FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > BMA at odds with Government on vaccine .
BMA at odds with Government on vaccine .
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
I firstly must admit that I have been impressed by the large numbers of vaccinations taking place recently so all credit to the health service and volunteers.
This morning the chief of the BMA has called for the ending of the large gap between the first and second injection in relation to the Pfizer vaccine as there is no data to say this is as effective and the WHO are recommending countries don’t follow our path.
My dads got his injection so I’m personably benefitting from the swift rollout but if he’s not getting a proper vaccination with the gap being too large is it substandard care?
Given this governments penchant for stretching the truth and fluffing numbers for political gain am I right to wonder if numbers matter over lives??
This is not a Tory / Labour or Brexit argument it’s about Boris and he’s reputation for lies over bad news.
Are they so desperate for good news they are cutting corners without medical facts to back up their actions?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I said asked this on another thread but it's suitable for here too.
Is it better to have a larger % of the population having some sort of protection or is it better to have a smaller % of the population having more protection.
I don't know the answer but I can see the dilemma |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No.
What would be the point if it didn't work
It will work to a point but be less effective is the point made by the BMA
So percentage wise more will die! "
They didn't say it would be less effective, they said there is no data, which you said in the opening post. You also said this is not about Labour or Tories or Brexit, then accused Johnson of lying  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
This opinion would seek to imply Boris sits in number 10 making a decision on vaccinations.
the records of both the MHRA and JCVI are freely available, along with the scientific data.
putting their considerable professional reputation and credibility on the line, at the request/pressure of Boris - just so there's a bit of good political news?
No. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Too hot made this point last night and I can’t see any good reason for the big gap the wife got hers last week her next one is second of March to me after reading the posts seems to big a gap but what do I know lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No.
What would be the point if it didn't work
It will work to a point but be less effective is the point made by the BMA
So percentage wise more will die!
They didn't say it would be less effective, they said there is no data, which you said in the opening post. You also said this is not about Labour or Tories or Brexit, then accused Johnson of lying "
God forbid. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke. |
I posted this on another thread over in VIRUS forum.
_______________________________________
The data that is being discussed now: Is because Israel said the efficacy rate was lower than expected in their experience at 33%
Many Doctors around the world have said that the data does not have a proper context to make those extrapolations."
vis-a-vi:
"Meanwhile, professor of pharmacoepidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Stephen Evans said, “The UK will soon have its own data showing efficacy after the first dose for the different vaccines currently in use and any policy changes should await more robust data. If, for example, efficacy after one dose was 33% but efficacy after two doses was 60%, the UK policy would still be justified. Similar arguments apply in relation to efficacy against serious disease.”
BMJ Published 22 January 2021
______________________________________________
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I firstly must admit that I have been impressed by the large numbers of vaccinations taking place recently so all credit to the health service and volunteers.
This morning the chief of the BMA has called for the ending of the large gap between the first and second injection in relation to the Pfizer vaccine as there is no data to say this is as effective and the WHO are recommending countries don’t follow our path.
My dads got his injection so I’m personably benefitting from the swift rollout but if he’s not getting a proper vaccination with the gap being too large is it substandard care?
Given this governments penchant for stretching the truth and fluffing numbers for political gain am I right to wonder if numbers matter over lives??
This is not a Tory / Labour or Brexit argument it’s about Boris and he’s reputation for lies over bad news.
Are they so desperate for good news they are cutting corners without medical facts to back up their actions?
"
It is a dilemma for sure. I see people are getting the second dose (nearly half a million so far) but first dose getting priority. My concern is they will have to keep up this highly impressive speed until all have both doses. Otherwise some will wait even longer than the 12 weeks
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"No.
What would be the point if it didn't work
It will work to a point but be less effective is the point made by the BMA
So percentage wise more will die!
They didn't say it would be less effective, they said there is no data, which you said in the opening post. You also said this is not about Labour or Tories or Brexit, then accused Johnson of lying "
I don’t associate Boris with our regulate parties which is weird but true. I think like trump he is a blip in our commons sense. I’ve voted Tory but would never vote for this guy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"I posted this on another thread over in VIRUS forum.
_______________________________________
The data that is being discussed now: Is because Israel said the efficacy rate was lower than expected in their experience at 33%
Many Doctors around the world have said that the data does not have a proper context to make those extrapolations."
vis-a-vi:
"Meanwhile, professor of pharmacoepidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Stephen Evans said, “The UK will soon have its own data showing efficacy after the first dose for the different vaccines currently in use and any policy changes should await more robust data. If, for example, efficacy after one dose was 33% but efficacy after two doses was 60%, the UK policy would still be justified. Similar arguments apply in relation to efficacy against serious disease.”
