Re: Coronavirus
 

JFman, along with many others is part of the rich tapestry of CF, and we’d be poorer without him. No matter how much he melts your head.

However


But you appear to be ignoring the very much reported issue of people demonstrably rejecting the AZ vaccine due to the info-war against it. Nothing to do with supply chain or logistics, people outrightly refusing to take it for fear of Blood clots, or it just not working.

politicians working for or responding to, lobbyists from other vaccine developers not yet in the game.

no...politicians, wanting to alter the,aging field so that vaccine developers they represent get a slice of the pie.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not sure people are refusing it in significant enough numbers to make money for other vaccine developers.

Your accusation seems to be that politicians in the US and Europe are corrupt, but only in the hands of pharmaceutical companies they represent. I’d contest that such widespread corruption in favour of corporate interests is just as likely (if not moreso) to come from the tens of (hundreds of) billions of pounds/dollars/euro at risk outside the the pharmaceutical sector. Boeing and Airbus can’t be too happy with all these planes not running up mileage.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Channel 4 News reporting that restrictions could be made on the AZ vaccine in the UK on under 30s but the MHRA saying “no decision has been made”.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-for-under-30s

The Guardian even dug up Professor Pantsdown for a quote. I’m sure the story over the weekend about giving people in their 20s the J&J vaccine “to allow them to get one shot and jet off on holiday” is conveniently timed and 100% unlinked.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Looks like some other vaccine manufacturer could get a slice of the pie £

Re: Coronavirus
 

Indeed, with good honest UK politicians and regulators making the decision we can be 100% confident that there’s no corruption in their processes. No drinking buddies, party donors etc. The sort of thing you’d expect from Europe.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

How quickly will AstraZeneca become a Swedish company if the vaccine is restricted. Much like Andy Murray is Scottish when he loses and British when he wins

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nah, their place in the great British success story is cemented as long as we avoid a deadly fourth wave.

I do hope they get to the bottom of the risk factors around clotting issue though - if this has to turn into an annual vaccine safety will be paramount to public confidence and "emergency use" is an easy decision knee deep in a pandemic, it might not always be so straightforward.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There's a risk factor in everything we do, and we need to look at the risk of death/serious illness from a blood clot, as opposed to the risk of death/serious illness from catching Covid.

In the current state of things, we also need to factor in the difference between having the vaccination or not, which introduces a greater risk of transmission to others from those who don't vaccinate (and also a probably reduced lifestyle for those who don't).

I think it's developing into a 'bark is worse than the bite' scenario, where people are more concerned about a possible blood clot than catching & transmitting Covid ;)

Regarding the yearly vaccination, by that time we will (hopefully) have better figures on the vaccine and it's side effects.

Re: Coronavirus
 

30 cases out of 18 million really ought to be re-stated every time this is discussed, because some of the commentary around this is starting to make it sound like taking the AZ vaccine is Russian roulette.

If there is a direct causal link then the odds of getting a blood clot from the vaccine are still ridiculously low. If there is a direct causal link, then some of the reported cases will still not have been caused by the vaccine because these things occur naturally in the population at a low rate anyway.

The danger here is that we talk ourselves into losing confidence in the vaccine for no other reason that talking about the latest covid-related gossip is now the national pastime.

If I were a betting man, I’d bet that the single-dose J&J vaccine is offered to younger people, and that the official advice underpinning that is that this is a harder-to-reach age group and a single vaccine is therefore advantageous. That will allow AZ to be restricted from the age group where it *might* pose an identifiable risk, without there being any loud public statements that undermine overall confidence in the AZ vaccine.

Meanwhile, as research continues, if there is a link, then it ought to be possible to identify why one vaccine causes clots and another doesn’t. Vaccines can and do get reformulated when necessary.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don't think there's any doubt about the fact there's an identifiable risk given it's independently noted in the UK, Germany and others.

