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 'd heard nothing about not drinking until I read it on here after my jab.
Nurse that gave me the vaccination didn't mention it, and nothing on the leaflet handed to me afterwards.
Assuming J&J vaccine gets approved will opt to get that one. 1 jab and done plus it was developed using the more tried and tested way of using a trojan horse virus to introduce the genetic material to the body rather than the synthetic mRNA method used by Pfizer and Moderna to develop it.
I think all it's saying is that for a vaccine to be as effective as possible building an immunity, you want to give your body the best chance possible. As alcohol is a poison/toxin, you are not helping your body build a strong immunity if you are poisoning it at the same time.
Assuming J&J vaccine gets approved will opt to get that one. 1 jab and done plus it was developed using the more tried and tested way of using a trojan horse virus to introduce the genetic material to the body rather than the synthetic mRNA method used by Pfizer and Moderna to develop it.
I think all it's saying is that for a vaccine to be as effective as possible building an immunity, you want to give your body the best chance possible. As alcohol is a poison/toxin, you are not helping your body build a strong immunity if you are poisoning it at the same time.
And that to me is a pretty big consideration. I wish JVT or Whitty had been pressed on it in one of the conferences.
If you are taking something that will give you 95% protection and there is something (alcohol) that could potentially reduce its effectiveness in building that protection to 70% (I'm making these figures up), I’d like these things made clear as I know I’d do what I could to maximise its effectiveness
Assuming J&J vaccine gets approved will opt to get that one. 1 jab and done plus it was developed using the more tried and tested way of using a trojan horse virus to introduce the genetic material to the body rather than the synthetic mRNA method used by Pfizer and Moderna to develop it.
I don’t think you’ll get a choice on the NHS
Other side of the pond mate. BTW we are way behind the UK.
Unfortunately I don’t think anyone knows what will make any of the vaccines more effective.
If you are undergoing any form of recovery it’s best not to drink, that goes for exercise recovery or any illness.
it’s also better to eat well, take supplements if you have a possible dietary deficiency, be outdoors, exercise well, be happy, treat people well, love deeply.
Unfortunately I don’t think anyone knows what will make any of the vaccines more effective.
If you are undergoing any form of recovery it’s best not to drink, that goes for exercise recovery or any illness.
it’s also better to eat well, take supplements if you have a possible dietary deficiency, be outdoors, exercise well, be happy, treat people well, love deeply.
Can you give me any more details as to where I can get the love deeply?
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.
Once again I'm forced to ask, are you really a teacher? The mind boggles.
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.
Once again I'm forced to ask, are you really a teacher? The mind boggles.
Don't think he is. I have a feeling he works on the railways (might be wrong).
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.
Once again I'm forced to ask, are you really a teacher? The mind boggles.
Don't think he is. I have a feeling he works on the railways (might be wrong).
Having read that post, yes I’m pretty sure he’s still at school.
I think all it's saying is that for a vaccine to be as effective as possible building an immunity, you want to give your body the best chance possible. As alcohol is a poison/toxin, you are not helping your body build a strong immunity if you are poisoning it at the same time.
And that to me is a pretty big consideration. I wish JVT or Whitty had been pressed on it in one of the conferences.
If you are taking something that will give you 95% protection and there is something (alcohol) that could potentially reduce its effectiveness in building that protection to 70% (I'm making these figures up), I’d like these things made clear as I know I’d do what I could to maximise its effectiveness
If those figures *were* correct (or even close) we’d have heard all about it, from Whitty etc at the press conferences, and it would have been mentioned in the leaflets.
I’m fairly sure there won’t be any solid stats on this, and the advice is theoretical, based on medical thinking on effects of alcohol on the immune system.
It makes sense to not drink for a couple of weeks, as it *might* just help, but I personally doubt it’ll make a huge difference if you have the occasional beer.
I think all it's saying is that for a vaccine to be as effective as possible building an immunity, you want to give your body the best chance possible. As alcohol is a poison/toxin, you are not helping your body build a strong immunity if you are poisoning it at the same time.
Compared to some of the toxins I'm having pumped into my body by IV and tablet form, a couple of beers and a few rums will have very little additional effect on poisoning me!
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.
Once again I'm forced to ask, are you really a teacher? The mind boggles.
