yes he had. He was ringing in and said 'but I hadn't I had lied'. The presenter was appalled, not at the lie, but at the government for not enforcing things, so he asked the caller what he would have done if he had been asked to prove it on the app, and the caller said he had that covered because 'I just opened up a test and put those details in as negative, I didn't do the test though' This was met another round of the government can't allow this to happen/it's shocking. No, that isn't Boris or Chris or any of them, it is the nobhead caller who simply lied because he wanted to watch the football. If he had infected you, would it be his fault or the governments?

It's really hard, but at some point, as a society we have to stop being selfish and take responsibility not only for ourselves but for our fellow citizens as well. People will die, if he hadn't acknowledged that he would have been ridiculed too. Sadly some people are just in a loop of government bashing for anything. Only a few months the teaching unions were saying schools shouldn't be reopened, now they are saying we shouldn't be bubbling and sending people home!

It's really sad to read the reaction he has had on you, but we do have to find our way through this in some way or other, or we are really stuck.


----------



## winjim (5 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Wow, that is quite a reaction you had there. I hope you feel better soon, and that the anxiety lifts.
> 
> I know we have had our run-ins, but seriously, I hope it calms for you soon.
> 
> ...



I appreciate what you're saying about responsibility, but the fact that people are breaking the rules is not an argument for relaxing them. You might say it's the fault of the bloke faking the tests but there should be a structure in place to make sure that doesn't happen. If it can't be put in place, or if people are going to find ways around it then _nobody gets to watch the football_. We say this to infant school children don't we, 'you're spoiling it for everyone else'. That's what this bloke is doing except the consequences, the way he's spoiling it, potentially involves the death of him and his loved ones, as well as goodness knows who else.

We do need to take responsibility and look after ourselves and each other, because we can be damn sure this government isn't going to. There's a huge difference between acknowledging that people will die and therefore we have to stick to restrictions for a bit longer, and acknowledging that people will die but we're gonna lift restrictions anyway.

We as a society and a community need to work together, hence my plea to be safe and sensible regardless of what we are 'allowed' to do. This is not over by a long way.


----------



## fossyant (5 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> Simple in ways.
> Like many medications, identical in every way, bar the brand name its licensed under, Covishield hasn't been tested let alone approved for use in Europe.
> 
> It's not something that has just been sprung on them.
> ...



Oh, I've had batch 4210Z003, that's me not going to Spain. Fark em, Wales will do. 

Second was a PV number


----------



## Andy in Germany (5 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Thanks for your concern, and regarding our run-ins, at the end of the day we're just a couple of dickheads talking bollocks on the internet really.
> 
> I appreciate what you're saying about responsibility, but the fact that people are breaking the rules is not an argument for relaxing them. You might say it's the fault of the bloke faking the tests but there should be a structure in place to make sure that doesn't happen. If it can't be put in place, or if people are going to find ways around it then _nobody gets to watch the football_. We say this to infant school children don't we, 'you're spoiling it for everyone else'. That's what this bloke is doing except the consequences, the way he's spoiling it, potentially involves the death of him and his loved ones, as well as goodness knows who else.
> 
> ...










Ah well, never mind...


----------



## mjr (5 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> This was met another round of the government can't allow this to happen/it's shocking. No, that isn't Boris or Chris or any of them, it is the nobhead caller who simply lied because he wanted to watch the football. If he had infected you, would it be his fault or the governments?


Both. One duty of government is to protect its citizens against what you call "nobheads" and I call "killers", whether brandishing knives or viruses.

It just seems so needless to go ideological and derestrict so much in the middle of summer when we seem so close with vaccines. We know that the likes of that guy are out there but it seems like government don't know, don't care or are unwilling to upset him. 



> It's really hard, but at some point, as a society we have to stop being selfish and take responsibility not only for ourselves but for our fellow citizens as well.


Go on, then: how do we take responsibility for "nobhead"? Sounds like a call for covidgilantes to return!


----------



## winjim (5 Jul 2021)

We have to stop being selfish and take responsibility, so here's an example of a bloke doing the exact polar farking opposite of that.

Give me strength.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (5 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> It's really hard, but at some point, as a society we have to stop being selfish and take responsibility not only for ourselves but for our fellow citizens as well



Absolutely. 

We should tell people that drink driving is bad, take personal responsibility and repeal the law against it.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (5 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> For maybe the first time since this all began I'm scared. Properly scared. I don't want us to have squandered our chance to get on top of this



I get the reaction, and I think it's understandable, but by the standards of the last two waves, this one will not be as harmful overall. And for vaccinated people like yourself, it's near certain to be much less risky. 

For unvaccinated vulnerable people, given the huge prevalence envisaged, it could be very risky. But most of them are black, poor, and highly unlikely to vote Tory, so who cares?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (5 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> We should tell people that drink driving is bad, take personal responsibility and repeal the law against it.



Or do it the other way, the way it is being suggested here against Covid. 

We tell people drink driving is bad and ban all cars until it can be proved no-one will drink drive ever again, which we can't do until we let people drive cars again, which we can't do because someone may drink drive.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (5 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Go on, then: how do we take responsibility for "nobhead"?



You don't take responsibility for nobhead, he takes what he sees as responsibility, you take what precautions you see as sensible.


----------



## PK99 (5 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> View attachment 597523
> 
> 
> Ah well, never mind...



_“I think we've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problem on society. And, you know,* there is no such thing as society*. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There's no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation." _– Women’s Own, 31 October 1987.


----------



## DCLane (5 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Meanwhile I've just watched a clip of the PM's press conference and it's made me feel sick. Actually physically sick. Here I am doing what I can do, contributing in my own tiny way to try and improve the situation and he's going to rip it all away. People will die he says and we need to reconcile ourselves to that. He says he can lift restrictions because of the vaccine.
> 
> As a participant in the trial, admittedly a tiny cog in a very large machine, I'd like to say not in my name and not on my behalf. I did not volunteer for this trial to have it all taken away by him and I do not support his actions or the lifting of restrictions one tiny bit. Not at all.
> 
> Please everyone, no matter what the legal situation is, stay safe and stay sensible. For maybe the first time since this all began I'm scared. Properly scared. I don't want us to have squandered our chance to get on top of this.





winjim said:


> We have to stop being selfish and take responsibility, so here's an example of a bloke doing the exact polar farking opposite of that.
> 
> Give me strength.



People are selfish. This is exactly what will happen when restrictions are lifted.

@winjim - thank you for doing the trial. I'm just as scared as you are, primarily because if I catch a serious dose of this I'm dead. No if or maybe. Dead.

I've been careful for 18 months, even when I've been at race events with my son. It's the selfish idiots who now have every reason to do what they like which mean my risk level just went sky-high. 

My work will now want me back in a classroom full of students. And I'll have to find a way to manage it.


----------



## mjr (5 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> You don't take responsibility for nobhead, he takes what he sees as responsibility, you take what precautions you see as sensible.


And fark business that will be harmed by people wanting to avoid nobhead?

I think imprisoning nobhead for the duration is sensible, but I bet government would try to stop me.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> I get the reaction, and I think it's understandable, but by the standards of the last two waves, this one will not be as harmful overall. And for vaccinated people like yourself, it's near certain to be much less risky.
> 
> For unvaccinated vulnerable people, given the huge prevalence envisaged, it could be very risky. But most of them are black, poor, and highly unlikely to vote Tory, so who cares?


I guess I'm not as scared of this 'wave' and the immediate death rate as such. Last year I knew there would be death, and risk, and although I think the government made some terrible decisions, and more people died than should have, there was the feeling that we were doing something. The vaccine was on its way, people were all pulling together, there was a sense of community.

Now though, it's the sense of helplessness. I've done everything in my power. It's not much, but I've done it. I'm not going to pretend I took part in the vaccine trial for entirely altruistic reasons, I certainly considered the benefit to myself and my immediate family, but I did want to do my bit in the wider fight against the virus. People I know are doing the same, be it the vaccine trial, SIREN study, LFD testing etc. Wife was breastfeeding so couldn't take part but she's been recording everything for the King's College symptom tracker. Everybody's been doing something.

Our children haven't seen their grandparents. Our parents haven't seen their grandchildren. We've spent money on childcare keeping our children out of school, we've masked, we've distanced, we've stayed at home, we've done everything we possibly could. I'm also aware that other people have made far greater sacrifices and given more than I would ever be able to.

And now, just as it feels we might be about to turn a corner, just as we have the chance to really get on top of things, we've got this crucial battle between the vaccine and the variants, we've done all we possibly can, and the people in power, the people who are supposed to keep us safe, the people we elect to keep us safe, the people we pay to keep us safe, are not doing so. And there's nothing more we can do. I have no more ability to affect the outcome. Both the PM and the health secretary have basically come out and said we're lifting restrictions, we all have to learn to live and die with a rampaging, mutating deadly virus in our midst and that's that. My fate, that of my family and of all of us is now beyond my control, or that's what it feels like. And I'm scared for all of us.

Apologies for the loser length post. TL-DR, it's the loss of power and handing over control to people I don't believe have our best interests at heart which scares me.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

A bit dramatic don't you think?

I've said before it's people's perception of fear and what they've been doing through all this, why haven't your kids seen their Grandparents for example?
Why have you kept your kids off school?

I assume you and their Grandparents have had both jabs by now?

Plus, you can just carry on doing what you've been doing anyway. 

Stay in, wear masks, keep them off school etc etc.

Why the panic?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> And fark business that will be harmed by people wanting to avoid nobhead?


What about all the businesses that are being put to the sword by staying shut? You are happy with them to go to the wall?



mjr said:


> I think imprisoning nobhead for the duration is sensible, but I bet government would try to stop me.


Great idea, I guess the only issue is deciding who exactly are we imprisoning? Is it the bloke on the radio who went to the football, anyone who went to a bike race he didn't need to go to despite the risk, anyone who won't take the vaccine, people who travel on public transport but won't wear a mask, you? Once inside, how long do we lock them up for? Until they die or until we cure Covid? When they are inside, who looks after them? I worry you haven't thought this through.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

How about all the people who refuse to have a vaccine, get them banged up for starters!

Oh, hang on, it's the Government's fault for not doing enough to 'encourage ' them to have the jab.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

DCLane said:


> I'm just as scared as you are, primarily because *if I catch a serious dose of this I'm dead. No if or maybe. Dead.*


Well, as scared as you may be, you don't actually know this. If it was possible to define this would such accuracy, things would actually be easier.



DCLane said:


> My work will now want me back in a classroom full of students. And I'll have to find a way to manage it.


Or find another job maybe? It's not the government that is making you go back, the advice to work from home is being lifted but it isn't an order. You also have to remember that as much as people are nervous of going back in, there are just as many people for who the isolation has been as very damaging.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

What you doing risking your life taking your kid to bike races then?


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

PK99 said:


> _“I think we've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problem on society. And, you know,* there is no such thing as society*. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There's no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation." _– Women’s Own, 31 October 1987.



Thanks, I couldn't find the complete quote last night. It illustrates the problem described above. Footy Fan wants the entitlements but isn't willing to take responsibility, and ironically, he's the embodiment of Thatcherism.


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> You don't take responsibility for nobhead, he takes what he sees as responsibility, you take what precautions you see as sensible.



That sounds reasonable untill you apply it to other situations: I can take all the prectutions I like when cycling, but if someone else decides speed limits are overcautious and steams through the town at 200km/h the likelihood of that driver killing me is much higher. Just because it isn't
inevitable that they will kill other people, doesn't mean it isn't stupid and irresponsible.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> A bit dramatic don't you think?


Once again you manage to display an almost complete lack of empathy. May I ask what you have done, above and beyond that which is legally required, to try and help us as a society beat this virus?


shep said:


> I've said before it's people's perception of fear and what they've been doing through all this, why haven't your kids seen their Grandparents for example?


There's a deadly virus.


shep said:


> Why have you kept your kids off school?


There's a deadly virus.


shep said:


> I assume you and their Grandparents have had both jabs by now?


Vaccines are not 100% effective, they are of uncertain effectiveness against some variants, there may be novel, as yet unknown variants and the purpose of vaccines is to build a level of immunity within a population rather than necessarily to protect the individual and the children are as yet unvaccinated. That said, the children have recently started to see their grandparents, but there was a substantial period of time when they didn't.


shep said:


> Plus, you can just carry on doing what you've been doing anyway.
> 
> Stay in, wear masks, keep them off school etc etc


Masks are not 100% effective and their purpose is to protect the population and not necessarily the individual. I hope that people will carry on wearing them but I have no power to make them. We can't afford to keep the kids off school. It would mean one of us having to home school them so giving up their job which would mean we would have to sell our home and move somewhere cheaper.


shep said:


> Why the panic?


There's a deadly virus which requires action at the community level rather than by individuals if we are to overcome it.


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> We have to stop being selfish and take responsibility, so here's an example of a bloke doing the exact polar farking opposite of that.
> 
> Give me strength.



Why isn't it a requirement to have evidence of a negative test? We can get a test for ourselves, but if we want to do something that requires us to be tested first then we have to get a stamp showing where and when we were tested.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Why isn't it a requirement to have evidence of a negative test? We can get a test for ourselves, but if we want to do something that requires us to be tested first then we have to get a stamp showing where and when we were tested.


It's entirely possible that your government actually cares whether you live or die.


----------



## DCLane (6 Jul 2021)

Bromptonaut said:


> Well, as scared as you may be, you don't actually know this. If it was possible to define this would such accuracy, things would actually be easier.
> 
> 
> Or find another job maybe? It's not the government that is making you go back, the advice to work from home is being lifted but it isn't an order. You also have to remember that as much as people are nervous of going back in, there are just as many people for who the isolation has been as very damaging.



I don't know it Craig, but my doctor's stated so and put me on the vulnerable list. I'll not share my medical history but I'm high risk.

We'll sort the job issue: if I'm back in the classroom I'll have a face covering and keep distance. They're a decent employer and I won't be the only one at risk.



shep said:


> What you doing risking your life taking your kid to bike races then?



I get him there, he does sign-on, warm-up, etc outside and I watch away from others. I have to help him live his life, but minimise risk to myself in the process.

The _really_ difficult bit has been SWMBO working on a Covid ward at times since March last year. Again, we've things in place at home to help manage risk there as well.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

DCLane said:


> People are selfish. This is exactly what will happen when restrictions are lifted.
> 
> @winjim - thank you for doing the trial. I'm just as scared as you are, primarily because if I catch a serious dose of this I'm dead. No if or maybe. Dead.
> 
> ...


Do you have no option for remote teaching? I notice that my university, Manchester are keeping all their lectures online. I was fine with that style of teaching although I'm studying a masters in a subject I already work in so it's a bit different to an undergrad degree.


----------



## DCLane (6 Jul 2021)

@winjim I've been remote teaching since last February and my university's helped there.

I doubt we'll deliver face-to-face lectures in the future since online delivery saves room space and means large modules won't require multiple lecture slots. Both of those save costs. I'll miss the 'theatre' of lectures, which is difficult to replicate using online delivery.

I can see face-to-face seminars returning, with probably some online delivery, due to student pressure for a typical student experience to return. In my case my OH report means I'll do the online lectures, as I lead the modules I teach on, plus the online seminars and we'll identify a low risk approach in any physical delivery. Some classrooms facilitate distance more easily and my guess is they're the ones I'll be in.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Once again you manage to display an almost complete lack of empathy. May I ask what you have done, above and beyond that which is legally required, to try and help us as a society beat this virus?
> There's a deadly virus.
> There's a deadly virus.
> Vaccines are not 100% effective, they are of uncertain effectiveness against some variants, there may be novel, as yet unknown variants and the purpose of vaccines is to build a level of immunity within a population rather than necessarily to protect the individual and the children are as yet unvaccinated. That said, the children have recently started to see their grandparents, but there was a substantial period of time when they didn't.
> ...


By way of an example, family of four, three fully vaccinated, now all positive for Covid.


View: https://twitter.com/johnpavlovitz/status/1412169747865620481?s=19


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> It's entirely possible that your government actually cares whether you live or die.


What will you be forced to do differently in 2 weeks time then?


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Once again you manage to display an almost complete lack of empathy. May I ask what you have done, above and beyond that which is legally required, to try and help us as a society beat this virus?
> There's a deadly virus.
> There's a deadly virus.
> Vaccines are not 100% effective, they are of uncertain effectiveness against some variants, there may be novel, as yet unknown variants and the purpose of vaccines is to build a level of immunity within a population rather than necessarily to protect the individual and the children are as yet unvaccinated. That said, the children have recently started to see their grandparents, but there was a substantial period of time when they didn't.
> ...


People like you will never get back to normal then will you?

It's your choice obviously, I'm just glad I'm not as afraid as you that's all.

Good luck.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> What will you be forced to do differently in 2 weeks time then?


I will be forced to exist in a society in which virus mitigation restrictions have been lifted. I'm not just scared for myself, you know. I'm scared that we're creating a perfect environment in which to evolve and mutate the virus which will have consequences for all of us.

It is, you may be surprised to hear, not all about me.


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Well, as scared as you may be, you don't actually know this. If it was possible to define this would such accuracy, things would actually be easier.
> 
> 
> Or find another job maybe? It's not the government that is making you go back, the advice to work from home is being lifted but it isn't an order. You also have to remember that as much as people are nervous of going back in, there are just as many people for who the isolation has been as very damaging.



See above: speeding through a built up area doesn't make it inevitable that beople will be killed, but it is still irresponsible.

I'm also in a high risk group: if I cought Covid I could be seriously ill, possibly long term, and maybe unable to work* My risk of dying from it ia also higher.

Telling people to "find another job" isn't practical. Apart from all the difficulties involved, it depends on training and abilities, and earning potential. To expect people to make such a big change this because other people don't wan't to wear a mask or stop watching the football is a bit unreasonable: it's like saying pedestrians and cyclists shoud stay indoors so drivers can drive fast.

*_Judging by the comments of those wanting us to stop the lockdown that would make me a 'workshy scrounger'. Funny that_.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> I will be forced to exist in a society in which virus mitigation restrictions have been lifted. I'm not just scared for myself, you know. I'm scared that we're creating a perfect environment in which to evolve and mutate the virus which will have consequences for all of us.
> 
> It is, you may be surprised to hear, not all about me.


So really apart from others wearing masks you can completely control your exposure to this virus?

To answer your question, I've done exactly what the rules said I had to nothing more.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> That sounds reasonable untill you apply it to other situations: I can take all the prectutions I like when cycling, but if someone else decides speed limits are overcautious and steams through the town at 200km/h the likelihood of that driver killing me is much higher. Just because it isn't
> inevitable that they will kill other people, doesn't mean it isn't stupid and irresponsible.


If you apply your Covid protection model to this situation, you simply ban all cars and on top of that you never go on the road.



winjim said:


> It would mean one of us having to home school them so giving up their job which would mean we would have to sell our home and move somewhere cheaper.


But there is a deadly virus going on, a small price to pay for you all staying alive surely?



winjim said:


> It's entirely possible that your government actually cares whether you live or die.


Do you really, honestly think Boris Johnson simply doesn't care if your wife dies?


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> If you apply your Covid protection model to this situation, you simply ban all cars and on top of that you never go on the road.



No, I'd make the people who cause the most risk take precautions and change their behaviour to minimalise the risk for others. Like speed limits do.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Telling people to "find another job" isn't practical. Apart from all the difficulties involved, it depends on training and abilities, and earning potential. To expect people to make such a big change this because other people don't wan't to wear a mask or stop watching the football is a bit unreasonable.


I don't want to drag the thread too far in that direction but telling a university lecturer to change jobs is potentially deskilling the next generation in an environment where we are being encouraged to upskill our population rather than rely on skilled immigration.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

DCLane said:


> because if I catch a serious dose of this I'm dead. No if or maybe. Dead.





Craig the cyclist said:


> you don't actually know this.





DCLane said:


> I don't know it Craig,



This is a great example of the casual hyperbole around this. It moved from 'definitely dead, no ifs or buts', to 'yeah, I don't actually know this' in less than an hour.

I really think everyone needs to calm down a bit and listen to what has been said. It isn't becoming illegal to take social distancing measures from July 19th, it hasn't introduced the banning of face masks, you don't have to snog anyone you are stood next to in a queue.

Carry on doing what you are doing, take every precaution you can, just like you did yesterday.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> I don't want to drag the thread too far in that direction but telling a university lecturer to change jobs is potentially deskilling the next generation in an environment where we are being encouraged to upskill our population rather than rely on skilled immigration.



If a lecturer can remain working from home, and all are happy with that, then he carries on working from home, easy. Working from home isn't becoming illegal.

Then in the evening he can go to a bike race.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

'We need to get back to normal so quit your job and sell your house.'

We truly are living in bizarro world.


----------



## DCLane (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> This is a great example of the casual hyperbole around this. It moved from 'definitely dead, no ifs or buts', to 'yeah, I don't actually know this' in less than an hour.
> 
> ...
> 
> Carry on doing what you are doing, take every precaution you can, just like you did yesterday.



Craig - I'll not share my medical details, but I've been in/out of hospital and had enough conversations with doctors since last February to have been told the probable outcome. That's why at a bike race I'm the one standing away from everyone else.

And yes, I'll continue to take the precautions I've been taking not just since last February but for much longer. It's a pain.


----------



## PK99 (6 Jul 2021)

There seems to be a chorus of voices of people who perceive themselves as extremely vulnerable who are against easing restrictions and seem to yearn for Zero Covid. 

As counterpoint: I'm extremely vulnerable - diagnosed with Leukaemia* in January this year. I recognise Zero Covid as impossible. Lockdown as damaging to society and individuals. And a need to open things up now that the cases/deaths baking in link has eased.

*Symptom Free CML, spotted on a routine blood sample at GP surgery during BP check.


----------



## PK99 (6 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Thanks, I couldn't find the complete quote last night. It illustrates the problem described above. Footy Fan wants the entitlements but isn't willing to take responsibility, and ironically, he's the embodiment of Thatcherism.



You mean, he is the embodiment of exactly what Thatcher was criticising!


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> 'We need to get back to normal so quit your job and sell your house.'
> 
> We truly are living in bizarro world.


That's because you're frightened to death and have taken extreme precautions, your prerogative obviously, kids have been back for ages so it's your choice to keep yours off.


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

PK99 said:


> You mean, he is the embodiment of exactly what Thatcher was criticising!



And yet the embodiment of her philosophy as well. It's an impressive achievement.


----------



## C R (6 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> So really apart from others wearing masks you can completely control your exposure to this virus?
> 
> To answer your question, I've done exactly what the rules said I had to nothing more.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

C R said:


>


Do that all you like pal, I feel the same about people frightened to go out and judging those that do!


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> 'We need to get back to normal so quit your job and sell your house.'
> 
> We truly are living in bizarro world.



Not at all. We need to get back to a slightly altered version of what we perceived as normal, and if you want your new normal to be a place where there is zero risk of infection, then you may have to sell your house and quit your job, but that is your decision.

If your new normal is a place where you take sensible precautions and interact with other people in a reasonable way, while taking personal responsibility, then build a bbq, put in a new kitchen invite the neighbours round (but don't lick them) and go to work undertaking sensible measures like before.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Not at all. We need to get back to a slightly altered version of what we perceived as normal, and if you want your new normal to be a place where there is zero risk of infection, then you may have to sell your house and quit your job, but that is your decision.
> 
> If your new normal is a place where you take sensible precautions and interact with other people in a reasonable way, while taking personal responsibility, then build a bbq, put in a new kitchen invite the neighbours round (but don't lick them) and go to work undertaking sensible measures like before.


But don't spout off to others that you are the only one to be acting correctly and think we should all be like you.

As a matter interest @winjim how old are your kids?


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Not at all. We need to get back to a slightly altered version of what we perceived as normal, and if you want your new normal to be a place where there is zero risk of infection, then you may have to sell your house and quit your job, but that is your decision.
> 
> If your new normal is a place where you take sensible precautions and interact with other people in a reasonable way, while taking personal responsibility, then build a bbq, put in a new kitchen invite the neighbours round (but don't lick them) and go to work undertaking sensible measures like before.


The example you gave upthread was of someone literally not taking sensible precautions and literally not interacting with others in a reasonable way. Your example. You have absolutely backwards logic.

'We need to get back to a new normal where people can cheat the system and potentially infect thousands of people at a football match because it's their choice'


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> But don't spout off to others that you are the only one to be acting correctly and think we should all be like you.
> 
> As a matter interest @winjim how old are your kids?


One infant, one preschool.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> One infant, one preschool.


Fair enough, this is a serious question now. 

What fears have you got with kids of that age given the thoughts on Covid in toddlers?

Worried they'll pass it on to you I guess?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

DCLane said:


> Craig - I'll not share my medical details, but I've been in/out of hospital and had enough conversations with doctors since last February to have been told the probable outcome. That's why at a bike race I'm the one standing away from everyone else.
> 
> And yes, I'll continue to take the precautions I've been taking not just since last February but for much longer. It's a pain.



Why do you keep telling us you won't share your medical details? No-one has asked you to.

I get it, you are at risk, the bit I don't get is that you are so afraid of 'the public' but live with someone who works on a Covid ward. Now unless you wear face masks all the time I don't see how you are not on the edge of a nervous breakdown 24/7. You won't go near people outside in case they infect you, but you share a house with someone who works on a 'Covid ward'. 
I know you said you were taking all sensible precautions, but unless she is not breathing out you are taking a risk, this virus is airborne.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Why do you keep telling us you won't share your medical details? No-one has asked you to.
> 
> I get it, you are at risk, the bit I don't get is that you are so afraid of 'the public' but live with someone who works on a Covid ward. Now unless you wear face masks all the time I don't see how you are not on the edge of a nervous breakdown 24/7. You won't go near people outside in case they infect you, but you share a house with someone who works on a 'Covid ward'.
> I know you said you were taking all sensible precautions, but unless she is not breathing out you are taking a risk, this virus is airborne.


And takes his kid bike racing?


----------



## purpan (6 Jul 2021)

An observation from someone who has diagnosed CLL and works teaching in universities. This year has been mainly distance teaching, but at times I’ve worked in the classroom and will again from September. The problem is the extreme carelessness of students (and some teachers) with regard to any of the social distancing and hygiene rules. It’s virtually impossible to keep any distance from them, and they’re pulling down masks and sneezing and coughing. The authorities often are not sympathetic and put far too many students in the same rooms (we’ve classes with up to 50 students).

It’s genuinely worrying. I’ll be going in for a dissertation viva on Thursday and I don’t know what sort of room I’ll be in, or how serious the other participants will be about covid.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> The example you gave upthread was of someone literally not taking sensible precautions and literally not interacting with others in a reasonable way. Your example.


Yes, my example. It was an appalling thing for the block to do, i believe I may have called him a nobhead.



winjim said:


> 'We need to get back to a new normal where people can cheat the system and potentially infect thousands of people at a football match because it's their choice'


You really do struggle sometimes don't you? I have never said that is the place we need to be, I keep saying, and you seem to not be able to read it when I write it, that we all need to get to a place where we take this seriously, take care of each other and behave responsibly. We can't stay locked in/up for ever, what we would do about things like furlough? Just keep paying it indefinitely?

You work in health and in a hospital. I assume you see health workers becoming more relaxed about the restrictions now in place and confident that things can be managed? Nothing changes on the 19th, if you want to do those same things you absolutely can. None of the restrictions being released are instructions to not wear masks, carry on wearing one.

Now, I asked earlier but you ignored it. Do you really honestly think that Boris Johnson doesn't care if your wife dies?


----------



## Rocky (6 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> And takes his kid bike racing?


Lecturing is in doors and in often in poorly ventilated buildings. Anyone who has worked in a university knows how quickly viruses spread through the sheer number of face to face contacts with people from around the globe. Last time I looked, bike racing is outside. Distancing is possible. 

it’s a matter of risk.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

purpan said:


> An observation from someone who has diagnosed CLL and works teaching in universities. This year has been mainly distance teaching, but at times I’ve worked in the classroom and will again from September. The problem is the extreme carelessness of students (and some teachers) with regard to any of the social distancing and hygiene rules. It’s virtually impossible to keep any distance from them, and they’re pulling down masks and sneezing and coughing. The authorities often are not sympathetic and put far too many students in the same rooms (we’ve classes with up to 50 students).
> 
> It’s genuinely worrying. I’ll be going in for a dissertation viva on Thursday and I don’t know what sort of room I’ll be in, or how serious the other participants will be about covid.


Have you had a vaccine at all, just wondering about your thoughts on the protection it offers?

I don't know what CLL is, sorry.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

Rocky said:


> Lecturing is in doors and in often in poorly ventilated buildings. Anyone who has worked in a university knows how quickly viruses spread through the sheer number of face to face contacts with people from around the globe. *Last time I looked, bike racing is outside.* Distancing is possible.
> 
> it’s a matter of risk.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Fair enough, this is a serious question now.
> 
> What fears have you got with kids of that age given the thoughts on Covid in toddlers?
> 
> Worried they'll pass it on to you I guess?


As I've said, it's not all about me. I'm worried for them if they catch it, I'm worried for me and my wife, parents, in-laws if they pass it on. I'm worried for the teachers and for the other children, I'm worried for the other parents, grandparents and guardians. I'm worried for the potential for mixing and for new variants developing and spreading via schools into the wider community.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

Rocky said:


> Lecturing is in doors and in often in poorly ventilated buildings. Anyone who has worked in a university knows how quickly viruses spread through the sheer number of face to face contacts with people from around the globe. Last time I looked, bike racing is outside. Distancing is possible.
> 
> it’s a matter of risk.


If you knew for definite that "I will Die" if you caught Covid would you risk being exposed anywhere, indoors or outdoors?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> As I've said, it's not all about me. I'm worried for them if they catch it, I'm worried for me and my wife, parents, in-laws if they pass it on. I'm worried for the teachers and for the other children, I'm worried for the other parents, grandparents and guardians. I'm worried for the potential for mixing and for new variants developing and spreading via schools into the wider community.



Well, I really have no answer then.

As that is the case, and try to avoid saying 'not what Boris is suggesting', what would be your, say 5 point, plan to get us out of this situation?

A positive, achievable, 5 point plan to get us back to some sort of 'normal' way of life.


----------



## shep (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> As I've said, it's not all about me. I'm worried for them if they catch it, I'm worried for me and my wife, parents, in-laws if they pass it on. I'm worried for the teachers and for the other children, I'm worried for the other parents, grandparents and guardians. I'm worried for the potential for mixing and for new variants developing and spreading via schools into the wider community.


What you're saying just doesn't stack up though does it?

You keep your kids away from their Grandparents so they're safe, you and your wife have been vaccinated ( I guess?) you can stay in for the rest of your life if you want so never come into contact with anyone. 

At what stage will you feel comfortable?


----------



## fossyant (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> As I've said, it's not all about me. I'm worried for them if they catch it, I'm worried for me and my wife, parents, in-laws if they pass it on. I'm worried for the teachers and for the other children, I'm worried for the other parents, grandparents and guardians. I'm worried for the potential for mixing and for new variants developing and spreading via schools into the wider community.



You are knackered having youngsters. Like any other 'bug' it will fly round and you won't know unless they are tested. We've been lucky with my daughter at college - she's 'only' had to isolate for two occasions, but that's 4 weeks lost at college. Many Primary/secondary have lost 6 occasions, nearly 3 months. That can't go on.

We will still have to be careful, and we can't see restrictions/testing lifting if my wife want's to see her mum in the Nursing home - we see the twice weekly testing continuing (very unpleasant), and Boris said the numbers of visitors can increase from 2 - I doubt us as a family of 4 will be allowed to visit at once.

We have to lift restrictions. TBH I'm sort of happy where we are now, but I'll most likely still carry hand sanitiser. It's seeing family that's been a restriction - we've had a couple of 'get togethers' but they have been in the garden - they actually would usually be there too at this time of year.

We've got a couple of concert's coming up, but I'm not going to be hugging everyone there. I'll be glad when I don't need to wear a mask - I don't see their efficiency, and I'll be relieved to be able to see where I'm going (glasses wearer).

I think the 'space' and 'hands' message still needs to be there. As part of general hygiene, you sort of realise how 'mucky' shopping trolly handles must have been - there are some right grotty folk out there. I do hope shops still have dispensers, although I'm seeing a few that don't.


----------



## fossyant (6 Jul 2021)

Unfortunately, the way the government has handled this has left folk in fear. My mum's hardly been anywhere, and really doesn't like going out for food shops - goes early morning.

Things like protecting the old - we don't go and see MIL if we've got a cold or are feeling unwell. Flu would kill her, and a cold usually ends in a chest infection for her. She's got knackered heart, lungs etc etc. Just common sense needs to prevail. She's managed to get through the last 18 months without covid, or any colds/flu. Prior to the nursing home, she'd have at least two hospital visits a year and be on death's door.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Yes, my example. It was an appalling thing for the block to do, i believe I may have called him a nobhead.
> 
> 
> You really do struggle sometimes don't you? I have never said that is the place we need to be, I keep saying, and you seem to not be able to read it when I write it, that we all need to get to a place where we take this seriously, take care of each other and behave responsibly. We can't stay locked in/up for ever, what we would do about things like furlough? Just keep paying it indefinitely?
> ...


My place of work is not relaxing Covid restrictions. I honestly do not believe that Boris Johnson cares in the slightest about anybody who is not Boris Johnson.

Covid restrictions work _at the population level_.

Nobheads will be nobheads. We need to remove their ability to be nobheads if the potential consequence of their nobheaddery is death.


----------



## DCLane (6 Jul 2021)

It's a matter of managing risk Craig and @shep . SWMBO's a medical specialist and Covid's not the first respiratory or other health crisis she's been involved with. We've at-home processes in place and her work's been great at providing accommodation for her when needed.

Does she leave her job because of the risk to me? We discussed that many years ago when she first wanted to work in medical emergency areas (SARS overseas, Swine Flu here and others) and Covid's just the current one. The decision was that her role is to help save lives and she's doing that. 

Her group of specialists won an award last month for their efforts in devising new medical treatment for Covid patients and she got recognised for her specialism: there's no way I'm stopping her and I don't think I should.



Craig the cyclist said:


> View attachment 597588



For reference, apparently velodromes are classed as 'outdoors' due to the roof height. I race at Manchester and their precautions are well thought-through. BC's got some very clear guidelines for managing races, which we helped out with as 'guinea pigs' last year, and I've very few concerns.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> My place of work is not relaxing Covid restrictions. I honestly do not believe that Boris Johnson cares in the slightest about anybody who is not Boris Johnson.
> 
> Covid restrictions work _at the population level_.
> 
> Nobheads will be nobheads. We need to remove their ability to be nobheads if the potential consequence of their nobheaddery is death.



But no view on how this could or should be handled, just that someone you don't like isn't doing it properly. That leaves you all the space in the world to constantly have a go at what is being planned, without ever having to take any of the responsibility for anything. I think that puts you in the same place as some of the selfish people.

You want to carry on with severe lock down restrictions, masks, restrictions to numbers, everyone working at home etc because that suits you. The people who it doesn't suit, actors, people who work in public spaces and people who thrive being around people can all just do what? Lose their jobs, go slightly mad from being alone all the time, as long as you are safe and things are done to suit you then all is well?

**Not aimed at @winjim ** Why do people find it so hard to come up with a plan that they would implement, yet carp on endlessly about the plan has had been put in place. Most contributors are happy to look back and complain about what has happened, but no-one will look forward, I guess because they realise just how impossible it is to predict something when you don't know what is around the corner and they simply aren't brave enough. They are brave enough to be abusive to the people who do have that job though.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

DCLane said:


> I race at Manchester and their precautions are well thought-through. BC's got some very clear guidelines for managing races, which we helped out with as 'guinea pigs' last year, and I've very few concerns.



Hold on, everyone has to stay locked down and you won't go near people because you will die, now you tell us you race and were a 'guinea pig'


----------



## PK99 (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Hold on, everyone has to stay locked down and you won't go near people because you will die, now you tell us you race and were a 'guinea pig'



Oxymoronic positions on issues is common.


----------



## newfhouse (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> someone you don't like isn't doing it properly


Why doesn't he like him? Cause or effect?


----------



## DCLane (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Hold on, everyone has to stay locked down and you won't go near people because you will die, now you tell us you race and were a 'guinea pig'



You're conflating two things Craig. 

We got asked last year whether we would help be part of British Cycling's development Covid racing/training processes which were formulated at Newcastle-under-Lyme velodrome for use across the country. That meant very careful guidelines; i.e. "join the track, ride round, stop, let us sanitise". It was, and is, heavily monitored. Don't follow the instructions and you're sent away: we saw that happen last year and this. The same in racing where we're not that close, particularly in time trials: they're "turn up, foot down, set off at 0" whilst the timekeeper counts you down from a distance , with sign in/out being done at a distance and results sent afterwards. It's a lot more manageable than you think.

That's totally different to an open environment where no-one has guidelines or rules to follow. If there aren't any, or it's 'be sensible', then the majority are but a few idiots always exist.


----------



## Milkfloat (6 Jul 2021)

Personally I think the government have got it about right. The severe hospitalisations and deaths are down to manageable numbers and the statistics show that dying from COVID is now pretty rare. Balanced out with the harm that restrictions bring, medically (including mentally) and economically, I think reduced restrictions make sense. I do however think the messaging should be slightly different, rather than ‘it’s go time’ I think the message should be ‘if you can take precautions without impacting your life too much then do so’. For example, keep masks on public transport and perhaps even shops, suggest that if people can eat and drink outside that they do, suggest that pubs keep table service and don’t go round licking strangers. These ’good practice‘ suggestions don’t cause harm or have a big economic cost, but they still have an impact on reducing transmission.

To me the ’do what you want’ message suggests that the government want to get a peak of infections over the summer so that the NHS is not overly stressed in the autumn/winter when you add in flu and normal winter bugs. This kind of makes sense and goes back to the early plan of herd immunity, but is risky if a new variant arrives. If this is the government‘s plan then I hope they are keeping a close eye out on variants and also are prepared to slam the borders shut.