BMJ Published 22 January 2021
______________________________________________
"
Good post and confirms it seams to be a political push rather than a medical recommendation. I’m not saying just one vaccine won’t help but if it’s effectiveness is low then we are getting a false sense of security .
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"This opinion would seek to imply Boris sits in number 10 making a decision on vaccinations.
the records of both the MHRA and JCVI are freely available, along with the scientific data.
putting their considerable professional reputation and credibility on the line, at the request/pressure of Boris - just so there's a bit of good political news?
No."
The cabinet have been reported as pushing very hard with the NHS to get as many vaccinations out as they can and promised 2 million a week. If the second dose bites into that promised number that would make the claim incorrect and lead to criticism of the Cabinet. I would rather they say this will be 1 million a week and be truthful against the recommended timings on the second dose.
I don’t want lies I want the truth and then we know it’s not lowering the risk until later in the year and we don’t get false hopes.
There are too many lies and in the end the government is ignored when they are found out!
That’s not good for anyone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"I firstly must admit that I have been impressed by the large numbers of vaccinations taking place recently so all credit to the health service and volunteers.
This morning the chief of the BMA has called for the ending of the large gap between the first and second injection in relation to the Pfizer vaccine as there is no data to say this is as effective and the WHO are recommending countries don’t follow our path.
My dads got his injection so I’m personably benefitting from the swift rollout but if he’s not getting a proper vaccination with the gap being too large is it substandard care?
Given this governments penchant for stretching the truth and fluffing numbers for political gain am I right to wonder if numbers matter over lives??
This is not a Tory / Labour or Brexit argument it’s about Boris and he’s reputation for lies over bad news.
Are they so desperate for good news they are cutting corners without medical facts to back up their actions?
It is a dilemma for sure. I see people are getting the second dose (nearly half a million so far) but first dose getting priority. My concern is they will have to keep up this highly impressive speed until all have both doses. Otherwise some will wait even longer than the 12 weeks
"
I agree and really hope the doses keep coming . Like I said my dads had his first and I certainly want him to have an effective second. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I posted this on another thread over in VIRUS forum.
_______________________________________
The data that is being discussed now: Is because Israel said the efficacy rate was lower than expected in their experience at 33%
Many Doctors around the world have said that the data does not have a proper context to make those extrapolations."
vis-a-vi:
"Meanwhile, professor of pharmacoepidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Stephen Evans said, “The UK will soon have its own data showing efficacy after the first dose for the different vaccines currently in use and any policy changes should await more robust data. If, for example, efficacy after one dose was 33% but efficacy after two doses was 60%, the UK policy would still be justified. Similar arguments apply in relation to efficacy against serious disease.”
BMJ Published 22 January 2021
______________________________________________
Good post and confirms it seams to be a political push rather than a medical recommendation. I’m not saying just one vaccine won’t help but if it’s effectiveness is low then we are getting a false sense of security .
"
This.
It's sounds like an obsession with numbers rather than people's health. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I am way down the list to get the vaccine but if I could I would have it tomorrow.
I personally think that the vaccine doses should be given as is stated by the company who has made them.
I hope the government do change the way they are thinking and follow this advice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
There is a long thread on this topic over in the virus room.
Briefly:
Boris is wrong, the government policy of 12 weeks is wrong.
The government is not following science, it is in fact directly rejecting the instructions of the vaccine developers, it is going against the terms under which the vaccine was licensed as being safe to administer.
There is scientific basis that the longer delay between doses will give a population with only marginal immunity, and (like when only partial courses of antibiotics are taken) increase the probability of a vaccine resistant covid mutation. Which would not only put the UK population at risk, but conceivably bugger up the entire global investment in the production of the vaccines. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm. "
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose. "
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it. "
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
"
Are we just ignoring the role of the MHRA and JCVI in all of this, instead building a picture of Boris somehow being able to fudge the scientific data.
How involved have the BMA been in all of the approval process to be as close to analyse, review and qualify all the data.
To quote the phrase adopted by the MHRA, “ safety is our watchword” - I believe they also have people’s health firmly at the centre of everything they do.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
Are we just ignoring the role of the MHRA and JCVI in all of this, instead building a picture of Boris somehow being able to fudge the scientific data.
