Vaccine

stoneroses19

SELR_addicks said:

So of the two major vaccines in circulation currently: The Oxford-Astrazeneca and the Pfizer, has it been determined yet which one is deemed 'better' due to the higher rates of protection? They aren't identical jabs so surely one has to be better than the other right? 

I understand it can't run as a mainstream story because people would turn against one of the jabs in favour of the other, when either one is better than nothing of course. 

If so, will people be able to choose in the future which of the multiple of vaccines are available to get, or is it simply pot luck as to whether you get the 'better' vaccine? 

If there is even one that’s better than the other, I hope it’s not mentioned in public/media, as that would be a very stressful situation for those who were wary of the vaccine already, and then to find out they received an inferior vaccine. 

Redrobo

Jon_CAFC_ said:

Has any one under 64 with underlying conditions been able to book via the nhs website - is it location specific linked to your nhs number 

 My understanding is that you are unable to book via the website until your group is announced. It felt like a National system as you can choose which location you want. I didn’t have a nhs number so it’s not linked to that.
I think everyone on here that got it early were invited by their GP. Hopefully you will get yours very soon. Good luck🤞 

ShootersHillGuru

SELR_addicks said:

So of the two major vaccines in circulation currently: The Oxford-Astrazeneca and the Pfizer, has it been determined yet which one is deemed 'better' due to the higher rates of protection? They aren't identical jabs so surely one has to be better than the other right? 

I understand it can't run as a mainstream story because people would turn against one of the jabs in favour of the other, when either one is better than nothing of course. 

If so, will people be able to choose in the future which of the multiple of vaccines are available to get, or is it simply pot luck as to whether you get the 'better' vaccine? 

I highly recommend you watch this video. Data now starting to build for Pfizer vaccine and at present less for AZ but building. Really. It’s fabulous news and real world data 


https://youtu.be/e-ApgJMVkM0

clive

Jon_CAFC_ said:

Has any one under 64 with underlying conditions been able to book via the nhs website - is it location specific linked to your nhs number 

You can book your vaccination appointments online if any of the following apply:

• you are aged 64 or over
• you have previously received a letter saying you are at high risk from coronavirus (clinically extremely vulnerable)
• you are an eligible frontline health worker
• you are an eligible frontline social care worker
• you are eligible for Carer's Allowance – find out more about Carer's Allowance on GOV.UK

You can book appointments at a larger vaccination centre or a pharmacy that provides COVID-19 vaccinations.

You do not need to wait to be contacted by the NHS.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-vaccine/

Redrobo

No argument there Shooters Hill, Very impressive.

killerandflash

I would also be interested in the comparative effectiveness of the Russian and Chinese vaccines. Yes I'm highly suspicious of their governments BUT that doesn't mean that they couldn't produce effective vaccines as well. 

After all countries like Singapore are planning to use the Chinese Sinovac vaccine as well as western ones

Redrobo

killerandflash said:

I would also be interested in the comparative effectiveness of the Russian and Chinese vaccines. Yes I'm highly suspicious of their governments BUT that doesn't mean that they couldn't produce effective vaccines as well. 

After all countries like Singapore are planning to use the Chinese Sinovac vaccine as well as western ones

The Sputnik vaccine appears to be as effective as anything else out there and no surprise that countries with a medical infrastructure have developed their own. The Sputnik is very similar to the Oxford with similar results after one dose and has been evaluated and validated by the Lancet.

Leroy Ambrose

Redrobo said:

killerandflash said:

I would also be interested in the comparative effectiveness of the Russian and Chinese vaccines. Yes I'm highly suspicious of their governments BUT that doesn't mean that they couldn't produce effective vaccines as well. 

After all countries like Singapore are planning to use the Chinese Sinovac vaccine as well as western ones

The Sputnik vaccine appears to be as effective as anything else out there and no surprise that countries with a medical infrastructure have developed their own. The Sputnik is very similar to the Oxford with similar results after one dose and has been evaluated and validated by the Lancet.

Lets not kick that wasps next again 🤣

cafcnick1992

Redrobo said:

killerandflash said:

I would also be interested in the comparative effectiveness of the Russian and Chinese vaccines. Yes I'm highly suspicious of their governments BUT that doesn't mean that they couldn't produce effective vaccines as well. 