----------



## PK99 (6 Jul 2021)

DCLane said:


> You're conflating two things Craig.
> 
> We got asked last year whether we would help be part of British Cycling's development Covid racing/training processes which were formulated at Newcastle-under-Lyme velodrome for use across the country. That meant very careful guidelines; i.e. "join the track, ride round, stop, let us sanitise". It was, and is, heavily monitored. Don't follow the instructions and you're sent away: we saw that happen last year and this. The same in racing where we're not that close, particularly in time trials: they're "turn up, foot down, set off at 0" whilst the timekeeper counts you down from a distance , with sign in/out being done at a distance and results sent afterwards. It's a lot more manageable than you think.
> 
> That's totally different to an open environment where no-one has guidelines or rules to follow. If there aren't any, or it's 'be sensible', then the majority are but a few idiots always exist.



All that seems sensible.

BUT, it seems a bit off beam for vulnerable individuals to be protocol testing guinea pigs.

Surely protocols are best tested by those less at risk?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> You want to carry on with severe lock down restrictions, masks, restrictions to numbers, everyone working at home etc because that suits you. The people who it doesn't suit, actors, people who work in public spaces and people who thrive being around people can all just do what? Lose their jobs, go slightly mad from being alone all the time, as long as you are safe and things are done to suit you then all is well?



The point being made is that "personal responsibility" does not pass muster with a societal issue. 



Craig the cyclist said:


> Most contributors are happy to look back and complain about what has happened, but no-one will look forward, I guess because they realise just how impossible it is to predict something when you don't know what is around the corner and they simply aren't brave enough.



I think it is irresponsible to relax restrictions to zero at a point where the virus is entirely out of control, doubling every ~10 days.

A policy to relax further once the delta wave is at a peak would be sensible. That would likely only be a short period of time, but if it weren't, it would be vindicated.

I also think we should be vaccinating children 12-17 ASAP.

Let's take a look at some other countries. All have high vaccination rates. One of these is continuing some restrictions. One is reintroducing some minor restrictions. One is removing all restrictions.









Craig the cyclist said:


> They are brave enough to be abusive



Glass houses and all that.


----------



## DCLane (6 Jul 2021)

@PK99 - true, but my 16yo was at home unable to do any track training. We talked it through and their processes were exemplary. If they weren't we wouldn't have taken part. We got involved when they wanted to go from 6 to 10 riders, most of whom were my son's team, with very clear instructions - even at the highest number we weren't above 16 and kept carefully apart.

The guidelines for track training/racing have participants separated apart from the track time where you're moving fast through the air. BC's limit is 30 currently, less if they can't be effectively spaced during non-track periods.

Anyway, this is now off-topic. Back to vaccines ...


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> If this is the government‘s plan then I hope they are keeping a close eye out on variants and also *are prepared to slam the borders shut.*



That made me laugh. I'm not sure if you have in mind protecting the UK or protecting the rest of the world.

We currently have not far off the highest prevalence in the world and are likely to get there soon with our current growth rate, though of course that assumes equal case ascertainment with is admittedly very unlikely. Nevertheless, alongside a highly vaccinated population this is literally a perfect way to generate new vaccine resistant variants.


----------



## purpan (6 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Have you had a vaccine at all, just wondering about your thoughts on the protection it offers?
> 
> I don't know what CLL is, sorry.


vaccinated, yes, both doses. I feel it offers considerable protection, but it needs widespread takeup to reduce the prevalence of mutations.
CLL is a type of leukaemia. It’s at a benign stage at the moment.


----------



## Milkfloat (6 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> That made me laugh. I'm not sure if you have in mind protecting the UK or protecting the rest of the world.
> 
> We currently have not far off the highest prevalence in the world and are likely to get there soon with our current growth rate, though of course that assumes equal case ascertainment with is admittedly very unlikely. Nevertheless, alongside a highly vaccinated population this is literally a perfect way to generate new vaccine resistant variants.


Both, but mainly external threats. Although we have a high number of cases, if you add up all the cases in the rest of the world, plus factor in huge under reporting in the majority of countries you will see that the chances of a variant externally dwarf the chances internally. Closed borders will not stop a variant, mainly because borders are never truly closed, but they will buy you time. Still laughing?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> Still laughing?



Yeah, it is pretty funny to focus on stopping people coming in when we will be exposing more vaccinated people to COVID than the rest of the world combined (I think this will be true - the high prevalence plus high vaccination is unique). 

Our policy right now is literally to maximise this risk as far as possible. It's quite something.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> But no view on how this could or should be handled, just that someone you don't like isn't doing it properly. That leaves you all the space in the world to constantly have a go at what is being planned, without ever having to take any of the responsibility for anything. I think that puts you in the same place as some of the selfish people.
> 
> You want to carry on with severe lock down restrictions, masks, restrictions to numbers, everyone working at home etc because that suits you. The people who it doesn't suit, actors, people who work in public spaces and people who thrive being around people can all just do what? Lose their jobs, go slightly mad from being alone all the time, as long as you are safe and things are done to suit you then all is well?
> 
> **Not aimed at @winjim ** Why do people find it so hard to come up with a plan that they would implement, yet carp on endlessly about the plan has had been put in place. Most contributors are happy to look back and complain about what has happened, but no-one will look forward, I guess because they realise just how impossible it is to predict something when you don't know what is around the corner and they simply aren't brave enough. They are brave enough to be abusive to the people who do have that job though.


I'm already taking a Master's degree in clinical biochemistry, I feel like also taking one in epidemiology and public health might be a bit much of an ask.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> But no view on how this could or should be handled, just that someone you don't like isn't doing it properly. That leaves you all the space in the world to constantly have a go at what is being planned, without ever having to take any of the responsibility for anything. I think that puts you in the same place as some of the selfish people.
> 
> You want to carry on with severe lock down restrictions, masks, restrictions to numbers, everyone working at home etc because that suits you. The people who it doesn't suit, actors, people who work in public spaces and people who thrive being around people can all just do what? Lose their jobs, go slightly mad from being alone all the time, as long as you are safe and things are done to suit you then all is well?
> 
> **Not aimed at @winjim ** Why do people find it so hard to come up with a plan that they would implement, yet carp on endlessly about the plan has had been put in place. Most contributors are happy to look back and complain about what has happened, but no-one will look forward, I guess because they realise just how impossible it is to predict something when you don't know what is around the corner and they simply aren't brave enough. They are brave enough to be abusive to the people who do have that job though.


I'm already taking a Master's degree in clinical biochemistry, I feel like also taking one in epidemiology and public health might be a bit much of an ask.


We're veering well away from the thread topic which is vaccination.


----------



## Milkfloat (6 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Yeah, it is pretty funny to focus on stopping people coming in when we will be exposing more vaccinated people to COVID than the rest of the world combined (I think this will be true - the high prevalence plus high vaccination is unique).
> 
> Our policy right now is literally to maximise this risk as far as possible. It's quite something.


You need to look at your numbers again, they are way off. In addition, so far all the variants that can be traced, occurred first in unvaccinated immunocompromised people. These are the very people who had the vaccine first. Finally, the chances of the vaccines having no effect on a variant is very slim, by design and luck coronavirus vaccines are very likely to cover all variants to a greater or lesser degree. Coronavirus is not like flu.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> Finally, the chances of the vaccines having no effect on a variant is very slim, by design and luck coronavirus vaccines are very likely to cover all variants to a greater or lesser degree.



Uh, you're the person suggesting border policy was critical to protect against this risk, not me. You're now arguing it doesn't need to be protected against...


----------



## mjr (6 Jul 2021)

PK99 said:


> There seems to be a chorus of voices of people who perceive themselves as extremely vulnerable who are against easing restrictions and seem to yearn for Zero Covid.


"seems" is doing a lot of work there. And while anyone sane might yearn for zero covid, most know it won't happen soon. People are against brainlessly lifting all restrictions, not merely easing a few.

I know it is easier to argue against things nobody said, but it does not help move the discussion along. Why not try discussing the real views posted here?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

PK99 said:


> seem to yearn for Zero Covid.



I don't think it's zero Covid, it's a manageable risk of Covid.

Right now, we're firmly on track for a higher prevalence than at any point during the entire pandemic. And yet we are deliberately choosing not merely to "live with" that projected level, but to further boost it.

Imagine how that feels if you're immune suppressed with a hospital appt to get to...


----------



## mjr (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> **Not aimed at @winjim ** Why do people find it so hard to come up with a plan that they would implement, yet carp on endlessly about the plan has had been put in place. Most contributors are happy to look back and complain about what has happened, but no-one will look forward, I guess because they realise just how impossible it is to predict something when you don't know what is around the corner and they simply aren't brave enough. They are brave enough to be abusive to the people who do have that job though.


I have posted plans occasionally in the past, generally of the form of allowing various things when R is below such-and-such. You and shep notably ignore it and accuse me of wanting to keep businesses closed and other things I did not, plus complain that no-one posts what we would do, so what would be the point of spending time developing it again now? 

Also, calling what amounts to "fark it, we surrender to covid" a plan is being very kind.


----------



## PK99 (6 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> "seems" is doing a lot of work there. And while anyone sane might yearn for zero covid, most know it won't happen soon. People are against brainlessly lifting all restrictions, not merely easing a few.
> 
> I know it is easier to argue against things nobody said, but it does not help move the discussion along. Why not try discussing the real views posted here?



This is a well informed and argued summary pf the current position

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-57678942


----------



## fossyant (6 Jul 2021)

Sort of steering it back on subject. Recent catch up with my line manager and he has seen a number of acquaintances (with kids in school) who've tested positive, one 30 year old ended in hospital. 

It's looking like responsibility will be sitting with employers as well. We're a Uni, so come September we will still have many student's not yet fully vaccinated, and you can still spread it. We think we will still have social distancing in place, and working will still be a hybrid. 

If you test 'positive' I'm assuming you've got to be off work, even if fully vaccinated. I know the isolation stops for 'contacts' for those double jabbed, but not if you test positive. 

There is going to be a lot of lost work hours hence it still makes sense to WFH if in a close office environment. What happens if the whole office test positive, no-one is ill, but all have to stay off for 10 days. We will still be testing staff and students.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> I have posted plans occasionally in the past, generally of the form of allowing various things *when R is below such-and-such*.



That is the problem, you say we should do this and that when R is below...

What we need to do though is figure out how we get R below (shall we say 1 for sake of the argument here?) . It is no good saying when we get a car we will go for a drive, but never buying a car is it?

So, what is your plan to get R below the notional figure of 1 (lets not get bogged down on the number)?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> I'm already taking a Master's degree in clinical biochemistry, I feel like also taking one in epidemiology and public health might be a bit much of an ask.



You are telling us very definitely then that you are not qualified to come up with a simple plan, but you are qualified enough to tell us the one that the experts have come up with isn't good enough, won't work and is basically going to kill us all?


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> You are telling us very definitely then that you are not qualified to come up with a simple plan, but you are qualified enough to tell us the one that the experts have come up with isn't good enough, won't work and is basically going to kill us all?


I'm telling you we're off topic.


----------



## mjr (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> That is the problem, you say we should do this and that when R is below...


That's called being data-driven. I know that is unpopular with supporters of this shower.



> What we need to do though is figure out how we get R below (shall we say 1 for sake of the argument here?) . It is no good saying when we get a car we will go for a drive, but never buying a car is it?
> 
> So, what is your plan to get R below the notional figure of 1 (lets not get bogged down on the number)?


I do actually say that I will buy an electric car when my current one fails, the range is more than X and the price is less than Y (but there are many other scenarios possible, too). That seems rational to me. The current government so-called plan for covid seems more like just going out and ordering a shiny top-end Tesla with no thought of whether they've got the cash or can afford the repayments - or rather, they think they've got enough support that they can afford the population to pay for it with their lives.

Part of my plan to reduce R would be not allowing high-risk activities when R is high, such as unmasked indoor hospitality, part of it would be encouraging low-risk alternatives such as waiving rates and charges on roofed outdoor terraces or putting more money into decent cycling and walking commuting/shopping routes to get people out of enclosed bus/tram and polluting cars, and - back on topic! - part of it would be vaccinating everyone who can be. We are so close to that, it is summer where outdoors living is easier (warmer even when wet!), yet they seem determined to spaff this luck up the wall.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> part of it would be vaccinating everyone who can be


Who can be? We can vaccinate absolutely everybody, everyone has some muscular tissue we can stick a needle in. So compulsory vaccination from you is a good start 



mjr said:


> putting more money into decent cycling and walking commuting/shopping routes to get people out of enclosed bus/tram and polluting cars


You are happy to discriminate against people who use public transport too. Very good.

The first two steps of your plan then are compulsory vaccination and making people walk and cycle. I have to say that is less libertarian than I was expecting from you, but good to know exactly where you stand. Certainly we are also in agreement on the first part.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> I'm telling you we're off topic.



Oh no, you are telling us much more than that


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> So compulsory vaccination from you is a good start



A suggestion that to address the points being made rather than invent ones not being made would improve the dialogue.


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Who can be? We can vaccinate absolutely everybody, everyone has some muscular tissue we can stick a needle in. So compulsory vaccination from you is a good start
> 
> 
> You are happy to discriminate against people who use public transport too. Very good.
> ...



That's not remotely what @mjr wrote. If we're going to discuss things, let's keep it to points actually made, rather than extreme interpretations thereof.

[Edit: Beaten by @roubaixtuesday ]


----------



## purpan (6 Jul 2021)

My wife’s also a teacher. Last week one student was repeatedly pulling off her mask and saying « I can’t breathe ». At the break, she was outside the building smoking a cigarette.


----------



## PK99 (6 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> I have posted plans occasionally in the past, generally of the form of allowing various things when R is below such-and-such.



When the chain: R >>>> Cases >>>> Hospitalisations >>>> ICU >>>>Deaths 
was as it was pre Vaccine, R was a valid proxy measure for controlling impact on NHS and reducing the Death rate.

Vaccination has broken that direct chain and R is now not the useful measure it was.


----------



## Milkfloat (6 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Uh, you're the person suggesting border policy was critical to protect against this risk, not me. You're now arguing it doesn't need to be protected against...


I am arguing that if a new variant is found, then borders should close to people from that area until we know if our vaccines are effective. The chances are they will be, but if they are not then every day counts to slow the spread of that variant.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> I am arguing that if a new variant is found, then borders should close to people from that area until we know if our vaccines are effective. The chances are they will be, but if they are not then every day counts to slow the spread of that variant.



Fair enough, that wasn't how I read it, my apologies.

At the same time you're arguing that making our own country the most efficient possible vaccine resistant variant generator, simultaneously prioritising border controls against variants seems somewhat inconsistent.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Oh no, you are telling us much more than that


Fine. Here's an actual expert.


View: https://twitter.com/bmj_latest/status/1412306682626121729?s=19


----------



## Milkfloat (6 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Fair enough, that wasn't how I read it, my apologies.
> 
> At the same time you're arguing that making our own country the most efficient possible vaccine resistant variant generator, simultaneously prioritising border controls against variants seems somewhat inconsistent.


I am confused, as I posted above, so far variants are not being produced by people who have been vaccinated, it is unvaccinated immunocompromised people.


----------



## Pale Rider (6 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> you're arguing that making our own country the most efficient possible vaccine resistant variant generator,





roubaixtuesday said:


> A suggestion that to address the points being made rather than invent ones not being made would improve the dialogue.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> so far variants are not being produced by people who have been vaccinated, it is unvaccinated immunocompromised people.



Variants are being produced all the time, as every replication of the virus brings the possibility of mutation. So everyone who has the virus has a proportion of potential new variants circulating in their body.

Now, if you wanted to generate a vaccine resistant virus, the *best* way to do it is to expose people who have been vaccinated to lots of virus.

Every single virion they are exposed to which has a new mutation is then tested against their vaccine generated immune response. Should one of those mutations imbue resistance to vaccine endowed immunity, then hey presto that mutated virus then replicates in the vaccinated individual, who passes it on to another. A vaccine resistant variant is born.

It's impossible to say how likely this scenario is, but if we have 100,000 cases rather than 1,000 it's 100x more likely.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

You are quite right. I should have said _"your proposal would make our own country the most efficient possible vaccine resistant variant generator"_

I shall defer to your sagacious Paleness's rhetorical guidance in future.


----------



## Milkfloat (6 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Variants are being produced all the time, as every replication of the virus brings the possibility of mutation. So everyone who has the virus has a proportion of potential new variants circulating in their body.
> 
> Now, if you wanted to generate a vaccine resistant virus, the *best* way to do it is to expose people who have been vaccinated to lots of virus.
> 
> ...


Fully agree, but if the likelihood is really low, then there is no real reason to stop the unlock. As you can see by my earlier post, whilst I agree with the government and the majority of scientists that we should unlock I think we should not drop all the measures that have been put in place.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> the majority of scientists



I don't think that's the case. There seem to be more questioning than supporting. But of course, there isn't an opinion poll available, and it's certainly true that opinion is divided.

That reflects the uncertainty in what will happen of course.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Fine. Here's an actual expert.
> 
> 
> View: https://twitter.com/bmj_latest/status/1412306682626121729?s=19
> ...



#
Yes, but facemasks haven't been banned have they?

Back to vaccines, how do we increase the amount of people taking up the offer then? There are 000,000s of Cohort 1-9 patients still not coming forward, do we all stay restricted until they are all jabbed, even though we know that the vast majority are always going to refuse? How do we release the restrictions if people are refusing the vaccine, or do we get to a place where they are placed at risk by their own actions and we are kind of happy with that?


----------



## mjr (6 Jul 2021)

PK99 said:


> When the chain: R >>>> Cases >>>> Hospitalisations >>>> ICU >>>>Deaths
> was as it was pre Vaccine, R was a valid proxy measure for controlling impact on NHS and reducing the Death rate.
> 
> Vaccination has broken that direct chain and R is now not the useful measure it was.


The vaccines have weakened, not broken, that chain, plus there is also the R >>>> Cases >>>> Variant propagation chain to consider. More cases will mean more deaths, one way or another.

Also, did experts switch to naming variants after Greek letters partly because they expect Boris or Bolsonaro to allow more to escape?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Also, did experts switch to naming variants after Greek letters partly because they expect Boris or Bolsonaro to allow more to escape?



No, of course not, it was to remove a geographical location from the variant, so idiots wouldn't discriminate, or even violently attack, people from that place.


----------



## mjr (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> You are happy to discriminate against people who use public transport too. Very good.


There is literally no reasonable reading of "putting more money into decent cycling and walking commuting/shopping routes to get people out of enclosed bus/tram and polluting cars" that means "discriminate against people who use public transport", nor is vaccinating all willing-and-able people translatable to "compulsory vaccination".

This sort of consistent misinterpretation is probably why few people will post alternative plans here. I'm happy to defend my suggestions, but not your misinterpretations and inventions: that's a fight you will have to have with your imagination.


----------



## mjr (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> No, of course not, it was to remove a geographical location from the variant, so idiots wouldn't discriminate, or even violently attack, people from that place.


Oh. How many people from Kent were violently attacked?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Oh. How many people from Kent were violently attacked?



Probably none at all. Maybe take it up with the experts, they are the ones worried about stigmatising and attacks on people from certain areas?

https://www.who.int/news/item/31-05...r-sars-cov-2-variants-of-interest-and-concern


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> part of it would be vaccinating everyone who can be


is different to


mjr said:


> vaccinating all willing-and-able people



We can literally vaccinate everyone, you didn't mention 'willing' in the first post, just 'everyone who can be'. 

Now we know you don't believe in compulsory vaccination, what do we do about unlocking as you don't want to unlock until the risk is virtually nil for everyone but 000,000s of people are refusing to be vaccinated. At what point do we say, ok, you are on your own from October/November/December the 1st. Or do we all stay locked down forever?


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Probably none at all. Maybe take it up with the experts, they are the ones worried about stigmatising and attacks on people from certain areas?
> 
> https://www.who.int/news/item/31-05...r-sars-cov-2-variants-of-interest-and-concern



Hmm. I wonder why they may be worried about stigmatising and attacks on people from certain areas?









I can't imagine why that would be a problem...


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

Alternative C-19 strategy?

1: Ask scientists with expertise in the relevant field for the best response to the current situation

2: Resource the health system to achieve what they suggest.

3: Let experts on the ground do the actual work

4: Repeat.

(I'm not entirely convinced the German government is doing brilliantly on this, by the way)


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> I'm not entirely convinced the German government is doing brilliantly on this, by the way



My general view has been "do what Germany are doing" is a reasonable first answer to "what should Britain do"?

I read today that it's being proposed to open up fully only after all adults have been vaccinated (or had the opportunity)

Is that correct? And do you know if that means one dose or two?


----------



## mjr (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> We can literally vaccinate everyone, you didn't mention 'willing' in the first post, just 'everyone who can be'.


I apologise for earlier slack phrasing, but it was still a long way from compulsion, and I would say we cannot "literally vaccinate everyone" because medics would refuse to vaccinate those expected to have fatal reactions, assuming they uphold the GMC standards and refuse to do intentional harm.



> you don't want to unlock until the risk is virtually nil for everyone


More invention!



> At what point do we say, ok, you are on your own from October/November/December the 1st.


Not yet. Maybe that point will come, maybe it won't, but "you are on your own from 19 July" is grossly irresponsible, an abdication of government.



> Or do we all stay locked down forever?


We've not been locked down for months, so it won't be "stay locked down".


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Or do we all stay locked down forever?



And you accuse @DCLane of hyperbole?


----------



## PK99 (6 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> My general view has been "do what Germany are doing" is a reasonable first answer to "what should Britain do"?
> 
> I read today that it's being proposed to open up fully only after all adults have been vaccinated (or had the opportunity)
> 
> Is that correct? And do you know if that means one dose or two?



this report reads as if it is one and 100% offered without specifying take up needed:

*Germany should lift all remaining Covid restriction by end of August – minister*
Germany should lift all remaining coronavirus-linked social and economic curbs as soon as everyone has been offered a vaccine, foreign minister Heiko Maas was quoted as saying this morning, suggesting that point should be reached next month.
Around 56.5% of people in Germany have received at least one dose and almost 39% are fully vaccinated, according to health ministry data.
“When everyone in Germany has received a vaccine offer, there is no longer a legal or political justification for any kind of restriction,” Maas told the Sueddeutsche Zeitung. That should occur sometime during August, he added.
Chancellor Angela Merkel has previously said she wants to offer everyone in Germany a vaccine by 21 September.

(grauniad)


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> My general view has been "do what Germany are doing" is a reasonable first answer to "what should Britain do"?
> 
> I read today that it's being proposed to open up fully only after all adults have been vaccinated (or had the opportunity)
> 
> Is that correct? And do you know if that means one dose or two?



I'm not so sure, we dropped the ball at one point although things have improved now. Honestly I haven't checked today. I do know there was a proposal yesterday that people who had both vaccine shots should be exempted from restrictions (which a damn fool idea as my mask is to protect other people, so you can see we aren't immune to daft ideas...) Fortunately this has to get through several layers of government before it can be applied, and I think the state governments have the final say anyway.

Equally "everyone has a vaccination" isn't going to happen, because that would mean forcing people and that would be constitutionally impossible.

It may be that once everyone has been offered the vaccine, then those who refuse will be considered partly responsible if they catch it, so restrictions can theoretically be lifted. Currently we're at about 55% first caccine and 38% fully vaccinated; things are speeding up.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Alternative C-19 strategy?
> 
> 1: Ask scientists with expertise in the relevant field for the best response to the current situation
> 
> ...



That seems entirely reasonable on the face of it.

1. In the UK though we have an expert, Prof Chris Whitty, saying that face masks should become voluntary and a matter of personal choice except in three scenarios a) indoors and crowded, b) if asked to do so by 'a competent authority', c) if the person you are with feels uncomfortable and would like you to. That was his advice, the government took it, now they apparently don't care if we all die. 
We also have an expert highlighted above by @winjim saying that face masks should remain.
I can't be arsed to look because you should wear a mask, but I bet you could find a Dr or Professor who would say there is no need to wear a mask.

So the first point is pick your expert, and as we know the definition of an expert is someone learned, hopefully a professor, who agrees with your opinion.

2. If they suggest 'social measures', then funding the health service won't matter. You need to find a way to incentivise the public to behave as you wish. As we have discussed, there will always be people who are almost unaccountable for, the nobhead who lied and went to the football is a good example. Personally, if he isn't going to comply, and they can catch him, bang him up for 100 days in solitary confinement, and don't let him out until he has been doubled jabbed. But hey, I am an extremist, and would advocate compulsory vaccination unless you were severely allergic to an ingredient of the vaccine, and even then I would probably give you another one. Carrots aren't working, it's time for a stick.

3. See point 1. Pick your expert.

4. Yep, just go round and round until everyone is jabbed, I agree.

But as we know that our current expert is saying the 19th seems reasonable, what are we to do? We can't go against the experts, so we have to relax our restrictions.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

I agree with Curtis Stigers.


View: https://twitter.com/curtisstigers/status/1412473187900674051?s=19


----------



## PK99 (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> I agree with Curtis Stigers.
> 
> 
> View: https://twitter.com/curtisstigers/status/1412473187900674051?s=19




Interesting choice of expert opinion to follow.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

PK99 said:


> Interesting choice of expert opinion to follow.


Mick Hucknall?


View: https://twitter.com/SimplyRedHQ/status/1412337900566482950?s=19


----------



## roubaixtuesday (6 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> We can't go against the experts,



Why not? We did before. 

I also think you are misinterpreting Whitty.

He's not saying this is his recommendation.


----------



## winjim (6 Jul 2021)

Find the actual written advice from named experts provided to the government and then we can discuss it. Until then I remain of the view that this is a political decision by Johnson.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (6 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Find the actual written advice from named experts provided to the government and then we can discuss it. Until then I remain of the view that this is a political decision by Johnson.



Longer delays prevent more hospitalisations and deaths, but most of the benefit comes from the first 4 weeks of delay (from 21st June) in the main scenarios modelled. This is partly because 4 weeks is a long enough to ensure significantly more vaccination coverage and would push step 4 close to the school holidays, when transmission is expected to be reduced.


----------



## mjr (6 Jul 2021)

PK99 said:


> this report reads as if it it one and 100% offered without specifying take up needed:


 I don't know. Is a word missing? Is the answer Thomas De Gendt?


----------



## PK99 (6 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> I don't know. Is a word missing? Is the answer Thomas De Gendt?



Edited it/is


----------



## rockyroller (8 Jul 2021)

100% of Maryland deaths last month were unvaccinated people
In June, all Covid-19 deaths in Maryland occurred in unvaccinated people, according to Michael Ricci, communications director for Gov. Larry Hogan. Additionally, 95% of new Covid-19 cases in the state -- as well as 93% of new hospitalizations -- occurred in people who were unvaccinated.

The US government is deploying a covid-19 surge team to provide public health support in southwest Missouri, where the spread of the virus is filling up hospital beds once again.


----------



## Buck (8 Jul 2021)

One of our local hospitals said admissions in the last couple of days have been 100% unvaccinated for the first time. 
One patient is 18 year old and most early 20s and in serious condition.

Hospital is having to open another red ward for Covid patients.


----------



## winjim (8 Jul 2021)

More experts.


View: https://twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1412905171798142983?s=19


----------



## johnblack (8 Jul 2021)

17 year old daughter had her first jab this afternoon


----------



## Craig the cyclist (8 Jul 2021)

johnblack said:


> 17 year old daughter had her first jab this afternoon



Excellent news, hope she is well


----------



## mjr (12 Jul 2021)

Italy have passed a law requiring doctors and health workers be vaccinated. France and Belgium will be deciding this week, if I understood the report correctly.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (12 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Italy have passed a law requiring doctors and health workers be vaccinated. France and Belgium will be deciding this week, if I understood the report correctly.



Good. It should be the law.

How do you feel about that?


----------



## winjim (12 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Italy have passed a law requiring doctors and health workers be vaccinated. France and Belgium will be deciding this week, if I understood the report correctly.


Is that necessary? Have they had low voluntary takeup or is there another reasoning behind it?


----------



## PK99 (12 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Is that necessary? Have they had low voluntary takeup or is there another reasoning behind it?



BMJ:

_Laura Palazzani, deputy vice president of the National Bioethics Committee, said, “Vaccines are an ethical obligation for health professionals: their professional duty to treat the sick obliges them to avoid transmitting the infection, to operate in safe conditions, and to provide reliable information on the significance of vaccines for the protection of public health.” The committee generally supports voluntary vaccination but has said that it accepts the value of mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers when necessary._


----------



## winjim (12 Jul 2021)

PK99 said:


> BMJ:
> 
> _Laura Palazzani, deputy vice president of the National Bioethics Committee, said, “Vaccines are an ethical obligation for health professionals: their professional duty to treat the sick obliges them to avoid transmitting the infection, to operate in safe conditions, and to provide reliable information on the significance of vaccines for the protection of public health.” The committee generally supports voluntary vaccination but has said that it accepts the value of mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers when necessary._


Indeed. It's the 'necessary' bit I'm querying. Is it PR?


----------



## mjr (12 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Is that necessary? Have they had low voluntary takeup or is there another reasoning behind it?


I didn't know anything more than the short TV news report I saw, but the same BMJ article as the above quote came from, found at https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n905 says:
"In Lombardy, the northern Italian region worst hit by covid-19, 6-10% of healthcare workers have not joined the vaccination plan, while in the southern region of Puglia the regional authority estimates that proportion to be 10-15%."

Is that low? Or is it just low enough to cause problems?


----------



## winjim (12 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> I didn't know anything more than the short TV news report I saw, but the same BMJ article as the above quote came from, found at https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n905 says:
> "In Lombardy, the northern Italian region worst hit by covid-19, 6-10% of healthcare workers have not joined the vaccination plan, while in the southern region of Puglia the regional authority estimates that proportion to be 10-15%."
> 
> Is that low? Or is it just low enough to cause problems?


15% does seem like low uptake to me actually although obviously I'm not an expert. It could be that they want to influence or to reassure the public as well. I wonder who they're counting as healthcare workers.


----------



## mjr (12 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> 15% does seem like low uptake to me actually although obviously I'm not an expert.


15% not voluntarily vaccinating, or 85% uptake, but I suspect you knew that and just misphrased.


----------



## winjim (12 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> 15% not voluntarily vaccinating, or 85% uptake, but I suspect you knew that and just misphrased.


Indeed. I was trying to untangle the way it was quoted and then phrased as 'low'. But we both know what each other meant...


----------



## mjr (14 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Italy have passed a law requiring doctors and health workers be vaccinated. France and Belgium will be deciding this week, if I understood the report correctly.


France making it compulsory for healthcare, before the UK, also a vaccine status cert will be required to sit indoors at cafes and restaurants and so on. https://www.france24.com/en/europe/...nounces-new-restrictions-for-the-unvaccinated

Germany has decided against it for now.


----------



## Andy in Germany (14 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> France making it compulsory for healthcare, before the UK, also a vaccine status cert will be required to sit indoors at cafes and restaurants and so on. https://www.france24.com/en/europe/...nounces-new-restrictions-for-the-unvaccinated
> 
> Germany has decided against it for now.



I think there may be constitutional issues in Germany with either compulsory vaccination or certificates: some of the states have already been making noises about personal freedoms.


----------



## C R (14 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> I think there may be constitutional issues in Germany with either compulsory vaccination or certificates: some of the states have already been making noises about personal freedoms.


And which freedom is that, the freedom to be a danger to everyone else?


----------



## PK99 (14 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> *France making it compulsory for healthcare, before the UK*, also a vaccine status cert will be required to sit indoors at cafes and restaurants and so on. https://www.france24.com/en/europe/...nounces-new-restrictions-for-the-unvaccinated
> 
> Germany has decided against it for now.



Civil Law/Napoleonic Code countries find it easier to impose such Rules/Laws than Common Law Countries like the UK.

Germany, for obvious historical reasons, is nervous about civil liberties/Personal freedoms


----------



## Andy in Germany (14 Jul 2021)

C R said:


> And which freedom is that, the freedom to be a danger to everyone else?



For fairly understandable historical reasons, the German government is very careful about insisting on medical procedures for individual citizens.


----------



## C R (14 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> For fairly understandable historical reasons, the German government is very careful about insisting on medical procedures for individual citizens.


I don't think that argument can be reasonably made in this case.


----------



## Andy in Germany (14 Jul 2021)

C R said:


> I don't think that argument can be reasonably made in this case.



Thankfully it isn't our decision: it would have to get past the constitutional court where the argument would be made and counter arguments presented, and then be ratified by the states where the arguments would be checked against the state constitutions; I have a sneaking suspicion that it wouldn't pass.


----------



## PK99 (14 Jul 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> Thankfully it isn't our decision: it would have to get past the* constitutional court *where the argument would be made and counter arguments presented, and then be *ratified by the states *where the arguments would be checked against the *state constitutions*; I have a sneaking suspicion that it wouldn't pass.



Covid-Times have been a revelation (for me) re the complexities of the Geman Constitution and the Lander structure. Far from the Unitary State i had previously though it to be.


----------



## Punkawallah (14 Jul 2021)

C R said:


> And which freedom is that, the freedom to be a danger to everyone else?



We already have that one :-)

I think in this case the Feminists said it best with their 'its my body' campaign. Institutional compulsory medical procedures are a slippery slope - see the historical American compulsory lobotomies in California, and the ECT regime in this country.

Once the 'we know best' genie is out of the bottle, it's difficult to put it back again.


----------



## C R (14 Jul 2021)

Punkawallah said:


> We already have that one :-)
> 
> I think in this case the Feminists said it best with their 'its my body' campaign. Institutional compulsory medical procedures are a slippery slope - see the historical American compulsory lobotomies in California, and the ECT regime in this country.
> 
> Once the 'we know best' genie is out of the bottle, it's difficult to put it back again.


Allowing "personal freedom" arguments of the sort bandied about by antivaxxer types is also a rather dangerous slippery slope, that in time could see things we thought we had left behind like children disabled by polio making a come back.


----------



## Punkawallah (14 Jul 2021)

Or, indeed, lobotomised people that the medical fraternity consider 'make good house pets'.

Think we can agree to disagree on this one.


----------



## Mo1959 (14 Jul 2021)

Punkawallah said:


> We already have that one :-)
> 
> I think in this case the Feminists said it best with their 'its my body' campaign. Institutional compulsory medical procedures are a slippery slope - see the historical American compulsory lobotomies in California, and the ECT regime in this country.
> 
> Once the 'we know best' genie is out of the bottle, it's difficult to put it back again.


Don’t know why people get so worried about a minority not wanting it if they’re so confident they are protected themselves. I hate the thought of being forced into taking any medical treatment.


----------



## KnittyNorah (14 Jul 2021)

Mandating certain health requirements - which may include vaccination - for healthcare staff (and for staff in some other sectors, too) is nothing new, terrifying or revolutionary. I can totally understand, though, why Germany as a federal government would not wish to mandate healthcare procedures, or legislate for sanctions against those who refuse, or who are unable, to comply with recommendations.

Those healthcare workers who are unable, through no fault of their own, to fulfil recommendations or requirements for infectious disease protocols are - at least in my personal experience - assisted in finding a different direction still within or close to their field of expertise but which has health requirements more appropriate to whatever the issue might be. 

Finding different and appropriate posts for healthcare workers who cannot, for good reason, have a C-19 vaccination, will be a lot more difficult than finding an appropriate post for someone like me who was merely a rubella vaccine non-responder, and I believe those individuals who cannot for good reason fulfil the requirements deserve more consideration - and IMO 'first dibs' at the (probably few) suitable jobs - than those who merely choose not to have the vaccination for no good scientific or medical reason.


----------



## Andy in Germany (14 Jul 2021)

C R said:


> Allowing "personal freedom" arguments of the sort bandied about by antivaxxer types is also a rather dangerous slippery slope, that in time could see things we thought we had left behind like children disabled by polio making a come back.



That isn't the question being asked though: the only question before the courts will be "Is this legislation permitted by the constitution?"


----------



## mjr (14 Jul 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> Don’t know why people get so worried about a minority not wanting it if they’re so confident they are protected themselves. I hate the thought of being forced into taking any medical treatment.


Some are betting on herd immunity as a way out of this. Each refuser is a problem to them.


----------



## PK99 (14 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Some are betting on herd immunity as a way out of this.



What are you betting on the get us out of this?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (14 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Some are betting on herd immunity as a way out of this. Each refuser is a problem to them.



Not so much a way out as an epidemiological inevitability, surely?

The only question is how we get there.


----------



## C R (14 Jul 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Not so much a way out as an epidemiological inevitability, surely?
> 
> The only question is how we get there.


The inescapable fact is that we have only ever acquired herd immunity through immunisation, it has never happened naturally.


----------



## KnittyNorah (14 Jul 2021)

C R said:


> Allowing "personal freedom" arguments of the sort bandied about by antivaxxer types is also a rather dangerous slippery slope



It's interesting to note that the WHO's Smallpox Eradication Campaign which ran from 1966 to 1980, _never _used compulsory vaccination or even attempted 100% vaccination coverage as any part of its campaign (although certainly methods which would now be considered unethical were used at times in some places). Improvements were made in vaccination techniques, means of using less of the (always in restricted supply) vaccine and increasing the percentage of vaccinations that 'took'. But more was needed.

WHO developed the E2 principle - eradication escalation - which as a basic principle, used both vaccination _and _highly-effective methods of tracing cases., hand-in-hand. The first trial was in Sierra Leone, then the country with the highest rate of smallpox in the world. Sierra Leone was declared pox-free less than a year after E2 was started in October 1967. Of course smallpox and C-19 are so very different that direct comparisons of their eradication are invalid, and the world fifty-plus years ago was very different to the world today - but the desire to eradicate is just the same, and requires the same sort of original thinking that came up with E2.


----------



## C R (14 Jul 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> It's interesting to note that the WHO's Smallpox Eradication Campaign which ran from 1966 to 1980, _never _used compulsory vaccination or even attempted 100% vaccination coverage as any part of its campaign (although certainly methods which would now be considered unethical were used at times in some places). Improvements were made in vaccination techniques, means of using less of the (always in restricted supply) vaccine and increasing the percentage of vaccinations that 'took'. But more was needed.
> 
> WHO developed the E2 principle - eradication escalation - which as a basic principle, used both vaccination _and _highly-effective methods of tracing cases., hand-in-hand. The first trial was in Sierra Leone, then the country with the highest rate of smallpox in the world. Sierra Leone was declared pox-free less than a year after E2 was started in October 1967. Of course smallpox and C-19 are so very different that direct comparisons of their eradication are invalid, and the world fifty-plus years ago was very different to the world today - but the desire to eradicate is just the same, and requires the same sort of original thinking that came up with E2.