How involved have the BMA been in all of the approval process to be as close to analyse, review and qualify all the data.
To quote the phrase adopted by the MHRA, “ safety is our watchword” - I believe they also have people’s health firmly at the centre of everything they do.
"
The MHRA is solely converted with safety so it’s not in itself going to kill anyone so not sure of your point?
The JCVI is an advisory body made up of experienced Doctors and professors who are also likely to be members of the BMA
They don’t say it’s unsafe to spread the vaccine doses but the data doesn’t support the push to increase the dosages spread which the BMA are questioning as there is no reason to increase this gap other than shortages or political influence . Which is it?
Either way it seems to be a risky approach without sound medical proof!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
Are we just ignoring the role of the MHRA and JCVI in all of this, instead building a picture of Boris somehow being able to fudge the scientific data.
How involved have the BMA been in all of the approval process to be as close to analyse, review and qualify all the data.
To quote the phrase adopted by the MHRA, “ safety is our watchword” - I believe they also have people’s health firmly at the centre of everything they do.
The MHRA is solely converted with safety so it’s not in itself going to kill anyone so not sure of your point?
The JCVI is an advisory body made up of experienced Doctors and professors who are also likely to be members of the BMA
They don’t say it’s unsafe to spread the vaccine doses but the data doesn’t support the push to increase the dosages spread which the BMA are questioning as there is no reason to increase this gap other than shortages or political influence . Which is it?
Either way it seems to be a risky approach without sound medical proof!
"
you are happy for your family to take a vaccine the MHRA have approved, but question their judgement when they approve an extended period between first and second doses?
The responsibilty of the MHRA doesn't end when they sign on the dotted line.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
Are we just ignoring the role of the MHRA and JCVI in all of this, instead building a picture of Boris somehow being able to fudge the scientific data.
How involved have the BMA been in all of the approval process to be as close to analyse, review and qualify all the data.
To quote the phrase adopted by the MHRA, “ safety is our watchword” - I believe they also have people’s health firmly at the centre of everything they do.
The MHRA is solely converted with safety so it’s not in itself going to kill anyone so not sure of your point?
The JCVI is an advisory body made up of experienced Doctors and professors who are also likely to be members of the BMA
They don’t say it’s unsafe to spread the vaccine doses but the data doesn’t support the push to increase the dosages spread which the BMA are questioning as there is no reason to increase this gap other than shortages or political influence . Which is it?
Either way it seems to be a risky approach without sound medical proof!
you are happy for your family to take a vaccine the MHRA have approved, but question their judgement when they approve an extended period between first and second doses?
The responsibilty of the MHRA doesn't end when they sign on the dotted line.
"
Did they approve the extension ? Where they asked ? It’s not questioning safety is it? It’s questioning best practice effectiveness .
I don’t know where their responsibility ends! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
Are we just ignoring the role of the MHRA and JCVI in all of this, instead building a picture of Boris somehow being able to fudge the scientific data.
How involved have the BMA been in all of the approval process to be as close to analyse, review and qualify all the data.
To quote the phrase adopted by the MHRA, “ safety is our watchword” - I believe they also have people’s health firmly at the centre of everything they do.
The MHRA is solely converted with safety so it’s not in itself going to kill anyone so not sure of your point?
The JCVI is an advisory body made up of experienced Doctors and professors who are also likely to be members of the BMA
They don’t say it’s unsafe to spread the vaccine doses but the data doesn’t support the push to increase the dosages spread which the BMA are questioning as there is no reason to increase this gap other than shortages or political influence . Which is it?
Either way it seems to be a risky approach without sound medical proof!
you are happy for your family to take a vaccine the MHRA have approved, but question their judgement when they approve an extended period between first and second doses?
The responsibilty of the MHRA doesn't end when they sign on the dotted line.
Did they approve the extension ? Where they asked ? It’s not questioning safety is it? It’s questioning best practice effectiveness .
I don’t know where their responsibility ends! "
These are the right questions to be asking, which are answered in the minutes of the JCVI, statements released by the 4 CMOS and in the conditions set out by the MHRA in authorising the different vaccines.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it. "
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not."
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus "
I was replying to the claim above that "I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma". Which is just utter bollocks. Any information that Johnson has he is incapable of understanding, and he does not listen to anybody that can understand the information. And the vaccine roll out is everything to do with Johnson - have you heard the phrase "the buck stops here"? This is one of the most important processes ever for the health of the nation. Taking a gamble with millions of lives, against the advice of the vaccine manufacturer, is the height of stupidity, it is not good governance. If Johnson is not taking responsibility, he should not be in the job.