The question is whether it's an acceptable risk, which for a vaccination programme by consent hits problems for the members of the public who have been told they are extremely low risk of Covid complications anyway.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Pretty much this - if there is a small risk of increased clotting events in certain populations and there are enough vaccines of different types to go around, then recommending AZ for those at a lower risk and Pfizer, Janssen, Moderna and Novavax for everyone else seems sensible.

That said, if you're in an 'at risk' group for clotting events and already have had your first shot of AZ, not sure what's going to happen there - mix and match or take the risk of a second shot of AZ?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Suspect they'll apply the logic that they didn't get complications the first time and it's extremely rare rather than introduce mix and match.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

30 cases out of 18million subjects is lower than what you expect in the general population.

I wonder how many people have fallen and broken their arm since having the vaccine? No doubt there could causal relationship between the vaccine and broken limbs if you looked hard enough.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It isn’t though, that’s why almost everyone is investigating.

Incidence of these rare blood clots could be as low as 2 per million in a 12 month period. Germany is seeing a higher incidence than the UK, as are other EU nations who based on their hapless vaccine rollout wouldn’t expect to see any at all.

The uneven distribution by age, sex, presumably is making it even more noteworthy.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The key thing is the blood clots have not occurred with the other Covid 19 vaccines.

I looked into why other countries throughout the world were being so cautious. One element is that they have a far higher level of vaccine scepticism - polls in France suggest half the population may decline a vaccine. So, unless statistically small issues are exhaustively investigated, populations may refuse the vaccine even if it is rolled out. Waiting and investigating may result in a higher uptake rate.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’ll be a good one for the public inquiry to find out what the MHRA knew and when under their “yellow card” scheme. It would seem odd for a statistically significant deviation to be observed in the hapless EU programme but not first emerge in the world beating UK vaccination programme.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's good at least to see that the vigilance systems work. From the noises of various regulatory bodies, it seems like women under 50 are at a higher than normal risk. Of course, the UK has been working on the oldest most vulnerable populations first so significant numbers in the UK may not have popped up until now.

If I have time later, I might have a look at Norway's vaccine prioritisation process to see if health workers or teachers were prioritised earlier which would then have exposed a much younger cohort earlier than the UK's process.

Re: Coronavirus
 

As low as two or as high a five per million that means, using 18million as a stake in the ground, but obviously the vaccinated number will go up, that you would expect to see anywhere between 36 - 90 cases, in that cohort of 18 million naturally.

As Chris pointed out some weeks ago, it seems to be young women affected mostly. A section most likely to take contraception pills, that also cause blood clots as a side affect.

https://www.stoptheclot.org/about-cl...control_clots/

---------- Post added at 15:48 ---------- Previous post was at 15:38 ----------

That is not correct

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special...clusives/91813

More investigations are required but I would think it is still too early to put a causal link to these issues at the hands of the vaccines.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Even if it were as high as 5 per million you're not factoring in the likelihood of it happening within X (MHRA haven't gone public with this) days of vaccination among a subset vaccinated between the start of January and March 23 (or whatever the cutoff the MHRA still use).

The cohort size hasn't permanently been 18 million - it's rising over time so analysis is more complicated.

You're also conflating blood clots in general with the rare type being seen here. If there is evidence that, linked with the contraceptive pill or other medication, the risk is higher than a vaccination programme by consent has to be open and transparent about what the risks are. Not wrap them up in a Union Flag and blame the dastardly EU.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A bit of lateral thinking: what if the vaccine is REDUCING the chance of a brain clot? The incidence has greatly reduced from what is normally seen.

:dunce:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wow, had a quick look at the 'Yellow card' reporting for the COVID vaccines. It seems a LOT of people report side effects!

Have fun with the reports for Pfizer and AZ

Someone apparently vomited themselves to death after the AZ vaccine. Nasty (and NOT a definite link at this point)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

The problem also exists that if you give people a list of side effects they MAY experience, coupled with a website to report them at, you'll get quite a few that think they're doing the right thing by reporting something trivial that they forget they've had on numerous occasions before. ;)

Not saying there aren't problems, but . . .