After all countries like Singapore are planning to use the Chinese Sinovac vaccine as well as western ones

The Sputnik vaccine appears to be as effective as anything else out there and no surprise that countries with a medical infrastructure have developed their own. The Sputnik is very similar to the Oxford with similar results after one dose and has been evaluated and validated by the Lancet.

Probably stolen and renamed, that's why.

JamesSeed

.

JamesSeed

Redrobo said:

Arsenetatters said:

Redrobo said:

Arsenetatters said:

Well I am fuming. I should be in group 6 and thought I'd better check as my surgery are bloody useless. I am in group 8. I have just steamed up there and handed in a letter to the doctor to get it changed. I had already spoken to my new GP by phone and he agreed I should be in group 6. That was months ago. No wonder they have a sign up saying 'any abuse will see you struck off our list'.

So not due yet.

Well it would be if I was put in the correct group. I have one of the health problems listed in the group 6 but the doctor says computer says group 8. I've asked him to change it but he says when he tries to it comes back as group 8 so he cant't do anything.

They are doing group 5 now which is over 65’s. 

Group 6 is adults 16 to 65 in an at risk group, and they come before the over 60’s. You are very close, and you maybe lucky and get one.

Friends in the their mid fifties were vaccinated three weeks ago. No underlying health conditions. They live in Wimbledon. 

bolloxbolder

JamesSeed said:

Redrobo said:

Arsenetatters said:

Redrobo said:

Arsenetatters said:

Well I am fuming. I should be in group 6 and thought I'd better check as my surgery are bloody useless. I am in group 8. I have just steamed up there and handed in a letter to the doctor to get it changed. I had already spoken to my new GP by phone and he agreed I should be in group 6. That was months ago. No wonder they have a sign up saying 'any abuse will see you struck off our list'.

So not due yet.

Well it would be if I was put in the correct group. I have one of the health problems listed in the group 6 but the doctor says computer says group 8. I've asked him to change it but he says when he tries to it comes back as group 8 so he cant't do anything.

They are doing group 5 now which is over 65’s. 

Group 6 is adults 16 to 65 in an at risk group, and they come before the over 60’s. You are very close, and you maybe lucky and get one.

Friends in the their mid fifties were vaccinated three weeks ago. No underlying health conditions. They live in Wimbledon. 

Yes, this annoyingly appears to be the case everywhere. A friend in York in her 50s was vaccinated 3 weeks ago.

He doesn't seem to grasp that argument and continues to trot out the government official line, even though clearly it is not happening. 

JamesSeed

SELR_addicks said:

So of the two major vaccines in circulation currently: The Oxford-Astrazeneca and the Pfizer, has it been determined yet which one is deemed 'better' due to the higher rates of protection? They aren't identical jabs so surely one has to be better than the other right? 

I understand it can't run as a mainstream story because people would turn against one of the jabs in favour of the other, when either one is better than nothing of course. 

If so, will people be able to choose in the future which of the multiple of vaccines are available to get, or is it simply pot luck as to whether you get the 'better' vaccine? 

That’s not how it works. You can’t tell journalists not to run with a story. If it’s a genuine story, it’ll get out, and if something was being covered up, that’d get out too. So if the Pfizer vaccine was far more effective that the AZ, for example, we’d know all about it. 

I believe it’s thought they’re roughly as effective as each other. 

The new J&J vaccine developed in the US is supposed to be a little less effective, although if you do still catch covid you only get very mild symptoms. 

AFKABartram

bolloxbolder said:

JamesSeed said:

Redrobo said:

Arsenetatters said:

Redrobo said:

Arsenetatters said:

Well I am fuming. I should be in group 6 and thought I'd better check as my surgery are bloody useless. I am in group 8. I have just steamed up there and handed in a letter to the doctor to get it changed. I had already spoken to my new GP by phone and he agreed I should be in group 6. That was months ago. No wonder they have a sign up saying 'any abuse will see you struck off our list'.

So not due yet.

Well it would be if I was put in the correct group. I have one of the health problems listed in the group 6 but the doctor says computer says group 8. I've asked him to change it but he says when he tries to it comes back as group 8 so he cant't do anything.

They are doing group 5 now which is over 65’s. 

Group 6 is adults 16 to 65 in an at risk group, and they come before the over 60’s. You are very close, and you maybe lucky and get one.

Friends in the their mid fifties were vaccinated three weeks ago. No underlying health conditions. They live in Wimbledon. 

