Jump to content

Covid 19, novel corona virus. Split from off-grid thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 903
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Well I’m still spamming because I think it’s important...... and this seems to bear it out Pity he takes half an hour when it needs 10 minutes tops but anyway..... Trial in a 

Earlier, I posted a link to the Royal Society symposium where several global experts spoke about Covid  and the vaccine.  They only had an hour and the speakers could answer a few questions from their

My work are very much blazing their own trail on this one: we've just been told that, unless pregnant or high risk, everyone must be in the office or will be marked as 'unauthorised leave' with subseq

Posted Images

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

So, for the medics and scientists........

UK gov has decreed that second vaccination (Pfizer) doses, rather than being administered after 21 days as directed by the manufacturer, shall be delayed for up to 12 weeks in order to maximise the effort in getting more first vaccinations into people.

On one level this makes sense, but only IF 
- the first vaccination does confer worthwhile protection
- the overall efficacy of the vaccine is not spoiled

It is not clear whether there is any evidence of this.  It is not even clear whether they are sticking to the terms of their own product licencing.  Certainly it does not appear to be endorsed by Pfizer

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-31/pfizer-backs-two-dose-vaccine-schedule-after-u-k-shift

Another aspect is the governments insistence that second doses should be delayed even where the first doses are already given and the second appointment scheduled.  This raises two aspects, one legal and one practical.

The legal one is that this is not what people were agreeing to when they signed their consent forms (not at Senior Managements practice anyway)

The practical one is that this involves contacting 1000 people, mainly over 80, and rescheduling their appointments (probably not a short conversation, and this age group are notoriously difficult to communicate with) and then making contact with 1000 more at short notice to get them in instead.  A quick estimate last night with SM (who knows a thing or two about dealing with the public on the phone in a medical context) suggested that the calls/admin involved will be something between 200 and 250 person hours.  Crazy.

We've since learned that the practice has decided not to do this and will continue this round of second shots as planned.  Good call IMO and one being echoed around the country.

I should also mention that among those vaccinated 2 weeks ago by SMs practice were a number of staff who were assisting with the vaccinations.  This wasn't planned, but due to a number of "no shows" plus the discovery than each vial easily provides 6 doses rather than the official 5.  This resulted in a rapid rounding up of whomever was available to ensure no doses were wasted.   Point is though, two of these vaccinated colleagues have, within the last couple of days, tested positive for Covid and one is quite ill with it.  If this were two out of the whole 1100 or so vaccinated it would perhaps be an acceptable percentage.  However it is two (so far) out of just 12 that we can track....... and perhaps indicates that the first dose doesn't give much protection...... which is a pretty scary thought in the light of HMg's recent proclamation.

So the HUGE question remains - what evidence is there that this delayed second shot doesn't owe more to political expedience than sound science and won't come back to haunt us in the same way as so many other decisions from our world-beating* government?

 

 

* world beating in U-turns, world beating in own goals, world beating in deaths, world beating in economic damage...... etc....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lunch/defrost break. Anyway, Mr Tony Blair made a plea about this a week or 2 ago. I skimmed through, and I "think" the article claimed 1 does gave 90% protection, 2 doses 95%. If that is the case, getting as many to have 1 dose would appear to be sensible. Big if. 

The other issue I can see at play is possible storage issues in the supply chain affecting the vaccine? Shouldn't happen, but you never know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Possible that two weeks were too short to mount a full antibody response. New technology.....

My reading is that SAGE is trying to stop NHS being overwhelmed. A part-effective vaccination offers that even if individuals are compromised later in the year.

Peter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PeterC said:

Possible that two weeks were too short to mount a full antibody response. New technology.....

True enough.  Those vaccinated report a sore arm within hours of the vaccination and several had a bad headache, mild nausea the following day and felt distinctly second hand for a couple of days, suggest a fairly strong response quite early on.  Not the same people who are C+ AFAIK.

I'm struggling to find anything that gives useful numbers for % coverage 1 shot vs 2, or indeed when immunity might be expected to kick in for either scenario.  Other than the original "full immunity 4 weeks after the second shot"  If the difference between 1 shot and 2 is only 90 vs 95% then I doubt they would have been bothering with 2 in the first place?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not Tony B Liar's biggest fan...... but, as I said above, I can see the attraction of the idea IF the numbers work.

