Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,338
Likes: 2,754
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jan 2, 2021 9:21:23 GMT
If you're not near a centre where they can administer the Pfizer vaccine you are going to be down the list until the AZ gets there.
Everyone is going to get two doses of whichever one, just further apart timewise.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,338
Likes: 2,754
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jan 2, 2021 9:24:31 GMT
Hmm, not convinced by the system. All the 80+ year olds in my road have had theirs. The one who hasnt is apparently somewhere between 0.5m & 4.5m on the list. I guess if you survived the last global pandemic, they assume you should be alright for this next one. Just tried putting in 102 years old and yes to extremely vulnerable and health risks, still don't get the vaccine till April or May next year! Edit: If I add care home resident or worker and health worker still comes out April next year (although between 0 and 500,000 ahead) odd that there are up to 500,000, 102 year old heath workers out there..... Maybe I broke it!
|
|
JamesFrance
Member of DD Central
Port Grimaud 1974
Posts: 1,323
Likes: 897
|
Post by JamesFrance on Jan 2, 2021 10:09:09 GMT
The queue means nothing, it seems to be all about the determination of GPs to look after their patients. The reason I was one of the first 100,000 is because my surgery is in Winsford and all our local GPs made a fantastic effort.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Jan 2, 2021 10:30:46 GMT
Hmm, not convinced by the system. All the 80+ year olds in my road have had theirs. The one who hasnt is apparently somewhere between 0.5m & 4.5m on the list. I guess if you survived the last global pandemic, they assume you should be alright for this next one. Just tried putting in 102 years old and yes to extremely vulnerable and health risks, still don't get the vaccine till April or May next year! Edit: If I add care home resident or worker and health worker still comes out April next year (although between 0 and 500,000 ahead) odd that there are up to 500,000, 102 year old heath workers out there..... Maybe I broke it! Hidden in the small print is this is the date by which you expect to receive your SECOND dose. So perhaps April/May 2021 sounds more feasible, given the expected 12 weeks wait between doses. It would be more helpful if the calculator gave the expected date for dose one.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,795
Likes: 3,223
|
Post by jonno on Jan 2, 2021 10:38:48 GMT
Oh don't worry so much. the average is around mid 2022, so as long as you live long enough, you know that everything reverts to the mean
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jan 2, 2021 10:40:53 GMT
Hmm, not convinced by the system. All the 80+ year olds in my road have had theirs. The one who hasnt is apparently somewhere between 0.5m & 4.5m on the list. I guess if you survived the last global pandemic, they assume you should be alright for this next one. thanks for the info. Both my parents are >80, have (signigficant) underlying health conditions, but have not been vaccinated as yet.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,231
Likes: 11,422
|
Post by ilmoro on Jan 2, 2021 10:48:23 GMT
The queue means nothing, it seems to be all about the determination of GPs to look after their patients. The reason I was one of the first 100,000 is because my surgery is in Winsford and all our local GPs made a fantastic effort.
Not sure you can draw that conclusion. Cant see anything that suggests that the 940 recipients were determined by the PCN rather than of the NHS list. The process is controlled by the NHS/PHE. Doesnt matter how determined the PCN was, the NHS decided when they got the vaccine not the PCN, presumably based on the criteria used to determine tiers etc. The question is what are the criteria that determines who gets priority once the vaccine is available ... being in line for a second birthday card from the Queen oddly doesnt seem to be a qualification despite the JCVI criteria for priority 2 As with everything else it seems, clarity is not part of the communications and introduces concern & confusion as a result. The one person who has had it in my family, is the one who should probably be second to last, sub 50, non frontline NHS (bumps them ahead of me)
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,668
Likes: 5,041
|
Post by adrianc on Jan 2, 2021 10:50:10 GMT
The queue means nothing, it seems to be all about the determination of GPs to look after their patients. The reason I was one of the first 100,000 is because my surgery is in Winsford and all our local GPs made a fantastic effort.
Round here, vaccinations aren't being done by GP surgeries. They're being done in a handful of county-wide centres. This may change once the Oxford comes on-stream.
|
|
JamesFrance
Member of DD Central
Port Grimaud 1974
Posts: 1,323
Likes: 897
|
Post by JamesFrance on Jan 2, 2021 10:59:06 GMT
The queue means nothing, it seems to be all about the determination of GPs to look after their patients. The reason I was one of the first 100,000 is because my surgery is in Winsford and all our local GPs made a fantastic effort.