Re: Coronavirus
 

I stand corrected.

Twitter informs me The Guardian have already moved from “the Oxford vaccine” to “the AstraZeneca vaccine” for bad news stories. :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Oxford-AstraZeneca child trial placed on hold
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56656356

Re: Coronavirus
 

Does all this mean that instead of having a vaccination passport to fly abroad, you now have to prove you haven't been vaccinated instead?

Can't be having the problem of blood clots when you're flying around, especially if you're a little on the tall side ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nope, that's raw data. Yellow Card reporting is unfiltered as anyone can drop in a report here. I remember some time back when you were discussing flu vaccine side effects and I recommended dropping a Yellow Card report in.

Here are the words from the MHRA with the important bits highlighted;

Just idly scrolling through the Pfizer list and there are some good ones in there. People reported the following as vaccine side effects;

• 6 electric shocks
• 1 crushed face
• 3 sunburn cases
• 39 negative COVID tests (oh no!)
• 1 bitten tongue
• 1 case of laziness
• 1 case of low income and 1 case of high income

We want to encourage side effect reporting, even for issues that wouldn't result in a doctor or hospital visit but some of the side effects reported are a stretch!

Re: Coronavirus
 

I think our society lost something when we stopped recording things like “simpleton” on the national census.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Or cretin.

Re: Coronavirus
 

yeah lets go back to when then hung thieves and debtors too

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Can not go back to it because they never hung em (unfortunately for the remoaners)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, I can think of one such person who ticks that box and will undoubtedly be given a Knighthood for helping save Leavers and Remainers alike from Coronavirus.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So as of last week, 130 or so cases of blood clotting side affects, after 30 odd million doses.

So potentially 4 in a 1,000,000 may develop an issue?

No need to panic then, but they will.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Would you vaccinate your kids?

---------- Post added at 16:03 ---------- Previous post was at 15:27 ----------

https://www.channel4.com/news/why-we...-advice-oxford

Channel 4’s story behind the story. Wonder who the ‘leading Government figure’ was and if any of today’s news would have seen the light of day if they hadn’t run with it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The odds narrow though when you slice the data by age and gender.

Even given a chance of death of four in a million or no chance of death with another vaccine I know which one most people would choose, everything else being equal.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Anyone on here ever been in a 'significant' road traffic accident?

Bet you still drive your car though . . . and take your kids with you :p:

Re: Coronavirus
 

No, and I'm on record on here no so long ago stating such.

There is no need. IMO, for any under 18's...........under 30's really without underlying conditions to be vaccinated, (in regards to the 18-30 unless they want to be)

Re: Coronavirus
 

I think that comment should really be in this thread. ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

The deaths is not 4 in a million, that's cases. I believe there have still only been 7 deaths.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A few more - 19 deaths according to the MHRA.

We still want under 30s vaccinated by the way if we want herd immunity...

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm not bothered about "herd immunity", as long as "at risk" groups are protected, hospitalisations are minimised to not over-burden the NHS and deaths are also greatly reduced. That's good enough.

Vaccinations should be a matter of choice, that's why I'm also against passports (domestic) and other means to coerce people.

And there is Zero evidence that kids need to be vaccinated.

19 deaths out of 30million doses..1 death per 1.5 million.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The more unvaccinated people who catch it and spread it (no matter what age they are), the more mutations will occur which the current vaccines may not work against.

Evidence shows that teenagers, particularly older teens, catch and spread it as much as adults.

Re: Coronavirus
 

which is what happens every year with the flu.

It has already been acknowledged that we will have to be vaccinated annually, as we do with the flu.

Still no way I would force anyone to be vaccinated that did not want to be, or coerce anybody by denying them access to freedoms if they haven't.

So what? if you've been vaccinated.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Per the latest announcements from the MHRA, EMA and WHO, there is a noted association but still no demonstrated causal link.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56665150

There is, by definition, still doubt over whether there is an “identifiable risk” with the Oxford-AZ vaccine. A link is plausible and there are plausible hypotheses around causation.