I agree with all you wrote, but I would point out that -to the best of my knowledge- there never was a widespread effort to convince people to refuse the smallpox vaccine.


----------



## icowden (14 Jul 2021)

winjim said:


> Find the actual written advice from named experts provided to the government and then we can discuss it. Until then I remain of the view that this is a political decision by Johnson.


#

From the FT:

View: https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1415017181348253698?s=20


----------



## classic33 (14 Jul 2021)

Punkawallah said:


> We already have that one :-)
> 
> I think in this case the Feminists said it best with their 'its my body' campaign. Institutional compulsory medical procedures are a slippery slope - see the historical American compulsory lobotomies in California, and the *ECT* regime in this country.
> 
> Once the 'we know best' genie is out of the bottle, it's difficult to put it back again.


You ever had that treatment?

A few years ago it was the in thing for treatment for siezures. Six years ago it was removal of the hippocampus for the same condition.


----------



## mjr (14 Jul 2021)

PK99 said:


> What are you betting on the get us out of this?


I have no country to stake, so it's a different question.

Personally, I'm betting on avoiding catching it long enough for some combination of vaccination, treatments and probability to mean I don't get any more chronic illnesses as a consequence. If someone develops those plus testing and tracing into a workable elimination strategy first, so much the better!



roubaixtuesday said:


> Not so much a way out as an epidemiological inevitability, surely?


Aren't there plenty of viruses that we either don't have lasting herd immunity to or keep evolving to reinfect us, depending on how you view them?


----------



## fossyant (14 Jul 2021)

When we're all 'back' at work (fortunately work saying stay as you are at the moment -we've got to think this through) we will have the three camps, jabbed, non-jabbers, and clinically vulnerable (jabbed or not). 

I do hope the non-jabbers don't ask for special treatment (classing non-jabbers as those that can, but won't). The real test will be what do we do with the clinically vulnerable as we've got to look after them as much as possible, and I no doubt there are quite a few in the workforce, especially an ageing one.

Bloody nightmare for employers. The difficulty will also be managing attitudes of jabbed to working with non-jabbers, and vise versa. We've a particular Department where there are a number of non-jabbers (linked to the type of 'specialism' they teach and it's not a 'health one'). Sort of person you don't start a debate with !


----------



## DCLane (14 Jul 2021)

My work's still figuring that one out, with us not back on-site until September. The message at the moment appears to be that we'll be on-site for some delivery, remote for others, and to only be on-site if we're teaching face-to-face. However, that _could_ all change at a moment's notice.


----------



## mjr (14 Jul 2021)

fossyant said:


> Bloody nightmare for employers.


Employers, retailers, shoppers, workers, ... actually, pretty much everyone except government which is giving up and going home, so I'm not sure you needed a qualifier there!


----------



## KnittyNorah (14 Jul 2021)

C R said:


> I agree with all you wrote, but I would point out that -to the best of my knowledge- there never was a widespread effort to convince people to refuse the smallpox vaccine.



No - which is why I said that fifty years ago the world was a very different place - but there were certainly localised, and very effective, anti-vax campaigns in several places - and it is against some of these that actions - some of which might be described merely unorthodox, and some highly illegal and unethical, and others of all degrees between - were taken, both with and without the knowledge and/or connivance of local and national authorities.


----------



## Punkawallah (14 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> You ever had that treatment?
> 
> A few years ago it was the in thing for treatment for siezures. Six years ago it was removal of the hippocampus for the same condition.



I was a part of administering it. Still, lessons learned, eh? 

At the time 'consent' was an interesting word. Anyway, no names, no pack drill.


----------



## shep (14 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Employers, retailers, shoppers, workers, ... actually, pretty much everyone except government which is giving up and going home, so I'm not sure you needed a qualifier there!


Or people who haven't stopped going to work throughout, no change whatsoever for me.
Building trade, drivers, prison staff etc.
Not everyone is stuck indoors you know or work from home


----------



## roubaixtuesday (14 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Aren't there plenty of viruses that we either don't have lasting herd immunity to or keep evolving to reinfect us, depending on how you view them?



Fair enough. 

The point I was trying to make is that the only way we'll get over the initial stage of this pandemic is through a high level of immunity, which will prevent huge spikes emerging. 

We do have the luxury of being able to choose the balance of infection and vaccinating acquired immunity in that. 

Longer term, whether through waning immunity, seasonality, new variants or birth of non- immune infants, there may well be an endemic waxing and waning infection. 

Again, we can choose whether to accept that or minimise it, and there are different ways to go about that.


----------



## mjr (14 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Or people who haven't stopped going to work throughout, no change whatsoever for me.


No change whatsoever? So you're not going to bin your mask, or whatever it was you posted earlier? Yippee!



> Not everyone is stuck indoors you know or work from home


I don't know why you repeatedly direct that daft comment at me. I've not been stuck indoors. I've been volunteering to deliver stuff to those who were shielding, amongst other things. I still think it's a stupid unnecessary risk to bet everything on vaccination and then surrender now. Not everyone who's been out and about minds taking small measures like covering our faces, queuing with space between us and shoot like that. After all, many cyclists cover much of their faces at least half the year anyway!


----------



## Andy in Germany (14 Jul 2021)

I heard an announcement today: People fully vaccinated in our state will have the normal C-19 restrictions restricted from September except for having to wear a mask.


----------



## Solocle (14 Jul 2021)

Bugger

1st dose was 4 weeks ago


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Jul 2021)

We're going to get there, insularly, by a combo of immunity by vaccination and post-infection. The modelling released yesterday shows that, with trajectories showing considerable uncertainty. England's daily cases exponential index has dropped a fair bit, he says optimistically (Edit: till today's figure came in!)


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Jul 2021)

Why is the daily rate of vaccination so low? Is this a lack of demand or lack of supply or a lack of delivery means?
What is the uptake percentage in under 30s?


----------



## classic33 (14 Jul 2021)

Punkawallah said:


> I was a part of administering it. Still, lessons learned, eh?
> 
> At the time 'consent' was an interesting word. Anyway, no names, no pack drill.


I don't think many were learnt, even when consent should have been given. 

What I don't want to see is a similar situation where "treatment" is given when the patient is unable to give consent. Purely and simply because it might help, and forget any long term damage when the "treatment" didn't work.


----------



## Punkawallah (14 Jul 2021)

Preaching to the choir, Brother :-)

Can you say ‘thalidomide’, ‘factor eight’, ‘maternity services’, ‘care in the community’? We have short/selective memories, it seems :-)


----------



## Andy in Germany (14 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> I don't think many were learnt, even when consent should have been given.
> 
> What I don't want to see is a similar situation where "treatment" is given when the patient is unable to give consent. Purely and simply because it might help, and forget any long term damage when the "treatment" didn't work.



This is why we had to be very, very careful dealing with clients at the Workshop for People with disabilities. Fortunately anyone who is considered incapable of making the decision has a guardian and their decision is (literally) law, so all we had to do was inform people and get it in writing.

To my surprise we only had one refusal from a legal guardian, who we think is an anti vaxxer. Even after we'd gone through the process, all patients were asked again by the doc before getting a shot.


----------



## Buck (14 Jul 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Why is the daily rate of vaccination so low? Is this a lack of demand or lack of supply or a lack of delivery means?
> What is the uptake percentage in under 30s?


Lack of demand

there is certainly no shortage of vaccines. In fact, risk of it going out of date. We’ve now started to hit the “don’t want” groups.


----------



## shep (14 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> No change whatsoever? So you're not going to bin your mask, or whatever it was you posted earlier? Yippee!
> 
> 
> I don't know why you repeatedly direct that daft comment at me. I've not been stuck indoors. I've been volunteering to deliver stuff to those who were shielding, amongst other things. I still think it's a stupid unnecessary risk to bet everything on vaccination and then surrender now. Not everyone who's been out and about minds taking small measures like covering our faces, queuing with space between us and shoot like that. After all, many cyclists cover much of their faces at least half the year anyway!


Bit touchy?
Directed at no-one specifically, you just seem to think everyone will be affected by the lifting of restrictions whereas for plenty of people it will make no difference at all.

I like to point out your World isn't the only one in existence, field based workers for example.

Don't make statements that aren't true then, loads of people will carry on as they have been for ages, just because you think there's going to be a massive change in your world, for many nothing has altered.


----------



## Punkawallah (15 Jul 2021)

Who knew that Zoom shrank your world? :-)


----------



## winjim (19 Jul 2021)

Righto, that's me triple vaccinated...


----------



## Solocle (19 Jul 2021)

Well, I got PCRed negative, was nice to get out of the house yesterday, even if briefly!




So either my exposure wasn't too bad, or one dose 5 weeks ago did its job. Could be both or neither.

No classical COVID symptoms at any point (some coughing, but that just goes with asthma). I did feel in a general malaise the day after I got the ping, but that was quite likely just stress.


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Jul 2021)

Back on topic:
https://public.tableau.com/app/prof...OVID-19DailyDashboard_15960160643010/Overview
Good graphical information showing 68.9% first dose in 18 to 29 age group in Scotland.
Wales at 73.4% on the same age band:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55855220
The no jabs for adolescents recommendation on which JCVI may or may not have decided, has been well trailed. I hope they allow 16 and 17yo to be vaccinated: it will help towards herd immunity.


----------



## Ajax Bay (20 Jul 2021)

The JCVI said yesterday that "[We are] of the view that the health benefits of universal *vaccination below the age of 18 years* do not outweigh the potential risks." The decision is not made on supply or logistic constraints. More details here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-of-children-and-young-people-aged-12-to-17-years-jcvi-statement 5


----------



## Buck (24 Jul 2021)

https://theconversation.com/covid-t...its-not-because-vaccines-arent-working-164797


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Jul 2021)

*Antibody Response *
The interval between vaccine doses for Pfizer/BioNTech (mRNA) vaccine was lengthened in the UK to accelerate population coverage with a single dose, and was strongly opposed by the BMA et al (the longer gap had not been tested).
JCVI were very confident in their judgement (implemented wef 31 Dec) and new research has backed their educated hunch: a 10+ week gap may have resulted in a stronger response to the second dose.
The preprint from the PITCH study* suggested that after a priming first dose of that vaccine, there was a marked decline in neutralising antibody responses over a 10-week period, but that T-cell responses were well-maintained. As a single dose of vaccine is known to offer significant protection, this suggests that T cells may be an important part of the protection from illness mechanism.
It found that following the second dose, the longer interval resulted in *twice as high neutralising antibodies against all variants of the virus*, including the Delta variant, compared with the shorter dosing interval.
* Led by the Universities of Oxford and Liverpool - 503 healthcare workers.
An expert commented: ". . . vaccinologists will not be surprised by the findings of this study".
Edit: The takeaway is, younger ones: bear in mind that the shorter the gap between jabs the lower overall protection you'll develop. Balanced against that, protection of only 33% after first jab improves to (say) 80% (figures vary between vaccine, protection 'gainst what and within a confidence interval). So getting the second jab at less than 10 weeks maybe one sweet now rather than two later.


----------



## mjr (27 Jul 2021)

Ireland vaccinating 16 and 17 year olds. 18+ can also choose AZ or Janssen, as well as default Pfizer or Moderna. https://www.thejournal.ie/covid-vaccine-portal-open-for-people-aged-16-17-5506742-Jul2021/


----------



## classic33 (28 Jul 2021)

Irish Government approves Covid vaccines for 12-15 year-olds.

_"Speaking on a visit to a vaccination centre at Punchestown Racecourse in Co Kildare, Minister Donnelly said the online portal to register for a Covid-19 vaccine will be opened to 12 to 15 year-olds "very quickly"."_

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0727/1237529-coronavirus-vaccine/


----------



## mjr (29 Jul 2021)

Facebook says Irish anti-vaxxers group that coordinates fake bookings and reviews is OK by them. https://www.thejournal.ie/anti-vax-cert-facebook-page-businesses-targetted-5507965-Jul2021/


----------



## classic33 (29 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Facebook says Irish anti-vaxxers group that coordinates fake bookings and reviews is OK by them. https://www.thejournal.ie/anti-vax-cert-facebook-page-businesses-targetted-5507965-Jul2021/


If you took the time to read it, it's not anti vaxxers, it's digital covid certificates that are the cause of the problem. You require both jabs to be allowed indoors, when they reopened.

_"On the Facebook page of around 600 members, people opposed to the use of Covid certificates to reopen indoor dining have been posting the names of businesses that are reopening to criticise them, and praising the businesses which have chosen not to reopen."_


----------



## mjr (29 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> If you took the time to read it, it's not anti vaxxers, it's digital covid certificates that are the cause of the problem.


Ok, anti-vaxxers and fellow travellers. Look at the group members and most are members of outright anti-vax groups and pages too.


----------



## classic33 (29 Jul 2021)

mjr said:


> Ok, anti-vaxxers and fellow travellers. Look at the group members and most are members of outright anti-vax groups and pages too.


Non essential intercounty travel only restarted this month, with non essential international travel restarting on the same day as pubs and other venues were allowed to reopen. And they've been better at keeping to travel restriction limits than we have.

I've not bothered looking at the facebook group, to see who's saying what. I followed the link you provided, with you saying it was anti vaxxers.


----------



## Landsurfer (29 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Or people who haven't stopped going to work throughout, no change whatsoever for me.
> Building trade, drivers, prison staff etc.
> Not everyone is stuck indoors you know or work from home


Totally agree ... all 32 of us in our company have been in the office and on-site every working day since the start of this. No masks at work or on site. LFT Tests at two customers only, only one person or their immediate family tested positive to date ... ME! ... and Julie and Connor, after a visit to our dentists ... who, to be honest, where wearing NBC grade PPE .... to no avail ...


----------



## Gillstay (29 Jul 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Totally agree ... all 32 of us in our company have been in the office and on-site every working day since the start of this. No masks at work or on site. LFT Tests at two customers only, only one person or their immediate family tested positive to date ... ME! ... and Julie and Connor, after a visit to our dentists ... who, to be honest, where wearing NBC grade PPE .... to no avail ...


So did you just not do risk assessments at work then ?


----------



## Landsurfer (29 Jul 2021)

Gillstay said:


> So did you just not do risk assessments at work then ?


Of course we did .. I.A.W HSE guidelines ... low risk ....


----------



## MrGrumpy (31 Jul 2021)

Gillstay said:


> So did you just not do risk assessments at work then ?


I assume working outside if I recall , so probably minimal risk and assume not sharing vehicles.

As for me I’ve worked right through this as well, mask wearing came In last July and strange at first but don’t even think about it now. No van sharing albeit that may change come the middle of August. However it will be a choice to start with.


----------



## Landsurfer (31 Jul 2021)

We’ve been sharing vans for months .. Why not ?


----------



## Milzy (31 Jul 2021)

Covid is just the new normal. As much as I don’t like Boris I think their plan now is the right one. 
We need to just get on with life now.


----------



## PK99 (31 Jul 2021)

Milzy said:


> Covid is just the new normal. As much as I don’t like Boris I think their plan now is the right one.
> We need to just get on with life now.



That sums up very well the general attitude of people I know.

Out and about on the Tube and in Central London mask-wearing indoors and social distancing from strangers seem to be the norm - less so with groups of people clearly meeting up again for the first time.

On the tube in particular (District, Nothern and Victoria) mask-wearing seems not to have dropped much.

Point of significance is the almost total absence of tourists - hence in Central London there is loads of space


----------



## MrGrumpy (31 Jul 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> We’ve been sharing vans for months .. Why not ?


Sharing as in driver and passenger ?


----------



## midlife (31 Jul 2021)

Next door neighbour reckons he caught covid from riding around in his works van.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Sharing as in driver and passenger ?


We do, and have dinner breaks in groups of up to 8 sometimes. 
Don't even give a thought to Covid.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Sharing as in driver and passenger ?


Let's Face it we're all probably going to get it at some time, just like flu, hopefully once jabbed we're not going to be seriously ill.


----------



## Electric_Andy (31 Jul 2021)

I had my 2nd Moderna jab on Monday. I've felt terrible ever since. Sweating, shivering, banging headache and dizziness. Today is Saturday and my head is just easing. Hopefully I'll be better tomorrow. I feel better now I'm double jabbed though


----------



## classic33 (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Let's Face it we're all probably going to get it at some time, just like flu, hopefully once jabbed we're not going to be seriously ill.


Never had flu, or the flu jab for that matter. Bad colds, but no flu.


----------



## newts (31 Jul 2021)

I had my second AZ jab end of April, my wife had 2nd Pfizer jab in February. We've always tried to take good precautions, mask, hand washing etc. I developed covid 12 days ago after a few days holiday in Weymouth. I'm mildy asthmatic & it's generally very controlled with a low dose preventative inhaler. Temp of 38.9c on day 2, breathing rapidly deteriorated over next 24 hours (94% spo2). Car park visit with Dr on day 3 has me home monitoring spo2 & temp for 14 days. I felt like sh*t for 7 days. Wife tested positive 3 days after me, she still feels rough & has no energy. Maybe we were unlucky to get such bad symptoms? Dr has told us, without the jabs I'd most likely been hospitalised. All said & done a couple of very worrying days. My only advice would be get vaccinated, it may save your life.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> Never had flu, or the flu jab for that matter. Bad colds, but no flu.


Aren't you the bloke who ended up on life support after taking an aspirin?


----------



## Milzy (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Let's Face it we're all probably going to get it at some time, just like flu, hopefully once jabbed we're not going to be seriously ill.


Not true. Millions of humans can pass it on but not be affected by it. I wonder how scientists explain that.


----------



## classic33 (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Aren't you the bloke who ended up on life support after taking an aspirin?


No. Never had asprin either.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

Milzy said:


> Not true. Millions of humans can pass it on but not be affected by it. I wonder how scientists explain that.


What's not true?

We're not likely to get it?

How do you know?


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

Mus


classic33 said:


> No. Never had asprin either.


Must have you mixed up with someone else, anyway what was your point?


----------



## Milzy (31 Jul 2021)

newts said:


> I had my second AZ jab end of April, my wife had 2nd Pfizer jab in February. We've always tried to take good precautions, mask, hand washing etc. I developed covid 12 days ago after a few days holiday in Weymouth. I'm mildy asthmatic & it's generally very controlled with a low dose preventative inhaler. Temp of 38.9c on day 2, breathing rapidly deteriorated over next 24 hours (94% spo2). Car park visit with Dr on day 3 has me home monitoring spo2 & temp for 14 days. I felt like sh*t for 7 days. Wife tested positive 3 days after me, she still feels rough & has no energy. Maybe we were unlucky to get such bad symptoms? Dr has told us, without the jabs I'd most likely been hospitalised. All said & done a couple of very worrying days. My only advice would be get vaccinated, it may save your life.


94 % spO2 is good for your age. In super fit people it can dip down much lower at night.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> Never had flu, or the flu jab for that matter. Bad colds, but no flu.


And?


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> Never had flu, or the flu jab for that matter. Bad colds, but no flu.


You may not get Covid then.


----------



## Milzy (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> What's not true?
> 
> We're not likely to get it?
> 
> How do you know?


There was a family on TV and the kids got it but the parents didn’t even though they’d been fully exposed for a long period of time.


----------



## classic33 (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Mus
> 
> Must have you mixed up with someone else, anyway what was your point?


Answering your question of me being on life support after taking aspirin.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

Milzy said:


> There was a family on TV and the kids got it but the parents didn’t even though they’d been fully exposed for a long period of time.


OK then, perhaps everyone won't get it.

Perhaps those that do won't get seriously ill. 

Happy?


----------



## classic33 (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> You may not get Covid then.


May not, who can say for certain. All tests to date have been negative though.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> Answering your question of me being on life support after taking aspirin.


No, the bit about not having flu?

Well done. 

Hopefully you won't get Covid either.


----------



## classic33 (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> No, the bit about not having flu?
> 
> Well done.
> 
> Hopefully you won't get Covid either.


Your assumption that


shep said:


> Let's Face it we're all probably going to get it at some time, just like flu, hopefully once jabbed we're not going to be seriously ill.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

What?


----------



## Landsurfer (31 Jul 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Sharing as in driver and passenger ?


And passengerS ... like you’ve been shopping in supermarketS surrounded by otherS... and another thing ... all of you that are wearing masks ..STILL !! .. “to protect others” ... who the hell are these “others” ???


----------



## midlife (31 Jul 2021)

94% SpO2 is the lowest limit I am taught to accept as being safe if I am monitoring for any reason, any lower and I get twitchy and reach for the oxygen. Something to do with oxygen dissociation curves.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

midlife said:


> 94% SpO2 is the lowest limit I am taught to accept as being safe if I am monitoring for any reason, any lower and I get twitchy and reach for the oxygen. Something to do with oxygen dissociation curves.


What does this mean?


----------



## midlife (31 Jul 2021)

See post 4364, if your oxygen sats are that low you are really not well and are a whisker away from being in hospital.


----------



## Milzy (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> OK then, perhaps everyone won't get it.
> 
> Perhaps those that do won't get seriously ill.
> 
> Happy?


Yes. Not as happy of all the pharma companies who’ve made billions out of the tax payers though.


----------



## newts (31 Jul 2021)

Milzy said:


> 94 % spO2 is good for your age. In super fit people it can dip down much lower at night.


I was advised if it dropped to 93% i should dial 999 immediately.
Apparently there's a narrow window to give you oxygen boost before things turn nasty quite quickly.
It's been a slow climb upwards over 10 days & now hovering at 96/97%.
I don't normally use Salbutamol because my asthma is well controlled but for 2 days i was puffing at it faster than Chris Froome on race day!


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

Milzy said:


> Yes. Not as happy of all the pharma companies who’ve made billions out of the tax payers though.


?


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

newts said:


> I was advised if it dropped to 93% i should dial 999 immediately.
> Apparently there's a narrow window to give you oxygen boost before things turn nasty quite quickly.
> It's been a slow climb upwards over 10 days & now hovering at 96/97%.
> I don't normally use Salbutamol because my asthma is well controlled but for 2 days i was puffing at it faster than Chris Froome on race day!


You people measure your Oxygen levels?


----------



## newts (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> You people measure your Oxygen levels?


DR gave me a pulse oxymeter to measure for 14 days. Temp, pulse & SpO2 levels are entered into an app 3 times a day (national data monitoring for covid & recovery), it's monitored by local health authority, who ring you if they notice a trend that's not right. The app will also tell you to call 111/999 if a reading is way of limits.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

newts said:


> DR gave me a pulse oxymeter to measure for 14 days. Temp, pulse & SpO2 levels are entered into an app 3 times a day (national data monitoring for covid & recovery), it's monitored by local health authority, who ring you if they notice a trend that's not right. The app will also tell you to call 111/999 if a reading is way of limits.


Why, you ill?


----------



## Craig the cyclist (31 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> Never had flu,



You don't know that.


----------



## classic33 (31 Jul 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> You don't know that.


Well, it isn't mentioned in my medical records.


----------



## shep (31 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> Well, it isn't mentioned in my medical records.


Why would it?


----------



## newts (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Why, you ill?


Yes, i had covid. See my earlier post #4364 for details as to why i was measuring SpO2 levels.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (31 Jul 2021)

classic33 said:


> Well, it isn't mentioned in my medical records.



It wouldn't be. They don't do tests for flu.

You could have had lots of things and not known it. Flu, migraine, chlamydia, depression, all sorts.


----------



## DaveReading (31 Jul 2021)

shep said:


> Let's Face it we're all probably going to get it at some time, just like flu, hopefully once jabbed we're not going to be seriously ill.



Most people have never had flu and won't.

Apart from that, your analogy is fine.


----------



## mjr (1 Aug 2021)

Israel has started giving third doses of BioNTech for 60+. President Herzog among the first.

I had a pint of "Pfiser" beer at a recent pub stop. Can't remember who brews it.


----------



## shep (1 Aug 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Most people have never had flu and won't.
> 
> Apart from that, your analogy is fine.


'Most people ' haven't had Covid either.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (1 Aug 2021)

Mod Note:
This thread is about the coronavirus vaccine.
To keep on topic, please post general covid19 observations/experiences on the main coronavirus thread
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/coronavirus-outbreak.256913/unread
Thanks from the mods


----------



## Cirrus (12 Aug 2021)

A German nurse is being investigated for giving saline injections rather than vaccine... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-58186032

Will be interesting (not sure what else to call it) to find out what here motivation was, she claims it's to cover up dropping a vile of vaccine but they are apparently looking into 8,000 cases!


----------



## vickster (12 Aug 2021)

Cirrus said:


> A German nurse is being investigated for giving saline injections rather than vaccine... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-58186032
> 
> Will be interesting (not sure what else to call it) to find out what here motivation was, she claims it's to cover up dropping a *vile* of vaccine but they are apparently looking into 8,000 cases!


sounds like an anti-vaxxer


----------



## Cirrus (12 Aug 2021)

vickster said:


> sounds like an anti-vaxxer


That's a vial thing to say....


----------



## classic33 (12 Aug 2021)

Why not here?

*HSE Midwest Community Healthcare is advising parents to only register once for their children’s Covid-19 vaccination.*

The HSE’s vaccine portal opened for 12 to 15 year-olds yesterday evening and appointments at vaccine centres are being reserved for children this weekend.
Parents will have to give consent for their children to receive the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine and attend with them when they’re being vaccinated.
GPs have been told they can begin administering the jab to the 12 to 15-year-old age chort immediately.

While Chief Pharmacist with HSE Midwest Community Healthcare, Louisa Power has been telling Clare FM’s Fiona Cahill that parents can register their children at their local community pharmacy from tomorrow.

https://www.clare.fm/news/clare-pharmacies-begin-administering-covid-jab-12-15-year-olds-tomorrow/


----------



## vickster (12 Aug 2021)

classic33 said:


> Why not here?
> 
> *HSE Midwest Community Healthcare is advising parents to only register once for their children’s Covid-19 vaccination.*
> 
> ...


Pretty sure JCVI and the Govt have explained reasoning on benefit of vaccination to child vs risk of vaccine to child?


----------



## mjr (12 Aug 2021)

vickster said:


> Pretty sure JCVI and the Govt have explained reasoning on benefit of vaccination to child vs risk of vaccine to child?


Is that the reasoning which doesn't care if children spread it to parents and grandparents? That won't hurt them at all(!)


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Aug 2021)

The JCVI reasoning has to be primarily individual centred/weighted, unless there are over-matching role aspects (care workers etc).


----------



## classic33 (13 Aug 2021)

Where there's blame, there's a possible claim.

_"The [Irish]Government says work is under way to establish a compensation scheme for anyone who suffers injury arising from one of the State’s vaccination programmes.

However Minister for Health Stephen Donnelly has ruled out setting up a specific scheme in response to any claims that might arise from the Covid-19 jab."_




https://www.irishtimes.com/news/hea...injury-compensation-scheme-1.4645797?mode=amp


----------



## Ajax Bay (14 Aug 2021)

Son had two appointments on Tuesday: am - got his 3 A level results and pm - got his second jab. Great.
Went out to local city to celebrate and last night (Friday) informed me he tested positive, with some symptoms (LFT).
Looks like he going to get to know his room better this next week. Maybe get some pre-university course work done, then!


----------



## Andy in Germany (14 Aug 2021)

To try and increase uptake of the vaccine (currently 60% first vaccine and 56% fully vaccinated in our state) the health ministry has started a "vaccination tour" using a bus in Stuttgart, so people can drop in to get vaccinated without an appointment.


----------



## C R (14 Aug 2021)

This is interesting, antivaxxers already existed in the 1930s, their target at the time was the smallpox vaccine

https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2021/08/13/nothing-changes/#comments

Plus ça change.


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (14 Aug 2021)

C R said:


> This is interesting, antivaxxers already existed in the 1930s, their target at the time was the smallpox vaccine
> 
> https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2021/08/13/nothing-changes/#comments
> 
> Plus ça change.


The big difference is the WWW - allowing them to find others that think the same and - worse still - others who might think the same with some persuasion

I seriously wonder how many of the people who start these dumb cults (checks spelling - yup OK ) actually believe them themselves
and how many are deliberately spreading known false information


----------



## KnittyNorah (14 Aug 2021)

Nothing remotely new about anti-vaxxers - its far, far older than the 1930s. 

Go back to the 1730s or even the 1630s ... given how old the practice of variolation is, maybe long, long before that.

But to have something directly comparable to today, involving people we might even 'know about' through research into our family tree, we need only go back to the 1860s to see the parallels with current anti-vaxxers, and the weird conflation of 'liberty' and 'freedom' with the issue of vaccination.
The equivalent of 'Covid vaccines change your DNA!' was 'Smallpox vaccines are made from cow product – they turn you bovine!' And cue pictures of people having had their vaccination, growing a horn here, a bit of fur there, an udder or a hoof ...
There was also the dismissal of the severity of the disease. 'Covid's no more than a bad cold!' 'It only kills those who were already seriously ill from other fatal things' and 'It's just like the flu' had exact equivalents 170-ish years ago from the Victorian anti-vaxxer's leagues - and today's claims that the C-19 vaccination is rushed and experimental are mere echoes of what was said almost 200 years ago. 

The saying 'there's nothing new in this world' is certainly true for the anti-vaxxer's arguments!


----------



## Andy in Germany (14 Aug 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> Nothing remotely new about anti-vaxxers - its far, far older than the 1930s.
> 
> Go back to the 1730s or even the 1630s ... given how old the practice of variolation is, maybe long, long before that.
> ...
> The equivalent of 'Covid vaccines change your DNA!' was 'Smallpox vaccines are made from cow product – they turn you bovine!' And cue pictures of people having had their vaccination, growing a horn here, a bit of fur there, an udder or a hoof ...



I believe the Smallpox vaccination included elements of a milder disease called "Cowpox", hence the bovine connection.

To some extent it was also understandable: vaccination was a new idea and apparently involved putting a disease in your body. It's not a great surprise some people viewed it with suspicion. 

Today, on the other hand, with a massive body of evidence and theoretically well educated population, you'd think people would know better.


----------



## purpan (14 Aug 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> I believe the Smallpox vaccination included elements of a milder disease called "Cowpox", hence the bovine connection.
> 
> To some extent it was also understandable: vaccination was a new idea and apparently involved putting a disease in your body. It's not a great surprise some people viewed it with suspicion.
> 
> Today, on the other hand, with a massive body of evidence and theoretically well educated population, you'd think people would know better.


Ah, but social media side-steps evidence and education.


----------



## KnittyNorah (14 Aug 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> I believe the Smallpox vaccination included elements of a milder disease called "Cowpox", hence the bovine connection.
> 
> To some extent it was also understandable: vaccination was a new idea and apparently involved putting a disease in your body. It's not a great surprise some people viewed it with suspicion.
> 
> Today, on the other hand, with a massive body of evidence and theoretically well educated population, you'd think people would know better.



But it wasn't actually a new idea - variolation for smallpox - a much riskier procedure than vaccination - had been around for centuries.

In addition, Jenner's vaccination had - by the 1860s - a long, safe and effective history - and did not, and had not for many, many years, used 'cowpox from a cow' but rather a changed or attenuated version of it which had passed through humans many many times. There had been many investigations - not just Jenner's - and instances recorded of successful use of cowpox as a vaccine in the second half of the 18thC, in the UK, Germany and France - and probably elsewhere too. The success, efficiency and safety of Jenner's procedure was widely recognised and rapidly spread around Europe; a Spanish physician in 1803 led a 3 year long mission around the world to vaccinate thousands, and Napoleon - who was at the time at war with Britain - awarded Jenner a medal, had all his troops vaccinated and even said, when Jenner requested of him to release two British POWs, that he could not "refuse anything to one of the greatest benefactors of mankind" and let them come home. Jenner's vaccination was widely provided in the UK and elsewhere, free of charge and in 1840 the UK government banned variolation – the use of smallpox itself to induce immunity.

The reason for the rise in 'anti-vaxxer' rhetoric in the 1860s appears to be because in 1863, the government of the day passed a Vaccination Act, making vaccination of small children compulsory.

Within weeks of the Act being passed, an Anti-Compulsory Vaccination League was formed and within a few short months had spread its tentacles to every corner of the UK. The anti-vaxxers even had their very own Bill Gates- style bogeyman - the long-dead Dr Jenner, who was accused of having 'given smallpox to the world solely so he could make his fortune with his vaccination'. The similarities in the anti-vaxxer campaigns from that moment on have been _striking_, even given the distances in time.


----------



## Johnno260 (15 Aug 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> I believe the Smallpox vaccination included elements of a milder disease called "Cowpox", hence the bovine connection.
> 
> To some extent it was also understandable: vaccination was a new idea and apparently involved putting a disease in your body. It's not a great surprise some people viewed it with suspicion.
> 
> Today, on the other hand, with a massive body of evidence and theoretically well educated population, you'd think people would know better.



Issue being you have educated people stating facts and providing proof, but these people have been conditioned to believe they’re lying or are paid for crisis actors. 

Then you have the YouTube graduates who think they know better than an actual expert, it’s why I always have one of these ready.






Many of these people are now kidding themselves that medical people aren’t actually educated well and it’s all a lie to fit their narrative.


----------



## Ajax Bay (15 Aug 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> these people are now kidding themselves


I think you are doing WAAY too much 'research' Johnno, and it's not good for you.
Btw, this is the 'vaccine' thread, not the anti-vaxxers thread, in case you've confused yourself. Get back over there and spread your intrepid counter-anti-vaxx propaganda


----------



## Johnno260 (15 Aug 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> I think you are doing WAAY too much 'research' Johnno, and it's not good for you.
> Btw, this is the 'vaccine' thread, not the anti-vaxxers thread, in case you've confused yourself. Get back over there and spread your intrepid counter-anti-vaxx propaganda



Unfortunately those pictures are all shots from people I know, it’s hardly research.


----------



## Johnno260 (15 Aug 2021)

I can’t see how people especially Americans can dispute the vaccine, when you look at the states worst affected and then look at ICU patients and deaths it’s almost exclusively unvaccinated people.


----------



## Gillstay (15 Aug 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> I can’t see how people especially Americans can dispute the vaccine, when you look at the states worst affected and then look at ICU patients and deaths it’s almost exclusively unvaccinated people.


Yes, but many Americans somehow cannot see how guns are bad either !


----------



## Ajax Bay (15 Aug 2021)

classic33 said:


> Why not here?
> . . . administering the jab to the 12 to 15-year-old age cohort


More detailed JCVI answer:
"Most children are at minimal risk of being made seriously ill by COVID-19. Having looked at the available international data, and considered the direct and indirect benefits (such as education), the JCVI has weighed in the balance the benefit to children over 12 of being vaccinated against the very small but important risk of potential side effects from the vaccine. It has decided that for children who are otherwise healthy, the risk is not outweighed by the benefit.
"JCVI has said it will continue to review evidence from around the world on the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, and whether this changes its view on the balance of risk and benefits."


----------



## mjr (15 Aug 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> More detailed JCVI answer:
> "Most children are at minimal risk of being made seriously ill by COVID-19. Having looked at the available international data, and considered the direct and indirect benefits (such as education), the JCVI has weighed in the balance the benefit to children over 12 of being vaccinated against the very small but important risk of potential side effects from the vaccine. It has decided that for children who are otherwise healthy, the risk is not outweighed by the benefit.
> "JCVI has said it will continue to review evidence from around the world on the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, and whether this changes its view on the balance of risk and benefits."


But is that weighing published? I suspect they are undervaluing mental health again.


----------



## Johnno260 (15 Aug 2021)

Gillstay said:


> Yes, but many Americans somehow cannot see how guns are bad either !


Good point.


----------



## midlife (15 Aug 2021)

Government say my 16 year old will be offered a vaccine by 23rd August. I wonder if the GP practice will contact him. He is keen to be vaccinated and maybe look for a walk in center?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (15 Aug 2021)

midlife said:


> Government say my 16 year old will be offered a vaccine by 23rd August. I wonder if the GP practice will contact him. He is keen to be vaccinated and maybe look for a walk in center?



Took ours to a walk in centre today. 

No publicity. Heard about it through Facebook, no official info whatever.


----------



## mjr (16 Aug 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Took ours to a walk in centre today.
> 
> No publicity. Heard about it through Facebook, no official info whatever.



You mean apart from "From 4 August - UK WIDE - 16 and 17 year olds can now get vaccinated." on gov.uk/coronavirus and "This site is for these age groups: 16 and over" on the list of walk-in vaccination sites?

Maybe you feel that's not enough publicity, but it's more than nothing.


----------



## midlife (16 Aug 2021)

Can you point me to a walk in centre Carlisle / Penrith, maybe it's me but can't find info from our CCG / nhs. This is all I can find.

From 4 August
UK WIDE
16 and 17 year olds can now get vaccinated. They’ll be contacted and invited by the NHS but cannot book online


----------



## roubaixtuesday (16 Aug 2021)

mjr said:


> You mean apart from "From 4 August - UK WIDE - 16 and 17 year olds can now get vaccinated." on gov.uk/coronavirus and "This site is for these age groups: 16 and over" on the list of walk-in vaccination sites?
> 
> Maybe you feel that's not enough publicity, but it's more than nothing.



Well done, you managed to find something.

All I could find was the instruction to await contact from the NHS.







https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coron...rus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/


----------



## classic33 (16 Aug 2021)

midlife said:


> Can you point me to a walk in centre Carlisle / Penrith, maybe it's me but can't find info from our CCG / nhs. This is all I can find.
> 
> From 4 August
> UK WIDE
> 16 and 17 year olds can now get vaccinated. They’ll be contacted and invited by the NHS but cannot book online


There are these, 
https://northcumbriaccg.nhs.uk/dropins
but...
_"<< Eligible 12-15 year olds cannot be vaccinated at a pharmacy drop-in and must go through their GP team >>"_

You were correct.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (16 Aug 2021)

midlife said:


> Can you point me to a walk in centre Carlisle / Penrith, maybe it's me but can't find info from our CCG / nhs. This is all I can find.
> 
> From 4 August
> UK WIDE
> 16 and 17 year olds can now get vaccinated. They’ll be contacted and invited by the NHS but cannot book online



https://www.nhs.uk/service-search/f...2.933018896928961&latitude=54.892621255114072


----------



## classic33 (16 Aug 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> https://www.nhs.uk/service-search/f...2.933018896928961&latitude=54.892621255114072


Wouldn't say that either Silsden or Keighley are particularly close by.