Not sure you can draw that conclusion. Cant see anything that suggests that the 940 recipients were determined by the PCN rather than of the NHS list. The process is controlled by the NHS/PHE. Doesnt matter how determined the PCN was, the NHS decided when they got the vaccine not the PCN, presumably based on the criteria used to determine tiers etc. The question is what are the criteria that determines who gets priority once the vaccine is available ... being in line for a second birthday card from the Queen oddly doesnt seem to be a qualification despite the JCVI criteria for priority 2 As with everything else it seems, clarity is not part of the communications and introduces concern & confusion as a result. I had a text from my GP surgery saying that I could apply and to phone them for an appointment, I phoned immediately and was given the two appointments 3 weeks apart, however they could not accept my wife as she was under 80.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,795
Likes: 3,223
|
Post by jonno on Jan 2, 2021 11:11:31 GMT
I've come across a product called "Taffix" (just google it). It is a nasal spray that purports to create a hostile environment in the nasal cavity where up to 97% of viruses can't survive. It works within 50 seconds and each single dose apparently protects for 5 hours. It works by lowering the ph in the nose from 6.5 (which apparently viruses love) to 3.5 which renders them ineffective. It does say it should be used IN ADDITION to wearing a mask and social distancing etc. While it purports to cost £13 per 1000mg bottle, it appears you can only purchase a "family pack" of four, costing £52 . I did spot some profiteering bastard on Amazon trying to sell one bottle for over £30. Just wondering whether anyone has heard of it or even tried it.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 1,461
|
Post by jlend on Jan 2, 2021 11:21:33 GMT
The queue means nothing, it seems to be all about the determination of GPs to look after their patients. The reason I was one of the first 100,000 is because my surgery is in Winsford and all our local GPs made a fantastic effort.
Round here, vaccinations aren't being done by GP surgeries. They're being done in a handful of county-wide centres. This may change once the Oxford comes on-stream. Similar where my mum lives. GP surgery phoned to confirm the booking, injection was done at a community vaccine hub in Gloucestershire. Luckily my mum still drives as it wasn't that close. Just her partner who is older has had his first jab so far. He has dementia and luckily one of the nurses who was giving injections knew him. Mum calls it his happy jab as he has been so much better with his mental health since the jab, it has been a transformation for the short term at least.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jan 2, 2021 11:27:17 GMT
We're basically experimenting with different dosing regimens as part of the mass rollout, instead of in the trial phases. It's a drastic measure that may well be justified by the current situation, but please let's stop pretending that "no corners are being cut". I completely agree with this. Many of the vaccines were ready in their current form back last Spring. The reason it takes so long to begin rollout as we know is due to stringent trials. Its for a very good reason. Are our scientific and medical leaders now going to override the recommendations of the trials based on some (albeit perhaps credible) theory? W hat if for some reason unknown at this stage, it turns out that not having a second dose actually makes you ill. Or what if not having the second dose means the immunity tapers off 10x quicker than it would with a second dose. Its sounds unlikely and it probably is, but you're dealing with billions of people - you need to be cast iron sure and that is what the trials give you. You don't run roughshod over them just because you're the CMO or whatever. To me this just adds more weight to my argument that many of these sci-med leaders have made all kinds of decisions based on little evidence and frequently in opposition to their peers. I think aspects of this is misunderstanding some of the science, the trials, and the recommendations. Which is not to say it is also not taking some risks. Talking about the AZN only. As I understand it, the MHRA authorisation stated that the second dose must not be given less than 4 weeks from, and should be given within 12 weeks. So the subsequent JCVI advise to go for 12 week separation is entirely within the MHRA authorisation. I think that is an important point before we talk about the science or evidence of the trials being bent out of shape. With regard to individual safety with regard to receiving the second dose. The biggest (virtually only) concern would I suspect be with receiving the second dose too soon, not too late. I would suggest that is why the MHRA guidance (4-12 weeks) is as it is. The trials showed the safety aspects of the vaccines, but with the proviso that it only tested it with the second dose being no less than 4 weeks. I doubt anyone is concerned that the simple act of not receiving the second dose for a longer period could of itself make you ill. I doubt there is any physiological model or process that makes that a candidate outcome. The science of even bothering to give a second dose is