But as I’m sure you’ll agree, it’s important to be led by the science and not state more or less than has been established.

Re: Coronavirus
 

But if I knew that the significant road accident could then cause a number of other road accidents, who would then go on to cause lots more road accidents, which would then go on to cause even greater numbers of road accidents - I probably wouldn't... :erm:

---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:26 ----------

But, and I can't repeat this often enough, it isn't the flu...

And if one of the mutations finds a way round the vaccine, that defeats all the work we have put in already.

Re: Coronavirus
 

New advice issued by MHRA re AZ and blood clots.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/m...ur-blood-clots

Re: Coronavirus
 

Without a vaccination programme (and confidence in it) in practice the herd immunity threshold will never be hit without significant vaccine penetration (or infection) within those groups.

More restrictions, for longer and potentially future lockdowns.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just hung out to dry...

And that's the point I was making the other day about France but lost the will to proceed due to people knowing better :rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Suspect the politicians in the UK and EU - who don't have a vaccination plan of any substance without significant proportions of AZ vaccine will always play these 'doubts' despite the science.

The important part is that the benefits outweigh the risks, which they do. But that's not to say there are no risks.

What is quite obvious is that despite a huge "rally behind the flag' effort this couldn't be hushed up any longer against emerging evidence.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I know it isn’t but it will be monitored and managed annually like the flu

No evidence of that, the vaccine producers have already gone on record that they can adapt and develop the vaccines to address other strains as and when they might appear.

---------- Post added at 18:24 ---------- Previous post was at 18:21 ----------

If you are vaccinating those that need to be vaccinated, why the need for “herd immunity”. Zero COVID is like chasing the end of the rainbow.

Vaccinate the vulnerable, manage the risks, live our lives.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nobody is disputing the skill of vaccine developers. The capability to manufacture and distribute vaccines on the other hand takes months. Months of lockdowns and other restrictions.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, I'm sure the EMA was absolutely at the beck and call of No.10 when it came to announcing findings over this.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Herd immunity and zero Covid aren’t one and the same thing.

Managing the risk is to remove as many opportunities for the virus to mutate as possible.

Not managing that risk - not reaching the herd immunity threshold - is resigning ourselves to failure. Inevitable mutation, more restrictions, more lockdowns, greater economic costs and more requirement for vaccines in the long run.

---------- Post added at 18:32 ---------- Previous post was at 18:29 ----------

Nobody is doubting the EMAs transparency given they identified the risks first despite a slower vaccine rollout. We passed the threshold at which is was possible to blame it as the EU deflecting.

It’s apparent we’ve known for some time. The Telegraph article describing an upcoming “difficult two weeks” for the Oxford vaccine didn’t spawn itself into existence. Someone briefed that.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not sure I think "monitoring and managing" something with six times the death rate of flu an appropriate method of health management...

COVID is much more infectious and deadlier than the flu,so it can’t be "managed and monitored" like it.

https://www.health.org.uk/publicatio...a-proved-wrong

Re: Coronavirus
 

The EMA have announced their findiings today.

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/as...lots-low-blood

Re: Coronavirus
 

No more lockdowns: UK will treat Covid like seasonal flu, says Chris Whitty


Lockdowns will likely become a thing of the past once England emerges from restrictions in June, Professor Chris Whitty has said, as he suggested Britain will treat coronavirus like the flu in the future.


https://www.cityam.com/no-more-lockd...-chris-whitty/

Re: Coronavirus
 

If that is the case then no need for (internal) covid vaccine passport or twice a week testing.

Re: Coronavirus
 

we just may have to admit it's over and start living and working again.

Re: Coronavirus
 

On the contrary - it makes them more essential to managing the response. Not less.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well..................that’s why you will be vaccinated every year.......Like........the........flu

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00396-2

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/...20-p566no.html

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/covid-...ry?id=75830451

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thehouse/co...ants-1.5973320

---------- Post added at 19:48 ---------- Previous post was at 19:46 ----------

Don’t tell that to Hugh!