Yes, this annoyingly appears to be the case everywhere. A friend in York in her 50s was vaccinated 3 weeks ago.

He doesn't seem to grasp that argument and continues to trot out the government official line, even though clearly it is not happening. 

Wouldn’t say it’s annoying, everyone has to be done and the quicker the better. If centres and areas have spare slots I’d rather they utilise them than stay empty due to arbitrary category bandings. My advice would be personally active in trying to get it progressed rather than waiting for the contact. Go along or contact vaccinations centres and enquire about cancellations etc 

clive

I am in the over 60 category, live in Abbey Wood & am waiting for a jab, it appears that some GP's are working through their lists quickly as they get rewarded financially for each jab, as somebody who rarely visits my GP i'm not expecting to be contacted by his practice & will book online,this should be possible in the next week or two,hopefully.

clive

Kent vaccine update

Large vaccination centres and pharmacy run services Booked through the national booking service online or call 119. You do not need to wait to be contacted if any of the following apply:	GP led vaccination services Local services will contact people and invite them directly when clinics are available.
People aged 64 or over. (People aged 60+ are expected to be receiving letters from the national booking service in the next few days).	People aged 16-64 with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk from coronavirus. Full list of conditions from page 10 of this government guidance.
Previously received a letter saying you are at high risk from coronavirus (Clinically Extremely Vulnerable)and were asked to shield.	Carers not eligible for carer’s allowance but who are the main carer of an elderly or disabled person whose welfare may be at risk if the carer falls ill. You will need to be registered as a carer with your GP practice before you will be invited.
People who have been added to the extremely vulnerable list and asked to shield.
Carers eligible for carer’s allowance.
Eligible frontline healthcare workers.
Eligible frontline social care workers. https://www.kentandmedwayccg.nhs.uk/news-and-events/news/covid-19-vaccine-update-25-feb-2021

killerandflash

clive said:

I am in the over 60 category, live in Abbey Wood & am waiting for a jab, it appears that some GP's are working through their lists quickly as they get rewarded financially for each jab, as somebody who rarely visits my GP i'm not expecting to be contacted by his practice & will book online,this should be possible in the next week or two,hopefully.

I wonder if I was invited for a vaccine earlier than I was expecting because I had a flu jab at my GP practice in December

clive

killerandflash said:

clive said:

I am in the over 60 category, live in Abbey Wood & am waiting for a jab, it appears that some GP's are working through their lists quickly as they get rewarded financially for each jab, as somebody who rarely visits my GP i'm not expecting to be contacted by his practice & will book online,this should be possible in the next week or two,hopefully.

I wonder if I was invited for a vaccine earlier than I was expecting because I had a flu jab at my GP practice in December

I received a flu jab from my local pharmacy after receiving a letter from the National NHS booking office, a lot of people seem to be contacted by their GP for the flu jab.

stevexreeve

Redrobo said:

SELR_addicks said:

So of the two major vaccines in circulation currently: The Oxford-Astrazeneca and the Pfizer, has it been determined yet which one is deemed 'better' due to the higher rates of protection? They aren't identical jabs so surely one has to be better than the other right? 

I understand it can't run as a mainstream story because people would turn against one of the jabs in favour of the other, when either one is better than nothing of course. 

If so, will people be able to choose in the future which of the multiple of vaccines are available to get, or is it simply pot luck as to whether you get the 'better' vaccine? 

Not much to choose between the two - at the moment, but the Pfizer should be easier to tweak to counter mutations. 

Mixing vaccines is likely to prove to provide greater protection which will be an interesting debate.
I see Europe have managed to vaccinate just 4% so far, and expect to vaccinate 70% by the end of September. Pathetic really.
I have forgotten the ladies name that was in charge of ordering in all the vaccines, but she deserves recognition. Outstanding work. 

Try hard not to comment about Covid. It can be very dangerous - I'll be frightened to open this thread now for a few weeks!

But it seems to me Europe has at least made some effort to ensure that the vaccine is spread around the continent. If Europe had tried to order vaccine for 450 million people they would never have got it.
Germany and France could have ordered 100 million for their own populations. But that would have stuffed everybody else including Britain.

Perhaps the British "Me first  -  fuck everybody else - winner takes all in this game" attitude will come back to bite us when we realise that vaccinating everyone in one area first may not actually be the best approach to the problem. We'll be complaining about unvaccinated people from smaller countries spreading the virus.