that it helps to reinforce the immune system memory, not that it helps to prevent you from getting ill from having the first jab. Bear in mind that a number of proven vaccines are given as single dose. The issue is whether the longer period will impact the eventual efficacy and presumably longevity outcome for the individual. My interpretation from what I've read is that the analysis of the AZN trial data is that they think from an efficacy point of view the extended interval may have some small impact but unlikely to be overriding. I would interpret this as the JCVI simply balancing efficacy at the population level with efficacy at the individual level, while not straying from the MHRA authorisation. I don't view this as 'cutting corners' from a safety point of view, but very clearly with a limited supply (whether that is of the vaccine itself or the ability to deliver it to the arm) some 'corners' will be cut in terms - or perhaps more accurately some risk of whether the best model is chosen - in determining the most effective deployment regime. After all, even a decision as to who has priority is itself a judgement: should it be the 80+ year old who is already sheltering in their own home, or the 20+ year old who is being socially and economically productive but also the biggest vector for spread of the virus. Personally, of course I'd prefer to be head of the Q, probably to get the Pfizer vaccine, and get it with the 21 day interval which has been shown to have a particular efficacy for the individual. But that of course is driven by my selfish consideration, not the broader population consideration.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,668
Likes: 5,041
|
Post by adrianc on Jan 2, 2021 11:28:46 GMT
I've come across a product called "Taffix" (just google it). It is a nasal spray that purports to create a hostile environment in the nasal cavity where up to 97% of viruses can't survive. It works within 50 seconds and each single dose apparently protects for 5 hours. It works by lowering the ph in the nose from 6.5 (which apparently viruses love) to 3.5 which renders them ineffective. It does say it should be used IN ADDITION to wearing a mask and social distancing etc. While it purports to cost £13 per 1000mg bottle, it appears you can only purchase a "family pack" of four, costing £52 . I did spot some profiteering bastard on Amazon trying to sell one bottle for over £30. Just wondering whether anyone has heard of it or even tried it. A very quick google suggests the active ingredient is hypromellose. Eyedrops. It seems to have been waved around previously for nasal use as a counter to rhinitis. Hay fever. SWMBO proof-reads an ENT medical journal. There's not been anything about this in that. But that quick google said there'd been plenty in the Daily Express...
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,231
Likes: 11,422
|
Post by ilmoro on Jan 2, 2021 11:33:48 GMT
Not sure you can draw that conclusion. Cant see anything that suggests that the 940 recipients were determined by the PCN rather than of the NHS list. The process is controlled by the NHS/PHE. Doesnt matter how determined the PCN was, the NHS decided when they got the vaccine not the PCN, presumably based on the criteria used to determine tiers etc. The question is what are the criteria that determines who gets priority once the vaccine is available ... being in line for a second birthday card from the Queen oddly doesnt seem to be a qualification despite the JCVI criteria for priority 2 As with everything else it seems, clarity is not part of the communications and introduces concern & confusion as a result. I had a text from my GP surgery saying that I could apply and to phone them for an appointment, I phoned immediately and was given the two appointments 3 weeks apart, however they could not accept my wife as she was under 80. OK, that does seem a little more proactive/flexible than just 'your name isnt on the list' even if you qualify. I suspect the heavy hand of bureaucracy has reasserted itself after the early days when there was a more flexible attitude ... weve got vaccine, who can we legitimately give it to
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jan 2, 2021 11:38:21 GMT
Not sure you can draw that conclusion. Cant see anything that suggests that the 940 recipients were determined by the PCN rather than of the NHS list. The process is controlled by the NHS/PHE. Doesnt matter how determined the PCN was, the NHS decided when they got the vaccine not the PCN, presumably based on the criteria used to determine tiers etc. The question is what are the criteria that determines who gets priority once the vaccine is available ... being in line for a second birthday card from the Queen oddly doesnt seem to be a qualification despite the JCVI criteria for priority 2 As with everything else it seems, clarity is not part of the communications and introduces concern & confusion as a result. I had a text from my GP surgery saying that I could apply and to phone them for an appointment, I phoned immediately and was given the two appointments 3 weeks apart, however they could not accept my wife as she was under 80. Umm, the text point is of interest. My parents mobile phone is useless - no signal. I do hope the surgery has not been trying to contact them on that......
|
|