---------- Post added at 19:50 ---------- Previous post was at 19:48 ----------

No it doesn’t. The response is “vaccinate all those required - annually”

Re: Coronavirus
 

They're likely to already be on blood thinners such as Warfarin or Rivaroxaban to protect against such events.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And that is to manage the response to what?

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-...place-12266517

There's also this.

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4848

Re: Coronavirus
 

Manage the response to the Covid 19 pandemic. The same as always.

Pierre says zero Covid is an unachievable ambition. However there is no “living with the virus” in the short term. The idea that we hit a magic number of vaccinations and the Government just open the floodgates and say “we did all we could do” continues to be fanciful.

As I’ve said consistently throughout the thread the decision making that led to lockdown 1 makes another one inevitable unless something significant changes.

The vaccine should be a game changer. However the basics will still apply for some time - finding cases, identifying contacts, identifying who is at risk among those contacts. This should be much easier with the vaccines reducing transmission.

There’s still a significant amount of unknowns. Vaccine performance against known variants, vaccine performance against as yet unknown variants, vaccine performance over time.

Complacency now risks making all the same mistakes all over again and undoing significant achievements to date.

Then again. Some people haven’t considered Covid that serious for 15 months so I’m unsurprised some haven’t grasped this either.

Re: Coronavirus
 

As I replied, when you posted the same link 3 days ago, the full message he said was...

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-...iants-12263319

Re: Coronavirus
 

Don’t worry Papa , you can always bank this and post in a years time if Hugh has got it wrong.......he’d appreciate that.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just as well I stopped banking yours.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In the meantime we can just treat it as we do a seasonal flue....

Re: Coronavirus
 

You mean get a chimney sweep to sort it out? :erm:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Likewise.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A thread without jfman-Pierre discussion is like a house without windows. :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Iain “get back to the office and buy a coffee you plebs” Duncan-Smith isn’t happy about the MHRA advice.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ers-say-tories

That’s good enough for me. If we can get a quote from Steve Baker of the (I presume ironically named) Covid recovery group I’ll sleep easy tonight.

Re: Coronavirus
 

He doesn’t understand what they thought they were doing ... well, they were doing exactly what they do with every drug that starts to produce post-marketing data. The only problem is that in this case there’s extreme scrutiny of the whole process, which is understandable and unavoidable under the circumstances. The only slightly different line they could have taken would be to advise alternative vaccines without actually acknowledging that there’s a likely risk factor with the Ox-AZ vaccine but again, given the level of scrutiny this whole process is under, that probably wouldn’t have flown - it would just have looked like a fudge, which of course it would have been.

Jonathan Van Tam’s presentation this afternoon was erudite, balanced and very reassuring.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm not sure the MHRA could have said anything else. Unfortunately, whilst IDS may yearn for a simple life, the MHRA has to follow the science.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Steve Baker is out retweeting folk scaremongering about vaccinating kids.

That’s reassuring that our Conservative backbench MPs have the health of the nation at heart. Remember, as always, there’s no economic recovery without solving the health issue. ONS data shows kids driving all but the first wave (data not available), and no doubt the next one too as schools return with pitiful non-pharmaceutical interventions.

---------- Post added at 23:45 ---------- Previous post was at 23:37 ----------

Once the European data became so compelling the game was up. No amount of selective interpretation or skewing the data was ever going to allow the charade to continue.

It’s laughable really to think so-called credible scientists peddled the line a mere few weeks ago that there were less of these rare types of clots among those vaccinated than would be expected to be seen in a population of similar size. Including a release on the MHRA website that lasted a mere two days before being taken down.

The timeline can be traced from 15 March to the Telegraph article on 30 March. At some point between those dates the 15 March statements became demonstrably false to such a clear extent the story was put out on that basis.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Usually there would be substance in your posts that I could break down and argue against, or for and drive the debate forward.