----------



## midlife (16 Aug 2021)

Will look at St Paul's Church in Carlisle. Thanks


----------



## roubaixtuesday (16 Aug 2021)

classic33 said:


> Wouldn't say that either Silsden or Keighley are particularly close by.



Indeed not. The whole thing hardly seems to be regarded as any kind of urgent priority.


----------



## classic33 (16 Aug 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Indeed not. The whole thing hardly seems to be regarded as any kind of urgent priority.


There's two(Boots and The Piece Hall), less than 100 yards walking distance apart, in Halifax town centre, every weekend.


----------



## mjr (16 Aug 2021)

Still more than no info but I agree it all appears rather random and low-key.


----------



## midlife (16 Aug 2021)

midlife said:


> Will look at St Paul's Church in Carlisle. Thanks



Next clinic running Tuesday 17th August so will drop by tomorrow. After that it's Thursday. Wonder why not every day? Perhaps don't want unwanted vaccine to go off.


----------



## vickster (16 Aug 2021)

midlife said:


> Next clinic running Tuesday 17th August so will drop by tomorrow. After that it's Thursday. Wonder why not every day? Perhaps don't want unwanted vaccine to go off.


Staffing maybe. Many centres are struggling to get enough volunteers these days. Maybe the nursing staff have other responsibilities, and jobs?

And if it’s like a church hall maybe it’s booked for other activities 👍🏻

Also perhaps not enough demand to warrant being there so avoid wastage. Friend who volunteers says the numbers can be very low


----------



## shep (16 Aug 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> Unfortunately those pictures are all shots from people I know, it’s hardly research.


Bin 'em off then!


----------



## Johnno260 (16 Aug 2021)

shep said:


> Bin 'em off then!



They're blocked now, just a sad step to take.


----------



## shep (16 Aug 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> They're blocked now, just a sad step to take.


I do it all the time, good friends I see regularly, posting crap on Facebook.

They often ask me later and I tell them to stop posting $hyte then, pictures of their dinner or the latest pint!

On that note I have less than 50 'friends ' so not really a user, or anything else for that matter.


----------



## Johnno260 (16 Aug 2021)

shep said:


> I do it all the time, good friends I see regularly, posting crap on Facebook.
> 
> They often ask me later and I tell them to stop posting $hyte then, pictures of their dinner or the latest pint!
> 
> On that note I have less than 50 'friends ' so not really a user, or anything else for that matter.



It’s misinformation that bothers me the most, I had a relative claiming all the deaths in the USA were breakthrough cases from vaccinated people.

Their only citation was a link to a conspiracy online tabloid, so I replied with the actual data from relevant sources.

I know it won’t change their mind, I just do it in case it helps someone on the fence about the vaccines.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (16 Aug 2021)

midlife said:


> Next clinic running Tuesday 17th August so will drop by tomorrow. After that it's Thursday. Wonder why not every day? Perhaps don't want unwanted vaccine to go off.


Depends on the type of site. Some sites as @vickster says are used for other things. Staff are shared around. Amount of vaccine in different sites. People not there to unlock (don't laugh, you would be surprised). If everyone was still doing vaccines then no-one would be doing the everyday stuff, and you would be surprised how behind things are.

Also, volunteers are 'drying up' a bit, people who returned from retirement during the early days are going back in to retirement.

And then there are the upcoming boosters, which will also take up capacity, as well as still trying to catch the people from 1-9 who haven't come forward to get dose 1 yet. Having clinics with multiple cohorts can be confusing too, plus the safeguarding issues, and some of the training done by staff vaccinating adults isn't the right training if they are working with younger people. 

Shall I go on?


----------



## midlife (16 Aug 2021)

*Availability of vaccines*
If you’ve already had your 1st dose, you need to have the same vaccine for your 2nd dose.

Availability of vaccine types

Vaccine typeAvailabilityAstraZeneca - Dose 1*Available*Pfizer - Dose 1*Available*Moderna - Dose 1*Available*AstraZeneca - Dose 2*Available*Pfizer - Dose 2*Available*Moderna - Dose 2*Available*

See above, it seems like a pretty major vaccine hub doing all the jabs for quite a large geographical area. I was just being curious so there is no need to go on...


----------



## Craig the cyclist (18 Aug 2021)

midlife said:


> Next clinic running Tuesday 17th August so will drop by tomorrow. After that it's Thursday. Wonder why not every day? Perhaps don't want unwanted vaccine to go off.



Did it all go ok?


----------



## Milkfloat (19 Aug 2021)

My wife got a text from the GP today telling her that she will be getting a Flu & COVID booster booking sent to her in the next few weeks. I was unaware that this had been fully decided yet. She is on a vulnerable list, I would not have thought too vulnerable though, certainly not to get notifications this early. I assume the booking will be for late autumn.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (19 Aug 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> My wife got a text from the GP today telling her that she will be getting a Flu & COVID booster booking sent to her in the next few weeks. I was unaware that this had been fully decided yet. She is on a vulnerable list, I would not have thought too vulnerable though, certainly not to get notifications this early. I assume the booking will be for late autumn.



No, the booster programme will start at some point in September. Possibly as early as the 6th, but more likely around the 20th.


----------



## Johnno260 (19 Aug 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> My wife got a text from the GP today telling her that she will be getting a Flu & COVID booster booking sent to her in the next few weeks. I was unaware that this had been fully decided yet. She is on a vulnerable list, I would not have thought too vulnerable though, certainly not to get notifications this early. I assume the booking will be for late autumn.



My wife has got a message advising her she will be getting a booster soon, she is a nurse so double jabbed for a long time now.


----------



## newfhouse (19 Aug 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> My wife got a text from the GP today telling her that she will be getting a Flu & COVID booster booking sent to her in the next few weeks. I was unaware that this had been fully decided yet. She is on a vulnerable list, I would not have thought too vulnerable though, certainly not to get notifications this early. I assume the booking will be for late autumn.


My wife and I have had similar texts. 58, no relevant health conditions, Croydon area.


----------



## midlife (19 Aug 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Did it all go ok?



Yep, rocked up at the walk in centre. 16 Yr old had Pfizer jab no issues. To keep footfall inside to a minimum as instructed I waited outside. 

Place was deserted, someone turned up about every 7 minutes. Interestingly has been given a QR code to book a second a. 

I wonder if NHS staff will be given booster or only the older cohort of staff?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (19 Aug 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> No, the booster programme will start at some point in September. Possibly as early as the 6th, but more likely around the 20th.



There was someone from JCVI on the Today programme today saying they were meeting today to decide and implied boosters would most probably be limited to the extremely vulnerable (immunocompromised etc), no general rollout.

Sounds at odds to what you know and what other posters on here are being communicated too.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (19 Aug 2021)

midlife said:


> I wonder if NHS staff will be given booster


Yes, the roll out of boosters will most likely follow the roll out of the first phase, exact details still being worked on thogh, as @roubaixtuesday has mentioned. Expect to roll up both sleeves though!



roubaixtuesday said:


> Sounds at odds to what you know


 Still working on the details is pretty accurate. Although I obviously know what we have been asked to plan for.


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Aug 2021)

Is there a scientific basis for giving JCVI Gps 1-4 booster jabs. Is there a measure/estimate of waning (eg % protection from +14 days of dose 2 level)?


----------



## Julia9054 (19 Aug 2021)

midlife said:


> I wonder if NHS staff will be given booster


I was wondering that with regards to my son. He was working as a carer so was double jabbed by the beginning of February. He is no longer working in care so I guess they won't offer him a booster


----------



## Buck (19 Aug 2021)

All front line staff will be offered the booster. IF your son is no longer working in the service then he won't be eligible for the booster at this time.

Current plans are: -

Stage 1





Stage 2


----------



## Ajax Bay (21 Aug 2021)

Public Health England (PHE) estimates the COVID-19 vaccination programme in England has so far prevented:

More than 82,100 hospitalisations in those aged 65 and over
95,200 deaths
23,957,000 COVID-19 infections

Medscape

England figures First dose total=34,511,819; Second dose total=39,859,148 (@ 20 Aug)
These figures do seem to imply that PHE think that even with zero to the 40M fully vaccinated, and ADDITIONAL 24M would have been infected in the last 8 months. Seems extraordinarily high.
Cases have in any case averaged 18k per day for 243 days and multiply by 2 (case number (+ve test) is roughly half actual infections) (= 9M total). Add to that 24M which suggests that, without the vaccines, we would have had 33+M cases. Add about 5M infections from 1 Mar - 20 Dec 2020 and that's 38M infections in a population of 60M. Seems high, compared to the proportion of the population that caught COVID-19 in 2020, in England.
Have I failed logically or arithmetically here?


----------



## Johnno260 (23 Aug 2021)

Edit: Fixed link.
https://www.businessinsider.com/pfi...ok.com&utm_campaign=sf-insider-main&r=US&IR=T

FDA have approved Pfizer vaccine, it’s not just approved under emergency use.


----------



## mjr (23 Aug 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> View: https://www.facebook.com/1413475698959824/posts/2948625742111471/



What's that about, for those in places where facebook is blocked?


----------



## dodgy (23 Aug 2021)

mjr said:


> What's that about, for those in places where facebook is blocked?


I might have misunderstood your post, but I'll point out that many people do not (more likely will not) have a Facebook account and won't even visit the site if they don't have an account. An alternative link is useful for those kind of people.


----------



## aferris2 (23 Aug 2021)

mjr said:


> What's that about, for those in places where facebook is blocked?


Here's a plain link https://www.businessinsider.com/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-gains-full-fda-approval-2021-8 but you can't read it if you have an ad-blocker...


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Aug 2021)

@Johnno260 - please go back and play on the anti-vaxxers thread (I know you are not one) but this is a 'vaccine' thread not a rubbish on Fb thread.
For those interested @aferris2 has offered the link to the businessinsider article itself.


----------



## Stephenite (23 Aug 2021)

mjr said:


> What's that about, for those in places where facebook is blocked?


FDA Approves First COVID-19 Vaccine

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine


----------



## Johnno260 (23 Aug 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> @Johnno260 - please go back and play on the anti-vaxxers thread (I know you are not one) but this is a 'vaccine' thread not a rubbish on Fb thread.
> For those interested @aferris2 has offered the link to the businessinsider article itself.



I was trying to link the actual report about the vaccine being totally FDA approved, sorry I copied the incorrect link.

I wasn’t posting anything anti vax at all sorry.

Edit: I got it correct in the other thread I have no idea how I posted the FB link.


----------



## Johnno260 (23 Aug 2021)

mjr said:


> What's that about, for those in places where facebook is blocked?


 
sorry I posted the incorrect link I saw someone corrected it now.


----------



## Ajax Bay (23 Aug 2021)

Perhaps go back and edit the Fb insert/link / delete?


----------



## Johnno260 (23 Aug 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Perhaps go back and edit the Fb insert/link / delete?



I made it the direct link now, sorry I did that.

Hopefully the other vaccines will be close behind now, something to be celebrated with regards to modern medicine for sure.

Hopefully if the media report this heavily it will help some people who were hesitant.


----------



## mjr (25 Aug 2021)

Zoe project estimates a 14 percentage point fall in BioNTech vaccine protection from month 1 to month 6, and a 10 percentage point fall for Oxford. https://www.thejournal.ie/waning-protection-with-astrazeneca-and-pfizer-over-time-5530999-Aug2021/


----------



## roubaixtuesday (25 Aug 2021)

mjr said:


> Zoe project estimates a 14 percentage point fall in BioNTech vaccine protection from month 1 to month 6, and a 10 percentage point fall for Oxford. https://www.thejournal.ie/waning-protection-with-astrazeneca-and-pfizer-over-time-5530999-Aug2021/



Zoe data is often all over the place and I'm highly sceptical of their ability to quantify to that level. Plus protection against what exactly, and what are the confidence limits?

Any chance of a link to the actual study rather than the press release?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (25 Aug 2021)

Excellent thread from academic on vaccine efficacy vs Delta.

Summary: don't panic. Still good.


View: https://twitter.com/mugecevik/status/1430218372348878860


----------



## mjr (25 Aug 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Zoe data is often all over the place and I'm highly sceptical of their ability to quantify to that level. Plus protection against what exactly, and what are the confidence limits?
> 
> Any chance of a link to the actual study rather than the press release?


Sadly, it has not yet appeared on https://covid.joinzoe.com/blog and the reports I've seen so far do not mention a publication.


----------



## Johnno260 (25 Aug 2021)

I found this article:
www.barrons.com/amp/articles/pfizer-covid-vaccine-efficacy-delta-variant-51629378855

The Oxford study is a link within that article but this is the direct link:
https://www.ndm.ox.ac.uk/files/coro...ction-survey/finalfinalcombinedve20210816.pdf

It does state the study has not been peer reviewed.


----------



## Ajax Bay (25 Aug 2021)

mjr said:


> Zoe project estimates a 14 percentage point fall in BioNTech vaccine protection from month 1 to month 6, and a 10 percentage point fall for Oxford. https://www.thejournal.ie/waning-protection-with-astrazeneca-and-pfizer-over-time-5530999-Aug2021/





roubaixtuesday said:


> Zoe data is often all over the place and I'm highly sceptical of their ability to quantify to that level. Plus protection against what exactly, and what are the confidence limits?
> Any chance of a link to the actual study rather than the press release?


Medical academics are sceptical.
Think this gives a useful insight: https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/...e-zoe-app-on-vaccine-effectiveness-over-time/
“The claim that immunity levels will hit around 50% by Christmas is not based on any robust analysis of data, and seems more like a finger in the air prediction."


----------



## Craig the cyclist (26 Aug 2021)

What you really need to make a vaccine work better is a dangerous sounding name.

Spikevax will do it, that will soon get the wimpy sounding Covid on the run


----------



## Archie_tect (26 Aug 2021)

Just heard that two people who I worked with ten years ago have had bad Covid reactions.

One, an anti-vaxxer, smoked 40 a day in his twenties- went to the first Newcastle match- he's 35 now and was hospitalised as he couldn't breathe. The other, a social smoker, 40, had the first jab but caught Covid two days before his second jab, at a rugby do. He's been bed-bound for 2 weeks and struggles to get up and down stairs.

Both have been telling everyone who's been in touch with them to get jabbed asap...


----------



## lazybloke (27 Aug 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> Just heard that two people who I worked with ten years ago have had bad Covid reactions.
> 
> One, an anti-vaxxer, smoked 40 a day in his twenties- went to the first Newcastle match- he's 35 now and was hospitalised as he couldn't breathe. The other, a social smoker, 40, had the first jab but caught Covid two days before his second jab, at a rugby do. He's been bed-bound for 2 weeks and struggles to get up and down stairs.
> 
> Both have been telling everyone who's been in touch with them to get jabbed asap...


Thinking about friends and family who had covid before jabs were available, the ex-smokers both came close to death; everyone else has had it much more mildly.

Far too small a sample size me me to suggest any correlation, but I wonder if smoking history vs covid severity has been studied.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (27 Aug 2021)

lazybloke said:


> I wonder if smoking history vs covid severity has been studied.


I can't find it now, but there was a piece published (probably in 'Fag Smokers weekly@ or something) by some idiots that showed the effect of nicotine was having on the Covid virus, in as much as it killed it and the benefits of smoking were underestimated! WTAF


----------



## KnittyNorah (27 Aug 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> I can't find it now, but there was a piece published (probably in 'Fag Smokers weekly@ or something) by some idiots that showed the effect of nicotine was having on the Covid virus, in as much as it killed it and the benefits of smoking were underestimated! WTAF



Even if nicotine _did_ produce a totally-unexpected side effect of offering a degree of protection against coronavirii in long-term addicts, the damage done to the respiratory system by the tars in the smoker's chosen method self-administration of the drug would be more than enough to negate any (highly implausible) benefit that even a conspiracy theorist could think up!


----------



## Low Gear Guy (27 Aug 2021)

I recall there was a news item last year that stated that smokers were less likely to catch covid. However, for those that caught it the consequences were worst.


----------



## MartinQ (27 Aug 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> I can't find it now, but there was a piece published (probably in 'Fag Smokers weekly@ or something) by some idiots that showed the effect of nicotine was having on the Covid virus, in as much as it killed it and the benefits of smoking were underestimated! WTAF



Sponsored by Marlboro? Not that the tobacco companies would ever "commission" "research" to say that their product was beneficial of course


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Aug 2021)

Am going to miss these COVID threads (in NACA), but the sub-forum's furloughing (or redundancy), as they say at the end of a work meeting ending early (on-line) "will give us some time back!(?)" People attempting to score political brownie points has been tiresome, but mostly attenuated by sharing of on topic information and opinions.

_Is Scotland's massive spike being caused by reopening schools?_ No, young adults drove the initial spike, which is subsiding and only now is school related growth taking its place in the data. England and Wales follow (term starts next month) and and a retrospective of the case data will display the effect of all pupils back in school (with some NPI (masking +) here in the SW).
_Why can't we get on with vaccinating kids sharpish, like some other countries are doing? Will that will fix that issue?_
As children are rarely going to hospital or getting ill, them catching the virus isn't so much of an "issue" though it does adversely affect their schooling and that of others (bubble) and (SAGE) _"subsequent consequences for parents and carers, and the wider workforce implications"_. It's their contribution to spreading the virus which is an issue whilst even a small %age of adults (O/18) remain unvaccinated. (+14 days from second dose this is currently 24% but will be down to roughly 16% by end Sep). Heterogeneous vaccination rates will also adversely affect things.
16 and 17 year olds: JCVI Advice
Not all the expert bodies out there have agreed on vaccinating non-vulnerable U/16s. JCVI appear to be deliberating on this and the press are hinting we expect a verdict at some point. MHRA gave the 'OK' 8 weeks ago: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-57358446
In Germany, aiui, the government have overruled their scientific panel (STIKO) in decided to vaccinate adolescents. We'll see if JCVI update their guidance; in England the government is legally bound to follow that; Scotland's government would likely choose to rubber stamp it, but don't have to.
Comment from SAGE documents (recent):
_SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) says it is still difficult to work out whether schools are drivers of transmission, or simply reflecting the spread of the virus in the communities where they are located._ - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58357021 2


----------



## classic33 (29 Aug 2021)

Some kids aren't going to a school in their community. Some have a two bus journey to get to school, 7 - 8 miles away. Some of them in another borough/council area.


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Aug 2021)

Sorry - don't quite get the point you may be making. Care to share deductions? You're agreeing that it's "_difficult to work out whether schools are drivers of transmission, or simply reflecting the spread of the virus in the communities" _- is that right?
Are schools back already over the water?


----------



## classic33 (29 Aug 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Sorry - don't quite get the point you may be making. Care to share deductions? You're agreeing that it's "_difficult to work out whether schools are drivers of transmission, or simply reflecting the spread of the virus in the communities" _- is that right?
> Are schools back already over the water?


Back over the water? You're not in the UK?

I simply pointed out that there are some kids of school age not going to schools in "their communities". Some are having to travel out of their local council districts to go to school. How would that reflect on the figures? They test positive for arguments sake, does that count at point of testing, their school or their local communities.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (29 Aug 2021)

classic33 said:


> does that count at point of testing, their school or their local communities.


A positive test counts against your home postcode.


----------



## Johnno260 (29 Aug 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Am going to miss these COVID threads (in NACA), but the sub-forum's furloughing (or redundancy), as they say at the end of a work meeting ending early (on-line) "will give us some time back!(?)" People attempting to score political brownie points has been tiresome, but mostly attenuated by sharing of on topic information and opinions.
> 
> _Is Scotland's massive spike being caused by reopening schools?_ No, young adults drove the initial spike, which is subsiding and only now is school related growth taking its place in the data. England and Wales follow (term starts next month) and and a retrospective of the case data will display the effect of all pupils back in school (with some NPI (masking +) here in the SW).
> _Why can't we get on with vaccinating kids sharpish, like some other countries are doing? Will that will fix that issue?_
> ...



I suppose one test on if schools are driving numbers up will be a few weeks after the schools go back, it won’t be that clear cut as I know many peoples offices are re-opening to coincide with the school term starting.

The question on what age groups should be vaccinated has to be lead by the data, and only data, politics and all other factors can’t be used in this.


----------



## MartinQ (29 Aug 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> I suppose one test on if schools are driving numbers up will be a few weeks after the schools go back, it won’t be that clear cut as I know many peoples offices are re-opening to coincide with the school term starting.
> 
> The question on what age groups should be vaccinated has to be lead by the data, and only data, politics and all other factors can’t be used in this.



Tbh, last year the numbers increased when schools returned after summer. 
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...les/coronaviruscovid192020incharts/2020-12-18
I know the causal / correlation argument, but it would hardly be surprising.


----------



## Julia9054 (29 Aug 2021)

I'm fully resigned to the fact that I'm probably going to catch covid sooner or later when schools go back. 
Difference is that I am a lot less scared now I'm vaccinated


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Aug 2021)

I agree about data, @Johnno260. More than one set of data, however. Think the data would show that the health risk to under 16s of vaccination (the faint hazard of significant side effects) is well less than the health risk if they caught COVID-19. But if the risk of catching it is higher:

because it's endemic,
and there's a residual %age of the population susceptible (12M under 16),
then there's an argument for vaccinating the (say) secondary school age groups. But JCVI are grappling with that.
There are some categories of 12-15s for whom the vaccine is advised, but generally "the overall harm-benefit balance related to the vaccination of healthy 12 to 15 year olds" is still 'no'. "JCVI will continue to review emerging data and provide further advice in a timely manner."
However this spills across into the community need, and (aiui) JCVI judgements are explicitly individual-based.
Our youth are going to develop antibodies in one of two ways: by vaccination or naturally (by infection). Which is safer?
So there are two sets of data:

individual risk of disease versus side effect risk of vaccination
effect on community disease transmission (and resulting prevalence).
Hence the Bundestag and the Bundesrat (?) decision to see the STIKO guidance/advice (no doubt based on the finest German data analysis) and raise it (vaccinate under 16s - stereotypical (and laudable) Germanic practicality).


----------



## DCLane (29 Aug 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> I'm fully resigned to the fact that I'm probably going to catch covid sooner or later when schools go back.
> Difference is that I am a lot less scared now I'm vaccinated



Similar for me as I'm back in the classroom when university teaching resumes at the end of September.

My students until February are almost all international arrivals from India and China, which could be 'interesting'.


----------



## Ajax Bay (29 Aug 2021)

MartinQ said:


> Tbh, last year the numbers increased when schools returned after summer.
> https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...les/coronaviruscovid192020incharts/2020-12-18
> I know the causal / correlation argument, but it would hardly be surprising.


Last year (September) 0% of the population was vaccinated and cases went up steadily and gradually in all communities. Were well regulated schools a driver or a reflection? As a Scottish sheriff might say 'unproven' (sotto voce - 'but I wouldn't be surprised').
Should we take measures on the basis that a cause might be hardly surprising? Yes: schools are taking a multitude of such measures.
Anyone want to suggest that we should keep children home from school for another month?
Should consideration be given to yet more adverse effect on their academic and social education in this balanced decision, and the effect on the workforce (parents of said children)?
But this is the 'vaccine' thread: and '_erro_'.


----------



## MartinQ (29 Aug 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Last year (September) 0% of the population was vaccinated and cases went up steadily and gradually in all communities. Were well regulated schools a driver or a reflection? As a Scottish sheriff might say 'unproven' (sotto voce - 'but I wouldn't be surprised').
> Should we take measures on the basis that a cause might be hardly surprising? Yes: schools are taking a multitude of such measures.
> Anyone want to suggest that we should keep children home from school for another month?
> Should consideration be given to yet more adverse effect on their academic and social education in this balanced decision, and the effect on the workforce (parents of said children)?
> But this is the 'vaccine' thread: and '_erro_'.



Sure, but the concept of schools being "well regulated" may be a tad optimistic with kids being kids. My lad seems to have caught it at school and passed it on to us in October, so generalizing from a sample size of 1 ...
Ours have gcse next summer so heres hoping vaccine/.... works well enough.


----------



## Julia9054 (29 Aug 2021)

MartinQ said:


> Sure, but the concept of schools being "well regulated" may be a tad optimistic with kids being kids. My lad seems to have caught it at school and passed it on to us in October, so generalizing from a sample size of 1 ...
> Ours have gcse next summer so heres hoping vaccine/.... works well enough.


Not just kids being kids but the impossibility of social distancing etc when you have up to 2000 people in a small space day after day.


----------



## MartinQ (29 Aug 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Not just kids being kids but the impossibility of social distancing etc when you have up to 2000 people in a small space day after day.



Agreed. My lad hates breaking rules and most days he was saying the one way systems wern't being used properly/enforced 100%/... Its probably unreasonable to expect schools/kids to be able to social distance properly, even with the best intentions. To bring it back to the vaccine a bit, they want to have it (gcse this year) and I'd encourage them to have it if it was seen as optional.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Aug 2021)

Vaccines old and new, then, while we can still post 

A *vaccine comprises two active parts* - the information on the part of the virus an immune response is to be formed against, and an adjuvant, something to stimulate the immune system in to responding to that information. This presents stimulation to the immune system along the lines of "some foreign body is present" - not very specific to viral infection.
*DNA and mRNA* vaccines undergo de novo synthesis where viral protein is synthesised within the cell. This process presents stimulation to the immune system that specifically says "something is replicating *within* the cell" - more specific to viral infection.
*Inactivated virus* vaccines and the new synthetic nanoparticle vaccine (Novovax) do not engage in de novo synthesis and so some of the virus-specific stimulation of the immune system is missing.
*Novovax* is not directly comparable to inactivated virus vaccines, but like them it presents complete viral proteins and does not undergo de novo synthesis. Yet, the data shows it elicits a strong T-cell response for example. This suggests that there's clear magic going on with its adjuvant. They use a saponin derived molecule to adjuvenate it - a complex organic molecule.
SinoPharm and CoronaVac both use *Alum based adjuvants*. As I understand it, these basically work by irritating the body and causing a generic inflammatory response, a rather less gory version of scratching around the injection site with a rusty needle.
*Valneva* is using a relatively new adjuvant (CpG 1018) that is a synthetic organic molecule. This adjuvant mimics aspects of the appearance of the DNA/RNA produced in the host during viral replication. This adjuvant has previously been shown (pre-Covid) to stimulate CD4+ and CD8+ responses as well as stimulating strong memory B and memory T cell responses. It's shown to be particularly effective at generating the kind of responses more potent against intra-cellular pathogens. And it'll be Scottish (produced).
So some of the new vaccines may do even better (efficacy) or have greater durability (last longer, less or no boosters)


----------



## Johnno260 (31 Aug 2021)

This may help some as well it’s about vaccine immunity vs natural immunity.

Full report:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.18.21262237v1

The summary by the author is on this tweet:

View: https://twitter.com/profshanecrotty/status/1432726171221778435?s=21


----------



## Ajax Bay (1 Sep 2021)

Note the "Ct < 30" definition of an infection. That is designed to include (ie capture in data) asymptomatic infections, aiui.
A take away from that tweet (if figures correct) is that a person doubly vaccinated with AZ Vaxzevria has reduced their chance of infection by 'exactly' 2/3rds (so still a one third chance, compared to an unvaccinated/no previous infection person).
ETA: For COVID19 (unlike measles @99% for example) vaccination does not confer immunity.
A take away for me is "Stay suitably safe and think about your responsibility for self and for others you come in close (indoor mostly) contact with, and what their likely behaviours are/have been."


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Sep 2021)

JCVI have given a limited 'go ahead' for third doses (note 'booster' terminology has been 'retired') for about half a million of the most severely immunosuppressed patients (link).
"JCVI advises that a third primary dose be offered to individuals aged 12 years and over with severe immunosuppression in proximity of their first or second COVID-19 vaccine doses in the primary schedule. Severe immunosuppression at the time of vaccination is defined" in the link.
The wider programme for at least all over 70s (ie JCVI Gps 1-4 (14M) who all received their first dose ahead of the 15 Feb target) seems still on hold "waiting for more evidence" - I think @midlife shared the draft plan upthread. NHS had made contingency plans to deliver a 25M+ Dose3 programme from next week (interim JCVI advice back in June). Whatever is finally rolled out will need to integrate (assumed) with the 'normal' autumn flu vaccination programme.


----------



## Johnno260 (2 Sep 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Note the "Ct < 30" definition of an infection. That is designed to include (ie capture in data) asymptomatic infections, aiui.
> A take away from that tweet (if figures correct) is that a person doubly vaccinated with AZ Vaxzevria has reduced their chance of infection by 'exactly' 2/3rds (so still a one third chance, compared to an unvaccinated/no previous infection person).
> *ETA: For COVID19 (unlike measles @99% for example) vaccination does not confer immunity.
> A take away for me is "Stay suitably safe and think about your responsibility for self and for others you come in close (indoor mostly) contact with, and what their likely behaviours are/have been."*



I highlighted the important part, and it's something many people misunderstand and I wish they could comprehend it, the vaccine doesn't offer total immunity but it does offer many other benefits, if you look at death rates that are reported through proper channels the deaths to unvaccinated massively outweigh the vaccinated.

I know people smile at the anti vax thread, but the above are aspects I see misunderstood far to often, and it's costing lives and futures, due to deaths and long Covid.


----------



## classic33 (2 Sep 2021)

It seems as though the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine will no longer be used locally. A list of what will be available and when, was published last week. The last mention of Oxford/AstraZeneca being given was yesterday(1st September). The Modena vaccine gets a mention at the end of this month. Other than that it's all Pfizer from now on.


----------



## Johnno260 (2 Sep 2021)

This is a report/study on how breakthrough infections are made far less serious if single or doubled vaccinated. 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/...al&utm_source=twitter&hss_channel=tw-27013292

The Lancet tweet for summary purposes:

View: https://twitter.com/thelancet/status/1433195677610352644?s=21


----------



## midlife (2 Sep 2021)

Boris seems to have announced booster jabs for the older generation starting this month. ....


----------



## Craig the cyclist (2 Sep 2021)

classic33 said:


> It seems as though the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine will no longer be used locally.


Not true. AZ will continue to be used.


----------



## classic33 (2 Sep 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> Not true. AZ will continue to be used.


Note the use of the word locally.
No-where is offering it as of yesterday, locally.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Sep 2021)

All (well nearly all) first and second doses will be administered to Under 40s, so that excludes the use of AZ Vaxzevria. I guess it will continue in use for the catch-up of the very small percentage of the over 40s who decided not to take the vaccine when offered months ago or who didn't come for their second dose when asked / on time. Is that right Craig?
I suspect you haven't an insight into the planned usage (or not) outside the purview of NHSE, so just declaring "not true" lacks nuance.


----------



## midlife (2 Sep 2021)

Out of interest checked a coupe of our local drop in vaccine centres.

Workington. Pfizer and modern first and second dose
AstraZeneca second dose only

Carlisle . Only Pfizer and Moderna on offer. 

I guess if you wanted a second AZ then you have to shop around


----------



## Craig the cyclist (2 Sep 2021)

classic33 said:


> Note the use of the word locally.


All vaccination sites still have access to AZ, it will continue to be used in every site in one way or another.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (2 Sep 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> All (well nearly all) first and second doses will be administered to Under 40s, so that excludes the use of AZ Vaxzevria.


Sorry, I don't quite get this sentence. Do you mean that when the time comes for under 40s to get a booster, it most probably won't be AZ?

AZ will be on offer for several groups, and continue to be available for all centres to order. It is also part of the evergreen offer for eligible groups as a first and second dose vaccine.

It is also not clear yet if third doses will be AZ for those who got AZ for doses 1 and 2.


----------



## midlife (2 Sep 2021)

https://northcumbriaccg.nhs.uk/dropins

As I mentioned above not all sites around me do all the vaccine types.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (2 Sep 2021)

But all vaccine types are available to all sites, subject to them having the correct assurance, which they all have for AZ.

They are not doing many AZ at the moment, but it remains available and still a licensed vaccine which sites will administer.


----------



## classic33 (2 Sep 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> But all vaccine types are available to all sites, subject to them having the correct assurance, which they all have for AZ.
> 
> They are not doing many AZ at the moment, but it remains available and still a licensed vaccine which sites will administer.


There's no-where offering it locally to me. That includes the three walk in vaccination "centres".

"Available to order" doesn't mean much if no-where is using it.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (2 Sep 2021)

classic33 said:


> There's no-where offering it locally to me. That includes the three walk in vaccination "centres".
> 
> "Available to order" doesn't mean much if no-where is using it.


If you aren't having it, why does it matter?


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Sep 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> This is a report/study on how breakthrough infections are made far less serious if single or doubled vaccinated.


Johnno - welcome, albeit briefly I fear as we're NACA'd, but I refer you to umpteen trials and studies which determine that the protection against infection is less than against severe infection and worse - so what you say is well known (by those reading this thread, anyway).
Here are the data used by one of the SPI-M papers looking at the July reduction in NPI.


----------



## classic33 (2 Sep 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> If you aren't having it, why does it matter?


I'm not the only one with only the one jab to date, locally. And so far it's been said you get the same the second time as you got the first time.

That's not possible if the LHA aren't using it. After all they stored it.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Sep 2021)

Craig - I know you can add real value.
Saying 'all centres have access *to* AZ' is meaningless to the vaccinatee. The key info is whether they're offering it. "It remains available." What, locally, do you mean by this? You mean there are supplies somewhere in UK?
Don't see why you attempted an (off-target) pop at @classic33 who has shared the reasons why he was very wary about being vaccinated, bravely went for it and had significant immediate complications. So it does "matter" to him, and maybe more to him than others on this thread whom I suspect are all double dosed.
How about: "For the next month, all (well nearly all) first and second doses will be being administered to Under 40s, so that excludes the use of AZ Vaxzevria." Quite likely that, if the JCVI so recommend, the over 70s will be offered AZ, but currently JCVI have not made a decision on that (see my post above). The JCVI text is:
"For those [immunosuppressed] aged 18 years and over, JCVI advises a preference for mRNA vaccines for the third primary dose, with the option of the AZ Vaxzevria vaccine for individuals who have received this vaccine previously where this would facilitate delivery. In exceptional circumstances, persons who received a mRNA COVID-19 vaccine previously may be offered a third primary dose of AZ Vaxzevria vaccine following a decision by a health professional on a case-by-case, individualised basis. For those aged 12 to 17 years the Pfizer-BNT162b2 vaccine remains the preferred choice, as set out in JCVI advice of 4 August 2021."
I think the studies on vaccine mixing have yet to report, but istr that early data suggested mixing resulted in a greater set of immune responses.


----------



## Buck (2 Sep 2021)

Pfizer is now licensed and is branded as *Cominarty*. There will be some changes to storage and transportation but nothing else and from a patient perspective we’ll just keep calling it Pfizer!

All orders for 3rd dose for W/C 6/9 (and emerging that very likely the same for 13/9) have been cancelled with a potential go-live W/C 20/9. It looks like all 3rd dose may well be Pfizer regardless of 1st and 2nd dose. At present we only have one 3rd dose order line which supports this. *The final JCVI guidance is still pending so everything is up for grabs and AZ may be 3rd dose for housebound and care homes if the transportation of Cominarty is too complex for these cohorts

AZ is now only second (and third?) dose only and IMO we will now see it move to be an export vaccine with our primary being Pfizer followed by Moderna With others as they come on stream. 

There is very likely an announcement tomorrow on healthy 12-15 Year olds.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (3 Sep 2021)

As @Buck says, planning should all be done by now for booster doses for cohorts 1-9 (+ the evergreen offer) . There is ongoing discussion around HCPs who were vaccinated very early on, but it looks likely they will be included.

The 3rd dose is available as a notional Pfizer vaccine, however the decision to include AZ isn't final yet, and it needs to be made clear that the AZ vaccine is still very much available to order for all sites who have been AZ assured. Buck has said that all 3rd doses for week 6/9 have been cancelled, just to be clear, that isn't quite right, the orders will now be moved on and delivered to sites in time for whenever the programme starts. Doses planned to be administered as part of the current programme (2nd jabs and evergreen 1st jobs etc) will also be delivered in time as planned and won't be cancelled.

AZ can be first dose for some groups, so remains very much one of the 4 licensed vaccines available for use in England (Pfizer (Cominarty), Moderna (Spikevax), Oxford/AZ and the Janssen single dose).


----------



## Craig the cyclist (3 Sep 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> You mean there are supplies somewhere in UK?


There is a large amount of AZ in the system already, with new vaccine available to order by any sites who have been assured for it to order/draw down on and administer.

You are right that most 1st dose vaccine won't now be AZ, certainly for the current age groups, but there still lots of people who are in the AZ age range and yet to be vaccinated. A surprising amount actually!

How about a fun quiz to lighten the mood (possibly Buck is banned from this)?

_There are also some people who are up for getting doses 4 or even 5, not many, but the programme is certainly doing those doses for some people, who may those people be?_


----------



## PK99 (3 Sep 2021)

I note the announcement of "booster/3rd" jabs for certain clinically vulnerable groups.

I have a vested interest in that happening in the next 3 weeks.

_Do any with an inside track_, know how/when the extra jabs will be rolled out?

No speculation please, just hard info.


----------



## Milkfloat (3 Sep 2021)

Craig the cyclist said:


> _There are also some people who are up for getting doses 4 or even 5, not many, but the programme is certainly doing those doses for some people, who may those people be?_


People from an early trial?


----------



## Johnno260 (3 Sep 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> All (well nearly all) first and second doses will be administered to Under 40s, so that excludes the use of AZ Vaxzevria. I guess it will continue in use for the catch-up of the very small percentage of the over 40s who decided not to take the vaccine when offered months ago or who didn't come for their second dose when asked / on time. Is that right Craig?
> I suspect you haven't an insight into the planned usage (or not) outside the purview of NHSE, so just declaring "not true" lacks nuance.



My wife has asked questions on this, she is in healthcare and has been told the trust is going to give workers a 3rd/booster.

