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.
I totally agree.
Lets stop vaccinating people in this country so that our infection rates can rise again and cause strain on the NHS, locking us down further causing more job losses and a crippled economy.
How about we give all our vaccinations to the Americans and Japanese in the hope that they will then come here and buy tea towels of the Royal Family.
I think you've probably worked out that i am not being serious and I do not agree with your post.
Our Government acted slowly and badly 12 month ago and many people died because of their lack of actions. Our vaccination programme, dating back to the government ordering vaccinations early, through to vaccinating a third of the adult population in less than three months of the vaccines being approved is a remarkable feat.
I really dont understand what your point is, especially seeing you havent offered an alternative to how you would have distributed vaccines.
In a pandemic, surely its a case of sort your own population first then help out the rest of the world once the internal battle is won.
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?
100% you should. This roll out is enormous and blurring of age lines and dates is inevitable. I find it hard to understand just how it could have been managed in any way better. Refusing the vaccine on some moral grounds just adds to the administration going forward.
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.
I got the same notification from my GP practice, I'm impressed with the efficiency of the booking system, never mind the speed of the vaccination programme!
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.
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.
Someone has to pay for the research and development. Paying up front for doses was one way. A gamble as you did not know if what you were paying for would actually work.
IMO, The British attitude to the rest of the World is appropriate in the circumstances. Not many have suffered to the degree we have, but putting that to one side, it is a bit rich to compare us to Europe. At one point they seemed quite happy to block supplies that had been ordered and paid for to cover the lack of planning that they had done. That would have put the health of all our front line staff and our most vulnerable at risk by stopping any second vaccination. Talk about ‘me first’!
They are still unsure, despite all the evidence, that they even want the Oxford vaccine and some Countries are peddling the view that it is not affective for the over 60’s. Sometimes you just can’t help some people.
If you want to have a kick off, have a look at South Africa who look like they are going to let a million doses go out of date. Despite being one of the richest African nations it has not secured a supply or have a vaccination roll out plan.
If we had shared it out it would have been wasted. Our Government has at last got something right and is shoving it as quickly as possible into peoples arms.
At last I have managed to get a doc to agree that because I have a disorder listed in group 6 I should be, in fact, in group 6 and not group 8. Unlike my own GP he has also managed to change it on the computer. Meanwhile I've now aged to around 95 and should be in an earlier group.
I hope they don't do a blood test on you, if they do you will have to wait for the Pinot Grigio vaccine to come out.
I don’t think the government will say don’t drink as loads of people won’t get the jab, because giving up booze for two weeks will fill some with dread.
I had mine yesterday and I’m off the booze, that’s mainly due to my partner being full term.
I don’t think the government will say don’t drink as loads of people won’t get the jab, because giving up booze for two weeks will fill some with dread.
I had mine yesterday and I’m off the booze, that’s mainly due to my partner being full term.
Yes - the thought of no Rioja for 2 weeks is horrific !!!
In fact, if I had to abstain for 2 weeks, I may well end up in hospital !!!
I am fascinated by the EU fixation with the AZ vaccine not being suitable for over 65's, Merkel who is 66 states she can not have the AZ vaccine as she is outside the German reccomendations, I wonder whet her excuse would be if she was 64, surely the age reccomendations are arbetory , why pick on 65 and not 63 or 67, makes no sense to me.
I am fascinated by the EU fixation with the AZ vaccine not being suitable for over 65's, Merkel who is 66 states she can not have the AZ vaccine as she is outside the German reccomendations, I wonder whet her excuse would be if she was 64, surely the age reccomendations are arbetory , why pick on 65 and not 63 or 67, makes no sense to me.
The EU regulator has approved the AZ vaccine, it's individual governments which have raised doubts
Which slightly begs the question why they agreed to allow the EU to purchase the vaccines centrally, if they weren't going to accept the vaccines bought and approved by the EU
There are obviously going to be areas who are onto say group six whilst other areas are still on group five. It depends in each area what the population breakdown of each group is. I’m in group six and type one diabetic and not been called yet but they are still working through group five I’m told. It is what it is, I’ll get called when it’s my turn.