Don't think he is. I have a feeling he works on the railways (might be wrong).
It's this reaction that concerns me a little. It's perfectly understandable to feel a degree of relief that one's received an initial vaccination but I worry that too many people will let their guard down as a result.
I'm not saying you personally will do this but looking around my town and speaking to businesses and those in front line roles there's definitely a creeping attitude of complacency. With that comes recklessness and risk. My own mother's peer group for example are already "bending" their interpretation of the rules on the basis they've now all been jabbed.
The fact is most of us haven't been vaccinated and very, very few of us have been fully immunised. I think this was alluded to in yesterday's briefing but something we all need to be mindful of.
I have mine at 2pm today but, because I’m in week 3 of my post op hip replacement and don’t want my mobility progress affected, I’m dreading any side effects that may confine me to bed (ie flu like symptoms or lack of energy) for a few days.
Must say, I’ve been in two minds about rescheduling for when I’m fully recovered but not knowing how long the wait would be for a new appointment, I don’t want to miss out !
Had the Pfizer Thursday morning, could not lay on my arm that night. Was very sore to touch. Felt ok yesterday, today feel a bit coldy and a bit meh. So I would say that one is not so bad if you have it.
Had the Astra Zenca yesterday. No problems, however my resting heartbeat shot up to 56 from 53 overnight, done a 2 hour dog work and then 15 minutes on my rowing machine, got a PB this morning of 587 on a program I've been using. first attempt on 14th Jan was 463.
I asked the question about booze yesterday after my jab. I was told it was okay to drink alcohol (although it’s not allowed in the vaccination centre which is a Mosque). I had bottle of Prosecco last night in celebration 🍾
I think all it's saying is that for a vaccine to be as effective as possible building an immunity, you want to give your body the best chance possible. As alcohol is a poison/toxin, you are not helping your body build a strong immunity if you are poisoning it at the same time.
And that to me is a pretty big consideration. I wish JVT or Whitty had been pressed on it in one of the conferences.
If you are taking something that will give you 95% protection and there is something (alcohol) that could potentially reduce its effectiveness in building that protection to 70% (I'm making these figures up), I’d like these things made clear as I know I’d do what I could to maximise its effectiveness
We're already seeing the effects of vaccination in the data. Hospitalisations amongst the elderly are falling faster than among the young. I think there's also been a real world study in Israel of vaccinated health care workers which showed the efficacy is something like 84%.
I'm not sure what the drinking culture is like in Israel but I think if alcohol had a significant impact then it would show in this data?
Also, surely the people who took part in all the trials didn't refrain from drinking?
The whole issue seems to have come from the drink aware article which was posted without any data backing up their claims. I think that's pretty irresponsible imo.
I wouldn't worry about it but obviously no harm in stopping for 2 weeks if you're concerned.
It's this reaction that concerns me a little. It's perfectly understandable to feel a degree of relief that one's received an initial vaccination but I worry that too many people will let their guard down as a result.
I'm not saying you personally will do this but looking around my town and speaking to businesses and those in front line roles there's definitely a creeping attitude of complacency. With that comes recklessness and risk. My own mother's peer group for example are already "bending" their interpretation of the rules on the basis they've now all been jabbed.
The fact is most of us haven't been vaccinated and very, very few of us have been fully immunised. I think this was alluded to in yesterday's briefing but something we all need to be mindful of.
Probably mean it more than after this dreadful year there is light at the end of the tunnel.
Not like right I am off to the pub or on holiday !!
I have mine at 2pm today but, because I’m in week 3 of my post op hip replacement and don’t want my mobility progress affected, I’m dreading any side effects that may confine me to bed (ie flu like symptoms or lack of energy) for a few days.
Must say, I’ve been in two minds about rescheduling for when I’m fully recovered but not knowing how long the wait would be for a new appointment, I don’t want to miss out !
Good luck today, hope there are no side effects that alter your mobility progress.
It's this reaction that concerns me a little. It's perfectly understandable to feel a degree of relief that one's received an initial vaccination but I worry that too many people will let their guard down as a result.
I'm not saying you personally will do this but looking around my town and speaking to businesses and those in front line roles there's definitely a creeping attitude of complacency. With that comes recklessness and risk. My own mother's peer group for example are already "bending" their interpretation of the rules on the basis they've now all been jabbed.