She has been told she can’t have the Pfizer due to reaction concerns, she has epilepsy and suffered anaphylaxis where the route cause was never diagnosed, for these reasons she was told AZ was the only one they would use.

PS: Sorry I posted that link the a report that had already been discussed, I had missed it when I looked back and was hoping to add before the forum was locked.


----------



## Craig the cyclist (3 Sep 2021)

PK99 said:


> _Do any with an inside track_, know how/when the extra jabs will be rolled out?


The plan was that this would start on the 6th, the most likely looking date is now the *20th of September.* It will be a re-run of the phase one. So if you had an early jab, then expect an earlyish recall. 



Milkfloat said:


> People from an early trial?


Good shout, but not quite right.



Johnno260 said:


> My wife has asked questions on this, she is in healthcare and has been told the trust is going to give workers a 3rd/booster.


Her info is probably correct, there is work ongoing to get hospital sites back up and running, but this time round the hospital sites won't just be doing health staff. 



Johnno260 said:


> She has been told she can’t have the Pfizer due to reaction concerns, she has epilepsy and suffered anaphylaxis where the route cause was never diagnosed, for these reasons she was told AZ was the only one they would use.


Which is why AZ remains available for all vaccination sites that are assured for AZ use. There is also plenty sloshing about in the system, it just won't be used in such large quantities as previously.


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Sep 2021)

JCVI Doesn't Recommend COVID-19 Jabs for All 12 to 15-year-olds
However, it is widening the limited roll out to at-risk groups. Children with chronic major heart, lung, kidney, liver, and neurological conditions will now be offered vaccination. Around 200,000 more children will be invited for jabs.
JCVI: "The health benefits from vaccination are marginally greater than the potential known harms. However, the margin of benefit is considered too small to support universal vaccination of healthy 12 to 15-year-olds at this time.
"It is not within the JCVI’s remit to consider the wider societal impacts of vaccination, including educational benefits. The Government may wish to seek further views on the wider societal and educational impacts from the Chief Medical Officers of the UK four nations."
The JCVI is under strict remit. The MHRA have cleared specific vaccines for use in 12-15s. I guess the government is grappling with the judgement calls (as flagged by JCVI above) of vaccinating 12-15s (and the implications for sufficient supply as a 'third dose' programme rolls out nationwide) without the support of a JCVI recommendation.
So it'll be down to CMOs x 4 to consider the societal benefits of having children vaccinated, and focus on areas outside the JCVI’s remit: including lost education time due to COVID-related absences (either infection or proximity-driven rustication).


----------



## Andy in Germany (4 Sep 2021)

Apparently from November people without a vaccination here will no longer get state assistance if they have to isolate. The vaccination rate will probably be about 65-70% by then. 

I'm not sure it makes scientific sense, but I can see how it makes political and economic sense.


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 Sep 2021)

mjr said:


> Ireland has reached 90% of 18+ fully vaccinated. The UK is currently at 80% of 16+


Ireland is at 56% for 12-15s and 75% for 16/17s (first doses)


----------



## mjr (14 Sep 2021)

UK cancels contract with Valneva for their in-development vaccine claiming Valneva breached obligations https://www.france24.com/en/europe/...ab-contract-with-franco-austrian-firm-valneva

French medicines regulator ANSM reports a “significant number of failures of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine” (the single-dose one). Recipients are being offered a second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna https://www.connexionfrance.com/Fre...oncerns-over-Johnson-Johnson-vaccine-failures


----------



## Pale Rider (21 Sep 2021)

PK99 said:


> I note the announcement of "booster/3rd" jabs for certain clinically vulnerable groups.
> 
> I have a vested interest in that happening in the next 3 weeks.
> 
> ...



I've been told I will get a booster jab in the next week or two, although this time it will be at the hospital clinic I attend regularly rather than at a 'public' vaccination centre.

Hospital staff I speak to are also expecting boosters sooner rather than later.


----------



## classic33 (24 Sep 2021)

The third jab has been given to some people already, over the last two weeks.


----------



## Buck (24 Sep 2021)

I’ve now had my booster and also my flu vaccine. No side effects except a slight headache today.


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (25 Sep 2021)

To add to your list of totally bat s**t crazy theories - here is a good one
https://www.indy100.com/news/trump-michael-flynn-salad-dressing-b1925607


Won't impact me - but if they add it to Heinze Ketchup I will have to check the overdose points


----------



## MartinQ (25 Sep 2021)

ebikeerwidnes said:


> To add to your list of totally bat s**t crazy theories - here is a good one
> https://www.indy100.com/news/trump-michael-flynn-salad-dressing-b1925607
> 
> 
> Won't impact me - but if they add it to Heinze Ketchup I will have to check the overdose points



Make sure you spread it on a llama steak
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58628689


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (25 Sep 2021)

MartinQ said:


> Make sure you spread it on a llama steak
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58628689



I can't eat FiFi!!!!!!


and anyway - what if she has tuberculosis 
or was that something else


----------



## MartinQ (25 Sep 2021)

ebikeerwidnes said:


> I can't eat FiFi!!!!!!
> 
> 
> and anyway - what if she has tuberculosis
> or was that something else


They're all alien killers anyway

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXBLv71E3bw


----------



## MrGrumpy (26 Sep 2021)

Son 15 had his vaccine today. Was booked in during the October break which I wasn’t aware off , however he was keen to get it done soon as he could.

Pfizer is now known as Comirnaty !?


----------



## classic33 (26 Sep 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Son 15 had his vaccine today. Was booked in during the October break which I wasn’t aware off , however he was keen to get it done soon as he could.
> 
> Pfizer is now known as Comirnaty !?


Sounds more like somewhere out of the shipping forecast.
FDA approval last month, so they were able to give it an actual name. As opposed to using the company name.


----------



## KnittyNorah (26 Sep 2021)

classic33 said:


> Sounds more like somewhere out of the shipping forecast.


LOL! I think it sounds like an organisation from Soviet-era Russia!


----------



## slowmotion (27 Sep 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> LOL! I think it sounds like an organisation from Soviet-era Russia!


It's what ladies in ridiculously short skirts call out to drum up trade while standing in doorways.


----------



## PK99 (27 Sep 2021)

We are in Vancouver. Mask wearing universal in shops and vaccine passport plus photo id to get into bars and restaurants is 100% required and checked.


----------



## mjr (15 Oct 2021)

Booster vaccine programme called a "chaotic failure" and main vaccination programme has lost momentum, says https://www.theguardian.com/society...llout-for-immunosuppressed-is-chaotic-failure


----------



## lazybloke (15 Oct 2021)

mjr said:


> Booster vaccine programme called a "chaotic failure" and main vaccination programme has lost momentum, says https://www.theguardian.com/society...llout-for-immunosuppressed-is-chaotic-failure


My youngest has a health condition and might qualify for a 3rd jab.
1st jab would be nice! 

More dither?


----------



## C R (15 Oct 2021)

Our two daughters over the age of 12. Some of their friends are registered with a doctors surgery in Upton, and have already been called. Not a peep from the surgeries in Worcester though, and when we asked we were just told to wait.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (15 Oct 2021)

Interesting to see how things will pan out down under now Aus is starting to open up and presumably NZ next.

Both countries have already administered more vaccine doses per capita than the US, and have about the same number of people with at least one dose as we do. Impressive stuff once they got going.

Their death tolls are a tiny fraction of ours, and lest anyone claims an overcrowded island like ours could never achieve this, Japan isn't far behind.


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Nov 2021)

Covaxin Trial Results
"Highly efficacious against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease”.
Covaxin has been developed by Bharat Biotech International and trialed in India (Jan-May 2021).
25,798 participants split 50/50: two doses of BBV152 (n=12,221) or placebo (n=12,198).
Interim results published in _The Lancet_ show that the vaccine had an overall estimated efficacy of:

77.8% (95% CI 65.2 to 86.4) against symptomatic COVID-19 
and against severe disease (93.4%; 95% CI 57.1 to 99.8).
Same adverse reaction levels - 12% . . no cases of anaphylaxis or vaccine-related deaths. "Vaccination was well tolerated with no safety concerns raised."


----------



## mjr (2 Dec 2021)

Researchers may have figured out how the OxAZ vaccine triggered blood clots in some people: https://www.thejournal.ie/astrazeneca-blood-clot-trigger-identified-5617686-Dec2021/

Also news of a GSK-Vir monoclonal antibody (name ends -mab, sotrovimab) treatment being approved by the UK regulator.


----------



## vickster (2 Dec 2021)

Quick thoughts from the double vaxed and subsequently infected...and getting the booster...

Pfizer 1st vax mid-March, 2nd mid-June. 
Positive PCR on 24 October  Did the antibody test a week after the PCR (3 Nov), antibodies detected to vaccine.
Just got results from second A/B test done 26 November, and I now have A/Bs to vaccine and virus 

I'd booked my booster for the 20 Dec before getting the latest results. Rebooked for 8 Jan. 
I'm now thinking I should wait for a few months more given I'm seemingly swimming in A/Bs (at least presumably to Delta) and there's talk of vaccines being tweaked for Omicron.

Anyone else in the same situation? Thoughts?


----------



## C R (2 Dec 2021)

I had Astra Zeneca, first dose in February, second in May, but never had a positive PCR and never had an A/B test, so don't actually know how my immune system is doing. I had moderna for my booster on Tuesday, so here's hoping it works well enough.


----------



## vickster (2 Dec 2021)

C R said:


> I had Astra Zeneca, first dose in February, second in May, but never had a positive PCR and never had an A/B test, so don't actually know how my immune system is doing. I had moderna for my booster on Tuesday, so here's hoping it works well enough.


You only get offered AB testing free if PCR positive (although I don’t think everyone who agrees gets the test) or part of a study. I believe you can pay for testing though if wanted,
A bit of a rigmarole trying to get enough blood into the little tube though, especially while it’s cold!


----------



## icowden (2 Dec 2021)

Just got my booster and a flu jab (Two for one offer!!)


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Dec 2021)

I think the target to offer all over 18s a third dose by end Jan is, as they say, a stretch target, but achievable.
Let's convert that 'offer by' to 'jab by' and say end Feb.
Vast majority of the 18-25s will have received their second jab by end September so the new '3 months after 2nd jab criterion' has no limiting effect.
Current situation (data from ONS, gov.uk dashboard and a bit of bbc for age cohort uptake (so far)):
Population of UK = 67M, Under 12s: 9.6M, Under 18s = 14M, Over 18s 53M
*Total – first dose*
51,020,285 (of which about 1.3M are 12-15 (40% uptake) and 0.9M are 16-17 (58% uptake))
So 48M adults (5M unvaccinated)
*Total – second dose*
46,431,662 (assume all are adults)
*Total – booster/third dose*
19,015,975
Assume minimal more adult first dose uptake (unless the UK descends into some authoritarian state behaviour).
Deduction: not many more adult O/18 second doses to give - *allow 1M*
Another 1.8M first doses needed for 12-17s (assume 90% uptake, likely over-estimate) -* allow 2M*
Second doses for 12-17s - *allow 4M* (90% uptake)
Third/booster doses (assumes all adults who get second dose (46.4 + 1 =) 47.4M) will take up offer of third) = (47.4 -19 =) *allow 28M*
So from 1 Dec to 28 Feb - 35M doses required. 90 days (including public holidays).
*Required rate: average of 389k doses per day.*
Current doses jabbed per day (7 day average) = 427k and average has been over 400k per day for over 3 weeks now.


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Dec 2021)

After my third jab for a virus which i’ve caught and recovered from, watching the MSN hysteria over a variant which we have no threat level knowledge off .... i’ve had enough ... if anyone wants my 4th -28th jab they can have it ...........


----------



## C R (3 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> After my third jab for a virus which i’ve caught and recovered from, watching the MSN hysteria over a variant which we have no threat level knowledge off .... i’ve had enough ... if anyone wants my 4th -28th jab they can have it ...........


We are all fed up. Unfortunately, the disease will not go away just because we are fed up or we ignore it, more likely, if we stop taking care it will get worse.


----------



## fossyant (3 Dec 2021)

C R said:


> We are all fed up. Unfortunately, the disease will not go away just because we are fed up or we ignore it, more likely, if we stop taking care it will get worse.



Quite. All we can hope is the disease mutates enough to be much less harmful, but spreads like colds do. It's still killing people, and the rest of the world still has a long way to go to catch up with vaccines than us 'rich' countries.


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Dec 2021)

C R said:


> We are all fed up. Unfortunately, the disease will not go away just because we are fed up or we ignore it, more likely, if we stop taking care it will get worse.


How is it going to get worse! If we all have antibodies, if we all have active T cells, if the vaccines and boosters work ... Just how will it get worse ... 
Fear porn never stops does it ...


----------



## Rocky (3 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> How is it going to get worse! If we all have antibodies, if we all have active T cells, if the vaccines and boosters work ... Just how will it get worse ...
> Fear porn never stops does it ...


You don’t seem to have taken into account the latest scientific knowledge in your claims. People who have been infected by original COVID strains or immunised have immunity to them. As COVID has mutated, it still raises a response but provides immunity to early variants but not, for example, against Omicron to the degree expected. Thus health services are reporting cases of serious infection even though it is thought those individuals should have immunity. It is called imprinting.

https://www.cell.com/trends/immunology/fulltext/S1471-4906(21)00177-0


----------



## Landsurfer (3 Dec 2021)

Rocky said:


> You don’t seem to have taken into account the latest scientific knowledge in your claims. People who have been infected by original COVID strains or immunised have immunity to them. As COVID has mutated, it still raises a response but provides immunity to early variants but not, for example, against Omicron to the degree expected. Thus health services are reporting cases of serious infection even though it is thought those individuals should have immunity. It is called imprinting.
> 
> https://www.cell.com/trends/immunology/fulltext/S1471-4906(21)00177-0


Serious infection ..... anyone dying ..... lots and lots of people dying of cancer while the Covid Brigade keep the fear going ..... 141 people sadly died with or of Covid yesterday ... but over 1500 died of other causes, many of them possibly as a result of being ignored by the health system over the last 2 years ...
Proportionate Response ... is the way forward .... End the Fear Porn.


----------



## mjr (3 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Serious infection ..... anyone dying ..... lots and lots of people dying of cancer while the Covid Brigade keep the fear going ..... 141 people sadly died with or of Covid yesterday ... but over 1200 died of other causes many of them possibly as a result of being ignored by the health system over the last 2 years ...
> Proportionate Response ... is the way forward ....


Surely the best way to stop people dying from other causes due to hospital overload would be to reduce the number of covid cases and thereby reduce covid hospitalisations? What's the suggested alternative? Ignoring covid won't reduce the numbers hospitalised, unless we deny covid sufferers treatment.


----------



## Rocky (3 Dec 2021)

Mmmm I bet thats the first time an article in Cell has been called Fear Porn.


----------



## icowden (3 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Surely the best way to stop people dying from other causes due to hospital overload would be to reduce the number of covid cases and thereby reduce covid hospitalisations? What's the suggested alternative? Ignoring covid won't reduce the numbers hospitalised, unless we deny covid sufferers treatment.



Worth adding that GPs, Nurses, Surgeons, Consultants are all human and can contract Covid. The more Covid there is, the more likely it is that the Surgeon carrying out your surgery is off sick.

Covid has a massive impact on health care. We have a shortage of doctors and nurses as is thanks to reasons only mentionable on the NACA forum. 
Sensible precautions to reduce the spread of infection aren't a restriction on your civil liberties. They are just politeness.


----------



## vickster (3 Dec 2021)

Also, if intensive care and high dependency units are full of Covid patients, those beds and staff aren't available for elective post surgical patients who've had major operations - so those operations will be postponed. You also need some available just in case patients need more post-op support than anticipated, for trauma cases and so on


----------



## MontyVeda (3 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Serious infection ..... anyone dying ..... lots and lots of people dying of cancer while the Covid Brigade keep the fear going ..... 141 people sadly died with or of Covid yesterday ... but over 1500 died of other causes, *many of them possibly as a result of being ignored by the health system over the last 2 years ...*
> Proportionate Response ... is the way forward .... End the Fear Porn.


That's what called baseless speculation if ever I've seen it. 

Consider, if you can, how many of these 'other causes' are contagious? How many of these 'other causes' put healthcare workers at risk? You're not going to catch cancer form someone who's got cancer are you!


----------



## markemark (3 Dec 2021)

My dad’s oldest friend died of cancer. He died because his surgeon was ill with covid so cancelled the operation he needed. 
People with covid are filling hospitals and keeping people away from work. If we want to get the nhs going again, we need to hammer covid as best as we can.


----------



## fossyant (3 Dec 2021)

vickster said:


> Also, if intensive care and high dependency units are full of Covid patients, those beds and staff aren't available for us stupid cyclists when we crash or get knocked off



Fixed it 

Ex HDU customer !


----------



## Ming the Merciless (3 Dec 2021)

Booster just over an hour ago. Moderna this time. Told to wait 15 mins this time. For AZ they said I could leave straight away.


----------



## Gillstay (3 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Serious infection ..... anyone dying ..... lots and lots of people dying of cancer while the Covid Brigade keep the fear going ..... 141 people sadly died with or of Covid yesterday ... but over 1500 died of other causes, many of them possibly as a result of being ignored by the health system over the last 2 years ...
> Proportionate Response ... is the way forward .... End the Fear Porn.


So your post then is `Doubt porn?' iI am trying to understand why you would state these views and struggle to understand what you hope to gain from them or are you just trying to be outspoken and wind people up.


----------



## mjr (3 Dec 2021)

MontyVeda said:


> Consider, if you can, how many of these 'other causes' are contagious? How many of these 'other causes' put healthcare workers at risk? You're not going to catch cancer form someone who's got cancer are you!


No, but someone's curable cancer may progress to incurable because it was ignored. Even some pretty benign conditions can become fatal if left untreated long enough. So far from being baseless speculation, I'd say it's certain that some deaths from other causes are due to covid delaying other treatments.

Full disclosure: I was on a 14-month hospital waiting list and it took them seven months to even admit that. I have now moved to the back of an up-to-4-month waiting list at a different hospital far away which I can get to by bike+train. I don't think this illness will kill me, but it has been getting worse recently and there are ways it could, eventually, even if I think they are usually rare in developed countries. And there was more in this rant which I've cut. So I'm a bit fed up with people suggesting 50'000 cases a day is fine and the NHS is coping because it really does not look like it to this ill person!


----------



## MontyVeda (3 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> No, but someone's curable cancer may progress to incurable because it was ignored. Even some pretty benign conditions can become fatal if left untreated long enough. So far from being baseless speculation, I'd say it's certain that some deaths from other causes are due to covid delaying other treatments.
> 
> ...


All due respect MJR but what was baseless speculation in LandSurfer's post is 'many of which'. That's not the same as 'some' or 'a few'.

'Many' of those deaths could have been caused by stupidity, recklessness or failing to seek medical advice soon enough, but that would be baseless speculation on my part.

The NHS has been stretched for decades and the media guffaw in the 80s and 90s about empty beds costing too much led to it being stretched even further. Throw in a pandemic and it quickly reaches breaking point, which is about where we are right now.


----------



## mjr (3 Dec 2021)

MontyVeda said:


> 'Many' of those deaths could have been caused by stupidity, recklessness or failing to seek medical advice soon enough, but that would be baseless speculation on my part.


If you include "failing to seek medical advice soon enough" in there, then you can dismiss all deaths due in part to covid-delayed treatments because they simply failed to seek enough medical advice before the pandemic or long enough to take account for year-plus waiting lists. You could probably even dismiss all deaths from progressions of chronic illnesses, even where the deceased didn't realise they were ill until too late. They clearly didn't seek medical advice soon enough.

I think it's fair to quibble about the proportions but we won't really know that for years. And even if delayed treatment is killing thousands, I don't see many ways of ignoring covid that would reduces it. Bringing it back on topic: it's better to go out and get as vaccinated as you can. Even if we end up with annual or twice-annual variant vaccines until it mutates itself out of lethality, is that really too difficult for people to cope with? I think it's a marvel of modern medicine. It could be far worse: the bunch of snowflakes currently populating this country could have been around in the war! They'd have been too busy protesting against gas masks to fight or dig for victory or whatever!


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Dec 2021)

I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that the significant excess *non-COVID deaths (about 15,000*) since the second wave bottomed out (@80pw) end April are down to a combination of factors. (Note that *COVID deaths* since 1 May are *about 14,900*.) One must be people's perfectly reasonable continued reluctance to go near a hospital with the ever-present risk of nosocomial infection. I'll bet another reason to stay away is the ?British too-unselfish 'other people need hospital treatment more'. No doubt people have stayed away from primary care for the same reasons and also far less face-to-face interaction so incipient disease has not been picked up as early as pre-pandemic it might. Sure there are excellent papers etc on this and many more likely causes.
All figures are England and Wales.
Here's the Nightingale graph produced by CEBM. I note that the excess death rate (which I'm defining as all deaths per week above the 2015-2019 average) is well above the number of deaths per week due to COVID-19 (deaths registered mentioning COVID-19 on the death certificate).
"The number of deaths registered in week 45 was 12,050 deaths (week ending 12 Nov); 16.6% above the five-year average (1,719 more [excess] deaths)." According to the gov.uk dashboard the 'COVID' deaths in the week to 12 Nov were about 939 (1198 for UK).


----------



## classic33 (3 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> If you include "failing to seek medical advice soon enough" in there, then you can dismiss all deaths due in part to covid-delayed treatments because they simply failed to seek enough medical advice before the pandemic or long enough to take account for year-plus waiting lists. You could probably even dismiss all deaths from progressions of chronic illnesses, even where the deceased didn't realise they were ill until too late. They clearly didn't seek medical advice soon enough.
> 
> I think it's fair to quibble about the proportions but we won't really know that for years. And even if delayed treatment is killing thousands, I don't see many ways of ignoring covid that would reduces it. Bringing it back on topic: it's better to go out and get as vaccinated as you can. Even if we end up with annual or twice-annual variant vaccines until it mutates itself out of lethality, is that really too difficult for people to cope with? I think it's a marvel of modern medicine. It could be far worse: the bunch of snowflakes currently populating this country could have been around in the war! They'd have been too busy protesting against gas masks to fight or dig for victory or whatever!


IF we include, as you suggest, progressive illnesses then as someone with cancer, and epilepsy I'll wait until the system is back up and running for routine appointments. Either of those could kill me, and treatment for both ceased last year. Long term side effects of medication led to a referral being made to check the damage done. Bone thinning has led to CSF leaks, which led to me being placed on a list for surgery which was cancelled last March. 

You seem to have a beef about having to wait for treatment. You're joining a long list, make the most of it.


----------



## mjr (3 Dec 2021)

classic33 said:


> You seem to have a beef about having to wait for treatment. You're joining a long list, make the most of it.


Of course I have, especially when lied to about the length of the wait. Why haven't you?


----------



## Dolorous Edd (3 Dec 2021)

> I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that the significant excess *non-COVID deaths (about 15,000*) since the second wave bottomed out (@80pw) end April are down to a combination of factors. (Note that *COVID deaths* since 1 May are *about 14,900*.) One must be people's perfectly reasonable continued reluctance to go near a hospital with the ever-present risk of nosocomial infection. I'll bet another reason to stay away is the ?British too-unselfish 'other people need hospital treatment more'. No doubt people have stayed away from primary care for the same reasons and also far less face-to-face interaction so incipient disease has not been picked up as early as pre-pandemic it might. Sure there are excellent papers etc on this and many more likely causes.



If access to medicine for non-COVID illness has only a very limited bearing on non-COVID deaths, we've wasted an awful lot of money on the NHS over the last 60 years.


----------



## classic33 (3 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Of course I have, especially when lied to about the length of the wait. Why haven't you?


I'll be seen when the system catches up. Right now I appreciate the work being done by front line NHS staff, too much to be moaning about having to wait. For the operation cancelled last March, I'd already been waiting 18 months.


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Dec 2021)

Dolorous Edd said:


> If access to medicine for non-COVID illness has only a very limited bearing on non-COVID deaths, we've wasted an awful lot of money on the NHS over the last 60 years.


https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/GBR/united-kingdom/life-expectancy




Data Source: United Nations - World Population Prospects


----------



## Landsurfer (4 Dec 2021)

The NHS is very much the "Curates Egg" of an organisation.
Julie, diagnosed in April with an aggressive arthritic hip condition, assessed again in September, returned home from hospital yesterday afternoon after a full hip replacement .... Thank you Mr. Blair and his team.
Me, Transient Global Amnesia event 4 weeks ago, ambulance refused to attend as “i was near a canal”, after being booked in at A&E I was left for over 14 hours before treatment commenced and spent 23 hours 50 minutes in A&E before being moved to the waiting room of a ward. The waiting room! ... Many thanks to the recently retired Paramedic and her husband who came to my assistance at the canal cycle path.

And so it is with the Covid vaccine experience. I booked in at the Well pharmacy 200 metres from my house and had an aggressive reaction to the Pfizer vaccine. My friend Mel who lives 50 metres a way from me ... 12 miles to Doncaster for her jab.. no reaction. 
There are 2 NHS’s. The clinical NHS that strives to care and help and the organisational NHS that is a cash absorbing monster that needs to be broken up and re set for the future.


----------



## PaulSB (4 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> The NHS is very much the "Curates Egg" of an organisation.
> Julie, diagnosed in April with an aggressive arthritic hip condition, assessed again in September, returned home from hospital yesterday afternoon after a full hip replacement .... Thank you Mr. Blair and his team.
> Me, Transient Global Amnesia event 4 weeks ago, ambulance refused to attend as “i was near a canal”, after being booked in at A&E I was left for over 14 hours before treatment commenced and spent 23 hours 50 minutes in A&E before being moved to the waiting room of a ward. The waiting room! ... Many thanks to the recently retired Paramedic and her husband who came to my assistance at the canal cycle path.
> *
> ...



In our household and everyone in our social circle has made a personal choice as to where to attend for a vaccine jab. From memory for the booster I had a choice of 6 sites and picked a day, time and site to suit me. Surely your friend had options? You don't say if she booked it or not.

The reaction is irrelevant to the point you're making.


----------



## Landsurfer (4 Dec 2021)

PaulSB said:


> In our household and everyone in our social circle has made a personal choice as to where to attend for a vaccine jab. From memory for the booster I had a choice of 6 sites and picked a day, time and site to suit me. Surely your friend had options? You don't say if she booked it or not.
> 
> The reaction is irrelevant to the point you're making.


And a good morning to you too Paul ... she booked it and had it as stated in the post ... did you read it ? She was given 6 options, the one in Doncaster was the closest ...


----------



## PaulSB (4 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> And a good morning to you too Paul ... she booked it and had it as stated in the post ... did you read it ? She was given 6 options, the one in Doncaster was the closest ...


You didn't say whether or not your friend had booked, to me this implies choice, her booster. From the way your post was phrased I understood she had been invited to Doncaster without any choice being your criticism of the system.

So yes I did read exactly what you posted.


----------



## Julia9054 (4 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> There are 2 NHS’s. The clinical NHS that strives to care and help and the organisational NHS that is a cash absorbing monster that needs to be broken up and re set for the future.


Currently dealing with my elderly and frail father in law with bladder cancer. The clinical side has been superb - swift, slick and efficient. The aftercare, communication and systems for organising his rehabilitation have been shocking. I have more sophisticated systems for ordering how many test tubes in need in my classroom for a practical lesson with year 7. If the poor old man didn’t have 3 adult children - two just down the road and the third a retired nurse - he would just be left to rot.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Dec 2021)

PaulSB said:


> You didn't say whether or not your friend had booked, to me this implies choice, her booster. From the way your post was phrased I understood she had been invited to Doncaster without any choice being your criticism of the system.
> 
> So yes I did read exactly what you posted.



@Landsurfer Did say she’d had no reaction which implies she went to the appointment.


----------



## PaulSB (4 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> @Landsurfer Did say she’d had no reaction which implies she went to the appointment.


Yes, quite right and I didn't question this. His point was, I think, that he was able to book, that is choose, a booster site 200 metres from his home but his friend who lives only 50 metres away had to travel 12 miles.

He didn't say whether or not she had been given a choice and considering the overall point he made I thought she had not been given a choice.

If the closest choice was 12 miles I'm surprised and agree it makes no sense. Equally in my experience the choices available are wide so i asked the question.


----------



## icowden (4 Dec 2021)

There seems to be a two tier booking system. If you go to the NHS website and book you get offered centres miles away from where you live. On the other hand if your GP invites you for a booster and sends you a link, you can usually get booked in down the road.

This does seem to be a daft design decision somewhere,


----------



## vickster (4 Dec 2021)

icowden said:


> There seems to be a two tier booking system. If you go to the NHS website and book you get offered centres miles away from where you live. On the other hand if your GP invites you for a booster and sends you a link, you can usually get booked in down the road.
> 
> This does seem to be a daft design decision somewhere,


Mine booked via the NHS site (I’ve not had a GP invite yet) is about a mile away and there were at least 5 more various locations within a few miles. I realise it’s very populated and built up around here but Rotherham isn’t a rural village I think.
was she looking for a very specific date and/or time?


----------



## PaulSB (4 Dec 2021)

icowden said:


> There seems to be a two tier booking system. If you go to the NHS website and book you get offered centres miles away from where you live. On the other hand if your GP invites you for a booster and sends you a link, you can usually get booked in down the road.
> 
> This does seem to be a daft design decision somewhere,


I've booked each Covid jab via the NHS website. We live rurally and I had six choices all easily accessible by car and within six miles of home. I could access two with a single bus journey but the public transport issue is one impacting access to a wide range of services.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Dec 2021)

"The spread of the virus was directly linked to how dense the population is."
Is this causal or a correlation? And how is this linked to vaccines? 

View: https://youtu.be/VULk2ik2IZo


----------



## midlife (4 Dec 2021)

Youngest son goes for second jab today and Mrs midlife her booster then for the moment it's a full house of jabbed people until the next one, probably a tinkered to Omicron Pfizer the way things are going.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Dec 2021)

Ages old but I don't recall this being noted here - bearing in mind the EU knashing and wailing and posturing in January (less so on here but with undertones of how much better the vaccine procurement would have been if we'd gone in with the EMA coordinated approach).
3 Sep (from AZ site): AZ and EU have reached an agreement that ends legal proceedings over the execution of the APA for doses of AZ vaccine. AZ (now) commits to deliver 60M by end 3Q 2021, another 15M in Q4 2021 and a further 65M in 1Q2022 - regular delivery schedules and capped rebates will apply in the event of any delayed doses.
EVP AstraZeneca, said: “We are fully committed to manufacture _Vaxzevria _for Europe following the release for supply of more than 140 million doses to date at no profit. We are also looking forward to working with the European Commission in a joint effort to further support COVAX.”
To date, AZ have supplied more than 1.1 billion doses to over 170 countries world wide: approx two thirds to low- and lower-middle-income countries.
Comment: I thought that most EU states had had to throw away supplied AZ vaccine because of the age cohorts they restricted it to, and because of reluctance to accept by populations.


----------



## Oldhippy (4 Dec 2021)

I just popped in to my surgery and receptionist booked me there and for local hospital. I was there ten minutes tops.


----------



## MontyVeda (4 Dec 2021)

icowden said:


> There seems to be a two tier booking system. If you go to the NHS website and book you get offered centres miles away from where you live. On the other hand if your GP invites you for a booster and sends you a link, you can usually get booked in down the road.
> 
> This does seem to be a daft design decision somewhere,


I had similar. Got a letter from the NHS saying i can now book my booster online, but the website wasn't offering me a vaccination centre in Lancaster. Rang my GP and booked via them and was given a choice of two centres in Lancaster.

Maybe it's a case of trying to spread the load around the various centres, rather than having everyone in Lancaster going to one location... send them to a different one with a much smaller catchment area.


----------



## FishFright (4 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Serious infection ..... anyone dying ..... lots and lots of people dying of cancer while the Covid Brigade keep the fear going ..... 141 people sadly died with or of Covid yesterday ... but over 1500 died of other causes, many of them possibly as a result of being ignored by the health system over the last 2 years ...
> Proportionate Response ... is the way forward ....* End the Fear Porn.*



Back to standard porn for you ?


----------



## lazybloke (4 Dec 2021)

icowden said:


> There seems to be a two tier booking system. If you go to the NHS website and book you get offered centres miles away from where you live. On the other hand if your GP invites you for a booster and sends you a link, you can usually get booked in down the road.
> 
> This does seem to be a daft design decision somewhere,


Worth remembering that anyone can go to walk-in sessions , although they're not always very convenient.

A jab offered by your local GP will likely be the closest, but not necessarily the soonest - because those services are so stretched. 

That's the beauty of the NHS website, which gives you such a wide choice of locations - near home, near work, or along the way on your commute or any other journey. There's typically a next-day appt available within a reasonable distance, if you're happy to travel.
I does sometimes offer weird choices. I just closed the page and found slightly different options.
If you've changed your mind about the location or date, just go back into the NHS website with your id and booking ref - it will automatically display an alternate choice of time, times & locations for your jab.


----------



## lazybloke (4 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Serious infection ..... anyone dying ..... lots and lots of people dying of cancer while the Covid Brigade keep the fear going ..... 141 people sadly died with or of Covid yesterday ... but over 1500 died of other causes, many of them possibly as a result of being ignored by the health system over the last 2 years ...
> Proportionate Response ... is the way forward .... End the Fear Porn.


Ah, but I can also cherry-pick numbers and point to 1500 daily deaths in Jan 2021!
That's what we're potentially dealing with, having abandoned all lockdown measures.

I dressed warm for a visit to a London pub this week so I could stand outside with my mates and about 50 like-minded people.
Inside were at least 100 people rammed in, standing room only, shoulder to shoulder. That's a superspreader event right there, as there wasn't a mask in sight. Every pub I saw was exactly the same.

Covid isn't a problem for most of us, but even the double-jabbed are getting infected, and events like that evening in a pub are just the situation where infections get taken home and passed onto the vulnerable. A fatal infection is not a nice Christmas gift to CEV Uncle Albert.

And I'm still only considering Delta/plus variants, as there's probably insufficient time for omicron to become significant before xmas.
If it's as infectious as feared then that will happen - presumably in Q1. If it puts severe pressure on the NHS , then Boris will have to consider lockdown or other restrictions.

Call that fear if you wish, but the NHS, SAGE and the Government call it contingency planning.


----------



## Landsurfer (4 Dec 2021)

lazybloke said:


> Ah, but I can also cherry-pick numbers and point to 1500 daily deaths in Jan 2021!
> That's what we're potentially dealing with, having abandoned all lockdown measures.
> 
> I dressed warm for a visit to a London pub this week so I could stand outside with my mates and about 50 like-minded people.
> ...


So it’s back behind the sofa for you then .... Don’t worry the rest of us will make sure you have power, food and transportation ....
Only deaths count ... If we wake up tomorrow morning and all 67 million of us have covid ..... And no one dies !! ... whats the problem ...
Global death toll from the omicron variant ...... 0 ... WHO figures ...
Back behind the sofa .....

However .....

Lets just all accept and respect our own responses to the current situation ... your view may not be my view ... my view not yours ...
But all are valid ........
All are real ......
Pro jab, anti mask, pro reality.

Lets just play nicely .....


----------



## lazybloke (4 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> So it’s back behind the sofa for you then .... Don’t worry the rest of us will make sure you have power, food and transportation ....
> Only deaths count ... If we wake up tomorrow morning and all 67 million of us have covid ..... And no one dies !! ... whats the problem ...
> Global death toll from the omicron variant ...... 0 ... WHO figures ...
> Back behind the sofa .....
> ...


No, not quaking behind the sofa.

I'm still doing keywork, I travelled and worked throughout the lockdowns, it was a secondment that I volunteered for; I could have gone back to my normal desk job at any time and worked from home. I'm playing my part.
I'm supporting tourism & hospitality industries in the UK.
I'm off to the pub again in about 5 mins - eating his time, indoors! without a mask!


If I have a fear it's for those more vulnerable than me. Just like the government have a fear for the NHS, so are being cautious to "buy time" when faced with an unknown new threat.

Your anti-mask stance might suggest you don't give a stuff about other people...


----------



## KnittyNorah (4 Dec 2021)

lazybloke said:


> Call that fear if you wish, but the NHS, SAGE and the Government call it contingency planning.



And most normal human beings - at least those who I know, who come from many and varied backgrounds - call it being sensible in the face of increased risks. Many people who I thought might well be reluctant to remask have been saying 'it's about time!' The couple of special interest groups - both small, so our monthly meeting is rarely more than a dozen people in a large airy WI Hall with opening windows - I belong to, and which are meeting IRL, are continuing to do so but with much greater attention to social distancing, masking and LFTs.


----------



## DaveReading (4 Dec 2021)

lazybloke said:


> Worth remembering that anyone can go to walk-in sessions , although they're not always very convenient.



Not (yet) everywhere. Some local sites are still working to 6 months after the second jab, rather than 3, before they will (currently) give the booster to walk-ins.


----------



## mjr (4 Dec 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Not (yet) everywhere. Some local sites are still working to 6 months after the second jab, rather than 3, before they will (currently) give the booster to walk-ins.


And last I checked (earlier this week), there are only two walk-in booster sites in Norfolk, a county 80 miles by 50. I am lucky to be near one.


----------



## mjr (4 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Comment: I thought that most EU states had had to throw away supplied AZ vaccine because of the age cohorts they restricted it to, and because of reluctance to accept by populations.


No, some countries were very willing to accept doses others (particularly the French) didn't want. As it keeps so much easier than the Pfizer, little was wasted.


----------



## mjr (5 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Global death toll from the omicron variant ...... 0 ... WHO figures ...


Remember, covid usually takes 14 days or more, sometimes much more, to kill, and we've not been able to identify the omicron variant that long.

Whoever pointed the zero death toll to you like it was significant may be either stupid or devious.


----------



## Landsurfer (5 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Remember, covid usually takes 14 days or more, sometimes much more, to kill, and we've not been able to identify the omicron variant that long.
> 
> Whoever pointed the zero death toll to you like it was significant may be either stupid or devious.


The WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION pointed it out in numerous world wide press releases ...... your choice ? Are they Stupid or Devious ..
You don't like the truth do you ....