I am fascinated by the EU fixation with the AZ vaccine not being suitable for over 65's, Merkel who is 66 states she can not have the AZ vaccine as she is outside the German reccomendations, I wonder whet her excuse would be if she was 64, surely the age reccomendations are arbetory , why pick on 65 and not 63 or 67, makes no sense to me.
As more data emerges and the dust settles on infection rates, hospitalisation rates and death rates I suspect that those countries that have placed restrictions on the AZ vaccine will not only look over cautious but there will be quite a public backlash in those countries. South Africa has decided not to use the AZ at all. I suppose it’s worth remembering that vaccine hesitancy is more widespread on mainland Europe than in the U.K.
I am fascinated by the EU fixation with the AZ vaccine not being suitable for over 65's, Merkel who is 66 states she can not have the AZ vaccine as she is outside the German reccomendations, I wonder whet her excuse would be if she was 64, surely the age reccomendations are arbetory , why pick on 65 and not 63 or 67, makes no sense to me.
The EU regulator has approved the AZ vaccine, it's individual governments which have raised doubts
Which slightly begs the question why they agreed to allow the EU to purchase the vaccines centrally, if they weren't going to accept the vaccines bought and approved by the EU
To be fair, there was a lot of gambling on success and rightly so. Companies needed the money for the research.
The evidence is now out there. The gap to second jab is more effective, it works for all age groups. The EU needs to get its finger out and start protecting their citizens. Especially those most at risk. We have done 19 million!
I am fascinated by the EU fixation with the AZ vaccine not being suitable for over 65's, Merkel who is 66 states she can not have the AZ vaccine as she is outside the German reccomendations, I wonder whet her excuse would be if she was 64, surely the age reccomendations are arbetory , why pick on 65 and not 63 or 67, makes no sense to me.
The EU regulator has approved the AZ vaccine, it's individual governments which have raised doubts
Which slightly begs the question why they agreed to allow the EU to purchase the vaccines centrally, if they weren't going to accept the vaccines bought and approved by the EU
To be fair, there was a lot of gambling on success and rightly so. Companies needed the money for the research.
The evidence is now out there. The gap to second jab is more effective, it works for all age groups. The EU needs to get its finger out and start protecting their citizens. Especially those most at risk. We have done 19 million!
My point was that you either have a central EU scheme or you don't
If the EU buys a vaccine AND the European Medicines Agency approves it, why do individual governments then need to add another level of control?
I am fascinated by the EU fixation with the AZ vaccine not being suitable for over 65's, Merkel who is 66 states she can not have the AZ vaccine as she is outside the German reccomendations, I wonder whet her excuse would be if she was 64, surely the age reccomendations are arbetory , why pick on 65 and not 63 or 67, makes no sense to me.
The EU regulator has approved the AZ vaccine, it's individual governments which have raised doubts
Which slightly begs the question why they agreed to allow the EU to purchase the vaccines centrally, if they weren't going to accept the vaccines bought and approved by the EU
To be fair, there was a lot of gambling on success and rightly so. Companies needed the money for the research.
The evidence is now out there. The gap to second jab is more effective, it works for all age groups. The EU needs to get its finger out and start protecting their citizens. Especially those most at risk. We have done 19 million!
My point was that you either have a central EU scheme or you don't
If the EU buys a vaccine AND the European Medicines Agency approves it, why do individual governments then need to add another level of control?
And therein is the main problem with the EU - and I voted remain !!!
I don’t think the government will say don’t drink as loads of people won’t get the jab, because giving up booze for two weeks will fill some with dread.
I had mine yesterday and I’m off the booze, that’s mainly due to my partner being full term.
Yes - the thought of no Rioja for 2 weeks is horrific !!!
In fact, if I had to abstain for 2 weeks, I may well end up in hospital !!!
Agree, and I know your only joking. but in all seriousness, if you were told that after having the jab if you drink alcohol it will lessen the chance of it being effective, wouldn’t it make you think twice?
if people can’t go two weeks without a drink to give a vaccine the maximum chance of potentially saving their life, then they’ve a serious problem they need to address badly.