However, I see no good evidence yet presented that the numbers work - the numbers in the MHRA document look suspiciously like the ones in the article.  I think they are taking a flyer, albeit an educated one.  Hell of an experiment to run on a whole country's population......... starting with the most vulnerable groups....... ethics of desperation?

In case you are in any doubt I've long ago reached the point where I assume that anything this government does is stupid until proven otherwise......  This too is educated assumption, but with plenty of supporting evidence!

As for Blair's suggestion about vaccination passports - I agree, but no good reason why it has to form part of a full digital ID other than it being a gifted opportunity for the control freaks to force it through .  I have a stack of old immunisation certificates covering cholera, typhoid, yellow fever, smallpox and probably others I have forgotten dating from the days when any African border would demand them.

Of course, the way this government operates, they'll suddenly come up with the idea only after it becomes apparent that we remain trapped on our island after the rest of the world adopted this path.... then there will be a multi-billion pound contract handed out in haste to some random mate without tender and long wait for substandard results.  Cynical.... moi? :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like those in Nick's "SM"'s practice, I was lucky to get my first vaccination, just before Xmas, only because I'm due to start vaccinating people next week and to have my second jab on the 10th, 20 days later.   I shall be p.o'ed if I don't get it!

Nick's account of several feeling queasy after the first jab is interesting.    I felt entirely normal - but then I'm hard to vaccinate.     Hepatitis 'B' was a risk in my old job so I had to have that vaccination, but after three goes, I showed no sign of "Sero-converting" - developing antibodies.     Either I'd already had HepB and never noticed - most unlikely - or my metabolism just chews up antigens and doesn't react.  Either way, I'm probably immune from HepB!     I hope it's true of Covid too!

Pfizer can't comment on the revised schedule, as their trials did not use it and they have no data.    The advice must come from the people in SAGE who look at graphs like this, generalised not Covid specific.

Topic 11.1 Antibody Production and Vaccination - AMAZING WORLD OF SCIENCE  WITH MR. GREEN

It is usual for a second 'challenge' with a vaccine to gain a bigger and longer response.    The Qs are, how large is the first and can it protect, and how long does it persist, to provide protection?      And we, and SAGE just don't know.    It is just an educated guess, but IMHO one that is a complete guess, with no data at all.    There may be some population modelling, to show that two jabs for some will not have as great an effect on the epidemic as one for twice as many.

What is missing is that this Government is not sharing that with it's population, but then we're used to that.

JOhn

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JohnD said:

What is missing is that this Government is not sharing that with it's population, but then we're used to that.

 

Indeed.... as I said, we are the experiment.... starting with our most vulnerable.

Hope it bloody works......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All

                But does any body really Know?

The thing is like in a Doctor Who episode (changing faster than we can understand!)(( the clever ones not the likes of me and a few others!))

Roger

ps just glad I am retired and do not have to go out and back to the daughter getting stuff for us!

Did you see the reports of (sorry) THE DIG HEADS outside the London hospital saying Covid is a HOAX!!!!!!

They should all be allowed to mix with each other and when they get sick we say well it is just a HOAX!

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, JohnD said:

Like those in Nick's "SM"'s practice, I was lucky to get my first vaccination, just before Xmas, only because I'm due to start vaccinating people next week and to have my second jab on the 10th, 20 days later.   I shall be p.o'ed if I don't get it!

Nick's account of several feeling queasy after the first jab is interesting.    I felt entirely normal - but then I'm hard to vaccinate.     Hepatitis 'B' was a risk in my old job so I had to have that vaccination, but after three goes, I showed no sign of "Sero-converting" - developing antibodies.     Either I'd already had HepB and never noticed - most unlikely - or my metabolism just chews up antigens and doesn't react.  Either way, I'm probably immune from HepB!     I hope it's true of Covid too!

Pfizer can't comment on the revised schedule, as their trials did not use it and they have no data.    The advice must come from the people in SAGE who look at graphs like this, generalised not Covid specific.

Topic 11.1 Antibody Production and Vaccination - AMAZING WORLD OF SCIENCE  WITH MR. GREEN

It is usual for a second 'challenge' with a vaccine to gain a bigger and longer response.    The Qs are, how large is the first and can it protect, and how long does it persist, to provide protection?      And we, and SAGE just don't know.    It is just an educated guess, but IMHO one that is a complete guess, with no data at all.    There may be some population modelling, to show that two jabs for some will not have as great an effect on the epidemic as one for twice as many.