Just a few weeks ago we had voices on here saying that the vaccine was insufficiently tested, how did the manufacturer know it would be safe, that there were bound to be unknown side effects. We now get the very same voices saying fuck the advice of the medical teams that developed this, we can ignore all that crap, it's gonna be fine to take it any which way that the tory government decides on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus "
Of course it is
Who is it do with if not the pm? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"I said asked this on another thread but it's suitable for here too.
Is it better to have a larger % of the population having some sort of protection or is it better to have a smaller % of the population having more protection.
I don't know the answer but I can see the dilemma "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not."
So a bright 9 year can go to oxford ? Sorry but he has access to the very best scientific brains in this country, his decisions are based on their knowledge you are letting your hatred of him blind you . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus
Of course it is
Who is it do with if not the pm?"
So are you going to praise him for the success of it so far? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus
Of course it is
Who is it do with if not the pm?
So are you going to praise him for the success of it so far? "
I said the other day that once it got into the hands of the professionals..it seemed to run a lot smoother.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus
Of course it is
Who is it do with if not the pm?
So are you going to praise him for the success of it so far?
I said the other day that once it got into the hands of the professionals..it seemed to run a lot smoother.
"
The vaccine roll out has always been in the hands of the professionals, do you think Boris goes round with it in a van?
So the gap in the doses is fine then? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus
Of course it is
Who is it do with if not the pm?
So are you going to praise him for the success of it so far?
I said the other day that once it got into the hands of the professionals..it seemed to run a lot smoother.
The vaccine roll out has always been in the hands of the professionals, do you think Boris goes round with it in a van?
So the gap in the doses is fine then? "
Again..like I said the other day..The NHS and the army are seemingly responsible.
I don't know.
I can see the logic in doing it but there seems to be some criticism.
The number of vulnerable people catching it..should..drop dramatically. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
So a bright 9 year can go to oxford ? Sorry but he has access to the very best scientific brains in this country, his decisions are based on their knowledge you are letting your hatred of him blind you ."
Boris did not do a science degree. If you want a phrase in Latin then I've no doubt he's your man. But in matters of science a bright scientifically aware nine year old is better than a scientifically ignorant arts graduate who's families money and contacts got him into Oxford.
Also he might have access to the very best scientific brains in this country, but that means nothing if he tells them what to say instead of listening to what they say. In any case I'm certain that Pfizer has access to the very best scientific brains that actually developed their vaccine, which on the matter of their vaccine is somewhat better than having access to the very best scientific brains that did not develop their vaccine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus
Of course it is
Who is it do with if not the pm?
So are you going to praise him for the success of it so far?
I said the other day that once it got into the hands of the professionals..it seemed to run a lot smoother.
The vaccine roll out has always been in the hands of the professionals, do you think Boris goes round with it in a van?
So the gap in the doses is fine then? "
None is questioning the doctors and nurses who stick the needles in your arm.
We are questioning the same leaders who didn’t listen to advice on the need for a quick lockdown in March who are now not listening to the vaccine manufacturers who say second dose in two to three week maximum thanks.
The WHO say don’t follow the U.K. the BMA are saying this is wrong. If I gave you the choice between Boris and Co. or the BMA and your life depended on that choice , would you think a little longer? That’s the reality of why I raised the point, which is this in fact a race for numbers which is leading us into an almighty fuck up of the highest degree and leading ultimately to untold unnecessary deaths.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus
Of course it is
Who is it do with if not the pm?
So are you going to praise him for the success of it so far?
I said the other day that once it got into the hands of the professionals..it seemed to run a lot smoother.
The vaccine roll out has always been in the hands of the professionals, do you think Boris goes round with it in a van?
So the gap in the doses is fine then?
Again..like I said the other day..The NHS and the army are seemingly responsible.
I don't know.
I can see the logic in doing it but there seems to be some criticism.
The number of vulnerable people catching it..should..drop dramatically."
Yes and it looks good as hospital numbers drop but if the vaccine doesn’t kill off the bug in you properly it apparently gives the virus a chance to survive and mutate more than if the vaccine was more effective. It would then come back even worse every time. I personally have no idea how this science works so I’m just repeating what I’ve heard and I definitely can’t prove or show scientific reason on anything. I just worry if the WHO say no don’t do that and the BMA and the manufacturers say we shouldn’t there must be a bloody good reason.