There is nothing in that diatribe above, nothing.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Now, now Pierre. Your inability to argue a counterpoint isn’t something to be ashamed of but unsurprising given the link you posted the other day about it being a conspiracy against AZ because it’s the cheap vaccine. Politicians meddling over science was the claim. Ironically it appears our politicians been doing that all along, including a plea to suppress the Channel 4 story.

I like the fact IDS loves freedom that much, opposing vaccine passports, he doesn’t want the population to have informed consent when taking the vaccine. The contradiction is hilarious really. Unsurprising, but hilarious.

Re: Coronavirus
 

All this, yet still many people think the 'experts' are right every time . . . about everything ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

OK then

But

And

What about

https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov...id-in-schools/

Again, once everybody that needs to be vaccinated has been vaccinated we should just get on. Under 18’s being vaccinated will be at the discretion of the parents.

Being vaccinated should be/is a matter of personal choice.

Nobody should be discriminated against for not having the vaccine.

If we stick to those four principles, i don’t see what the issue would be

Re: Coronavirus
 

Back on the blood clotting risk thing, I found this paper from the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication at Cambridge University which is a very good discussion of the risks and benefits for the AZ vaccine in different age groups depending on the prevalence of COVID infections in the population.

The top figure is the standout one. At current infection rates, the risk of blood clots of the type seen in vaccinated patients in the 20-29 year age range is higher than the risk of ICU admission due to COVID.

If infection rates rise, then the risk/benefit swings towards vaccination but of course we want to go towards lower rates...

Re: Coronavirus
 

With the best will in the world Pierre you're making the same false assumptions as the herd immunity crowd last March.

Transmission in schools remains low while community prevalence is low. It's inevitable that infection, given time without mitigation, will spread and infect significant proportions of the school age population and into the wider population - among those unvaccinated and where vaccine efficacy has waned.

It's then an absolute inevitability that at a later date we will be spending more time, money and effort in lockdowns against an escape variant.

I agree being vaccinated should be a matter of choice. However if too many people choose not to the herd immunity threshold is never hit and we spend years firefighting.

If we say it's not safe to vaccinate teenagers and those younger why would someone in their early 20s volunteer to take it? Suddenly HIT requires almost 100% uptake of a 90% vaccine - something we've not seen against new variants.

If we get 70% uptake of a 70% vaccine then mutant variants are an absolute inevitability.

Vaccinate the vulnerable is 2021s 'shield the vulnerable'. While it's rational to want HIT to be achieved by other people taking the vaccine - personal risk becomes zero - the problem is where everyone chooses to be rational at an individual level.

---------- Post added at 09:27 ---------- Previous post was at 09:23 ----------

So a rational individual doesn't take the vaccine but hopes everyone else does. Especially whatever politician was leaning on Channel 4 to suppress the story because it could slow easing of restrictions by a mere two weeks.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No, they’re not - but they’re right more often about things because they base their decisions & recommendations on science & experience, and are willing to change their decisions & recommendations when new evidence comes to light.

No one is right all the time about everything - but I assume you trust your doctor’s diagnosis over some random in the street?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Talking of herd immunity.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...eshold-monday/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah, this is where health messaging becomes difficult and can also be an illuminating window into the British pysche. If we look back at the start of this whole thing, the messaging was 'protect the NHS'. The NHS polls well in this country as most people are proud of the NHS as a British institution. Eventually though, messaging gets old and things change and went from protecting the NHS to a more fearful message. What is interesting however is the fearful message wasn't out ward looking - 'behave yourselves or you will kill someone's nan' but more a 'you really don't want to get COVID'.

Masks are a great example of this. The evidence of masks protecting the user is low but the evidence of masks protecting other is much stronger. This was picked up by anti mask people early on as evidence masks don't work which is somewhat true but only for the person wearing them. Mask wearing protects others. So why isn't mask wearing pitched as a civic duty? Do the people putting together the messaging think that we wouldn't care about protecting others or do they know that we wouldn't care about protecting others? The best case scenario is the first but I fear it is the second.