----------



## mjr (5 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> The WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION pointed it out in numerous world wide press releases ...... your choice ? Are they Stupid or Devious ..
> You don't like the truth do you ....


Go on, link one. The latest WHO Update on Omicron basically says it's too soon to tell: https://www.who.int/news/item/28-11-2021-update-on-omicron

Truth? You can't handle the truth!


----------



## Ajax Bay (5 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Global death toll from the omicron variant ...... 0 ... WHO figures ...


As sort of reported: " On Friday, World Health Organization (WHO) spokesperson Christian Lindmeier said that the agency has no data on mortality linked to the newly detected Omicron variant. " Not the same as =0


mjr said:


> Remember, covid usually takes 14 days or more, sometimes much more, to kill, and we've not been able to identify the omicron variant that long.
> Whoever pointed the zero death toll to you like it was significant may be either stupid or devious.





Landsurfer said:


> The [WHO] pointed it out in numerous world wide press releases .. Are they Stupid or Devious ..
> You don't like the truth do you ....


Suggest @mjr 'loves' the truth. I doubt @Landsurfer , anyone 'pointed it out to you' let alone suggested it was 'significant'.
So he is writing in 'like it was significant' without basis.
But do you think that the 'zero deaths' IS a significant point? You must have thought it worth typing (quote above).
@mjr has offered the very likely reason, to which I'd add a second: the high proportion of cases in the 11-40s, few of whom are liable to suffer serious illness let alone death.
Let us hope this virus variant is at least no more virulent, and we just have to manage either higher R0 or higher immunity (vaccine or naturally acquired) escape, or both.


----------



## DaveReading (5 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> As sort of reported: " On Friday, World Health Organization (WHO) spokesperson Christian Lindmeier said that the agency has no data on mortality linked to the newly detected Omicron variant. " Not the same as =0



Except to the innumerate.


----------



## Landsurfer (6 Dec 2021)

You lot are loving Covid aren't you .... you’ll miss it when its gone ... 
No silly me .... it will never be gone for some will it ....
Toodle Pip !


----------



## mjr (6 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> You lot are loving Covid aren't you .... you’ll miss it when its gone ...
> No silly me .... it will never be gone for some will it ....
> Toodle Pip !



It may well never be gone for all of us, thanks in part to the nobbers who keep saying it is not dangerous, it is like the flu, why should I cover my face wah wah wah. It appears that the bets are now on endimicity.

Not loving covid and really hating daffodils who are making matters worse by reposting misinformation and claiming it was from WHO press releases :P


----------



## Ajax Bay (6 Dec 2021)

Bit early for daffodils, isn't it?
But @Landsurfer 's right: the world is in this for the long haul. Rehashing 'we don't have data' as =0 is a mere irritant. Think 'making it worse' is hyperbole.


----------



## mjr (6 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Bit early for daffodils, isn't it?
> But @Landsurfer 's right: the world is in this for the long haul. Rehashing 'we don't have data' as =0 is a mere irritant. Think 'making it worse' is hyperbole.


I believe daffodils are bought from Russia year-round now(!)

It ain't hyperbole if it's true. Can you name any piece of misinformation that has made things better during the pandemic? Do you consider "mere irritant"s to be improvements?


----------



## classic33 (6 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> I believe daffodils are bought from Russia year-round now(!)
> 
> It ain't hyperbole if it's true. Can you name any piece of misinformation that has made things better during the pandemic? Do you consider "mere irritant"s to be improvements?


I get the feeling that covid, and everything directly related to it are no longer your main concerns.

You, like many others in this country have had treatment curtailed, and you're unhappy with this. That's your main concern now, "When do I get treated?" seems to override everything.

From someone in a similar situation, in need of long term healthcare for pre-existing conditions, the attitude stinks. I've missed one bone density scan, scheduled for May last year, and an imaging scan to see what other areas have damage. The CSF leaks were under investigation, the specialist I was seeing has since died* due to covid as far as I'm aware. These last 21 months are for me, a minor irritation, things will improve. But don't expect quick and simple.

Going way off topic, but the last time we, as a country, had such severe restrictions was in 2001. Almost a year long, rules were flouted then. Last month I noticed there was livestock on a local hillside where there had been non for the last 20 years. Twenty years to get back to feeling it's safe to do this, to "normal".


*His name appeared amongst a list produced earlier this year, of hospital staff who had died due to it. No first name or initial given, so there's a chance it may have been another with the same surname.


----------



## mjr (6 Dec 2021)

classic33 said:


> I get the feeling that covid, and everything directly related to it are no longer your main concerns.
> 
> You, like many others in this country have had treatment curtailed, and you're unhappy with this. That's your main concern now, "When do I get treated?" seems to override everything.


In one way, you're correct: covid has rarely been my main concern. Why would it be? Stuff like food and heating are far more often my main concern. Covid is major for all sorts of reasons, though, and the vaccines are usually my main concern when posting in this topic.

The vaccines have been great but the organisation has seemed very chaotic around here. Now the boosters are not as easy to get as the politicians say they should be, although I see Matt Hancock (who was vaccinated later than me) apparently had no trouble getting a booster at the weekend. I've been told that the vaccination centre he went to decided to waive the 6-month limit to avoid wasting doses due to low attendance. Maybe I'll go hang around ours with a coffee near the end of the day...

But more generally, you're wrong about my treatment and, as I've posted many times before:


mjr said:


> When you have to start making shoot up about the person you're replying to, you've lost the argument.


----------



## classic33 (6 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> In one way, you're correct: covid has rarely been my main concern. Why would it be? Stuff like food and heating are far more often my main concern. Covid is major for all sorts of reasons, though, and the vaccines are usually my main concern when posting in this topic.
> 
> The vaccines have been great but the organisation has seemed very chaotic around here. Now the boosters are not as easy to get as the politicians say they should be, although I see Matt Hancock (who was vaccinated later than me) apparently had no trouble getting a booster at the weekend. I've been told that the vaccination centre he went to decided to waive the 6-month limit to avoid wasting doses due to low attendance. Maybe I'll go hang around ours with a coffee near the end of the day...
> 
> But more generally, you're wrong about my treatment and, as I've posted many times before:


Again it's someone got treated before me, _rule was changed, nowhere close to you offering the booster_.

As for "making stuff up", you've already admitted to having a beef about treatment, and having to wait.


mjr said:


> Of course I have, especially when lied to about the length of the wait. Why haven't you?



My answer on that last part remains the same. The system will catch up, and like everyone else in the system you can moan all you want, but ask yourself what is that really achieving?

I'm more than willing to wait, and a possible reason for this behaviour on my part may be the frequent A&E visits over the last 50 years. I've seen far worse than me coming in.

Do you accept no responsibility for managing your own health, where it's possible.

As for the vaccine, you're one of the lucky ones. What is available locally, now, has been deemed unsafe for me not by me. And given the reaction to the safe one, there's a reluctance to give/use it again on me. Again I doubt I'm the only one in this situation.


Before correction for the quoted post to be read correctly

Again it's someone got treated before me, _rule was changed, nowhere close to you offering the booster_.

As for "making stuff up", you've already admitted to having a beef about treatment, and having to wait.
QUOTE="mjr, post: 6603486, member: 34410"]Of course I have, especially when lied to about the length of the wait. Why haven't you? [/QUOTE]

My answer on that last part remains the same. The system will catch up, and like everyone else in the system you can moan all you want, but ask yourself what is that really achieving?

I'm more than willing to wait, and a possible reason for this behaviour on my part may be the frequent A&E visits over the last 50 years. I've seen far worse than me coming in.

Do you accept no responsibility for managing your own health, where it's possible. 

As for the vaccine, you're one of the lucky ones. What is available locally, now, has been deemed unsafe for me not by me. And given the reaction to the safe one, there's a reluctance to give/use it again on me. Again I doubt I'm the only one in this situation.


----------



## mjr (6 Dec 2021)

classic33 said:


> Again it's someone got treated before me, _rule was changed, nowhere close to you offering the booster_.


Again, you're making shoot up.



> As for "making stuff up", you've already admitted to having a beef about treatment, and having to wait.


Which wasn't what you wrote.



> My answer on that last part remains the same. The system will catch up, and like everyone else in the system you can moan all you want, but ask yourself what is that really achieving?


Maybe it'll wake some of the Polyannas up to just how far in the shoot the NHS is right now and they'll join those calling for corrective action.



> Do you accept no responsibility for managing your own health, where it's possible.


I do manage my own health where it's possible. I would be in far worse shape right now if not. But it's not reasonably possible to do stuff like diagnostic testing on everything...



> As for the vaccine, you're one of the lucky ones. What is available locally, now, has been deemed unsafe for me not by me. And given the reaction to the safe one, there's a reluctance to give/use it again on me. Again I doubt I'm the only one in this situation.


Yep, you're in a shoot position. That doesn't make any of my comments untrue, or entitle you to post shoot.


----------



## Ajax Bay (6 Dec 2021)

Have just listened 'live' to Professor Dame Sarah Gilbert giving the Dimbleby lecture. Recommended (on BBC iPlayer I guess)


----------



## PK99 (6 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Have just listened 'live' to Professor Dame Sarah Gilbert giving the Dimbleby lecture. *Recommended* (on BBC iPlayer I guess)



Seconded. Excellent lecture simply explaining a complex problem and process. One deeply impressive lady.


----------



## presta (6 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Have just listened 'live' to Professor Dame Sarah Gilbert giving the Dimbleby lecture. Recommended (on BBC iPlayer I guess)


I like the way she kicked off right at the start with a snipe at Gove and his "people are fed up with experts".


----------



## KnittyNorah (7 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> You lot are loving Covid aren't you .... you’ll miss it when its gone ...
> No silly me .... it will never be gone for some will it ....
> Toodle Pip !



Just like a great many other viruses ... I highly doubt it'll be 'gone' in the lifetime of most adults today, but somewhere down the line - not too far down the line, we must hope - it'll likely become of little major import for most in the developed world through one or more of improvements in vaccine efficacy and duration, highly-effective and easily-obtainable (preferably OTC) treatments, and/or changes in the virus itself, resulting in a more benign disease. 

However, as the only two diseases ever to be eradicated 'in the wild' are - in humans - smallpox in 1980 and - in animals - rinderpest in 2011, both of which have plagued the world for centuries or millennia, I don't think it's reasonable to hold out hope of eradication of anything else _just_ yet ... even the eradication of polio, although almost there, seems to falter regularly ...


----------



## Alex321 (7 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> You lot are loving Covid aren't you .... you’ll miss it when its gone ...
> No silly me .... *it will never be gone for some will it* ....
> Toodle Pip !


While that was apparently meant to be sarcastic, it was of course, entirely true.

We are not going to be rid of Covid in the foreseeable future, and it will probably mean annual vaccinations for many for the rest of our lives.

Hopefully, with vaccines and improved medications, it will eventually settle down to be not much worse than flu - but remember, in most "normal" years, approximately 20,000-25,000 people die from flu in the UK.


----------



## alicat (7 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Have just listened 'live' to Professor Dame Sarah Gilbert giving the Dimbleby lecture. Recommended (on BBC iPlayer I guess)




Thirded. She richly deserves her damehood.


----------



## MrGrumpy (7 Dec 2021)

Cancelled my booster today , not sure it would be wise whilst coughing to attend. Managed to avoid this chesty crap till now !


----------



## Alex321 (7 Dec 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Cancelled my booster today , not sure it would be wise whilst coughing to attend. Managed to avoid this chesty crap till now !


Yes, they generally say not to go for the vaccination if showing any symptoms.


----------



## midlife (7 Dec 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Cancelled my booster today , not sure it would be wise whilst coughing to attend. Managed to avoid this chesty crap till now !



Hope you are not too unwell, as you have symptoms its time for a PCR.....


----------



## SpokeyDokey (8 Dec 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> Just like a great many other viruses ... I highly doubt it'll be 'gone' in the lifetime of most adults today, but somewhere down the line - not too far down the line, we must hope - it'll likely become of little major import for most in the developed world through one or more of improvements in vaccine efficacy and duration, highly-effective and easily-obtainable (preferably OTC) treatments, and/or changes in the virus itself, resulting in a more benign disease.
> 
> However, as the only two diseases ever to be eradicated 'in the wild' are - in humans - smallpox in 1980 and - in animals - rinderpest in 2011, both of which have plagued the world for centuries or millennia, I don't think it's reasonable to hold out hope of eradication of anything else _just_ yet ... even the eradication of polio, although almost there, seems to falter regularly ...



Hopefully Covid will not become mired in politics as per Polio which would have been gone by now.


----------



## KnittyNorah (9 Dec 2021)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Hopefully Covid will not become mired in politics as per Polio which would have been gone by now.


Huh? Is this meant to be sarcasm or irony? 
It already _is _mired in politics, surely - politics and conspiracy theories in even more peculiar forms than polio ever has been - and has been since about 2 days after it was 'discovered' in/by 'the West', and very probably, in politics of a sort at least, since before that (although I doubt we'll ever find out for sure).


----------



## Johnno260 (9 Dec 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> Just like a great many other viruses ... I highly doubt it'll be 'gone' in the lifetime of most adults today, but somewhere down the line - not too far down the line, we must hope - it'll likely become of little major import for most in the developed world through one or more of improvements in vaccine efficacy and duration, highly-effective and easily-obtainable (preferably OTC) treatments, and/or changes in the virus itself, resulting in a more benign disease.
> 
> However, as the only two diseases ever to be eradicated 'in the wild' are - in humans - smallpox in 1980 and - in animals - rinderpest in 2011, both of which have plagued the world for centuries or millennia, I don't think it's reasonable to hold out hope of eradication of anything else _just_ yet ... even the eradication of polio, although almost there, seems to falter regularly ...



Was there as much hate and issues with smallpox vaccines? I'm a little too young to remember from the early 80's.

With Polio there are many anti vax now targeting that illness and vaccine as well, basically they say they renamed Polio Guillain-Barré Syndrome.


----------



## Alex321 (9 Dec 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> Was there as much hate and issues with smallpox vaccines? I'm a little too young to remember from the early 80's.


No, but then we didn't have the internet allowing disinformation to be spread so easily.

And of course, smallpox vaccination was the first ever developed, and the program to eradicate the disease by mass vaccination started in 1967, when people were generally far less questioning of authority.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> No, but then we didn't have the internet allowing disinformation to be spread so easily.
> 
> And of course, smallpox vaccination was the first ever developed, and the program to eradicate the disease by mass vaccination started in 1967, when people were generally far less questioning of authority.



I love that people forget that we had the Internet well before the 1980s. What we didn’t have was the world wide web. The latter arriving in the early 90s.


----------



## Alex321 (9 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> I love that people forget that we had the Internet well before the 1980s. What we didn’t have was the world wide web. The latter arriving in the early 90s.


Most people didn't have the internet well before the 1980s. 

The earliest things that could possibly be called "the internet" weren't around until the mid 1970's, and those didn't really get out of academia until around 1980. But even then they weren't in widespread use until quite late 80's. I can still remember things like email and usenet only becoming widespread some time after I started work (in IT) in 1981.


----------



## Dogtrousers (9 Dec 2021)

In the late 80s I worked briefly on a system called "Internet". It had nothing to do with _that_ internet, this was a different one. The fact that it had been so named tells you about the lack of profile of "the internet" at the time.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> Most people didn't have the internet well before the 1980s.
> 
> The earliest things that could possibly be called "the internet" weren't around until the mid 1970's, and those didn't really get out of academia until around 1980. But even then they weren't in widespread use until quite late 80's. I can still remember things like email and usenet only becoming widespread some time after I started work (in IT) in 1981.



Correct most didn’t, but that is not the same as saying before the Internet which was blatantly not true. Usenet etc was around in the 70s and as you know email as we know it came about in 1974. It wasn’t just in academia either many business were using the Internet by the 80s


----------



## SpokeyDokey (9 Dec 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> Huh? Is this meant to be sarcasm or irony?
> It already _is _mired in politics, surely - politics and conspiracy theories in even more peculiar forms than polio ever has been - and has been since about 2 days after it was 'discovered' in/by 'the West', and very probably, in politics of a sort at least, since before that (although I doubt we'll ever find out for sure).



Neither. 

What I was trying to say was that the eradication of Polio has been hampered by ignorance and superstition at a political level. 

I hope that in the long-term that this will not be the case with Covid.


----------



## Alex321 (9 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Correct most didn’t, but that is not the same as saying before the Internet which was blatantly not true. Usenet etc was around in the 70s and as you know email as we know it came about in 1974.


I didn't say it was "before the internet", I said " we didn't have the internet allowing disinformation to be spread so easily " and I would stand by that, as most people didn't have it, and even for those who did, it wasn't so easy to spread misinformation to the credulous/gullible.

Yes, the internet existed, but not in the mass usage form which allows or even encourages that. Most of us didn't have it at all.

I worked in IT from 1981, and had a home computer (Sinclair Spectrum) when those were still in their infancy. But it was quite late 80's before I had an external connection from home - and that was via a 33k modem initially. That was shortly after buying our first IBM-compatible PC, and was still well before internet access became commonplace at an individual level.


----------



## Dogtrousers (9 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> I worked in IT from 1981, and had a home computer (Sinclair Spectrum) when those were still in their infancy. But it was quite late 80's before I had an external connection from home - and that was via a 33k modem initially. That was shortly after buying our first IBM-compatible PC, and was still well before internet access became commonplace at an individual level.


In the mid-late 80s I worked on comms and TCP/IP was a wierd oddity that was known to exist but the industry where I was working weas all about X.25 and various SNA things like APPC. People with home connectivity were mainly uber nerds who dialled up to bulletin bourds where they talked about bulletin boards with other bulletin board nerds.

I imagine the only misinformation that was being spread over the internet at the time was some inaccurate lecture timetables at some American university or other.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Dec 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> In the mid-late 80s I worked on comms and TCP/IP was a wierd oddity that was known to exist but the industry where I was working weas all about X.25 and various SNA things like APPC. People with home connectivity were mainly uber nerds who dialled up to bulletin bourds where they talked about bulletin boards with other bulletin board nerds.
> 
> I imagine the only misinformation that was being spread over the internet at the time was some inaccurate lecture timetables at some American university or other.



Or playing Dungeons and Dragons.


----------



## Dogtrousers (9 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Or playing Dungeons and Dragons.


You are in a maze of twisty little passages all alike 
Take vaccine
You take the vaccine. Your hands turn blue and fall off.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Dec 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> In the mid-late 80s I worked on comms and TCP/IP was a wierd oddity that was known to exist but the industry where I was working weas all about X.25 and various SNA things like APPC. People with home connectivity were mainly uber nerds who dialled up to bulletin bourds where they talked about bulletin boards with other bulletin board nerds.
> 
> I imagine the only misinformation that was being spread over the internet at the time was some inaccurate lecture timetables at some American university or other.



Though our favourite in the 80s was that our instant messaging system allowed you to send them with a date / time in the future. That meant the message would be held until that time. You set up future messages for colleagues that would appear when you were on holiday and have suitable gaps between to appear you were responding to them.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Dec 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> You are in a maze of twisty little passages all alike
> Take vaccine
> You take the vaccine. Your hands turn blue and fall off.



After you look through a key hole and get jabbed in the eye.


----------



## C R (9 Dec 2021)

Off to look for an android nethack clone


----------



## mjr (9 Dec 2021)

So I took an hour off work and went to the vaccination centre for a booked booster... but I was refused entry because it hasn't been 180 days yet and Norfolk and Waveney CCG (who operate that centre) are still sticking to that. Why the fark did it let me book there without warning, then? Seems like someone goofed. I seem to have a knack for finding these.

I cannot rebook now until they mark me as a no-show and I was told about 50 people were refused entry to that centre this morning alone. Nothing on the CCG website about when they will change anything.


----------



## midlife (9 Dec 2021)

seems like my CCG are sticking to the 6 month rule as well..........

https://northcumbriaccg.nhs.uk/dropins


----------



## MrGrumpy (9 Dec 2021)

180 days it’s 3 months or 12 weeks now up here? It was prior to omnicron 6 month or 24 weeks?


----------



## mjr (9 Dec 2021)

midlife said:


> seems like my CCG are sticking to the 6 month rule as well..........
> 
> https://northcumbriaccg.nhs.uk/dropins


As I understand it from what's written on www.nhs.uk, all walk-in centres are still at 6 months and only bookings have gone to 3 yet anywhere. Of course, this means I cannot simply go to a walk-in centre in another area and have to wait for Norfolk to cancel my booking. Edit: one of the neighbouring districts is ignoring national guidance in a good way and doing walk-in centres for 3 month boosters.


----------



## MontyVeda (9 Dec 2021)

Had my booster yesterday. Absolutely shattered today. Almost pulled a sickie and come lunchtime, I wish I had. 
Lesson learned.
Next time I'll book it when i don't have to go to work the following day


----------



## mjr (9 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> As I understand it from what's written on www.nhs.uk, all walk-in centres are still at 6 months and only bookings have gone to 3 yet anywhere. Of course, this means I cannot simply go to a walk-in centre in another area and have to wait for Norfolk to cancel my booking. Edit: one of the neighbouring districts is ignoring national guidance in a good way and doing walk-in centres for 3 month boosters.


And now to complete the farce, Norfolk will be vaccinating with 90 day gap from tomorrow! https://www.lynnnews.co.uk/news/much-ado-about-boosters-at-shakespeare-barn-9230000/ https://norfolkandwaveneyccg.nhs.uk/vaccinations/covid-19-vaccines/covid-vaccinations


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Dec 2021)

MontyVeda said:


> Had my booster yesterday. Absolutely shattered today. Almost pulled a sickie and come lunchtime, I wish I had.
> Lesson learned.
> Next time I'll book it when i don't have to go to work the following day



Which one did you get?


----------



## Jody (9 Dec 2021)

vickster said:


> Anyone else in the same situation? Thoughts?



Same as you but a couple of weeks behind. 

Had my booster booked for the 20th but got COVID last week. I applied for the anti body test which has yet to arrive.

Cant see the point in having my booster for a little while yet and plan to see how things pan out.


----------



## vickster (9 Dec 2021)

Jody said:


> Same as you but a couple of weeks behind.
> 
> Had my booster booked for the 20th but got COVID last week. I applied for the anti body test which has yet to arrive.
> 
> Cant see the point in having my booster for a little while yet and plan to see how things pan out.


I had lunch with a Consultant friend on Sunday, she suggested to wait 3 months from infection to booster (not least as it’s possible to have a much stronger reaction to vaccine in terms of side effects post infection).

You have to do 2 antibody tests, first within a week or so of infection, the second 3 weeks later. First will usually only show vaccine antibodies, not antibodies to virus. I don’t think everyone gets the antibody test even if say will do from what a colleague told me (as it’s more a trial)


----------



## KnittyNorah (9 Dec 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> Was there as much hate and issues with smallpox vaccines?



When Jenner's vaccine - which was much safer and more acceptable than the earlier, expensive and risky practice of variolation - was recommended for mass use, there was widespread acceptance and within five years of his development of it in the late 18thC it was being used widely across Europe and within ten it was in global usage. 

However, opposition to Jenner's vaccination was widespread and very active in Europe and North America. It came from a variety of angles. Some felt that using materials from cattle was unsanitary, others considered that the use of 'lower animals' was 'unchristian'. Some simply did not believe that smallpox was passed from person to person, while others quoted what we would now call 'human rights'. Throughout the 19thC there were armed riots, peaceful protests and marches on Town Halls and the like by large - for that time - groups of people in many different places.
There was also a great deal of fake news and publicity, not dissimilar to today's claims of tracking microchips, 5G, magnetism and 'shedding radiation', in which pamphlets were distributed to the increasingly-literate population of the 19thC, with titles like with titles like 'Vaccination: its fallacies and evils', 'Vaccination, a Curse' and 'Horrors of Vaccination'. Claims we would today recognise as nonsensical - that vaccinated people would develop bovine features, or that vaccinated women would roam the countryside 'at certain times' looking for a bull - were made, and there were many cartoons published - which even the illiterate could understand of course - depicting the evils of vaccination as seen in the fervent imagination of cartoonists of the time.

Governments widely tried to encourage the practice of vaccination; many countries made it free and many moved towards making it compulsory, which resulted in Anti-Vaccination Leagues being formed and protests becoming more organised. Here in the UK, a conscience clause was eventually added to vaccination legislation and things quietened down considerably, at least here.

Through a combination of quarantine, understanding of disease processes, vaccination and re-vaccination, smallpox outbreaks became increasingly rare in Europe and most of the Americas during the 20thC. However, even as late as 1959, over 2 million people were dying from smallpox every year mainly in Africa and Asia.

Of course, it wasn't 'just' vaccination which eradicated smallpox - it was the disease surveillance and containment methods developed by the Czech epidemiologist Karel Raška during and post WW2 which enabled the WHO's smallpox eradication campaign to be effective.


----------



## Jody (9 Dec 2021)

I'll probably not get it then as its 7 days from point of positive PCR tomorrow. 

3 months sounds like a reasonable time to leave It, especially if it can be worse after infection. Had a bad time with my first shot but nothing from the second. My luck I'd have an almost symptom free dose of COVID and then get wiped out by the vaccine.


----------



## vickster (9 Dec 2021)

Jody said:


> I'll probably not get it then as its 7 days from point of positive PCR tomorrow.
> 
> 3 months sounds like a reasonable time to leave It, especially if it can be worse after infection. Had a bad time with my first shot but nothing from the second. My luck I'd have an almost symptom free dose of COVID and then get wiped out by the vaccine.


Yeah I think I got mine in about 4 days (symptoms started Sunday, test Monday, think it arrived on Friday, said had to do no more than 7 days from symptoms.


----------



## Jody (9 Dec 2021)

I haven't really had any symptoms. Slight headache on Tuesday but thats about it.

I'm the only person at work that hasn't been poorly with it.


----------



## Johnno260 (9 Dec 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> When Jenner's vaccine - which was much safer and more acceptable than the earlier, expensive and risky practice of variolation - was recommended for mass use, there was widespread acceptance and within five years of his development of it in the late 18thC it was being used widely across Europe and within ten it was in global usage.
> 
> However, opposition to Jenner's vaccination was widespread and very active in Europe and North America. It came from a variety of angles. Some felt that using materials from cattle was unsanitary, others considered that the use of 'lower animals' was 'unchristian'. Some simply did not believe that smallpox was passed from person to person, while others quoted what we would now call 'human rights'. Throughout the 19thC there were armed riots, peaceful protests and marches on Town Halls and the like by large - for that time - groups of people in many different places.
> There was also a great deal of fake news and publicity, not dissimilar to today's claims of tracking microchips, 5G, magnetism and 'shedding radiation', in which pamphlets were distributed to the increasingly-literate population of the 19thC, with titles like with titles like 'Vaccination: its fallacies and evils', 'Vaccination, a Curse' and 'Horrors of Vaccination'. Claims we would today recognise as nonsensical - that vaccinated people would develop bovine features, or that vaccinated women would roam the countryside 'at certain times' looking for a bull - were made, and there were many cartoons published - which even the illiterate could understand of course - depicting the evils of vaccination as seen in the fervent imagination of cartoonists of the time.
> ...



I think this is a meme from back then?







So basically they used science and common sense to combat it.


----------



## Milzy (9 Dec 2021)

Loads of people haven’t been able to get their boosters because they got Covid. What’s the point of getting boosters then if the double vax hasn’t worked?


----------



## KnittyNorah (9 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> Loads of people haven’t been able to get their boosters because they got Covid. What’s the point of getting boosters then if the double vax hasn’t worked?


It _has_ worked - most of them haven't been much affected by infection and are now well enough to want, and be able to get at the appropriate time, a booster.


----------



## KnittyNorah (9 Dec 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> I think this is a meme from back then?
> 
> View attachment 621344
> 
> ...



Actual science - which was little-understood - played only a small part; it was mainly astute observation which enabled people such as Jenner to proceed. 
Remember that even among scientists and medical professionals, germ theory was only being accepted with difficulty as late as the 1890s.
People like Jenner, Semmelweis and others were really going out on a limb to promote their practices, which went against all that was thought of as 'common sense' in those days.


----------



## newts (9 Dec 2021)

I had the Moderna booster last Friday, felt washed out & lethargic on Saturday. My arm felt like it had been hit with a hammer for a couple of days. I'd been advised to wait 3 weeks post respiratory infection before having the booster, long covid still lingers in the background.


----------



## MontyVeda (10 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Which one did you get?


Moderna


----------



## Johnno260 (10 Dec 2021)

newts said:


> I had the Moderna booster last Friday, felt washed out & lethargic on Saturday. My arm felt like it had been hit with a hammer for a couple of days. I'd been advised to wait 3 weeks post respiratory infection before having the booster, long covid still lingers in the background.



I was told by track and trace my booster may get delayed, also the blood transfusion service won't allow me to donate until into the new year after having a positive test early in November.


----------



## vickster (10 Dec 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> I was told by track and trace my booster may get delayed, also the blood transfusion service won't allow me to donate until into the new year after having a positive test early in November.


Really? The website says 28 days after resolution of symptoms
https://my.blood.co.uk/KnowledgeBase/Index/coronavirus infection
I tested positive on 24 October and am booked to give on Thursday (16.12).
Unless you’re a platelet donor or something abd rules are different?
Call them before cancelling if not had specific instructions.

you can’t have the booster for 28 days either


----------



## Johnno260 (10 Dec 2021)

vickster said:


> Really? The website says 28 days after resolution of symptoms
> https://my.blood.co.uk/KnowledgeBase/Index/coronavirus infection
> I tested positive on 24 October and am booked to give on Thursday (16.12).
> Unless you’re a platelet donor or something abd rules are different?
> ...



For the blood donation call I told them my isolation ended on the 13th November, I said my sense of taste and smell hadn't returned, they said we will contact you mid Jan to see if you can donate, it's just blood not platelets etc.

I'm not due a booster yet, I was told I need to mention the dates when I got contacted, it maybe they were reading from a script and just mentioned it in case.


----------



## vickster (10 Dec 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> For the blood donation call I told them my isolation ended on the 13th November, I said my sense of taste and smell hadn't returned, they said we will contact you mid Jan to see if you can donate, it's just blood not platelets etc.
> 
> I'm not due a booster yet, I was told I need to mention the dates when I got contacted, it maybe they were reading from a script and just mentioned it in case.


Fair enough, website says smell and taste loss not an impediment but seems you’ve been told different


----------



## Johnno260 (10 Dec 2021)

vickster said:


> Fair enough, website says smell and taste loss not an impediment but seems you’ve been told different



I may call them again and see if I get a different answer, like you said the website says otherwise, unless it's not been updated but I doubt that's the case.


----------



## vickster (10 Dec 2021)

You may not get an appointment this year now anyhow, another month to wait won’t make much difference


----------



## Pat "5mph" (10 Dec 2021)

SydZ said:


> The Scottish vaccine passport app has updated in the last day or so and is now show my booster 2 months and 12 days ago.


My booster doesn't show on the app.
Maybe because I only had it 2 weeks ago.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (10 Dec 2021)

Pat "5mph" said:


> My booster doesn't show on the app.
> Maybe because I only had it 2 weeks ago.



Should be within 24 hours all things being equal regards how IT works.


----------



## Ajax Bay (10 Dec 2021)

Latest UK data (9 Dec) shows that (of people in the UK aged 12 and older - about 57M) 89% have had a first dose of vaccine, 81% a second dose and 38% have got boosters. That's still nearly 16M (all ages) who've not been vaccinated at all.
Over half a million jabs reported given yesterday (7 day average = 445k). Above the rate needed to meet the 'offer all over 18s a booster' aim (but needs to be as there be 'nil' days during the public holidays, I'd assume).


----------



## IaninSheffield (11 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> people in the UK aged 12 and older - about *57M*) 89%


Should that be 51M? Or have I misunderstood?


----------



## Ajax Bay (11 Dec 2021)

89% of 57M (number of over 12s in UK) = 51M. 67M total - 51M = 16M unjabbed. HTH


----------



## oldwheels (11 Dec 2021)

Pat "5mph" said:


> My booster doesn't show on the app.
> Maybe because I only had it 2 weeks ago.


My first two shots came up within a couple of weeks but the third one has taken much longer tho' it has now appeared.
Give it a bit longer perhaps.


----------



## oldwheels (11 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Should be within 24 hours all things being equal regards how IT works.


In theory perhaps but there was much more delay than after the first one which appeared very quickly. The third one took even longer but not sure of the time scale as I have only just noticed it.


----------



## roadrash (11 Dec 2021)

Had my booster on wednesday, rough as feck thursday every joint in my body ached i haven't felt anything like it before , friday morning nothing , all fine , small price to pay compared to the alternative


----------



## Pat "5mph" (11 Dec 2021)

oldwheels said:


> My first two shots came up within a couple of weeks but the third one has taken much longer tho' it has now appeared.
> Give it a bit longer perhaps.


Cheers: booster is showing now on the app .


----------



## Mr Celine (11 Dec 2021)

In October I was invited for the flu jag and third primary jag (not a booster) due to the medication I take putting me in the 'severely immuno-suppressed' category. The guidance in October (and still current) is that a third primary dose can be given at least 8 weeks after the second dose. However, the nurse at the vaccination centre insisted I had to wait 24 weeks after the second dose, so wouldn't give me the third. 

Two weeks later I caught covid. 

It's now a month since I recovered and I've still not been sent another blue envelope. I checked the NHS inform Scotland website but I can't book another jag online because I've had a flu jag. 

I phoned the helpline. They can't book me a third primary jag. I asked about a booster instead but they can't book a booster because I haven't had my third jag. 

Apparently I have to be re-referred for a third primary jag by my GP or consultant. 

FFS


----------



## Ajax Bay (13 Dec 2021)

In case there's confusion from the weekend's communications (and I'm thinking back to the 15 Feb 2020 target to offer a first dose to all those in JCVI Groups 1-4), the 'booster' target has been brought forward by one month.
I have seen this mis-reported as 'everyone over 18 to get a jab by the New Year.
The previous target was to offer a booster dose to all over 18s (in England but other home nations expected to do the same) by end Jan. This implies a vaccination appointment within 28 days (of 31 Jan).
The new target is to offer a booster dose to all over 18s by NYE, implying a vaccination appointment by end Jan.
Whereas the previous version was entirely 'doable' this is going to be a massive ask: I hope that the effort will be balanced against the need to keep all the other parts of the NHS going full tilt. Still better than lock downs and the adverse effect on people's educational and mental well-being.
The average daily vaccination rate will need to be about 650k per day (averaged over the 48 days and taking into account down time during seasonal holidays). The rolling average is currently 458kpd.
Current totals are: first 51M, second 47M and booster 23M.
There's still a dribble (50+k per day) of first and second jabs including those for adolescents, but this rate will trend up.
There are still 4M who 'need' a second dose. I suspect jabs for 5-11s (5M) will be placed on hold till Feb half term, if the JCVI decide to recommend that the programme extends to that age cohort.


----------



## fossyant (13 Dec 2021)

Just how long can NHS staff keep this up - 4th jab soon (six months)


----------



## classic33 (13 Dec 2021)

fossyant said:


> Just how long can NHS staff keep this up - 4th jab soon (six months)


Well, if I understood him correctly last night, it's going to be at least another year before routine appointments start up fully. 
I wonder what people's reaction to being told they'll just have to wait will be. Hopefully they'll not take it out on staff.


----------



## PaulSB (13 Dec 2021)

One of my sons enjoys Supported Living in the Community. As with all care support SLC is in the grip of a staffing crisis. Knowing this I called his house to say I would organise his booster - four lads live at the house and taking one out means three staff are needed, two to remain at the house and one to travel with my lad. It's very rare for two staff to be present, three are like hen's teeth.

By coincidence my son was offered the flu jab today as well. Impossible to get an appointment locally for this. Hopefully one will be offered tomorrow.

On the booster front I was in position 10854 in the queue! Took about ten minutes to get to the actual booking page.

I tried various nearby centres to get offers ranging from December 14th to January 4th. Booked on for tomorrow at 8.50.

As an aside when entering your NHS number be sure to include the spaces 123 456 7890. I was rejected 4-5 times before I realised my error.


----------



## DaveReading (13 Dec 2021)

PaulSB said:


> As an aside when entering your NHS number be sure to include the spaces 123 456 7890. I was rejected 4-5 times before I realised my error.



One wonders which of Boris's cronies got paid millions for designing such an inflexible system. All it needed to do was count 10 digits FFS.


----------



## mjr (13 Dec 2021)

DaveReading said:


> One wonders which of Boris's cronies got paid millions for designing such an inflexible system. All it needed to do was count 10 digits FFS.


I'm sure I put it in in a block, but they may well have stripped out niceities like the system putting spaces back in, to increase system capacity during today's server-crashing surge.


----------



## PaulSB (14 Dec 2021)

DaveReading said:


> One wonders which of Boris's cronies got paid millions for designing such an inflexible system. All it needed to do was count 10 digits FFS.


The NHS website has been there a long time and while I'm no fan of Bojo I very much doubt this one is down to him or his cronies.


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

PaulSB said:


> The NHS website has been there a long time and while I'm no fan of Bojo I very much doubt this one is down to him or his cronies.


Isn't the covid vaccine booking web service another of those web apps so beloved of Dom which were made by new developers and then made to look like part of the main NHS website using simplified style guidelines and the trafficmanager.net Content Delivery Network? This is seriously cool stuff IMO but let's not pretend it is the old NHS website or that it has all worked perfectly: https://digital.nhs.uk/coronavirus/vaccinations/national-booking-service


----------



## Ming the Merciless (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> I'm sure I put it in in a block, but they may well have stripped out niceities like the system putting spaces back in, to increase system capacity during today's server-crashing surge.



Any nice form field formatting would be done by your browser and would have zero impact on capacity at their servers end.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (14 Dec 2021)

P.S. You can now order LFTs for home again.


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Any nice form field formatting would be done by your browser and would have zero impact on capacity at their servers end.


My browser ignores most such orders from servers, for security reasons.



Ming the Merciless said:


> P.S. You can now order LFTs for home again.


Why order? Can still just collect them from libraries here as you ride past.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> My browser ignores most such orders from servers, for security reasons.
> 
> 
> Why order? Can still just collect them from libraries here as you ride past.