My argument I started is because I don’t trust Boris to be truthful as he wants good news. We’re all grown ups and have seen the terrible news this virus brings. If we really can’t vaccinate everyone properly then just say it. No more bullshit political angles over the very real people who have and are still dying. Those horrific statistics deserve grown up honest government not spin. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
Are we just ignoring the role of the MHRA and JCVI in all of this, instead building a picture of Boris somehow being able to fudge the scientific data.
How involved have the BMA been in all of the approval process to be as close to analyse, review and qualify all the data.
To quote the phrase adopted by the MHRA, “ safety is our watchword” - I believe they also have people’s health firmly at the centre of everything they do.
The MHRA is solely converted with safety so it’s not in itself going to kill anyone so not sure of your point?
The JCVI is an advisory body made up of experienced Doctors and professors who are also likely to be members of the BMA
They don’t say it’s unsafe to spread the vaccine doses but the data doesn’t support the push to increase the dosages spread which the BMA are questioning as there is no reason to increase this gap other than shortages or political influence . Which is it?
Either way it seems to be a risky approach without sound medical proof!
you are happy for your family to take a vaccine the MHRA have approved, but question their judgement when they approve an extended period between first and second doses?
The responsibilty of the MHRA doesn't end when they sign on the dotted line.
Did they approve the extension ? Where they asked ? It’s not questioning safety is it? It’s questioning best practice effectiveness .
I don’t know where their responsibility ends!
These are the right questions to be asking, which are answered in the minutes of the JCVI, statements released by the 4 CMOS and in the conditions set out by the MHRA in authorising the different vaccines.
"
The MHRA could not have authorised the extension between the doses as there is no data available. It is shown in the authorisation that the manufacturers are obliged to update the data as soon as it’s available. The delivery of the vaccine is considered to be developing so not final.
Given the Chief medical officers also don’t have the data they are guessing. It may be a good guess but still guessing. I bet Boris will be telling them so you can’t say it won’t work? And you can’t say it’s proven to be a risky option to have just one dose, as there is no data.
Is this as I said politics overriding good long term health practice? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
Are we just ignoring the role of the MHRA and JCVI in all of this, instead building a picture of Boris somehow being able to fudge the scientific data.
How involved have the BMA been in all of the approval process to be as close to analyse, review and qualify all the data.
To quote the phrase adopted by the MHRA, “ safety is our watchword” - I believe they also have people’s health firmly at the centre of everything they do.
The MHRA is solely converted with safety so it’s not in itself going to kill anyone so not sure of your point?
The JCVI is an advisory body made up of experienced Doctors and professors who are also likely to be members of the BMA
They don’t say it’s unsafe to spread the vaccine doses but the data doesn’t support the push to increase the dosages spread which the BMA are questioning as there is no reason to increase this gap other than shortages or political influence . Which is it?
Either way it seems to be a risky approach without sound medical proof!
you are happy for your family to take a vaccine the MHRA have approved, but question their judgement when they approve an extended period between first and second doses?
The responsibilty of the MHRA doesn't end when they sign on the dotted line.
Did they approve the extension ? Where they asked ? It’s not questioning safety is it? It’s questioning best practice effectiveness .
I don’t know where their responsibility ends!
These are the right questions to be asking, which are answered in the minutes of the JCVI, statements released by the 4 CMOS and in the conditions set out by the MHRA in authorising the different vaccines.
The MHRA could not have authorised the extension between the doses as there is no data available. It is shown in the authorisation that the manufacturers are obliged to update the data as soon as it’s available. The delivery of the vaccine is considered to be developing so not final.
Given the Chief medical officers also don’t have the data they are guessing. It may be a good guess but still guessing. I bet Boris will be telling them so you can’t say it won’t work? And you can’t say it’s proven to be a risky option to have just one dose, as there is no data.
Is this as I said politics overriding good long term health practice? "
It wouldn't be the first time... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Before the vaccine was on the scene the only method of staying safe was the lockdown and isolation, masks and distancing.
All of which are still in place and should be as effective now as before.
So why not take advantage of that to increase numbers vaccinated?
If the vaccine was the ONLY course of action being taken then i would agree with WHO and get as many with both doses as soon as possible.
Couple that with the fact Pfizer are having problems with supply, personally i think the strategy has merit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus
Of course it is
Who is it do with if not the pm?
So are you going to praise him for the success of it so far?
I said the other day that once it got into the hands of the professionals..it seemed to run a lot smoother.
The vaccine roll out has always been in the hands of the professionals, do you think Boris goes round with it in a van?