This is where we get to vaccines. The absolute necessity of vaccines for the protection 18-30 years olds is probably low (again, long COVID excepted) but, as jfman said, we need to get the uptake up for herd immunity or at least to lower the Re value. Matt Hancock said this morning on the BBC that is was your 'patriotic duty' to be vaccinated which is arguable (in that I don't want to argue about this!) but it is definitely a civic duty for younger people to be vaccinated to help protect the older population who either didn't seroconvert or couldn't be jabbed.

We tend to get more right wing as we age. Left wing politics is more around collective responsibility in contrast with more personal responsibility on the right side of things. Should we be pitching vaccination as a duty to society when the time comes for younger people to get jabbed?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Actually no I don't. All my doctor wants to do is prescribe me numerous tablets based on the rather shady 5 minute 'telephone consultation' that is the norm nowadays. I haven't seen a doctor in a year - in fact I'm close to telling the practice to get stuffed and simply use the hospital casualty dept. instead :rolleyes:

I guess you could also call me an expert in 'not believing everything an expert says', although I've never published any papers on it ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Only in the absence of other vaccines. Ideally you'd get non-AZ, and not care what everyone else gets as long as they get one.

Just wondering: Are all three approved vaccines still considered 100% effective against serious illness? If not, any difference probably outweighs the blood clot risk.

How convenient!

Re: Coronavirus
 

Or you simply change the dynamics of the question.

“What’s in it for me?”

This is where vaccine passports/certification presents a significant opportunity to shift vaccination from being ‘for the collective good’ to in someone’s personal interest. That’s why they are absolutely inevitable - to inconvenience those who want to sit back and opt out of the 70%+.

---------- Post added at 11:51 ---------- Previous post was at 11:47 ----------

You’re assuming we are being given all the information.

With political pressure from Tory backbenchers, and arguably Government itself, to prop up confidence in the vaccination drive to speed up easing restrictions the legitimate question remains would they tell us if any red flags arose?

I’d contest that the evidence from the MHRA to date suggests they would not.

Re: Coronavirus
 

My second JAB is Saturday 10th (Oxford vaccine)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Source material for the herd immunity claim - lots of caveats...

https://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/co...ing_040421.pdf

---------- Post added at 14:39 ---------- Previous post was at 14:37 ----------

Sorry to hear you’ve got a duff medic - never good.

Can’t you change doctor/practice?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Time unleash the Nuffield Intervention Ladder :tu: By my reckoning, we're half up the ladder at 'Guide choice by changing the default policy' as every adult is being offered a jab by default.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...pite-shortage/
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...blocked-export

Re: Coronavirus
 

No sign of any slowdown yet Andrew. The Moderna vaccine roll out started yesteday and there's no reason to see any slowdown.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Unfortunately, the Government statistics show differently - hopefully, this is a blip, and it will get back to previous rates.

In the week ending 21st March an additional 3,053,371 people were reported to have received an NHS vaccination for COVID-19 in England (first dose 2,539,057)

In the week ending 28th March an additional 3,509,245 NHS vaccinations for COVID19 (both first and second doses) were administered in England (first dose 2,200,416)

In the week ending 4th April an additional 2,131,838 NHS vaccinations for COVID-19 (both first and second doses) were reported in England (first dose 670,745)

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistic...March-2021.pdf

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistic...April-2021.pdf

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistic...April-2021.pdf

Re: Coronavirus
 

There has always been an anticipated dip around now based on published (and then unpublished) data from Scotland in January. Scaling up from the population share of 10% the UK figures would look something like this:

W/C
22/02 1.9m
01/03 4.4m
08/03 4.3m
15/03 1.2m
22/03 4.6m
29/03 2.3m
04/04 4.1m
11/04 1.6m
18/04 3.9m
25/04 3.9m
Then 3.4m thereafter.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Probably because of the need to get the 2nd dose into people in the agreed time period.