Maybe we don’t all ride past libraries on a regular basis 😂


----------



## Ming the Merciless (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> My browser ignores most such orders from servers, for security reasons.



The order isn’t from the server anymore than the rest of the web page is 😂


----------



## Alex321 (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> My browser ignores most such orders from servers, for security reasons.
> 
> 
> Why order? Can still just collect them from libraries here as you ride past.


Here in the Vale of Glamorgan, there are no places holding local stocks, we have to order them. Seems a bit wasteful to me, though more convenient.


----------



## PK99 (14 Dec 2021)

Packs of lateral flow tests and blue masks being handed out by Kingston Station yesterday. Very big stacks of both.


----------



## rockyroller (14 Dec 2021)

read yesterday that 1 out of 100 seniors in the US (65 or older) have died from covid. that's quite a perspective


----------



## PK99 (14 Dec 2021)

rockyroller said:


> read yesterday that 1 out of 100 seniors in the US (65 or older) have died from covid. that's quite a perspective



What proportion of over 65s would be expected to die in any 2 year period?


----------



## rockyroller (14 Dec 2021)

PK99 said:


> What proportion of over 65s would be expected to die in any 2 year period?


hmmm, found this here: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/older-american-health.htm

no idea if these 3s are pre-covid. anyone know the math to extrapolate a correlation to the above "1 out of 100"?

Number of deaths of persons age 65 and over: 2,117,332
Deaths per 100,000 population:
65-74: 1,764.6
75-84: 4,308.3
85 and over: 13,228.6

Leading cause of death

Heart disease
Cancer
Chronic lower respiratory disease


----------



## rockyroller (14 Dec 2021)

a little more here but don't wnat to hijack the vax thread
https://www.americashealthrankings.org/explore/senior/measure/premature_death_sr/state/U.S.

In 2019, the leading causes of death among adults ages 65 and older in the United States were heart disease, cancer, chronic lower respiratory diseases, stroke and Alzheimer’s disease according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Research estimates that 15% to 43% of these deaths are preventable depending on the cause through lifestyle modifications in Americans younger than 80 years.


----------



## oldwheels (14 Dec 2021)

DaveReading said:


> One wonders which of Boris's cronies got paid millions for designing such an inflexible system. All it needed to do was count 10 digits FFS.


I entered my Scottish NHS number in one block and there was no problem.


----------



## Landsurfer (14 Dec 2021)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...re-covid-delta-variant-two-vaccine-jabs-give/


----------



## MrGrumpy (14 Dec 2021)

Hopefully good news but governments seems to be crapping it !! Probably due to time of year !


----------



## Rocky (14 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...re-covid-delta-variant-two-vaccine-jabs-give/


It's behind a paywall......but I'm sure the article mentioned that people who have been double jabbed with AstraZeneca vaccine, don't seem to be as well protected - the mRNA booster is needed to afford a good level of protection. I'm also sure the Telegraph said that even though it apparently causes less severe illness in most people than delta, its overall (massively increased) transmissibility means that it has a huge potential to overwhelm health services.

I'd also add that it is early days for Omicron.......and so we need to be wary of pronouncing how severe or mild its impact is going to be. Of course we could take a precautionary approach, because if it does turnout to be severe, it'll be a little late to put the toothpaste back in the tube (if you see what I mean).


----------



## Landsurfer (14 Dec 2021)

Rocky said:


> It's behind a paywall......but I'm sure the article mentioned that people who have been double jabbed with AstraZeneca vaccine, don't seem to be as well protected - the mRNA booster is needed to afford a good level of protection. I'm also sure the Telegraph said that even though it apparently causes less severe illness in most people than delta, its overall (massively increased) transmissibility means that it has a huge potential to overwhelm health services.
> 
> I'd also add that it is early days for Omicron.......and so we need to be wary of pronouncing how severe or mild its impact is going to be. Of course we could take a precautionary approach, because if it does turnout to be severe, it'll be a little late to put the toothpaste back in the tube (if you see what I mean).


It didn’t say any of that Rocky ... Ill post a screen shot.


----------



## potsy (14 Dec 2021)

I had my booster jab booked for a place nearly 4 miles from home, it was the closest one offered via the NHS booking system. 

Yesterday got a message from my own doctors practice to say they are now offering them in the surgery. 

Have now booked in there but had to do it as a 'general' appointment, and have now cancelled the original one. 

No idea if I will get the jab on the day, not too fussed tbh, I'll get it eventually.


----------



## Kingfisher101 (14 Dec 2021)

I'm not having any of them, its a total crock and you've been had. Instead I'm going to join the Tories at their endless parties and with the scientists etc. What a joke.


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

Kingfisher101 said:


> I'm not having any of them, its a total crock and you've been had. Instead I'm going to join the Tories at their endless parties and with the scientists etc. What a joke.


I’ve played my part with two. The boosters will go on for years. We’ve all been had, maybe this is satire but more people are waking up to their agenda now.


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Kingfisher101 said:


> I'm not having any of them, its a total crock and you've been had. Instead I'm going to join the Tories at their endless parties and with the scientists etc. What a joke.


How do you figure that will help you? Scientists are telling people to limit parties but it seems some politicians and journalists aren't listening. MPs are now testing positive en masse so I would not follow them. Tonight Parliament is hosting another superspreader event, so let's see what happens next 
View: https://mobile.twitter.com/PeterGrantMP/status/1470724600535343109


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> I’ve played my part with two. The boosters will go on for years. We’ve all been had, maybe this is satire but more people are waking up to their agenda now.


The "agenda" claims are far right scams: https://factcheck.afp.com/hoax-circulates-about-united-nations-mission-goals


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

Look at the risks 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-_iCAb2c2_ajs60rkS7EB-mSQfNerEIHswX0FfVgrhYf0


----------



## Rocky (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> Look at the risks
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-_iCAb2c2_ajs60rkS7EB-mSQfNerEIHswX0FfVgrhYf0


Do you want to balance that claim by setting out the risks of being unvaccinated?


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> Look at the risks
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-_iCAb2c2_ajs60rkS7EB-mSQfNerEIHswX0FfVgrhYf0


Yes, tiny, aren't they?


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

Rocky said:


> Do you want to balance that claim by setting out the risks of being unvaccinated?


I suppose it’s down to the individuals choice to weigh it up. 
This statement is frightening.


View: https://www.instagram.com/tv/CXd3drTgtOv/?utm_medium=copy_link


----------



## Rocky (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> I suppose it’s down to the individuals choice to weigh it up.
> This statement is frightening.
> 
> 
> View: https://www.instagram.com/tv/CXd3drTgtOv/?utm_medium=copy_link



I think you might want to read this excellent article in The Atlantic before paying too much attention to Malone's claims. He certainly didn't invent any of the current anti-covid mRNA vaccines and it is doubtful if he even came up with the original idea. As it says in the article, and as @mjr has hinted, the risks from mRNA vaccines are far lower than getting Covid.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science...lone-vaccine-inventor-vaccine-skeptic/619734/


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> I suppose it’s down to the individuals choice to weigh it up.
> This statement is frightening.
> 
> 
> View: https://www.instagram.com/tv/CXd3drTgtOv/?utm_medium=copy_link



He's got form as a sceptic. His claims about his own expertise are disputed. https://www.theatlantic.com/science...lone-vaccine-inventor-vaccine-skeptic/619734/


----------



## markemark (14 Dec 2021)

This highly transmittable variant will go one way or the other. Hopefully the vulnerable are mostly protected. We’ll have a short lockdown. The nhs will muffle through. And the unvaccinated will all get covid (as will everyone else) and we’ll soon find out if they’re right or not.


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

This booster is more than likely a placebo. I back the Tory rebellion.
*Mod Edit: *In @Milzy's opinion, not scientifically proven.


----------



## markemark (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> This booster is more than likely a placebo. I back the Tory rebellion.


No it isn’t. But like I say, this is coming for everyone.


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

markemark said:


> No it isn’t. But like I say, this is coming for everyone.


I’ve been around loads of infected people but never caught it. Same story with my brother & sister. We must have genes that won’t take it on.


----------



## vickster (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> This booster is more than likely a placebo. I back the Tory rebellion.
> *Mod Edit: *In @Milzy's opinion, not scientifically proven.


hopefully you didn’t back it with real cash, as you would have just lost 

actually, hopefully you did, so I could have a big old snigger


----------



## Ming the Merciless (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> Look at the risks
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-_iCAb2c2_ajs60rkS7EB-mSQfNerEIHswX0FfVgrhYf0



The MHRA did, in their response and you‘ll see the vaccine is nothing to worry about.

“The data do not allow a judgment on the distribution of the mRNA component or expression and distribution of the encoded COVID-19 spike protein. Whilst the lipid was widely distributed, the amounts outside the injection site and liver were small and were not associated with any adverse effects. In the repeated dose preclinical toxicity studies, no adverse effects outside of the expected inflammation associated with an immune response were detected.”

We are not aware from UK Yellow Card data of any similar reports with breastfed infants. We are also not currently aware of any evidence that the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 or other approved COVID vaccines are transferred to human breast milk. Recent published data suggest that mRNA from COVID-19 BNT162b2 (Pfizer) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines are not detected in human breast milk samples collected 4-48 hours post-vaccination(Golan et al 2021 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.05.21252998v1).

Adverse event profile of the vaccine The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine was evaluated in clinical trials involving more than 44,000 participants. The most frequent adverse reactions in trials were pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, myalgia (muscle pains), chills, arthralgia (joint pains), and fever; these were each reported in more than 1 in 10 people. These reactions were usually mild or moderate in intensity and resolved within a few days after vaccination.

The MHRA continually monitors the safety of COVID-19 vaccines available in the UK. A weekly summary of Yellow Card reporting is published by the MHRA. These reports can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...irus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting

Question: In case MHRA does (according to the above findings) not amend or withdrawn its current version: please state why and which study supports such reasoning As of 16 June, an estimated 16.8 million first doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and around 10.9 million second doses have been administered. As of 16 June 2021, for the UK, 73,944 Yellow Cards have been reported for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. For all COVID-19 vaccines, the overwhelming majority of reports relate to injection-site reactions (sore arm for example) and generalised symptoms such as ‘flu-like’ illness, headache, chills, fatigue (tiredness), nausea (feeling sick), fever, dizziness, weakness, aching muscles, and rapid heartbeat.

Generally, these happen shortly after the vaccination and are not associated with more serious or lasting illness. In clinical trials, the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine has demonstrated very high levels of protection against symptomatic infection. Data is now available on the impact of the vaccination campaign in reducing infections and illness in the UK (https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-of-the-effectiveness-of-covid-19-vaccination ).

All vaccines and medicines have some side effects. These side effects need to be continuously balanced against the expected benefits in preventing illness. As with all vaccines and medicines, the safety of COVID-19 vaccines is continuously monitored and benefits and possible risks remain under review. Thank you for your inquiry and please contact us should you have further questions.”


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> The MHRA did, in their response and you‘ll see the vaccine is nothing to worry about.


It's almost like deniers don't read to the end of the document, isn't it?


----------



## pawl (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> I’ve been around loads of infected people but never caught it. Same story with my brother & sister. We must have genes that won’t take it on.


 

Lucky you .


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

Why does it seem loads of folks are suddenly collapsing with heart problems then? Just anti vax propaganda I guess.


----------



## midlife (14 Dec 2021)

SydZ said:


> Vaccination being made mandatory for NHS workers in England.



I already have mandatory vaccines to be able to work in the NHS, not an issue with me personally.


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> Why does it seem loads of folks are suddenly collapsing with heart problems then? Just anti vax propaganda I guess.


The only one I remember right now who I know that "suddenly" collapsed (rather than a known condition or something like that) has been attributed to covid aftereffects.

Why do you think loads of folks are?


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> The only one I remember right now who I know that "suddenly" collapsed (rather than a known condition or something like that) has been attributed to covid aftereffects.
> 
> Why do you think loads of folks are?


Couldn’t it be because of the jibby jab? 
And also about NHS workers having mandatory jabs, in another year I wouldn’t be surprised if they weren’t mandatory full stop. No vaX no work etc.


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> Couldn’t it be because of the jibby jab?


I mean: why do you think that it's loads of people? I see no evidence that they are for any reason, let alone that.



> And also about NHS workers having mandatory jabs, in another year I wouldn’t be surprised if they weren’t mandatory full stop. No vaX no work etc.


As @midlife pointed out, NHS workers already have some mandatory vaccines.


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> I mean: why do you think loads of people are suddenly collapsing? I see no evidence that they are for any reason, let alone that.
> 
> 
> As @midlife pointed out, NHS workers already have some mandatory vaccines.


It’s common knowledge on both counts, I meant for people going into factory’s & call centres etc too.


----------



## PaulSB (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> I*sn't the covid vaccine booking web service another of those web apps so beloved of Dom which were made by new developers and then made to look like part of the main NHS website using simplified style guidelines and the trafficmanager.net Content Delivery Network?* This is seriously cool stuff IMO but let's not pretend it is the old NHS website or that it has all worked perfectly: https://digital.nhs.uk/coronavirus/vaccinations/national-booking-service


Not as far as I am aware and I'm not pretending anything. I don't recognise the web address you have posted so I cannot comment on what this may or may not be. I checked my browsing history for yesterday when making the booking:

https://www.nhs.uk/book-a-coronavirus-vaccination/

This is the NHS website I have used whenever I have wanted to access NHS information over the years. It worked perfectly for me yesterday with the exception of the NHS number entry. When I looked at this more closely the drop down showed me I had entered my own number previously as 123 4567 890 while I had entered my son's as 1234567890 and until I corrected this the site would not accept the booking. A small user error.


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> It’s common knowledge on both counts, I meant for people going into factory’s & call centres etc too.


Not around here it isn't and I talk every day to someone who goes into factories.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> Couldn’t it be because of the jibby jab?
> And also about NHS workers having mandatory jabs, in another year I wouldn’t be surprised if they weren’t mandatory full stop. No vaX no work etc.



It will be potentially a combination of many not seeking treatment during the pandemic and deaths always go up this time of year. I say potentially because no actual data has been linked to yet. Which ONS dataset were you looking at? Post a link to ONS data, save everyone speculating over nothing. We don’t need rumours and unsubstantiated claims.


----------



## Kingfisher101 (14 Dec 2021)

SydZ said:


> Vaccination being made mandatory for NHS workers in England.


For frontline NHS workers.


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

PaulSB said:


> Not as far as I am aware and I'm not pretending anything. I don't recognise the web address you have posted so I cannot comment on what this may or may not be. I checked my browsing history for yesterday when making the booking:
> 
> https://www.nhs.uk/book-a-coronavirus-vaccination/


Sorry to be techie but:
mjr@bletchley:~$ host www.nhs.uk
www.nhs.uk is an alias for nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net.
nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net is an alias for e10931.ig15.akamaiedge.net.
e10931.ig15.akamaiedge.net has address 104.89.75.74

Akamai Edge is a similar sort of thing. Once that's involved (and if it's set up right), you've often no way of telling how many servers are really involved or where. Imagine a website equivalent of Legion from Red Dwarf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akamai_Technologies#Akamai_Intelligent_Edge_Platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion_(Red_Dwarf)

As others mention, their spaceless NHS numbers were accepted... but I believe you and think such neatening might have been removed during a surge.


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

Tonight's vote comes as no surprise but what it does confirm is the death of democracy in this country.
As we and many others have been saying all along the UK is now a tyranny run for special global interests and not its people. 
This was never about anyones health
The only way forward is complete non-compliance


----------



## pawl (14 Dec 2021)

I doubt if many of my ex colleagues working on the front line would agree with you .


----------



## PaulSB (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Sorry to be techie but:
> mjr@bletchley:~$ host www.nhs.uk
> www.nhs.uk is an alias for nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net.
> nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net is an alias for e10931.ig15.akamaiedge.net.
> ...


I am aware website addresses are not always what they seem but beyond that.........so I'll believe you as well!! 👍

TBH it worked for me once I recognised the need for spaces. I viewed it as similar to phone numbers. Some sites accept a space as in 07973 123456 and others won't. I'm a bit of a nerd about spaces and as far as I'm concerned 07973 123456 is correct and the website is wrong!! 😂


----------



## Milzy (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Not around here it isn't and I talk every day to someone who goes into factories.


You must agree it should be mandatory in factories the same as NHS frontline though right? No jab, no job.


----------



## mjr (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> You must agree it should be mandatory in factories the same as NHS frontline though right? No jab, no job.


Why must I? You cannot make agreement mandatory!

I think if factory workers can be protected other ways, those should be preferred, but I wouldn't absolutely rule out no factory ever requiring some vaccinations.


----------



## Kingfisher101 (14 Dec 2021)

When this is shown not to be anything there will be another variant in the Spring with another vaccination needed. The country is a s show and a medical dictatorship. Its just bonkers.


----------



## classic33 (14 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Sorry to be techie but:
> mjr@bletchley:~$ host www.nhs.uk
> www.nhs.uk is an alias for nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net.
> nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net is an alias for e10931.ig15.akamaiedge.net.
> ...


Agree with @PaulSB, two very different sites.

Even accounting for any paranoia.


----------



## classic33 (14 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> It’s common knowledge on both counts, I meant for people going into factory’s & *call centres *etc too.


Many have gone back to working from home.


----------



## cougie uk (15 Dec 2021)

Crazy isn't it. 
Governments have the right to conscript people to fight wars and people are fine with it - but god forbid we have a vaccine scheme eh ?


----------



## PaulSB (15 Dec 2021)

Supporting a government action which is for the overall good of the population is a responsible act regardless of one's political view.



I'm looking forward to Saturday to see how my football club copes. I imagine it will be utter chaos.


----------



## Landsurfer (15 Dec 2021)

PaulSB said:


> Supporting a government action which is for the overall good of the population is a responsible act regardless of one's political view.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm looking forward to Saturday to see how my football club copes. I imagine it will be utter chaos.


Don’t worry .. the chap that runs the “ZOE Survey” was on R4 this morning unwillingly saying it's a mild cold .....


----------



## PaulSB (15 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Don’t worry .. the chap that runs the “ZOE Survey” was on R4 this morning unwillingly saying it's a mild cold .....


Where did I express worry or concern?


----------



## Landsurfer (15 Dec 2021)

PaulSB said:


> Where did I express worry or concern?


"I imagine it will be utter chaos."


----------



## PaulSB (15 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> "I imagine it will be utter chaos."


I do but I've no worries over it. I've had a Covid passport for months, I'll get my son's today and we always use the disabled entrance. The passport is no big deal and I fail to see the issue other than the practical difficulties of inspection.

It will though be chaos as I'd guess at least 50% won't have passports and fans being refused entry to a ground tend to react badly.


----------



## roadrash (15 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> I’ve been around loads of infected people but never caught it. Same story with my brother & sister. We must have genes that won’t take it on.



That does not mean you have not carried it and passed it on to others, 




Milzy said:


> This was never about anyones health



There are many that will strongly disagree .


----------



## mjr (15 Dec 2021)

classic33 said:


> Agree with @PaulSB, two very different sites.


You got those backwards. Paul was saying it was the same old nhs website. I'm saying it's using Akamai Edge to make many appear as one.



> Even accounting for any paranoia.


??? No paranoia. Just trying to explain how some big websites are built now.


----------



## Ian H (15 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Don’t worry .. the chap that runs the “ZOE Survey” was on R4 this morning unwillingly saying it's a mild cold .....


He didn't. He said one of the symptoms may be mistaken for a cold. That doesn't mean that the outcome for you or someone you infect wouldn't be serious.


----------



## Milzy (15 Dec 2021)

classic33 said:


> Many have gone back to working from home.


It’s probably Christmas shoppers causing all the extra traffic then. The rules don’t make sense & the common man/women have had enough & do as they please.


----------



## Kingfisher101 (15 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> It’s probably Christmas shoppers causing all the extra traffic then. The rules don’t make sense & the common man/women have had enough & do as they please.


 I agree its utter twaddle/ rubbish and total brainwashing in the media. The many thousands that have died previously from respiratory diseases prior to the last 2 years were never even mentioned.


----------



## vickster (15 Dec 2021)

Kingfisher101 said:


> I agree its utter twaddle/ rubbish and total brainwashing in the media. The many thousands that have died previously from respiratory diseases prior to the last 2 years were never even mentioned.


Which do you mean? Most of the common ones aren’t highly contagious


----------



## Landsurfer (15 Dec 2021)

vickster said:


> Which do you mean? Most of the common ones aren’t highly contagious


FLU ......?
But thank god there hasn’t been a single flu case last year or this so far ...
Julie’s booked her booster ... Friday the 24th ...
.... the Jabbathon is with us ....
"Mass Jabbing events” .. in football stadiums .... full of people wanting jabbed .... Or Targets as certain terrorist groups call them ...
Just saying .......


----------



## Milzy (15 Dec 2021)

You are witnessing the biggest transfer of wealth the world has ever seen ... and most people have no idea it is taking place.


----------



## MrGrumpy (15 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> I’ve been around loads of infected people but never caught it. Same story with my brother & sister. We must have genes that won’t take it on.


That’s quite possible. We had this discussion at work but centered round AIDS . Some folk back in the day didn’t ever get it , natural immunity apparently. COVID might be the same but you will never know !!


----------



## DaveReading (15 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> FLU ......?



The R number for flu is a little over 1.

The R number for the Omicron variant is reckoned to be about 3.5

So no, flu isn't "highly contagious".


----------



## MrGrumpy (15 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> You are witnessing the biggest transfer of wealth the world has ever seen ... and most people have no idea it is taking place.


Proof ?


----------



## Milzy (15 Dec 2021)

MrGrumpy said:


> Proof ?


Duck Duck Go the profits.


----------



## Landsurfer (15 Dec 2021)

DaveReading said:


> The R number for flu is a little over 1.
> 
> The R number for the Omicron variant is reckoned to be about 3.5
> 
> So no, flu isn't "highly contagious".


Death toll from flu in the tens of thousands
Death toll from Omicron ... oh wait ... oops .... Zero .....

Julies surprised just how long she has to wait for her booster ...
Had mine weeks ago ...


----------



## mjr (15 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> FLU ......?
> But thank god there hasn’t been a single flu case last year or this so far ...


What was the last year when flu killed 100,000 in the UK?



> Julie’s booked her booster ... Friday the 24th ...
> .... the Jabbathon is with us ....
> "Mass Jabbing events” .. in football stadiums .... full of people wanting jabbed .... Or Targets as certain terrorist groups call them ...
> Just saying .......


2 metre distancing makes it rather difficult to target them with a bomb and there's enough security at most of the sites I've seen that I hope a gunman would be neutralised pretty quickly. Something to thank the anti-vaxers for?


----------



## vickster (15 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Death toll from flu in the tens of thousands


Source : assume you mean last week if comparing to omicton


----------



## mjr (15 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> Duck Duck Go the profits.


So either you're not confident in where you read it, or ...?


----------



## Milzy (15 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> So either you're not confident in where you read it, or ...?


It’s chain gang night I’ll post evidence in good time.


----------



## mjr (15 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> It’s chain gang night I’ll post evidence in good time.


Yeah, on with the serious stuff! And kudos to your chain gang for being the first road club I've heard of continuing through winter instead of hiding under the blankets and leaving the roads to tourists and sportivers.


----------



## Landsurfer (15 Dec 2021)

All of my road clubs rode through the winter ?? !1 shorter chain gangs but we still rode ...


----------



## Ming the Merciless (15 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Sorry to be techie but:
> mjr@bletchley:~$ host www.nhs.uk
> www.nhs.uk is an alias for nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net.
> nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net is an alias for e10931.ig15.akamaiedge.net.
> ...



Standard content delivery stuff for any website that sees large volumes of traffic.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (15 Dec 2021)

Milzy said:


> Duck Duck Go the profits.



Done that , here’s the result

https://www.economicsonline.co.uk/business_economics/profits.html/


----------



## PaulSB (15 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Sorry to be techie but:
> mjr@bletchley:~$ host www.nhs.uk
> www.nhs.uk is an alias for nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net.
> nhswebsite-production.edgekey.net is an alias for e10931.ig15.akamaiedge.net.
> ...


I've just been on the nhs.uk website to organise my son's Covid pass. At the box where one enters an NHS number the instruction is very clear giving an example as 123 456 7890


----------



## Pat "5mph" (15 Dec 2021)

*Mod Note:*
Please dispense of political digs on this thread, or permanent thread bans will happen 
Also, the conspiracy theories are getting a bit tedious.
Thanks for your understanding.


----------



## PaulSB (15 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Yeah, on with the serious stuff! And kudos to your chain gang for being the first road club I've heard of continuing through winter instead of hiding under the blankets and leaving the roads to tourists and sportivers.


My club rides every weekend of the year but the mid-week evening rides only take place during BST. I've been in three clubs and each rode through the winter. All the local Lancashire clubs do the same.

Obviously numbers reduce in the colder months.


----------



## roadrash (16 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> But thank god there hasn’t been a single flu case last year or this so far




tell me , do you expect people to take your contribution to this thread seriously after that statement


----------



## Landsurfer (16 Dec 2021)

If deaths from the booster are 1 / 100,000,000 ..
And deaths from omicron are zero ...

Then ................


----------



## mjr (16 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> If deaths from the booster are 1 / 100,000,000 ..
> And deaths from omicron are zero ...
> 
> Then ................


Then both may well cause zero deaths in the UK population of about 67 million where about 10m aren't being vaccinated.

But we already know vaccination reduces illness severity and deaths from omicron and all other variants, so let's vaccinate, right?

And I will try to remember to remind you of this foolish scaremongering anti-vax post when omicron has been in the UK long enough to kill some people, even unvaccinated ones.


----------



## Bike Tyson (16 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> What was the last year when flu killed 100,000 in the UK?



Do you mean killed 100,000 or died within _28 days_ of receiving a _positive test_?


----------



## Landsurfer (16 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Then both may well cause zero deaths in the UK population of about 67 million where about 10m aren't being vaccinated.
> 
> But we already know vaccination reduces illness severity and deaths from omicron and all other variants, so let's vaccinate, right?
> 
> And I will try to remember to remind you of this foolish scaremongering anti-vax post when omicron has been in the UK long enough to kill some people, even unvaccinated ones.


How can i possibly be anti - vax when i have previously stated my vaccine status .... 3 jabbed ....I am anti - stupidity however.


----------



## mjr (16 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> How can i possibly be anti - vax when i have previously stated my vaccine status .... 3 jabbed ....I am anti - stupidity however.


If you were anti-stupidity, then you would not imply that I had called you anti-vax when I called your post anti-vax.


----------



## mjr (16 Dec 2021)

Bike Tyson said:


> Do you mean killed 100,000 or died within _28 days_ of receiving a _positive test_?


Either would be fine(!)

What exactly do you all get from going on and on about the difference between the PHE/HSA mechanical death-with-days-of-positive-test and the GRO judged death-from-covid numbers? When checked for the first few months of the crisis, the difference was pretty small even then, about 3%, and the faster mechanical number enabled decisions to be taken sooner, without waiting weeks for the GRO data, saving lives.


----------



## SydZ (16 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> If deaths from the booster are 1 / 100,000,000 ..
> And deaths from omicron are zero ...
> 
> Then ................


Deaths from Omicron are 1. So far.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...041210/20211215_OS_Daily_Omicron_Overview.pdf


----------



## Bike Tyson (16 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Either would be fine(!)
> 
> What exactly do you all get from going on and on about the difference between the PHE/HSA mechanical death-with-days-of-positive-test and the GRO judged death-from-covid numbers? When checked for the first few months of the crisis, the difference was pretty small even then, about 3%, and the faster mechanical number enabled decisions to be taken sooner, without waiting weeks for the GRO data, saving lives.



I don't believe in a million years if I have got this right that only 3% of people who died within 28 days of testing positive with Covid died of something else and not Covid.

All the BS reporting hurts my brain, all anyone wants is accurate numbers on deaths, vaccine injury, etc.


----------



## mjr (16 Dec 2021)

Bike Tyson said:


> I don't believe in a million years if I have got this right that only 3% of people who died within 28 days of testing positive with Covid died of something else and not Covid.


Not exactly: the difference is 3%. Some who died within 28 days of testing positive died of something else, but a smaller number died from covid after 28 days or without ever testing positive, especially early on when testing was more limited.

That's not definite, but it's the best estimate there is yet. As the good book says "Anything you still can't cope with is therefore your own problem."

What difference does it make to any arguments if 147,000 or 143,000 or 134,000 in the UK have died from covid so far?



> All the BS reporting hurts my brain, all anyone wants is accurate numbers on deaths, vaccine injury, etc.


The numbers are as accurate as possible but you cannot have both certainty and truth on this, or at least not yet. I think that causes a lot of people problems with this crisis. So much is probabilities and chance which people tend to be crap at. But that doesn't make the reporting BS, although it probably doesn't help that journalists have often been selected for their writing not their numeracy.

Sorry life is confusing sometimes. Good luck with it.


----------



## Bike Tyson (16 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Not exactly: the difference is 3%. Some who died within 28 days of testing positive died of something else, but a smaller number died from covid after 28 days or without ever testing positive, especially early on when testing was more limited.
> 
> It's not definite, but it's the best estimate there is. As the good book says "Anything you still can't cope with is therefore your own problem."
> 
> ...



MSM has been the major problem, I have read a story saying X equals Y from one source only to read in the very next article X equals Z

Also censorship on social media, journalists that get the true story out first get censored because the mainstream narrative is usually lagging behind .

Any flu deaths recorded last year?


----------



## Kingfisher101 (16 Dec 2021)

I think people have to make their own minds up really. But they don't seem to be given the chance to do so really.
I think its really disgraceful that a lot of very elderly and vulnerable people will become even more isolated by this total utter hogwash.


----------



## Rocky (16 Dec 2021)

@Moderators ….. please can we cut the conspiracy theories from this important thread and stick to discussing Covid vaccines?


----------



## midlife (16 Dec 2021)

Kingfisher101 said:


> I think people have to make their own minds up really. But they don't seem to be given the chance to do so really.
> I think its really disgraceful that a lot of very elderly and vulnerable people will become even more isolated by this total utter hogwash.



I’m a little confused, do you think that the COVID 19 pandemic is hogwash or the vaccines ?


----------



## Landsurfer (16 Dec 2021)

Good point Rocky.
so ..
"One is tempted to ask: if it were not for the mass testing, would the nation as a whole even be aware of this omicron wave? But that is to utter heresy in the age of Covid.” 
From the Daily Telegraph today ... that the vaccines work or are effective is beyond doubt ... but do we actually need the booster is the question ... it’s a vaccine question Rocky.


----------



## Bike Tyson (16 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> that the vaccines work or are effective is beyond doubt



Not seen anybody disagree on this, they save lives!


----------



## Alex321 (16 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> ... that the vaccines work or are effective is beyond doubt ... but do we actually need the booster is the question ... it’s a vaccine question Rocky.



I don't think there is really even much question there. Against the Delta variant, the booster was raising protection from 75% after two jabs to over 90% after the booster as well. With a similar apparent level of improvement (from a lower baseline, so not 90%) against Omicron.

The general population being aware of Omicron or not doesn't make much difference to the spread, but does make it easier for the politicians to explain why there is a surge in cases and why we need further restriction.


----------



## Rusty Nails (16 Dec 2021)

SydZ said:


> Deaths from Omicron are 1. So far.
> 
> https://assets.publishing.service.g...041210/20211215_OS_Daily_Omicron_Overview.pdf



Well his argument was good for a minute or two, until facts got in the way.


----------



## Alex321 (16 Dec 2021)

Bike Tyson said:


> I don't believe in a million years if I have got this right that only 3% of people who died within 28 days of testing positive with Covid died of something else and not Covid.
> 
> All the BS reporting hurts my brain, all anyone wants is accurate numbers on deaths, vaccine injury, etc.


Why do you have difficulty in believing that?

Why do you think it isn't reasonably accurate?


----------



## roadrash (16 Dec 2021)

Kingfisher101 said:


> I think people have to make their own minds up really. But they don't seem to be given the chance to do so really.
> I think its really disgraceful that a lot of very elderly and vulnerable people will become even more isolated by this total utter hogwash



1st point , everyone does have the chance to make their own minds up whether to have the vaccine or not, perhaps you can you some evidence to the contrary

2nd point I cannot make until you clarify just what it is that you think is utter hogwash. is it the vaccine , the booster, covid ????


----------



## Bike Tyson (16 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> Why do you have difficulty in believing that?
> 
> Why do you think it isn't reasonably accurate?



Well for one the office for National Statistics says "COVID-19 is the underlying cause of death in around 92% of deaths where it was mentioned on the death certificate."


----------



## Alex321 (16 Dec 2021)

Bike Tyson said:


> Well for one the office for National Statistics says "COVID-19 is the underlying cause of death in around 92% of deaths where it was mentioned on the death certificate."


"Mentioned on the death certificate" isn't the same thing as "within 28 days of testing positive". Though TBH, I'm surprised that it is as low as that when mentioned on the death certificate.


----------



## Bike Tyson (16 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> "Mentioned on the death certificate" isn't the same thing as "within 28 days of testing positive". Though TBH, I'm surprised that it is as low as that when mentioned on the death certificate.



This is the thing, why report " within 28 days after testing positive" 
Just report Covid as the main cause of death although I have no idea how a doctor would know how someone dies for sure without an autopsy.


----------



## Rocky (16 Dec 2021)

This thread is about vaccines......could we take other matters elsewhere? @Pat "5mph" .......help!!


----------



## roadrash (16 Dec 2021)

Always the same @Rocky. it seems some just cant help themselves


----------



## Ming the Merciless (16 Dec 2021)

Bike Tyson said:


> Any flu deaths recorded last year?



Yes, see office for national statistics data

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/tran...formationfoi/influenzadeathsin20182019and2020


----------



## Landsurfer (17 Dec 2021)

Julies off for her booster today and my grandson, 18, is off for his first ... booked appointments not standing around in the rain.
We had a txt from our GP’S surgery last night telling us they have shut down for all health care for the rest of the month, Covid boosters only.


----------



## matticus (17 Dec 2021)

Booster booked for evening of the 21st: so a sort of Solstice celebration!
(think I got lucky booking so easily, in walking distance of home - mustn't grumble etc ... )

I shall hug everyone I meet on the way home.


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Dec 2021)

A couple of interesting snippets from the 'around the world' brief on Medscape - hoping this will pass the @Rocky test 
"The *Brazil* government have taken a stand against the requirement of a health passport. Last Monday, the MoH *vaccination website* was inaccessible because of "preventive maintenance", however, the Health Minister later admitted that the site had suffered a new cyberattack attempt: the website and the application _ConecteSUS_, a platform that shows proof of vaccination against COVID-19, suffered a ransomware *attack by hackers*. The problem also affected the system for reporting cases of the disease." (edited)
"An unnamed man in *New Zealand* is being investigated for receiving 10 doses of COVID-19 vaccine in one day at multiple vaccination centers after being allegedly paid to *impersonate* other individuals."
Comment: Only ID asked for in UK vaccination centres is, I think, DoB. Perhaps the 'reception desk' should ask for age as well or ask which doctors' surgery they are registered with? As a confidence/cross check (for the un-mathed imposter).


----------



## Julia9054 (19 Dec 2021)

Landsurfer said:


> Julies off for her booster today and my grandson, 18, is off for his first ... booked appointments not standing around in the rain.
> We had a txt from our GP’S surgery last night telling us they have shut down for all health care for the rest of the month, Covid boosters only.


What happens if someone is ill? A&E?


----------



## mjr (19 Dec 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> What happens if someone is ill? A&E?


That, or a Minor Injuries Unit. If you have one. Our nearest is 35 miles away, but it's a different NHS region so the local surgeries only ever refer to one 45 miles away...


----------



## vickster (19 Dec 2021)

Are you sure it said no appointments at all , or no routine appointments?


----------



## Buck (19 Dec 2021)

The directive is no routine appointments where those staff are being redeployed to the vaccine effort. Only emergencies including those that may indicate cancer.

Other key appointments such as cervical screening continue due to the associated risk of cancer and the prevention strategy being high on the Ganesha.


----------



## Ajax Bay (19 Dec 2021)

4.9 million booster or third doses delivered in the UK in the past seven days. Wow! Bravo to NHS (ESW&NI), pharmacies and volunteers across the United Kingdom.
[To which add about 75k in Wales not reported.]
Still over 4M have had one dose but not second (51M - 47M). Wonder how many of those under 18?
Over 18 UK population = 53M
12-17 = 4.6M.
Edit to add:
Total number of people (black) who received a 2nd dose at least 90 days ago and (in blue) number of 3rd doses given (up to yesterday, England) black bar is a proxy for number eligible now for a third dose. The high rates over 65, and to a lesser extent over 50, can offer optimism over the numbers of break-through infections severe enough to require hospitalisation. Also I read that the increased protective effect of a third dose kicks in quicker than the first/second.





As an aside daily first dose rate seems a bit up. Those who still refuse will get a level of immunity via the nasal route soon enough; just hope it's not a severe process for them and that they don't end up with long term effects


----------



## Chromatic (19 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Comment: Only ID asked for in UK vaccination centres is, I think, DoB. Perhaps the 'reception desk' should ask for age as well or ask which doctors' surgery they are registered with? As a confidence/cross check (for the un-mathed imposter).



I was asked my date of birth, to give part of my address and which doctor's practice I was registered with before getting in to get my jab


----------



## PaulSB (20 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> Comment: Only ID asked for in UK vaccination centres is, I think, DoB. Perhaps the 'reception desk' should ask for age as well or ask which doctors' surgery they are registered with? As a confidence/cross check (for the un-mathed imposter).


Booking online requires a lot more detail, for example NHS number and it's hard to imagine walk-ins at vaccination centres are treated very differently. However online bookings do have the question "Do you know your NHS number. Answer Yes or No." I suspect DOB and name would be sufficient for a database search to find a registered person. I think we all have an NHS number?

There has to be a mechanism because without one people would not be able to obtain a Covid pass.


----------



## matticus (20 Dec 2021)

PaulSB said:


> Booking online requires a lot more detail, for example NHS number and it's hard to imagine walk-ins at vaccination centres are treated very differently. However online bookings do have the question "*Do you know your NHS number. Answer* Yes or *No." *I suspect DOB and name would be sufficient for a database search to find a registered person. I think we all have an NHS number?
> 
> There has to be a mechanism because without one people would not be able to obtain a Covid pass.