So the gap in the doses is fine then?
None is questioning the doctors and nurses who stick the needles in your arm.
We are questioning the same leaders who didn’t listen to advice on the need for a quick lockdown in March who are now not listening to the vaccine manufacturers who say second dose in two to three week maximum thanks.
The WHO say don’t follow the U.K. the BMA are saying this is wrong. If I gave you the choice between Boris and Co. or the BMA and your life depended on that choice , would you think a little longer? That’s the reality of why I raised the point, which is this in fact a race for numbers which is leading us into an almighty fuck up of the highest degree and leading ultimately to untold unnecessary deaths.
"
Do you seriously believe that Boris and Co. are not listening to the advice on this? What use are headline numbers now, if in a few months time the vaccine hasn't worked? I've never heard such crap just because you don't like the bloke. And as for the lockdown in March, I also heard the experts at the time saying it would be wrong to lock down too early. People spread this virus, not the government, and they should take more responsibility for themselves and others. There was a wedding party at a school in London the other day with 400 guests. 400! If people aren't listening by now then what hope is there of them ever listening. I suppose that's Boris's fault though |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
So a bright 9 year can go to oxford ? Sorry but he has access to the very best scientific brains in this country, his decisions are based on their knowledge you are letting your hatred of him blind you .
Boris did not do a science degree. If you want a phrase in Latin then I've no doubt he's your man. But in matters of science a bright scientifically aware nine year old is better than a scientifically ignorant arts graduate who's families money and contacts got him into Oxford.
Also he might have access to the very best scientific brains in this country, but that means nothing if he tells them what to say instead of listening to what they say. In any case I'm certain that Pfizer has access to the very best scientific brains that actually developed their vaccine, which on the matter of their vaccine is somewhat better than having access to the very best scientific brains that did not develop their vaccine."
Says the person who says the virus could become immune to the vaccine in the same way as bacteria do to antibiotics, that shows the level of your knowledge on the subject.
People dont get into oxford by money or influence once again your hatred and bias coming out. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andy 1Couple
over a year ago
northeast |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
So a bright 9 year can go to oxford ? Sorry but he has access to the very best scientific brains in this country, his decisions are based on their knowledge you are letting your hatred of him blind you ."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
Are we just ignoring the role of the MHRA and JCVI in all of this, instead building a picture of Boris somehow being able to fudge the scientific data.
How involved have the BMA been in all of the approval process to be as close to analyse, review and qualify all the data.
To quote the phrase adopted by the MHRA, “ safety is our watchword” - I believe they also have people’s health firmly at the centre of everything they do.
The MHRA is solely converted with safety so it’s not in itself going to kill anyone so not sure of your point?
The JCVI is an advisory body made up of experienced Doctors and professors who are also likely to be members of the BMA
They don’t say it’s unsafe to spread the vaccine doses but the data doesn’t support the push to increase the dosages spread which the BMA are questioning as there is no reason to increase this gap other than shortages or political influence . Which is it?
Either way it seems to be a risky approach without sound medical proof!
you are happy for your family to take a vaccine the MHRA have approved, but question their judgement when they approve an extended period between first and second doses?
The responsibilty of the MHRA doesn't end when they sign on the dotted line.
Did they approve the extension ? Where they asked ? It’s not questioning safety is it? It’s questioning best practice effectiveness .
I don’t know where their responsibility ends!
These are the right questions to be asking, which are answered in the minutes of the JCVI, statements released by the 4 CMOS and in the conditions set out by the MHRA in authorising the different vaccines.
The MHRA could not have authorised the extension between the doses as there is no data available. It is shown in the authorisation that the manufacturers are obliged to update the data as soon as it’s available. The delivery of the vaccine is considered to be developing so not final.
Given the Chief medical officers also don’t have the data they are guessing. It may be a good guess but still guessing. I bet Boris will be telling them so you can’t say it won’t work? And you can’t say it’s proven to be a risky option to have just one dose, as there is no data.
Is this as I said politics overriding good long term health practice? "
No.
Read the MHRA authorization and JCVI minutes.
You are questioning the integrity and professionalism of every single scientist, professor or doctor involved in order to promote a theory that is politically driven.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks
Is there any evidence this is actually happening ?"
Yes the figures are announced everyday. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks
Is there any evidence this is actually happening ?"