The fact is most of us haven't been vaccinated and very, very few of us have been fully immunised. I think this was alluded to in yesterday's briefing but something we all need to be mindful of.
I think you're right and the messaging is partly to blame. The various dates for relaxation of the rules are an aspiration and not definite, as they depend on everything going well. A lot of people are thinking that things will definitely open, that this is nearly over and we can go back to acting normally. There is such a lot we still don't know about the virus and we are only a small part of a world which is nowhere near as advanced with vaccines as we are.
I understand that the Government wants to give hope to everyone, but there is a danger that people let down their guard too early, I hope that doesn't happen.
It's this reaction that concerns me a little. It's perfectly understandable to feel a degree of relief that one's received an initial vaccination but I worry that too many people will let their guard down as a result.
I'm not saying you personally will do this but looking around my town and speaking to businesses and those in front line roles there's definitely a creeping attitude of complacency. With that comes recklessness and risk. My own mother's peer group for example are already "bending" their interpretation of the rules on the basis they've now all been jabbed.
The fact is most of us haven't been vaccinated and very, very few of us have been fully immunised. I think this was alluded to in yesterday's briefing but something we all need to be mindful of.
I think you're right and the messaging is partly to blame. The various dates for relaxation of the rules are an aspiration and not definite, as they depend on everything going well. A lot of people are thinking that things will definitely open, that this is nearly over and we can go back to acting normally. There is such a lot we still don't know about the virus and we are only a small part of a world which is nowhere near as advanced with vaccines as we are.
I understand that the Government wants to give hope to everyone, but there is a danger that people let down their guard too early, I hope that doesn't happen.
I think the messaging has been clear enough in terms of the risks and actions in the event of another rise in infections, but people will hear what they want to and interpret in a way that suits their own wishes. While the government is right to give people an expectation of unwinding lockdown so that businesses can plan for reopening efficiently, the less community spirited will simply use it as an excuse to go back to gathering in numbers on the basis it's all opening up soon enough anyway. This lovely sunny weather isnt going to help that. The conifdence that comes with a successful roll out will also cause caution to be relaxed too early. Can only hope that the vaccine is as effective in reducing R rates as seems to be the case.
Comments
Nurse that gave me the vaccination didn't mention it, and nothing on the leaflet handed to me afterwards.
As alcohol is a poison/toxin, you are not helping your body build a strong immunity if you are poisoning it at the same time.
I wish JVT or Whitty had been pressed on it in one of the conferences.
If you are taking something that will give you 95% protection and there is something (alcohol) that could potentially reduce its effectiveness in building that protection to 70% (I'm making these figures up), I’d like these things made clear as I know I’d do what I could to maximise its effectiveness
it’s also better to eat well, take supplements if you have a possible dietary deficiency, be outdoors, exercise well, be happy, treat people well, love deeply.
I'm not saying you personally will do this but looking around my town and speaking to businesses and those in front line roles there's definitely a creeping attitude of complacency. With that comes recklessness and risk. My own mother's peer group for example are already "bending" their interpretation of the rules on the basis they've now all been jabbed.
The fact is most of us haven't been vaccinated and very, very few of us have been fully immunised. I think this was alluded to in yesterday's briefing but something we all need to be mindful of.
Got into bed and was shaking so badly my wife thanked me for the massage through the mattress
Cant taste much this morning and legs feel a bit achy / heavy
To top it off its Football day today 😂 - Least I know that the vaccine is doing its job
not lay on my arm that night. Was very sore to touch. Felt ok yesterday, today feel a bit coldy and a bit meh. So I would say that one is not so bad if you have it.
I'm not sure what the drinking culture is like in Israel but I think if alcohol had a significant impact then it would show in this data?
Also, surely the people who took part in all the trials didn't refrain from drinking?
The whole issue seems to have come from the drink aware article which was posted without any data backing up their claims. I think that's pretty irresponsible imo.
I wouldn't worry about it but obviously no harm in stopping for 2 weeks if you're concerned.
Good luck today, hope there are no side effects that alter your mobility progress.
I understand that the Government wants to give hope to everyone, but there is a danger that people let down their guard too early, I hope that doesn't happen.