Im surprised not more official guidance has been given on this
I don’t think the government will say don’t drink as loads of people won’t get the jab, because giving up booze for two weeks will fill some with dread.
I had mine yesterday and I’m off the booze, that’s mainly due to my partner being full term.
Yes - the thought of no Rioja for 2 weeks is horrific !!!
In fact, if I had to abstain for 2 weeks, I may well end up in hospital !!!
Agree, and I know your only joking. but in all seriousness, if you were told that after having the jab if you drink alcohol it will lessen the chance of it being effective, wouldn’t it make you think twice?
if people can’t go two weeks without a drink to give a vaccine the maximum chance of potentially saving their life, then they’ve a serious problem they need to address badly.
Im surprised not more official guidance has been given on this
No. It will still lessen the risk so is still good.
I don’t think the government will say don’t drink as loads of people won’t get the jab, because giving up booze for two weeks will fill some with dread.
I had mine yesterday and I’m off the booze, that’s mainly due to my partner being full term.
Yes - the thought of no Rioja for 2 weeks is horrific !!!
In fact, if I had to abstain for 2 weeks, I may well end up in hospital !!!
Agree, and I know your only joking. but in all seriousness, if you were told that after having the jab if you drink alcohol it will lessen the chance of it being effective, wouldn’t it make you think twice?
if people can’t go two weeks without a drink to give a vaccine the maximum chance of potentially saving their life, then they’ve a serious problem they need to address badly.
Im surprised not more official guidance has been given on this
Mine’s booked for Monday, I’m having a few beers tonight but nothing this weekend. Not planning to drink for a couple of weeks afterwards, even if it doesn’t have an effect on the vaccine it won’t do any harm.
Comments
Lets stop vaccinating people in this country so that our infection rates can rise again and cause strain on the NHS, locking us down further causing more job losses and a crippled economy.
How about we give all our vaccinations to the Americans and Japanese in the hope that they will then come here and buy tea towels of the Royal Family.
I think you've probably worked out that i am not being serious and I do not agree with your post.
Our Government acted slowly and badly 12 month ago and many people died because of their lack of actions. Our vaccination programme, dating back to the government ordering vaccinations early, through to vaccinating a third of the adult population in less than three months of the vaccines being approved is a remarkable feat.
I really dont understand what your point is, especially seeing you havent offered an alternative to how you would have distributed vaccines.
In a pandemic, surely its a case of sort your own population first then help out the rest of the world once the internal battle is won.
IMO, The British attitude to the rest of the World is appropriate in the circumstances. Not many have suffered to the degree we have, but putting that to one side, it is a bit rich to compare us to Europe. At one point they seemed quite happy to block supplies that had been ordered and paid for to cover the lack of planning that they had done. That would have put the health of all our front line staff and our most vulnerable at risk by stopping any second vaccination. Talk about ‘me first’!
They are still unsure, despite all the evidence, that they even want the Oxford vaccine and some Countries are peddling the view that it is not affective for the over 60’s. Sometimes you just can’t help some people.
If you want to have a kick off, have a look at South Africa who look like they are going to let a million doses go out of date. Despite being one of the richest African nations it has not secured a supply or have a vaccination roll out plan.
If we had shared it out it would have been wasted. Our Government has at last got something right and is shoving it as quickly as possible into peoples arms.
Big hug and kisses from me xx
I think if it was an issue the government spokesman or whoever would have mentioned it.
Very pleased for you
Which slightly begs the question why they agreed to allow the EU to purchase the vaccines centrally, if they weren't going to accept the vaccines bought and approved by the EU
The evidence is now out there. The gap to second jab is more effective, it works for all age groups. The EU needs to get its finger out and start protecting their citizens. Especially those most at risk. We have done 19 million!
If the EU buys a vaccine AND the European Medicines Agency approves it, why do individual governments then need to add another level of control?
It will still lessen the risk so is still good.