Vaccine

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.

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.

Alwaysneil said:

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!

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.

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.

Arsenetatters said:

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. 

blackpool72 said:

Arsenetatters said:

Also got a text from the GP this morning. Vaccine in Swanley tomorrow lunchtime.

Great news.
Big hug and kisses from me xx

Oh thank you :

Had my vaccination this morning. 

robroy said:

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 !!!

Arsenetatters said:

Also got a text from the GP this morning. Vaccine in Swanley tomorrow lunchtime.

Very pleased for you

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. 

killerandflash said:

Dansk_Red said:

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!

killerandflash said:

Redrobo said:

killerandflash said:

Dansk_Red said:

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 !!!

AFKABartram said:

Lordflashheart said:

robroy said:

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.