What is missing is that this Government is not sharing that with it's population, but then we're used to that.

JOhn

John, Covid and the vaccine will undoubtedly behave like many other virus's so predictions will be based on real data. But with a level of uncertainty. (but of course the Pfizer vaccine is all new, so may have some quirks?)

I read this morning that India makes 60% of the world vaccines on a normal day. And expect to make 50million doses of the Oxford vaccine a month, ramping up to 100million a month. I guess they have the labs to make it, unlike poor old UK who outsource everything. However, I expect they will be selling much of their production off, as they have said 300million of the most vulnerable citizens will get the jab this year. Where will the other billion doses go? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2020 at 9:39 AM, Hamish said:

8A4689E1-23D5-4277-BF0F-A8394A93EB73.jpeg

My wife, recently retired, decided to apply to be a volunteer vaccinator. Although she qualified and practiced as a pharmacist that was 40 years ago, prePhD, post doctoral research and several decades working for a well-known medical regulator. So we anticipated that a certain amount of checking and learning would be required.

Well, the entire process seems to have been designed to discourage potential applicants and is not focussed on the immediate needs of the job in hand. At least she did not have to submit a copy of her marriage certificate as her friend did before moving to the training required to complete the application. This involves submitting 18 certificates. To achieve each involves a minimum of 45 minutes e-learning. So far, three full days of study and tests and not yet finished. Each is learning session is followed by a test in which you have to achieve 80-100% depending on the topic. If you get below the minimum twice, that is sudden death - your application fails.

Fair enough you might think until you look at the topics required: Conflict resolution, Equality, diversity and human rights, Fire safety, Moving and handling, Preventing radicalisation, Safeguarding children, Medico-legal ethics, Infection prevention and control. Thank goodness she now knows what coloured bag to place soiled hospital sheets into, which fire extinguisher should be used on a petrol fire and the application of the Gillick principle to teenagers (who won't be getting the vaccine).

Once vaccine supplies are on full stream, we will need a great many people, working in teams, subject to appropriate supervision to vaccinate millions of people. They need to be intelligent, caring, capable of social interaction and reasonably dextrous. They also need to be vetted and trained appropriately. This approach seems to be completely unthought out - someone has simply dragged an existing process off the shelf without any thought for what is actually needed to identify suitable vaccinators or its disincentive impacts on potentially good candidates. I believe that even doctors who retired more than 12 months ago are required to undertake the same process.

Furthermore, given that the approximate dates of when decisions would be made by the MHRA on the vaccines, I would have thought this process should have been commenced some months ago so that sufficient numbers of volunteers would be ready and available to take the pressure off the NHS as soon as mass vaccination became possible. 

My wife will persist (she is very driven) and assuming she gets past this stage and her application is successful, more checks are required (more delay) and we will then see what actual training is available and how deployment actually happens. 

Yet again, the words 'p**s up' and 'brewery' come to mind in terms of this governments response...

Miles

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, thebrookster said:

What worries me is how fast the virus mutates.

If the initial dosage of the vaccine is only partially effective, surely this gives the virus a chance to mutate itself to combat the vaccine?

Everybody seems confident that the latest mutation will still respond to the vaccine. But mutations are indeed rapid, very rapid with most not surviving. But it overcomes a vaccine by chance, it is not a thought-out process. So IF a mutation survives the vaccine, it will become successful. A real shot-gun approach, but something all life (if virus's count as life) does. 

The big hope is that like so many diseases, a vaccine will get the infection numbers so low it will be easy to control localised outbreaks. Well, that is the idea. Roughly. If we get really lucky, it an be eliminated. But very very doubtful we will get that lucky. Think it may end up like the flu, depending how well the virus manages to mutate. But once a new mutation is noted, it should be easy to tweek the vaccine to suit. 

Again a lot of "fingers crossed" involved, but that is the best we can hope for at present.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mutations that outfox the vaccines are more likely to evolve and succeed in a partially vaccinated population...... That’s the way evolution works.

Interesting post Miles. SM has been asked to train as a vaccinator, but presumably a direct, practical process as she is a practising pharmacist.

I’m considering volunteering, (not as a needle jockey, but there are many others involved) but I can tell you I absolutely would not accept the process your wife is negotiating as it it is clearly largely worthless and wasteful. Some private company being paid for it without tender?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...