Just say NO!

And you're in - booking my jab (for tomorrow) was really quick and easy.


----------



## DCLane (20 Dec 2021)

Son no. 2, age 17 and a twig, had his second vaccination this morning - promptly passing out afterwards 

Cue an army media scooping him up, into a wheelchair and off to resus with him waking up en route. All was fine pretty much immediately, but he got them worried for a few minutes.


----------



## classic33 (20 Dec 2021)

DCLane said:


> Son no. 2, age 17 and a twig, had his second vaccination this morning - promptly passing out afterwards
> 
> Cue an army media scooping him up, into a wheelchair and off to resus with him waking up en route. All was fine pretty much immediately, but he got them worried for a few minutes.


Hopefully no bumps or bruises.


----------



## DCLane (20 Dec 2021)

classic33 said:


> Hopefully no bumps or bruises.



Nope, they responded really quickly. It was helpful the army medic was standing right by him.


----------



## lazybloke (20 Dec 2021)

DCLane said:


> Son no. 2, age 17 and a twig, had his second vaccination this morning - promptly passing out afterwards
> 
> Cue an army media scooping him up, into a wheelchair and off to resus with him waking up en route. All was fine pretty much immediately, but he got them worried for a few minutes.


A faint from a jab is one thing, usually with a quick recovery like your son.

A faint after donating blood seems infinitely worse, like you're dying! Tea and biscuits have never been so welcome.


----------



## PK99 (20 Dec 2021)

I'm seeing reports of AntiVaxxers block booking vaccinations to prevent access to those who want to be vaccinated.

Grrrr!


----------



## DaveReading (20 Dec 2021)

PK99 said:


> I'm seeing reports of AntiVaxxers block booking vaccinations to prevent access to those who want to be vaccinated.



I'd be very surprised if the booking system allows multiple bookings for the same individual. 

If it does, then abusers should be locked up for a month, and the designer for a year ...

But more likely an urban myth.


----------



## Alex321 (20 Dec 2021)

DaveReading said:


> I'd be very surprised if the booking system allows multiple bookings for the same individual.
> 
> If it does, then abusers should be locked up for a month, and the designer for a year ...
> 
> But more likely an urban myth.


They could do it by getting a list of names & addresses form the electoral register, then booking while saying they don't know their NHS number. 

Still seems a bit unlikely. But who knows what some of them might do.


----------



## matticus (20 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> They could do it by getting a list of names & addresses form the electoral register, then booking while saying they don't know their NHS number.
> 
> Still seems a bit unlikely. But who knows what some of them might do.


And birth dates. Again, not impossible - but extremely unlikely.


----------



## PK99 (20 Dec 2021)

DaveReading said:


> I'd be very surprised if the booking system allows *multiple bookings for the same individual.*
> 
> If it does, then abusers should be locked up for a month, and the designer for a year ...
> 
> But more likely an urban myth.



*Groups *of anti-vaxxers booking and not turning up


----------



## DaveReading (20 Dec 2021)

PK99 said:


> *Groups *of anti-vaxxers booking and not turning up



Possible, I suppose.

Is there a presumption that no-shows must be anti-vaxxers? 

If not, how do we know that they are ?


----------



## IanSmithCSE (20 Dec 2021)

It must be true as Russia Today and GB News are reporting it, quoting an article in the Telegraph.

https://www.gbnews.uk/news/anti-vax...nts-to-stop-public-from-getting-jabbed/186796
https://www.rt.com/uk/543764-anti-vaccine-britain-covid19-omicron/


----------



## Ming the Merciless (20 Dec 2021)

PK99 said:


> *Groups *of anti-vaxxers booking and not turning up



Sounds like a whispering campaign repeating an article from September from Australia .

https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/coronavirus/2021/09/07/anti-vaxxers-book-covid-shots/


----------



## Buck (20 Dec 2021)

No shows or DNAs (Did Not Atrend) are many and varied. 
They can be people who simply forgot or are unwell and unable to get the vaccine. 
we are finding though that many are ones who have hedged their bets and booked on the NBS and also with their local GP then pick and choose on the day which they prefer to attend!


----------



## mjr (20 Dec 2021)

Buck said:


> No shows or DNAs (Did Not Atrend) are many and varied.
> They can be people who simply forgot or are unwell and unable to get the vaccine.
> we are finding though that many are ones who have hedged their bets and booked on the NBS and also with their local GP then pick and choose on the day which they prefer to attend!


Or they can be ones turned away by the bouncers because the NHS hasn't been keeping up with JCVI and gov.uk actions.


----------



## Buck (21 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Or they can be ones turned away by the bouncers because the NHS hasn't been keeping up with JCVI and gov.uk actions.



I'm not going to get into a debate about that. Granted the complexities of eligibility are not making this easier but it takes two minutes to check.


----------



## MrGrumpy (21 Dec 2021)

Folk refusing to get jabbed is one thing but the same people stopping others from doing so ( if true ) is another!! Idiots


----------



## lazybloke (21 Dec 2021)

Had my first major dissatisfaction with the booking system when trying to get 2nd jab appts arrange for my children yesterday, the "nearest" vaccination centre is currently a 28 mile drive!


----------



## vickster (21 Dec 2021)

A friend of mine (late 40s, an ex nurse) is unvaccinated (some unfounded fear about blood clots and a sister had some minor side effects), just had a Covid scare after being a close contact with a positive case, tested negative in the end.
However, she was super concerned as she lives with her elderly mother (who is thankfully vaxed and boosted). I asked her if now she would actually get vaccinated...her reply "nah"...I told her she is a fool...I've not had a reply. She was also complaining about how unpleasant the PCR nose swab was...I suggested that full blown Covid could be far worse... Some people


----------



## vickster (21 Dec 2021)

Oh and she was complaining about people not wearing masks and not cleaning their coffee shop table upon leaving...so is clearly highly concerned about catching it (and asked me loads of questions about it when I had in late October). 
Just strange


----------



## KnittyNorah (21 Dec 2021)

vickster said:


> Oh and she was complaining about people not wearing masks and not cleaning their coffee shop table upon leaving...so is clearly highly concerned about catching it (and asked me loads of questions about it when I had in late October).
> Just strange


If she's still asking questions, it means there's still 'a way in' for her to be convinced to get the vaccine. Let's hope it happens before it's too late.


----------



## vickster (21 Dec 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> If she's still asking questions, it means there's still 'a way in' for her to be convinced to get the vaccine. Let's hope it happens before it's too late.


Hopefully. I just find it astonishing that despite her evident concern for her mum, she won’t get jabbed. Must be something else going on.
She works in the same industry as me (healthcare market research) so she can’t be anti medicine/big pharma!


----------



## Arrowfoot (21 Dec 2021)

Had come across some who have underlying medical condition whether real or perceived and afraid to take the vaccine. They are not hooked into the anti vaxx frequency, just unfounded fear. The authorities should target a educational and information program for these people and bring them in. Not aware of any programme for this lot.


----------



## mjr (21 Dec 2021)

vickster said:


> A friend of mine (late 40s, an ex nurse) is unvaccinated (some unfounded fear about blood clots [...]


I think you maybe mean overblown rather than unfounded. We now know more about why the OxAZ vaccine caused clots in a very small number of people: https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view...blood-clots-in-the-oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine — vaccines will be redesigned and improved as a result of this, eventually.


----------



## vickster (21 Dec 2021)

Ok fine. Except there’s now minimal AZ out there so it would be unfounded.
I wonder if she’s taken the pill in the past or might consider HRT in future both of which have a higher associated risk of clots (not to mention Covid itself!)


----------



## IanSmithCSE (21 Dec 2021)

Good afternoon,


SydZ said:


> The suspicion, in the cases I have heard, is that those refusing to be identified are not in the country legally but do want to be vaccinated.
> 
> Unfortunately they cause delays for others by being more difficult to process.


As mentioned either before or on another thread, the big database can't find me.

Yet I have been to three walk in centres, shown my driving licence and have been given an injection within the time it takes the admin person to do a few head scratches and check with a supervisor.

I really get the impression that the walk in centres have a different attitude to well established NHS sites, maybe they have a lot of temp staff who haven't had years of indoctrination and quite possibly more comfortable dealing with the edge cases.

To borrow from https://www.essexcovidvaccine.nhs.u...mber-and-who-are-not-registered-with-a-GP.pdf

_You do not need to be registered with a GP to receive a COVID-19 vaccination, and you do not need an NHS number to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. _
_ You do not need to provide ID to receive a COVID-19 vaccination, although (except for Janssen single dose) you will need to provide enough information to be contacted for your second dose. This does not mean a person has to give their full or legal name or address. _
_No one should be denied or turned away from any site or prevented from booking for these reasons_

There is of course a Gotcha, without an NHS number you can't get a COVID passport as NIMS doesn't support any form of temporary id number.

If you look at https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/coronavirus-outbreak.256913/page-1311 post 19,653 you will see an _Unlinked_ column, which is showing the number of deaths where an NHS number could not be found and passed to NIMS. It may surprise some that such situations exist and sure the numbers are low but at around 0.5% to 1% they are a long way from being effectively zero.

Bye

Ian


----------



## MartinQ (22 Dec 2021)

4th jab https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-59749967

View: https://youtu.be/aaKT2AdJCAc?t=9


----------



## matticus (22 Dec 2021)

When the _Upper Arm Jabbing Technician_ was giving me the usual quiz questions yesterday, I had to admit that I was starting to lose track of how many jabs I'd had! 
I can remember three (and I'll remember that this one was with masks, in the dark, and it was freezing), but I might start to struggle from four onwards ...


----------



## matticus (22 Dec 2021)

MartinQ said:


> View: https://youtu.be/aaKT2AdJCAc?t=9



In all seriousness, that would make part of a good Public Advert for jabs! Or at least use the same tone


----------



## MartinQ (22 Dec 2021)

matticus said:


> In all seriousness, that would make part of a good Public Advert for jabs! Or at least use the same tone


Or if they're unsure

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBSxAAJ_2SI&ab_channel=wungman
I only lasted about 30s.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (22 Dec 2021)

matticus said:


> I can remember three (and I'll remember that this one was with masks, in the dark, and it was freezing), but I might start to struggle from four onwards ...


Log them in the Zoe Covid Study app.
I have logged my vaccines, all lateral and PCRs to date. 
Also, the NHS vaccine passport app will keep a record.


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Dec 2021)

Ajax Bay said:


> 4.9 million booster or third doses delivered in the UK in the past seven days. Wow!


6.2 million booster or third doses delivered in the UK in the past seven days. Even more Wow! (and plaudits to NHS and vaccine organisation and all volunteers). I hope that the over 60s already have a high take up rate (data anywhere anyone?)
The increased protection this'll give (experts suggest the enhancement kicks in days not a fortnight) should allow the UK to get through this without too much more NPIs In England). And Wales and Scotland screwing down will help keep the averages lower.
London's cosmopolitan population is the least vaccinated in the whole country: we might expect cases in the rest of the UK to be less peaky. The rate of increase in hospitalisations there will, if sustained, overwhelm London's hospitals at a time of year when they're already (in normal winters even) under strain. Lump onto that the number of staff off sick/'isolation because in contact with' and we'll be seeing patients transported to the home counties' hospitals next week.


----------



## Buck (24 Dec 2021)

For us, the over 65s with Booster is running at high 80%s

this increases to low 90%s for the over 70s and above.

weakest areas are pregnant women and those with no clinical risk aged 18 to 49 at c32-35%


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Dec 2021)

I wonder what the chances are of an unvaccinated pregnant woman catching Covid current variant is, however careful she is (?home birth planned)? Pretty high I'd have thought. And rationally, do these mothers-to-be think that's a better lower-risk option than the negligible risk of vaccination (assumes no contra-indications to vaccination)? Do they want to risk serious illness during pregnancy? Do they want to nurture the baby while suffering post-COVID effects post partum.
Do all midwives sing from the same NHS-provided carol sheet?


----------



## Buck (24 Dec 2021)

We’ll we know the answer to the last question and that’ll be a resounding no!

There is a real anxiety from expectant mums that the vaccine could be harmful fuelled by inaccurate SM posts and remembering that the majority of these patients will be in the prime age group for SM activity!

this is a good infographic
https://www.npeu.ox.ac.uk/assets/downloads/MBRRACE-UK_Rapid_COVID_19_2021_-__Infographic_v10.pdf


----------



## lazybloke (24 Dec 2021)

If you're too reluctant to take a potentially life-saving vaccine when pregnant, does that fear continue beyond childbirth? Has uptake of MMR and other vaccines dropped?


----------



## midlife (24 Dec 2021)

Mutterings at work this week about jab number 4 coming our way. Will have to wait and see....


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Dec 2021)

Stumbled on this (from October - KeeptalkingGreece) [some precising]
*Anti-vaxxers bribe doctors for “vaccination” with water, end up with the real vaccine*
Mass fake vaccinations have been taking place in dozens of vaccination centres throughout Greece
Bribe = 400 euros, paid by those who do not want to receive the vaccines but want to gain a vaccination certificate which would allow access to several activities and/or avoid mandatory every 3 day testing.
But doctors pocketed the bribe but administered real vaccine and not “water” in order to avoid "getting into trouble".






According to newspaper _tovima_, some 100 to 200 vaccination centre s (2,000 in Greece) and 200-300 doctors and nurses have been involved. Over 100,000 have obtained 'fake' vaccination certificates [Comment: Except they aren't 'fake' are they?]
*Fake Vaccinations with the real thing: it’s complicated*
Can you imagine? Duped anti-vaxxers could have the usual side effects of the vaccine, go to doctors' and find out that they were administered the real thing [Comment: Except they wouldn't find that out.]
On the positive side: they now have antibodies against the coronavirus.
On the negative side, though: they underwent a medical treatment without their consent.
Can they sue the doctors? Yes, if they admit they bribed them with the aim of a fake vaccination certificate.
Legal action? Mmmm?


----------



## cougie uk (24 Dec 2021)

Genius. Nice work Greek doctors.


----------



## Ajax Bay (24 Dec 2021)

Apparently the police in Greece are reportedly not agreeing with all the information published in _tovima_, but it's unclear exactly what they do not agree with. Suspect most likely (apart from a real challenge on 'evidence') the Greek police either don't agree with other occupations taking bribes without sharing a few 'cuts' around; or cuts have been shared around.
The issue of vaccine certificate integrity is sure to blossom across Europe, and even here (after Commons vote - NB this is a practical not a political issue). A sure fire money making opportunity for criminals with low downside for participants.
Will be interesting to see how the mandatory vaccination for UK-wide NHS staff and support workers is finessed as we run up to 1 April.


----------



## presta (26 Dec 2021)

I've just had a text from the NHS telling me to get a booster, over a month after I had it done (Nov 20th).


----------



## KnittyNorah (26 Dec 2021)

presta said:


> I've just had a text from the NHS telling me to get a booster, over a month after I had it done (Nov 20th).



I was just coming on here to say that - after having had my booster on October - 20th? I think - October anyway, so I would be all safely boosted up and ready for the big exhibition at the Harrogate Conference Centre on Nov 17th & 18th, I've just got a text off the NHS, too, telling me to get one ... I wonder if I should phone up 119 and ask to book _another_ one ... after all it's over 2 mo since my last one!


----------



## Oldhippy (26 Dec 2021)

Me too.


----------



## mjr (26 Dec 2021)

midlife said:


> Mutterings at work this week about jab number 4 coming our way. Will have to wait and see....


There will be jab 4. The only question is when. I hope it will be next autumn so vaccine equipment makers can get on delivering jab 1&2 to more countries.


----------



## classic33 (26 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> There will be jab 4. The only question is when. I hope it will be next autumn so vaccine equipment makers can get on delivering jab 1&2 to more countries.


March next year.


----------



## Buck (26 Dec 2021)

The NHS has sent out blanket text messages to all eligible in the hope that any who haven’t had will come forward. 
yes, some who have had will receive a text but I guess they didn’t want to rely on all records being 100% accurate as we know that some admin errors will have occurred.


----------



## Buck (26 Dec 2021)

Second booster are mooted to be 3 months after the first booster but this will depend upon the severity of Omicron.

Boosters are already being planned for next year alongside the flu vaccination programme.


----------



## classic33 (26 Dec 2021)

Buck said:


> The NHS has sent out blanket text messages to all eligible in the hope that any who haven’t had will come forward.
> yes, some who have had will receive a text but I guess they didn’t want to rely on all records being 100% accurate as we know that some admin errors will have occurred.


Seems a lot easier than having folk saying they've not heard anything about their third/booster jab.


----------



## Buck (26 Dec 2021)

More pressing is the need for those who are immuno suppressed to get their third primary dose and then their booster plus preganant women. Too high risk groups where uptake is relatively low a d they will directly benefit from having the vaccine.

I had my 4th dose this week so done for a while !


----------



## Buck (26 Dec 2021)

classic33 said:


> Seems a lot easier than having folk saying they've not heard anything about their third/booster jab.


Totally. Early indications seem to be good uptake. We have seen good upturn in first and second doses under the evergreen offer and not just for boosters.


----------



## Julia9054 (26 Dec 2021)

Buck said:


> The NHS has sent out blanket text messages to all eligible in the hope that any who haven’t had will come forward.
> yes, some who have had will receive a text but I guess they didn’t want to rely on all records being 100% accurate as we know that some admin errors will have occurred.


Everyone in my house (already boosted) got that text today except me!


----------



## Buck (26 Dec 2021)

Texts are sent out in batches (sometimes by NHS number not address!). So not everyone gets them at the same time.
There are many millions of texts being sent out this week.


----------



## IanSmithCSE (27 Dec 2021)

Good morning,

I've had one too and from https://www.gov.uk/government/news/get-boosted-now-text-message-to-go-out-from-boxing-day--2
It seems that the message is not based on vaccine records or lack of records.

In partnership with UK phone networks, the UK Government will send out SMS texts on Boxing Day urging people to get a booster
Seems to suggest not the government sending a file with the phone numbers to be texted but just send to all phones. Given that the number of texts sent daily in the UK is over 200 million, targeted texts would not seem to require any special treatment.

If this is the case I wonder if we will see a super complaint to the ICO for the sending of what is clearly marketing material without any opt out option and it appears also any opt in either.

According to the ICO site _Please note that our helpline and live chat services are closed for the festive period. We will re-open on 4 January 2022 at 9am. _and _Regulators apply their authority within the larger social and economic situation. _

It is not really credible to me to say that many people who have mobile phones will not be aware of the booster programme, so this is not genuine new information it is pure marketing. 

I have to wonder what your "90 year old granny" who is not aware of this plan is going to make of getting a surprise text saying that they need a booster.

Bye

Ian


----------



## Alex321 (27 Dec 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> If this is the case I wonder if we will see a super complaint to the ICO for the sending of what is clearly marketing material without any opt out option and it appears also any opt in either.



We will see nothing because it doesn't come particularly close to fitting the definitions.

I have no idea why you believe it to be "clearly marketing material", when it is (to me) clearly no such thing.


----------



## Buck (27 Dec 2021)

The NHS / Government are able to transmit these messages under emergency regulations “in the interest of the country” (my words). 
Opt in is not a requirement.


----------



## IanSmithCSE (27 Dec 2021)

Good morning,


Alex321 said:


> We will see nothing because it doesn't come particularly close to fitting the definitions.
> 
> I have no idea why you believe it to be "clearly marketing material", when it is (to me) clearly no such thing.





Buck said:


> The NHS / Government are able to transmit these messages under emergency regulations “in the interest of the country” (my words).
> Opt in is not a requirement.


It fits the category of marketing material as

The first paragraph on https://www.gov.uk/government/news/get-boosted-now-text-message-to-go-out-from-boxing-day--2 clearly says so. _As part of the national Get Boosted Now campaign to protect against Omicron, a text will be sent out from Boxing Day reminding people to get jabbed. _
Remember that boosters are entirely optional.

It appears to be targeted at everyone regardless of whether or not they have had their booster, information that is readily available to the NHS. It is true that the NHS may not know that a particular mobile is tied to a particular patient for whom they have a record, but that is their problem and they do know that some mobile phone numbers are tied to people who have had boosters.
It contains no information that a person who has a mobile phone is not likely to be already aware of, it is simply an encouragement to an action.
It is not an emergency by any sensible definition, I truly don't believe that there are many people capable of receiving these texts that are not aware of the option to receive a booster, so the only purpose can be to nag those who are obeying the law but not doing what the government wants.
I would accept that it is not marketing material if

The majority, or possibly a significant number, of people were unaware of the option to have a booster.
It was a legal requirement and it was targeted at those who had not complied.
IF you don't believe that it is marketing material what do you believe that it is, it is clearly not

New information to any but a very, very, very tiny portion of mobile phone users.
A reminder for an appointment that the recipient had arranged
A reminder to arrange an appointment as it has been sent to everyone including those not eligible for an appointment including
This who are not in the time window, having either recently had a booster or 1st or 2nd dose
Those for whom a vaccine is inappropriate for medical reasons
Those who have chosen not to have an original vaccine or a booster

Something else
Most bad things start of with something not bad, the whole spam regulations came into being because the original idea of collecting customer email addresses and occasionally sending customers genuinely useful information became bombard and accept 1 in 1,000 finding it useful.

There was no new information in these texts, it was spam.

For clarity I have had 2 Moderna and 1 Pfizer booster but am fully supportive of _I choose not to have one brigade. _COVID seems to have changed into a religion, whatever you do in its name is okay and anyone who suggests otherwise is a disbeliever who should be burnt at the stake.

Bye

Ian


----------



## newfhouse (27 Dec 2021)

Of all the things to get upset about around the pandemic response, receiving an occasional SMS isn’t one of them. Get a grip.


----------



## Mo1959 (27 Dec 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> For clarity I have had 2 Moderna and 1 Pfizer booster but am fully supportive of _I choose not to have one brigade. _COVID seems to have changed into a religion, whatever you do in its name is okay and anyone who suggests otherwise is a disbeliever who should be burnt at the stake.


Unless someone has been living as a hermit with no contact with the outside world it seems a bit daft to me. Will the government be paying all the mobile firms for this do you think?


----------



## Buck (27 Dec 2021)

@IanSmithCSE

the overall response to the Covid pandemic has emergency legislation attached to it and within this it gives the ability to communicate without consent. This is what is being used here.
The act of promoting the booster campaign itself is not an emergency but is contained within the overall legislation which enables this.

ETA :https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/emergency-powers


----------



## fossyant (27 Dec 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> It is not really credible to me to say that many people who have mobile phones will not be aware of the booster programme, so this is not genuine new information it is pure marketing.



Take your stupid conspiracy theories somewhere else FFS.


----------



## classic33 (27 Dec 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good morning,
> 
> 
> It fits the category of marketing material as
> ...


Marketing means having something to sell, what are they selling?


----------



## Alex321 (27 Dec 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good morning,
> 
> 
> It fits the category of marketing material as


No it doesn't.

Nothing you have added has anything to do with "marketing".


> The first paragraph on https://www.gov.uk/government/news/get-boosted-now-text-message-to-go-out-from-boxing-day--2 clearly says so. _As part of the national Get Boosted Now campaign to protect against Omicron, a text will be sent out from Boxing Day reminding people to get jabbed. _
> Remember that boosters are entirely optional.
> 
> It appears to be targeted at everyone regardless of whether or not they have had their booster, information that is readily available to the NHS. It is true that the NHS may not know that a particular mobile is tied to a particular patient for whom they have a record, but that is their problem and they do know that some mobile phone numbers are tied to people who have had boosters.
> ...




All perfectly correct, but nothing to do with marketing.



> I would accept that it is not marketing material if
> 
> The majority, or possibly a significant number, of people were unaware of the option to have a booster.
> It was a legal requirement and it was targeted at those who had not complied.
> IF you don't believe that it is marketing material what do you believe that it is,


Public Information. Delivered by SMS rather than TV broadcast.

You can believe it to be "marketing" all you like, but there is no chance whagsoever the ICO will agree.


----------



## Alex321 (27 Dec 2021)

fossyant said:


> Take your stupid conspiracy theories somewhere else FFS.


While I disagre completely with what be is saying, it isn't in any way a "conspiracy theory".


----------



## Mo1959 (27 Dec 2021)

fossyant said:


> Take your stupid conspiracy theories somewhere else FFS.


Why is every comment that remotely criticises the vaccine a conspiracy theory? Get a grip.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (27 Dec 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> Why is every comment that remotely criticises the vaccine a conspiracy theory? Get a grip.


I think @fossyant was joking there.
I got the text too: for a targeted "marketing" campaign it seems to me a bit unprofessional, like Ian said, spam like.
Yes, I was already treble jabbed when I got the text.
Of course, like said upthread, it's legal for the government to send out such messages: in this case, I feel the campaign makes the government look desperate for everybody to have the booster.
Could be the booster is really the answer to the latest Coronavirus variant, or could be that the government has so many vaccines going out of date, may as well use them? 
I have accepted any jab that's come my way  because, every rare time I'm not well (maybe once in a decade), it has always had to do with my respiratory apparatus.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Dec 2021)

Buck said:


> Second booster are mooted to be 3 months after the first booster but this will depend upon the severity of Omicron.
> 
> Boosters are already being planned for next year alongside the flu vaccination programme.



Mooted by whom?


----------



## Buck (27 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Mooted by whom?


NHSE


----------



## Buck (27 Dec 2021)

Pat "5mph" said:


> I think @fossyant was joking there.
> I got the text too: for a targeted "marketing" campaign it seems to me a bit unprofessional, like Ian said, spam like.
> Yes, I was already treble jabbed when I got the text.
> Of course, like said upthread, it's legal for the government to send out such messages: in this case, I feel the campaign makes the government look desperate for everybody to have the booster.
> ...



vaccines aren’t going out of date any time soon They are in the freezer and only defrosted for demand. 
mid they are unused/not needed then they will be donated to other countries via COVAX


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Dec 2021)

IanSmithCSE said:


> It is not really credible to me to say that many people who have mobile phones will not be aware of the booster programme, so this is not genuine new information it is pure marketing.



It is however credible that people aware of the booster program, but have not bothered so far, may be prompted into action by the text.

The winter flu vaccine programme was brought down to 50 and above last winter. I wasn’t going to bother. I got a text inviting me, decided what the hell, and went and got jabbed. Without the text I’d probably have not got round to it.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Dec 2021)

Buck said:


> NHSE



Haven’t seen anything on their website other than a fourth for immuno compromised. Perhaps you can provide a link? The history of vaccines says that a single booster (after first couple) is usually enough to give long lasting immunity.


----------



## fossyant (27 Dec 2021)

Pat "5mph" said:


> I think @fossyant was joking there.
> I got the text too: for a targeted "marketing" campaign it seems to me a bit unprofessional, like Ian said, spam like.
> Yes, I was already treble jabbed when I got the text.



 gave it away.  

It's only like the 'public service announcement' going out on terrestrial TV about getting boosted. Thing is, most youngsters don't watch terrestrial TV, so next best is a text coming direct from the srvie provider to all phones. Simple to do. I got my text this morning - already vaxxed.


----------



## PaulSB (27 Dec 2021)

Pat "5mph" said:


> I think @fossyant was joking there.
> 
> *Could be the booster is really the answer to the latest Coronavirus variant*,


As one who is jabbed and boosted and currently isolating I'm happy the vaccines have worked for me. My routine LFT was positive last Tuesday, a PCR the same day confirmed this, my first "get out of jail" LFT this morning was positive. During the past six days I've had a soar throat for 48 hours, cough, runny nose and sneezing yet at no point have I felt in anyway unwell. Bizarre? Yes. True? Yes.

I had a terrible cold 5-6 weeks ago which put me in bed for three days, my wife for 4 days, and I wasn't fully recovered when I tested positive. That cold was awful, Covid hasn't made me feel at all unwell. It has to be the vaccine.


----------



## Buck (27 Dec 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Haven’t seen anything on their website other than a fourth for immuno compromised. Perhaps you can provide a link? The history of vaccines says that a single booster (after first couple) is usually enough to give long lasting the immunity.



It’s not in the public domain as yet so nothing to quote/link to hence me saying mooted. Being talked about on the system calls and we are looking at how we might respond to such an ask.

Personally, I think a lot will depend on the infection and hospitalisation rates following the booster campaign.

JCVI will also make their recommendations formally to the NHS once they have been determined.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Dec 2021)

Buck said:


> It’s not in the public domain as yet so nothing to quote/link to hence me saying mooted. Being talked about on the system calls and we are looking at how we might respond to such an ask.
> 
> Personally, I think a lot will depend on the infection and hospitalisation rates following the booster campaign.
> 
> JCVI will also make their recommendations formally to the NHS once they have been determined.



Sounds like it’s just planning for different scenarios rather than mooted. Part of normal planning.


----------



## Buck (27 Dec 2021)

Moot

_verb_
past tense: *mooted*; past participle: *mooted*

raise (a question or topic) for discussion; suggest (an idea or possibility).


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Dec 2021)

Buck said:


> Moot
> 
> _verb_
> past tense: *mooted*; past participle: *mooted*
> ...



Exactly so not of significance either way. Certainly not something to present in public as likely to happen or considered probable.


----------



## Buck (27 Dec 2021)

I’m not going to get into a circular debate on here but it is being discussed hence the word _mooted_ (aka debated/discussed) but yes, all options are available at this present time as nobody knows what the next few weeks will bring.

You could argue nothing has significance until it actually happens. The vast majority of posts are a replay of people’s experiences, thoughts and views sprinkled with information from various sources.

It wasn’t a statement of fact In that it WILL happen but that it is now being given serious consideration based on the waning levels of immunity and the desire to keep the population immunity at its highest possible levels.

I know what we have been told, asked to do and are doing. I guess only time will tell.


----------



## KnittyNorah (27 Dec 2021)

Thoughts on Dr Clive Dix's (a former head of the vaccine taskforce ) statement that he believes the AZ vaccine is behind the UK's lower death rates due to lasting cellular immunity, which is not as much a feature of mRNA vaccines? Yahoo link here, also in Independent yesterday. Doubtless elsewhere, too.


----------



## postman (27 Dec 2021)

I am pleased that more people are having jabs and boostersBut the nhs is more than just for covid,I wonder how many people like me are sliding down a Very long waiting list ladder.My hydrocele op has been cancelled and I am still waiting for my mri scan results of my prostate.There are illnesses other than covid and we would like our treatment.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Dec 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> Thoughts on Dr Clive Dix's (a former head of the vaccine taskforce ) statement that he believes the AZ vaccine is behind the UK's lower death rates due to lasting cellular immunity, which is not as much a feature of mRNA vaccines? Yahoo link here, also in Independent yesterday. Doubtless elsewhere, too.



Yes saw that and makes sense


----------



## classic33 (27 Dec 2021)

postman said:


> I am pleased that more people are having jabs and boostersBut the nhs is more than just for covid,I wonder how many people like me are sliding down a Very long waiting list ladder.My hydrocele op has been cancelled and I am still waiting for my mri scan results of my prostate.There are illnesses other than covid and we would like our treatment.


We'll get back on the list sooner rather than later.


----------



## Julia9054 (27 Dec 2021)

postman said:


> I am pleased that more people are having jabs and boostersBut the nhs is more than just for covid,I wonder how many people like me are sliding down a Very long waiting list ladder.My hydrocele op has been cancelled and I am still waiting for my mri scan results of my prostate.There are illnesses other than covid and we would like our treatment.


Unfortunately, less due to covid patients in hospital and more due to staff at home with covid those waiting lists are just going to get longer.


----------



## DaveReading (27 Dec 2021)

classic33 said:


> We'll get back on the list sooner rather than later.



Sadly, the capacity of waiting lists is infinite. It's not whether you can get on it that matters, it's how quickly you move up it.


----------



## classic33 (27 Dec 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Sadly, the capacity of waiting lists is infinite. It's not whether you can get on it that matters, it's how quickly you move up it.


I know that first part. I've had no routine appointments since late November 19. 
The routinely carried out tests have been ceasing since last March, including one operation I'd been waiting 18 months for. And I believe that one specialist I was under fell victim to covid-19. If that's the case their workload will be passed onto others.

The point is the system will catch up, when is another matter beyond anyone's control at present. I'm willing to accepted that, as I'm one person with no medical skills, unlike those that are treating people in hospitals around the country.


----------



## IanSmithCSE (28 Dec 2021)

Good evening,

I have posted a reply to my recent posts,

https://naca.cyclechat.net/threads/continuation-of-covid-vaccine-post-from-the-main-site.142/

as this clearly moves into the area that is both off topic and outside of CycleChat's purpose.

Bye

Ian


----------



## mjr (28 Dec 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Sadly, the capacity of waiting lists is infinite. It's not whether you can get on it that matters, it's how quickly you move up it.


It is both. I was booted off one waiting list last week (merry xmas(!)) for an extremely dodgy reason, so I suspect the backlog to be far worse in reality than the official reports which are already pretty bad.


----------



## Julia9054 (30 Dec 2021)

Quick pcr test question 
If I have a pcr test that I sent for a few weeks ago by post but didn't use, is there anything in the system to stop me using it in the coming weeks should I need to?


----------



## newfhouse (30 Dec 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Quick pcr test question
> If I have a pcr test that I sent for a few weeks ago by post but didn't use, is there anything in the system to stop me using it in the coming weeks should I need to?


My wife did just that on Monday and got her result in the normal way. It wasn’t a pre-registered test kit but I can’t see it mattering either way.


----------



## PaulSB (30 Dec 2021)

Julia9054 said:


> Quick pcr test question
> If I have a pcr test that I sent for a few weeks ago by post but didn't use, is there anything in the system to stop me using it in the coming weeks should I need to?


We don't have PCR kits in the house but do have LFT kits. The LFT kits have a use by date on both the outer and inner packaging. I would suggest the PCR kits will have the same and provided yours is in date you can use it. Our LFT kits have use by date of late October 2023. I'm hoping not to need them by then!!


----------



## Julia9054 (30 Dec 2021)

newfhouse said:


> My wife did just that on Monday and got her result in the normal way. It wasn’t a pre-registered test kit but I can’t see it mattering either way.





PaulSB said:


> We don't have PCR kits in the house but do have LFT kits. The LFT kits have a use by date on both the outer and inner packaging. I would suggest the PCR kits will have the same and provided yours is in date you can use it. Our LFT kits have use by date of late October 2023. I'm hoping not to need them by then!!


Thanks. It was one I ordered when I had cold symptoms at the end of October because the nearest drive through appointment was 20 miles away. By the time it arrived, my symptoms had gone. I have tons of LFTs because i get them issued at work so since it was half term and I wasn’t going anywhere I just did an LFT test every day and didn’t bother with the pcr. “The system” sent me one text reminder to use it. 
I guess, as long as I check the use by date, it’s a useful thing to hang on to given the patchy availability at the moment.


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (30 Dec 2021)

We have about 7-8 boxes of LFT tests around the house - a lot of the time there are people giving them out in Tesco when I go shopping
Some of the people are quite - well not quite insistent - just difficult to refuse at times
and I was worried that we would run out over Christamas if they became rare

so I grabbed a couple of boxes - and they built up a bit

ALl the family know we have spares so if they need them I will take a box round - only person so far has been the step-son's mother-in-law that "didn't know you could get them'
but she got some from a Pharmacy when we suggested it and says she tested negative so I didn't need to give her any


----------



## mjr (30 Dec 2021)

ebikeerwidnes said:


> We have about 7-8 boxes of LFT tests around the house - [...]


Some local GP surgeries here have been asking anyone with surplus sealed boxes of tests to give them to the surgeries because they're not expecting restock until next Wednesday. Might be worth checking if your local GPs have enough?


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (30 Dec 2021)

mjr said:


> Some local GP surgeries here have been asking anyone with surplus sealed boxes of tests to give them to the surgeries because they're not expecting restock until next Wednesday. Might be worth checking if your local GPs have enough?


Good idea - I'll give them a ring tomorrow


----------



## mjr (30 Dec 2021)

ebikeerwidnes said:


> Good idea - I'll give them a ring tomorrow


Checking their website or social media might find an appeal without tying up the phone.


----------



## Buck (30 Dec 2021)

SydZ said:


> I got my booster 3 months and 3 days ago.



me too. Had my 4th jab last week. Masses of people having their boosters but nice to see a lot of 1st, 2nd and 3rd primary’s coming through.


----------



## Blue Hills (30 Dec 2021)

Buck said:


> me too. Had my 4th jab last week. Masses of people having their boosters but nice to see a lot of 1st, 2nd and 3rd primary’s coming through.


I didn't know they were doing 4th jabs yet.
?


----------



## PaulSB (30 Dec 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> I didn't know they were doing 4th jabs yet.
> ?


As I understand it people with particular vulnerabilities have been getting a fourth dose for a while now.

A friend, retired midwife, has been working the vaccine centres for a year. She says they're gearing up for a second general booster in March.

No evidence just a chat with a friend.


----------



## classic33 (30 Dec 2021)

PaulSB said:


> As I understand it people with particular vulnerabilities have been getting a fourth dose for a while now.
> 
> A friend, retired midwife, has been working the vaccine centres for a year. She says they're gearing up for a second general booster in March.
> 
> No evidence just a chat with a friend.





classic33 said:


> March next year.


Got that from someone who already has a date for their fourth jab.


----------



## vickster (30 Dec 2021)

ECV (lymphoma) friend expects her 4th jab in March (she’s doing well to avoid Covid so far having seen me the day before I tested positive and her son who brought it back recently from uni)


----------



## Buck (31 Dec 2021)

Blue Hills said:


> I didn't know they were doing 4th jabs yet.
> ?



i need 3 primary doses (due to a medical condition/medication) and the 4th was my booster.


----------



## Johnno260 (7 Jan 2022)

Got boosted the other day, sore arm and a little under the weather. 

Nurses spent a little more time with me as I’m still waiting for an ECG and bloods for heart palpitations.


----------



## PK99 (8 Jan 2022)

Apparently, according to LA email, I will shortly be eligible for 4th jab. Immuno compromised because of CML, my 3rd dose was Third Primary. From 19th Jan I can get a booster.


----------