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
This link will show how many doses have been administered. You will see that nearly half a million second doses have been administered to date so yes they are happening.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I have seen figures that about 440,000 people have had two doses but not data about the gap between their doses. "
We only started vaccinating in December. I'm pretty sure that would put these 2nd doses into the timeline of 4/6 weeks |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I think the people who have had two doses are from the first batch up to 11th January who got their second dose after three weeks. I don't think there has ever been a policy of some second doses at 4/6 weeks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think the people who have had two doses are from the first batch up to 11th January who got their second dose after three weeks. I don't think there has ever been a policy of some second doses at 4/6 weeks. "
All I know is the data shows 70k ish people have received 2nd doses since the 11th.
Whether these have been 3/4/6 weeks, I have no idea. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
With respect, Boris knows fuck all about science. A bright nine year old with access to a library knows more about science than Boris Johnson. The government SAGE committee has been proven to just say any bloody thing that boris and his enforcers tell them to, since bj got the job there has been systematic removal of anybody that dared argue with him.
This is why we are in the fucking hole that we are in, with the worst daily death rate from covid in the world (or with covid if you like, I really don't give a shit about the precise semantics, people who would not have died if they had not been exposed to the SARS-COV-2 virus).
There may be many things that Boris Johnson is, but a scientific genius he certainly is bleeding not.
The vaccine roll out is fuck all to do with Johnson, jeeesus
Of course it is
Who is it do with if not the pm?
So are you going to praise him for the success of it so far?
I said the other day that once it got into the hands of the professionals..it seemed to run a lot smoother.
The vaccine roll out has always been in the hands of the professionals, do you think Boris goes round with it in a van?
So the gap in the doses is fine then?
None is questioning the doctors and nurses who stick the needles in your arm.
We are questioning the same leaders who didn’t listen to advice on the need for a quick lockdown in March who are now not listening to the vaccine manufacturers who say second dose in two to three week maximum thanks.
The WHO say don’t follow the U.K. the BMA are saying this is wrong. If I gave you the choice between Boris and Co. or the BMA and your life depended on that choice , would you think a little longer? That’s the reality of why I raised the point, which is this in fact a race for numbers which is leading us into an almighty fuck up of the highest degree and leading ultimately to untold unnecessary deaths.
Do you seriously believe that Boris and Co. are not listening to the advice on this? What use are headline numbers now, if in a few months time the vaccine hasn't worked? I've never heard such crap just because you don't like the bloke. And as for the lockdown in March, I also heard the experts at the time saying it would be wrong to lock down too early. People spread this virus, not the government, and they should take more responsibility for themselves and others. There was a wedding party at a school in London the other day with 400 guests. 400! If people aren't listening by now then what hope is there of them ever listening. I suppose that's Boris's fault though "
He hasn’t listened three times now regarding the timings of lockdown so yes I seriously doubt he’s listening. Those same experts must have been recommending a full week of mixing at Christmas then if they say locking down to early is bad. How can delaying lockdown help prevent the spread. Utter bollocks.
I’m hoping the rest of the cabinet grow some balls and challenge him. Yes I don’t like him but the post is about the shallow politics of image over substance.
The numbers won’t show for a long time and probably not until next winter so he’s on a good image for months yet.
I agree totally with you’re point on the moronic behaviour witnessed across the country regarding such things as parts weddings. They should be nailed by the authorities heavily. The smaller breeches I’m laying at the feet of Cummings as he said I’m alright Jack and fuck you. The governments message lost a lot of credibility in that one stupid act and the subsequent turning of a blind eye by Boris.
The wedding comment being Boris fault was like my reply a waste of a sentence but carry on. Maybe blame the right wing element of the Tory party and perhaps Farage as they are anti lockdown. Who knows but not part of my post so I’ll leave that there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1 OP Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Obviously there are a lot of people who are still receiving a second dose at four/six weeks, perhaps those are the people who are deemed to be more likely to produce a lower immune response from the first one so need the second quicker. Personally I can see the sense in getting as many done with the first dose as possible, it reduces the likely hood of needing hospital treatment which at the moment is the priority, even if it does turn out that stretching the gap lowers the response in the long term there is no reason that people cant receive more jabs later on, if as it appears the virus is mutating quickly then a yearly jab is probable, getting as many done as possible is the priority atm.
Good points made but. I think it’s getting the number done properly otherwise the risks could be the vaccine become ineffective and where do we go then? Referring to Polly’s quote this could be a very dangerous backwards step.
I’d trust the BMA over Boris any day you chose.