Having said that I can see that we've messed this up so much that we probably are a special case in desperate need of the vaccine first.

ShootersHillGuru

stevexreeve said:

Redrobo said:

SELR_addicks said:

So of the two major vaccines in circulation currently: The Oxford-Astrazeneca and the Pfizer, has it been determined yet which one is deemed 'better' due to the higher rates of protection? They aren't identical jabs so surely one has to be better than the other right? 

I understand it can't run as a mainstream story because people would turn against one of the jabs in favour of the other, when either one is better than nothing of course. 

If so, will people be able to choose in the future which of the multiple of vaccines are available to get, or is it simply pot luck as to whether you get the 'better' vaccine? 

Not much to choose between the two - at the moment, but the Pfizer should be easier to tweak to counter mutations. 

Mixing vaccines is likely to prove to provide greater protection which will be an interesting debate.
I see Europe have managed to vaccinate just 4% so far, and expect to vaccinate 70% by the end of September. Pathetic really.
I have forgotten the ladies name that was in charge of ordering in all the vaccines, but she deserves recognition. Outstanding work. 

Try hard not to comment about Covid. It can be very dangerous - I'll be frightened to open this thread now for a few weeks!

But it seems to me Europe has at least made some effort to ensure that the vaccine is spread around the continent. If Europe had tried to order vaccine for 450 million people they would never have got it.
Germany and France could have ordered 100 million for their own populations. But that would have stuffed everybody else including Britain.

Perhaps the British "Me first  -  fuck everybody else - winner takes all in this game" attitude will come back to bite us when we realise that vaccinating everyone in one area first may not actually be the best approach to the problem. We'll be complaining about unvaccinated people from smaller countries spreading the virus.

Having said that I can see that we've messed this up so much that we probably are a special case in desperate need of the vaccine first.

Don’t think I can find a single thing I can agree with in that post. Perhaps I’m not understanding.

bobmunro

stevexreeve said:

Redrobo said:

SELR_addicks said:

So of the two major vaccines in circulation currently: The Oxford-Astrazeneca and the Pfizer, has it been determined yet which one is deemed 'better' due to the higher rates of protection? They aren't identical jabs so surely one has to be better than the other right? 

I understand it can't run as a mainstream story because people would turn against one of the jabs in favour of the other, when either one is better than nothing of course. 

If so, will people be able to choose in the future which of the multiple of vaccines are available to get, or is it simply pot luck as to whether you get the 'better' vaccine? 

Not much to choose between the two - at the moment, but the Pfizer should be easier to tweak to counter mutations. 

Mixing vaccines is likely to prove to provide greater protection which will be an interesting debate.
I see Europe have managed to vaccinate just 4% so far, and expect to vaccinate 70% by the end of September. Pathetic really.
I have forgotten the ladies name that was in charge of ordering in all the vaccines, but she deserves recognition. Outstanding work. 

Try hard not to comment about Covid. It can be very dangerous - I'll be frightened to open this thread now for a few weeks!

But it seems to me Europe has at least made some effort to ensure that the vaccine is spread around the continent. If Europe had tried to order vaccine for 450 million people they would never have got it.
Germany and France could have ordered 100 million for their own populations. But that would have stuffed everybody else including Britain.

Perhaps the British "Me first  -  fuck everybody else - winner takes all in this game" attitude will come back to bite us when we realise that vaccinating everyone in one area first may not actually be the best approach to the problem. We'll be complaining about unvaccinated people from smaller countries spreading the virus.

Having said that I can see that we've messed this up so much that we probably are a special case in desperate need of the vaccine first.

Up to December last year the UK was the biggest single donor to Covax - the US and Germany have since pledged more.

Hardly the behaviour of a country that takes the view "Me first  -  fuck everybody else - winner takes all in this game".

stoneroses19

stevexreeve said:

Redrobo said:

SELR_addicks said:

So of the two major vaccines in circulation currently: The Oxford-Astrazeneca and the Pfizer, has it been determined yet which one is deemed 'better' due to the higher rates of protection? They aren't identical jabs so surely one has to be better than the other right? 

I understand it can't run as a mainstream story because people would turn against one of the jabs in favour of the other, when either one is better than nothing of course. 

If so, will people be able to choose in the future which of the multiple of vaccines are available to get, or is it simply pot luck as to whether you get the 'better' vaccine? 

