Second vaccine dose timing

janeainsworth Sat 30-Jan-21 08:00:0

Suffice to say, if you think the police in this country use oppressive powers, I suggest you take a look at countries like China, Russia, or even Australia.

Unfortunately, jane I do not believe it necessary to visit these countries. All I need to do is stay here in England and wait.

It will come.

Ladyleftfieldlover

At the moment I am happy to listen to Whitty and JVT and believe what they say. They are the experts. I am getting fed up of lesser scientists spouting their beliefs. Shouldn’t we just listen to the acknowledged experts and ignore those who probably don’t have the full picture? Otherwise we are all going to go madder than we are already?

They aren’t “lesser scientists” ???. They are scientists with different jobs to Whitty and Van Tam.

Jobs like professorships, PHD’s working in the vaccine industry, or immunology or virologists.

They aren’t “lesser” it is just that you may not be aware of them or their expertise.

If they have "treated us like idiots" it is probably because there are such a lot of people around whose understanding doesn't seem to stretch to anything more complicated than "The cat sat on the mat" There are a surprisingly large number of people whose reaction to anything even vaguely scientific is "Don't confuse me!" or even to mistrust it because it came from an acknowledged expert.

Science is all about discussion, disagreement and eventual concensus. This fundamental scientific process has been sadly lacking in our response to this virus.

What's your science background GrannyRose15? Because clearly you have a rather unusual view of the "scientific process" Have you been present in any of the MHRA and JCVI meetings where they had to make the decisions that are meant to save as many lives as possible? Maybe you've stayed awake at night mulling over the implications of your decisions? I'm sure they have.

Although the phrase "lesser scientists" maybe isn't the one I'd have chosen I do agree with Ladyleftfieldlover . I've been amazed by the rent-a-quote brigade on TV recently. In particular one Public Health expert here in Scotland who regularly turns up on TV telling us what we already know, but with the words in a different order and the judicious use of "could".

Whitty and JVT are the people who are communicating and they are pretty good at it. Whitty in particular has been a revelation - the quiet man. But there are armies of scientists, medics and technical people at their backs who are making the recommendations. Casting doubt on them in favour of people who don't actually have any responsibility in any of this is unfair.

Alegrias1

^Science is all about discussion, disagreement and eventual concensus. This fundamental scientific process has been sadly lacking in our response to this virus.^

What's your science background GrannyRose15? Because clearly you have a rather unusual view of the "scientific process" Have you been present in any of the MHRA and JCVI meetings where they had to make the decisions that are meant to save as many lives as possible? Maybe you've stayed awake at night mulling over the implications of your decisions? I'm sure they have.

What's yours?

PhD in Physics

Alegrias. ???‍??

I've stayed awake at night worrying about the impact all this is having on my children and grandchildren. On their finances, their well being, both mental and physical, on their education and their prospects for the future. All of which is looking pretty bleak at present.
The over - reaction of so-called experts has cost my family dear and will continue to take its toll years after I am dead.

I can however understand your comment about responsibility. It is our elected representatives that should be shouldering the responsibility, not the scientists. Their role should be to advise. And the politicians should be considering all points of view not just those of SAGE.

Alegrias1

PhD in Physics

Not epidemiology then?

I know you were going to say that! ???

knew

You haven't told us yours, GrannyRose15 I thought it was going to be "You show me yours and I'l show you mine".

How do you get to be a "so-called expert"? Is it by buying a degree from a so-called university run from someone's back bedroom, or maybe getting a job in a so-called scientific establishment typing up so-called theses on so-called research?

Possibly a graduate of Trump university?

Alegrias1

I know you were going to say that! ???

Can we call it quits yet or do I have to agree you've won?

No, we'll call it quits . You did ask

Its absolutely the politicians that have to take the responsibility publicly but the scientists and medics who make the recommendations are bound to have the weight of that on their shoulders.

Still begs the question - 'Why is the UK the only country who is rolling out vaccinations to its population, who is having a 12 week gap between first and second?

I have always been told with any medication -'read the instructions and follow with care'. Instructions say first and second dose within three weeks of each other!!!

But it would not look so good for government propoganda machine as it would, effectively, half the numbers they can now claim are being vaccinated.

Sorry - cannot believe that people are still willing to trust any part of the current UK government and their so-called advisers. So far they have given this country one of the highest death rates and one of the worst economic outcomes for this Pandemic. So, why do we believe them when they say they know better than the companies that have developed and marketed these vaccines??

Franbern this has been gone over a lot in this thread and others. The manufacturers don't issue "instructions", they show the results of tests and MHRA and JCVI decide on how the medication is going to be used.

As for the "so-called" advisors, well to pick up on what Elegran said....the so-called advisors in the so-called MHRA and JCVI have so called years of so-called experience and use their so-called expertise to advise the government on what their so-called recommendations are on how to save so-called thousands of so-called lives.

Oh, and they don't have any so-called monetary interest in any specific so-called product so you could say that they are so-called independent.

And there are many scientists etc. who are opposing the long gap between the doses.

Just commenting that I am very suspicious that anything this government does - seems to me they have two main agendas

A) Which of us can make 'loadsamoney' from it
B) How can we spin figures to make us sound good

Just as well that the JCVI don't have these agendas then.

Franbern And there are many scientists etc. who are opposing the long gap between the doses

Could you provide some references so we can see which scientists you’re talking about?

As far as I can see the consensus seems to be that for individuals there might , with the emphasis on might , be a problem with the Pfizer vaccine, but not the AstraZeneca one.
At a population level, there are good arguments for giving some level of immunity with the first dose, to more people, than leaving larger numbers without any protection at all.

janeainsworth
“At a population level, there are good arguments for giving some level of immunity with the first dose, to more people, than leaving larger numbers without any protection at all.”
Agree Jane!

Actually one thing Franbern says explains a lot of things.
“I am very suspicious that (of) anything this government does . . .” though to be fair, I think the same, whichever government is in power when it’s actions, or lack of them, have the power to damage my life.
I’m grateful to have finally had my first dose, which I might not have got if everyone was getting two doses closer together.

In a Sky TV interview - Prof Anthony Harnden, deputy chair of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation says there's "no substantial evidence" a second dose of Pfizer gives better protection against COVID-19. We believe you should have second dose, but we believe this can be delayed. He states it's similar to the Moderna vaccine where their data show one protection lasts 2 months and probably longer. So here is the Deputy of the JCVI who advise the Government using word and phrases such as: "We believe", "probably". "no substantial evidence" (which means there is some and he offers none). So the Government decides to follow the advice from the JCVI because without evidence, they know better than the manufacturers and the rest of the world. The truth is they are gambling with peoples lives and that is not good Government or science, I just hope that their recklessness pays off.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=NARoV8gPVRk

It's not reckless and it is good science.

I feel for these people. Trying to do their best and so much animosity comes their way. The Moderna vaccine is an mRNA vaccine, just like the Pfizer one, and it shows that you have 94% protection after 2 months and there is no theoretical reason that the immunity will fall off a cliff. His actual words. The interviewer brings up the 33% figure again - he has no no idea what that means, clearly. Or that its been debunked a few weeks ago.

Here's the guy you think is being reckless.

www.phc.ox.ac.uk/team/anthony-harnden

This makes me so angry.