thfcsteff
George Hunt
If under instruction by the govt, it's cowering. If done by choice, it's consideration.
...we're back to traffic lights aren't we...
If under instruction by the govt, it's cowering. If done by choice, it's consideration.
Would you like to explain how terrible life was in 2003? How people were dying on the streets, corpses rotting in mass graves?
Or was it OK actually and not much to concern ourselves with?
Haha
So thats a no then...
And yet the decision to vaccinate more people earlier remains comprehensively correct, does it not?
Which is the sole point being made.
My wife has heard through work that it’s a combination of supply and staffing issues
That Guardian journalist’s article (whilst I have a subscription I find most of their COVID-19 stuff has become tediously blinkered clickbait) lead me to this thread in which some immunologists discuss the efficacy of single dose regimen... hopefully a detailed study will be forthcoming in lieu of the lack of phase 3 data beyond 21 days...Perhaps not, according to the early data coming out of Israel - and the point made by a number of epidemiologists (see The Guardian and BMJ articles that I posted above) that leaving such a large time between doses could encourage the virus to mutate further, and in a way which makes it vaccine resistant.
That Guardian journalist’s article (whilst I have a subscription I find most of their COVID-19 stuff has become tediously blinkered clickbait) lead me to this thread in which some immunologists discuss the efficacy of single dose regimen... hopefully a detailed study will be forthcoming in lieu of the lack of phase 3 data beyond 21 days...
And yet the decision to vaccinate more people earlier remains comprehensively correct, does it not?
Which is the sole point being made.
You dont know that... the fact is that no one knows that.
This government has decided to gamble on the presumption 1 dose is enough.
As others have mentioned that poses many potentially catastrophic risks, most notable of which is its the ideal breading ground for a vaccine resistant strain of the virus.
Perhaps not, according to the early data coming out of Israel - and the point made by a number of epidemiologists (see The Guardian and BMJ articles that I posted above) that leaving such a large time between doses could encourage the virus to mutate further, and in a way which makes it vaccine resistant.
Yeah, it’s undoubtedly a calculated risk and wish that someone had the foresight to request more data on different dosage spacing when Pfizer and AstraZeneca were conducting their phase 3 trials plus informed GPs before they began roll out; rather than constantly moving the goalposts.It’s unclear. Which is the point, really, I suppose. As noted in the BMJ article, by administering the vaccination programme in a way that runs contrary to the research which saw the vaccines initially approved we are essentially conducting an experiment on a national scale.
But I do know that.[/B] The professional scientists laid the argument for the decision out for all of us.
When more trial phase results and analysis of the actuality comes in they will review their understanding and recommend tweaks to the plans accordingly.
Certainly I take the point that the potential for a vaccine resistant strain to come out is enhanced, but the multiple vaccine approach must mitigate that considerably. Not that I have seen this discussed anywhere.
Also the regulator aren’t saying one dose is enough, just delaying the second would appear to be beneficial.
And then the government scientists take into account the other relevant inputs, seasonality, epidemiology and supply logistics etc.
Yes and if that is the case you would expect them to alter their strategy as rapidly as before. As I said, expect changes. I note that that relates to Pfizer- and not fully formalised - The Oxford efficacy could be shaped entirely differently.
Note that the uk will now have plenty of data and analysis around the efficacy of these vaccinations for the elderly and younger care workers as the programme has been running longer here than in Israel.
Could you please show a link from the drug companies themselves that says that 1 jab will give 80% protection against covid.
Again from the drug companies themselves please.
Alter what strategy? The single dose strategy? If the virus mutates and becomes vaccine resistant it will be much too late.
Although in fairness I can definitely see this government doing something as stupid and incompetent as that.
Here you go...
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-r...iontech-announce-publication-results-landmark
The cumulative incidence of Covid-19 cases over time among placebo and vaccine recipients begins to diverge by 12 days after the first dose, 7 days after the estimated median viral incubation period of 5 days,indicating the early onset of a partially protective effect of immunization. The study was not designed to assess the efficacy of a single-dose regimen. Nevertheless, in the interval between the first and second doses, the observed vaccine efficacy against Covid-19 was 52%, and in the first 7 days after dose 2, it was 91%, reaching full efficacy against disease with onset at least 7 days after dose 2. Of the 10 cases of severe Covid-19 that were observed after the first dose, only 1 occurred in the vaccine group. This finding is consistent with overall high efficacy against all Covid-19 cases.
And here’s what Dr Fauci’s Food and Drugs Administration had to say about that trial data, their Vaccine Efficacy for single dose is 82%...
https://www.fda.gov/media/144325/download
View attachment 10705 View attachment 10706
It’s all up for grabs. Prompt and sharp decision making had been absent so personally I welcome it when it makes an appearance.
What do you find so politically relevant about the vaccination program? It’s surely a triumph of science and all the various National governments are making foul ups over logistics and organisation.
Have you a specific political agenda that intrudes even into this topic?