Not much to choose between the two - at the moment, but the Pfizer should be easier to tweak to counter mutations. 

Mixing vaccines is likely to prove to provide greater protection which will be an interesting debate.
I see Europe have managed to vaccinate just 4% so far, and expect to vaccinate 70% by the end of September. Pathetic really.
I have forgotten the ladies name that was in charge of ordering in all the vaccines, but she deserves recognition. Outstanding work. 

Try hard not to comment about Covid. It can be very dangerous - I'll be frightened to open this thread now for a few weeks!

But it seems to me Europe has at least made some effort to ensure that the vaccine is spread around the continent. If Europe had tried to order vaccine for 450 million people they would never have got it.
Germany and France could have ordered 100 million for their own populations. But that would have stuffed everybody else including Britain.

Perhaps the British "Me first  -  fuck everybody else - winner takes all in this game" attitude will come back to bite us when we realise that vaccinating everyone in one area first may not actually be the best approach to the problem. We'll be complaining about unvaccinated people from smaller countries spreading the virus.

Having said that I can see that we've messed this up so much that we probably are a special case in desperate need of the vaccine first.

Feel that’s slightly unfair to say we’re going ahead with this attitude, just because we’ve finally got our act together and are doing something even the most anti-government people would have to admit is the right thing. 

Obviously there’s so much news to consume at the moment, and not everything is factually correct, but reading that the low percentage of people vaccinated in some of the larger countries of Europe isn’t just down to not having enough vaccines. So who’s to say if we’d given a few million of our vaccines to Germany, France, Spain etc that they’d have even been used as efficiently as we’ve used them ourselves. 

stonemuse

stevexreeve said:

Redrobo said:

SELR_addicks said:

So of the two major vaccines in circulation currently: The Oxford-Astrazeneca and the Pfizer, has it been determined yet which one is deemed 'better' due to the higher rates of protection? They aren't identical jabs so surely one has to be better than the other right? 

I understand it can't run as a mainstream story because people would turn against one of the jabs in favour of the other, when either one is better than nothing of course. 

If so, will people be able to choose in the future which of the multiple of vaccines are available to get, or is it simply pot luck as to whether you get the 'better' vaccine? 

Not much to choose between the two - at the moment, but the Pfizer should be easier to tweak to counter mutations. 

Mixing vaccines is likely to prove to provide greater protection which will be an interesting debate.
I see Europe have managed to vaccinate just 4% so far, and expect to vaccinate 70% by the end of September. Pathetic really.
I have forgotten the ladies name that was in charge of ordering in all the vaccines, but she deserves recognition. Outstanding work. 

Try hard not to comment about Covid. It can be very dangerous - I'll be frightened to open this thread now for a few weeks!

But it seems to me Europe has at least made some effort to ensure that the vaccine is spread around the continent. If Europe had tried to order vaccine for 450 million people they would never have got it.
Germany and France could have ordered 100 million for their own populations. But that would have stuffed everybody else including Britain.

Perhaps the British "Me first  -  fuck everybody else - winner takes all in this game" attitude will come back to bite us when we realise that vaccinating everyone in one area first may not actually be the best approach to the problem. We'll be complaining about unvaccinated people from smaller countries spreading the virus.

Having said that I can see that we've messed this up so much that we probably are a special case in desperate need of the vaccine first.

Utter rubbish 

ValleyGary

Had a lump come up on my neck, under the skin, about the size of a large pea. Went docs this morning, as can't be careful enough with lumps. Turns out its most likely a raised lymph node (I've been referred for ultra sound and blood test), a reaction to the vaccine. Apparently a lot of women have been getting them in their breasts after the vaccine and have seeked medical advice worried it might be cancerous.

stonemuse

ValleyGary said:

Had a lump come up on my neck, under the skin, about the size of a large pea. Went docs this morning, as can't be careful enough with lumps. Turns out its most likely a raised lymph node (I've been referred for ultra sound and blood test), a reaction to the vaccine. Apparently a lot of women have been getting them in their breasts after the vaccine and have seeked medical advice worried it might be cancerous.

all the best with that

McBobbin

40-49yo to be the next priority group. Works for me as I'm 40 now!

