COVID Vaccine !

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

rualexander

Legendary Member
.....
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.......

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

Norven Mankey
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

Legendary Member
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.
 

SpokeyDokey

68, & my GP says I will officially be old at 70!
Moderator

BoldonLad

Not part of the Elite
Location
South Tyneside
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.

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 ;) ).
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R
Good afternoon,

....... 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.
 
Last edited:

the snail

Guru
Location
Chippenham
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.
 
Good evening,

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>
 
Last edited:

mjr

Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
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! :cursing:
 

SpokeyDokey

68, & my GP says I will officially be old at 70!
Moderator
He's changed from when he was knocking houses down, hasn't he?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvtPglw5ftk



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! :cursing:



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.
 
Top Bottom