To be honest I expect boris has access to more info on this than the bma, viruses dont become resistant to vaccines in the same way bacteria do to antibiotics so it isnt the same risk. The two are completely different ways of tackling infections. I like everyone else here havent got the info the government has, it is their view based on the advice from sage who have no doubt had lots of discussions with Pfizer about it.
True and I’m not claiming any technical knowledge either but when the BMA complain then I listen as they have no agenda with this other than people’s health. Boris doesn’t do detail as we all know. He does however like good news over the truth.
Are we just ignoring the role of the MHRA and JCVI in all of this, instead building a picture of Boris somehow being able to fudge the scientific data.
How involved have the BMA been in all of the approval process to be as close to analyse, review and qualify all the data.
To quote the phrase adopted by the MHRA, “ safety is our watchword” - I believe they also have people’s health firmly at the centre of everything they do.
The MHRA is solely converted with safety so it’s not in itself going to kill anyone so not sure of your point?
The JCVI is an advisory body made up of experienced Doctors and professors who are also likely to be members of the BMA
They don’t say it’s unsafe to spread the vaccine doses but the data doesn’t support the push to increase the dosages spread which the BMA are questioning as there is no reason to increase this gap other than shortages or political influence . Which is it?
Either way it seems to be a risky approach without sound medical proof!
you are happy for your family to take a vaccine the MHRA have approved, but question their judgement when they approve an extended period between first and second doses?
The responsibilty of the MHRA doesn't end when they sign on the dotted line.
Did they approve the extension ? Where they asked ? It’s not questioning safety is it? It’s questioning best practice effectiveness .
I don’t know where their responsibility ends!
These are the right questions to be asking, which are answered in the minutes of the JCVI, statements released by the 4 CMOS and in the conditions set out by the MHRA in authorising the different vaccines.
The MHRA could not have authorised the extension between the doses as there is no data available. It is shown in the authorisation that the manufacturers are obliged to update the data as soon as it’s available. The delivery of the vaccine is considered to be developing so not final.
Given the Chief medical officers also don’t have the data they are guessing. It may be a good guess but still guessing. I bet Boris will be telling them so you can’t say it won’t work? And you can’t say it’s proven to be a risky option to have just one dose, as there is no data.
Is this as I said politics overriding good long term health practice?
No.
Read the MHRA authorization and JCVI minutes.
You are questioning the integrity and professionalism of every single scientist, professor or doctor involved in order to promote a theory that is politically driven.
"
I did actually read the MHRA release and authorisation before posting so my point still stands.
The BMA and WHO are challenging the extension of the dose so it’s professionals challenging the government policy not me. I’m questioning why the esteemed BMA are so concerned they’ve gone public? So yes my question has to be political as I’m not a medical professional. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Be very clear- this vaccination regime is NOT about the science and most certainly not about the individual, it’s about herd management- give the maximum number of bodies one vaccination and improve moral based on the false hope of safety and so have workers return and businesses reopen and get the economy restarted in some shape or form.
There is also a likely issue with logistics- proper vaccine regimes take double the number of vaccines, which the UK is unlikely to garner, lasts perhaps six months and is double the work. Without extending the gap there is no possibility of wholesale vaccination.
At the moment even with only one injection it’s likely revaccination targets will not be met either. This vaccine will not get rid of the vaccination- most people will still get infected at some point but the real hope is that it is not so severe, not so life-threatening for the majority and not swamp tge NHS. People will still die of it, though, vaccine or not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
the government have regularly demanded that their experts revise down their advise to suit the party narrative or resign. it appears from the ever changing dialogue surrounding the vaccine programme over previous months, that it is entirely possible that this instance is no different. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Be very clear- this vaccination regime is NOT about the science and most certainly not about the individual, it’s about herd management- give the maximum number of bodies one vaccination and improve moral based on the false hope of safety and so have workers return and businesses reopen and get the economy restarted in some shape or form.
There is also a likely issue with logistics- proper vaccine regimes take double the number of vaccines, which the UK is unlikely to garner, lasts perhaps six months and is double the work. Without extending the gap there is no possibility of wholesale vaccination.
At the moment even with only one injection it’s likely revaccination targets will not be met either. This vaccine will not get rid of the vaccination- most people will still get infected at some point but the real hope is that it is not so severe, not so life-threatening for the majority and not swamp tge NHS. People will still die of it, though, vaccine or not."
Just like the flu eh |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Only in that they are both viruses.
SARS-cov-19 kills in many other ways than influenza does and has the possibility of mutating into much more dangerous variants affecting much younger people and next generations. But yes, there are vaccines for both. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