Redrobo

bolloxbolder said:

JamesSeed said:

Redrobo said:

Arsenetatters said:

Redrobo said:

Arsenetatters said:

Well I am fuming. I should be in group 6 and thought I'd better check as my surgery are bloody useless. I am in group 8. I have just steamed up there and handed in a letter to the doctor to get it changed. I had already spoken to my new GP by phone and he agreed I should be in group 6. That was months ago. No wonder they have a sign up saying 'any abuse will see you struck off our list'.

So not due yet.

Well it would be if I was put in the correct group. I have one of the health problems listed in the group 6 but the doctor says computer says group 8. I've asked him to change it but he says when he tries to it comes back as group 8 so he cant't do anything.

They are doing group 5 now which is over 65’s. 

Group 6 is adults 16 to 65 in an at risk group, and they come before the over 60’s. You are very close, and you maybe lucky and get one.

Friends in the their mid fifties were vaccinated three weeks ago. No underlying health conditions. They live in Wimbledon. 

Yes, this annoyingly appears to be the case everywhere. A friend in York in her 50s was vaccinated 3 weeks ago.

He doesn't seem to grasp that argument and continues to trot out the government official line, even though clearly it is not happening. 

There is no need to be rude. Has anyone who has not been called up by their doctor managed to book online?
There is a big difference between being accidentally called up and an expectation that because someone else has been vaccinated in a lower group that you have been missed.

The moral dimension. Should you accept a vaccine offered in error which does mean that a person more at risk loses out?

paulie8290

Just wanted to quickly put this on here.

I am epileptic and I know epileptics come under group 6 so 16-65 with underlying condition.

I spoke to my doctors last week to find out when I would get my appointment and they said they were unaware epileptics were in group 6.

So I spoke to an epilepsy support group who said a number of doctors where saying the same thing, and gave me the information to pass on, i did that on thursday and sure enough I woke up this morning with a message asking me to book my appointment which I have now done for next week.


So if you know you have an underlying condition and should be in group 6, speak to your doctor

alan dugdale

stevexreeve said:

Redrobo said:

SELR_addicks said:

So of the two major vaccines in circulation currently: The Oxford-Astrazeneca and the Pfizer, has it been determined yet which one is deemed 'better' due to the higher rates of protection? They aren't identical jabs so surely one has to be better than the other right? 

I understand it can't run as a mainstream story because people would turn against one of the jabs in favour of the other, when either one is better than nothing of course. 

If so, will people be able to choose in the future which of the multiple of vaccines are available to get, or is it simply pot luck as to whether you get the 'better' vaccine? 

Not much to choose between the two - at the moment, but the Pfizer should be easier to tweak to counter mutations. 

Mixing vaccines is likely to prove to provide greater protection which will be an interesting debate.
I see Europe have managed to vaccinate just 4% so far, and expect to vaccinate 70% by the end of September. Pathetic really.
I have forgotten the ladies name that was in charge of ordering in all the vaccines, but she deserves recognition. Outstanding work. 

Try hard not to comment about Covid. It can be very dangerous - I'll be frightened to open this thread now for a few weeks!

But it seems to me Europe has at least made some effort to ensure that the vaccine is spread around the continent. If Europe had tried to order vaccine for 450 million people they would never have got it.
Germany and France could have ordered 100 million for their own populations. But that would have stuffed everybody else including Britain.

Perhaps the British "Me first  -  fuck everybody else - winner takes all in this game" attitude will come back to bite us when we realise that vaccinating everyone in one area first may not actually be the best approach to the problem. We'll be complaining about unvaccinated people from smaller countries spreading the virus.

Having said that I can see that we've messed this up so much that we probably are a special case in desperate need of the vaccine first.

Probably the most ridiculous post I’ve read on this forum. 

Would you have preferred the U.K. government to have not ordered as much vaccine ? Or to have ordered none at all ? 

Not only did they order sufficient amounts, they picked the “right” ones too. Additionally, as others have said, the U.K. is a major contributor to Covax. Hardly an indication of taking a “fuck every one else” attitude. 

The fact is, that the EU took ages to order vaccines and to approve them and their lack of vaccine is nothing to do with ordering a few,  so each country can have a few here and there.

Alwaysneil

Posted this on the COVID thread but probably more appropriate here. I got a text from my Gp surgery this morning inviting me to book first jab at Charlton House. Have booked for 4th March being the first available but slots available every day after then on the booking app.

Very easy to book, had to put in my date of birth and nothing else.

I’m 47 with no known underlying health conditions and I’m very surprised to have been offered the jab so soon but am delighted to be able to take them up on the offer.