Second vaccine dose timing

PS. Do you have some kind of insider knowledge?

Rightly or wrongly, how many on GN would refuse their first dose even if you could guarantee someone else got two?
Mind you, it would be quite easy to say that on here and still go and get a vaccine tomorrow if offered, so we’ll never know.

No, I wouldn't struggle Lizbethann if it turns out that having just one dose has been a waste of time - and the truth is that nobody knows, whatever they claim.

I thought Tim Harford is an economist or is there another Tim Harford?

As far as I can tell, the jury is still out amongst scientists and medics.

I guess results from Israel should tell us within a couple of weeks how many people who have been infected have become seriously ill.

We are already hearing so many people complaining that they haven't even had one dose yet. Imagine how much worse it would be if thousands were left with no protection while their friends and neighbours were getting both vaccines. Imagine your mum's neighbour had had two doses and your mum had none. Then your mum catches Covid and died. I think you would struggle to honestly say you think that was the right decision. I am firmly in the camp of one dose for all is better than two doses for a few. Absolutely everybody involved is working as hard as they possibly can to make this work for the greater good of the entire populace. Nothing like this has ever been done before in the history of our country. Incredibly difficult and complex decisions have to be made and with conflicting advice coming from all sides! I am only glad I am not the one having to make them. I should think that very many sleepless nights are being had by those who have to make the ultimate decision. I think we should all just cut them some slack.

Not really sure why an analogy from Tim Harford is more important than definite opposition to this long gap from the BMC, I know which I would rather believe - but ....Heigh does that make me a WOKE as I would rather take the word of experts in the field!!!???

Franbern BUT......one dose is NOT being vaccinated!!! Nobody is actually vaccinated against this virus until about two or three weeks after receiving the SECOND DOSE.

Not true, despite your shouty capitals.
You start forming antibodies after the first dose of vaccine had been administered and this gives you some level of protection. Quite how much hasn’t been established but it is certainly better than nothing and will almost certainly protect you from severe illness and hospitalisation. By increasing the interval between doses, more people can be given partial protection and that benefits the whole population. The second dose boosts the immunity you have already developed.

Tim Harford compared it to driving on a dark night without car headlights.
If all the cars on the road have one headlight, that is safer than if half the cars have two headlights and half of them have none.

Calendargirl

I hope there isn’t a petition. I think we need to accept this is the way forward, and get as many people vaccinated ASAP.

BUT......one dose is NOT being vaccinated!!! Nobody is actually vaccinated against this virus until about two or three weeks after receiving the SECOND DOSE.

This idea of single dose vaccine and twelve weeks delay is purely for government propaganda purposes, if they could not claim that anyone was actually vaccinated until they had received the second dose, it would show REAL numbers who are protected.

The BMA coming out so strongly against the 12 week gap increases my concern. They are hardly a bunch of amateurs who get their information from YouTube.

My fear is that it is a political rather than scientific decision, as so many decisions have been during the pandemic. Too often the possible effect on the government's popularity or the anger of the Tory back benches has seemed to play too much of a part in their conclusions.

If you were prescribed a medicine, would you listen to your doctor's instructions on how and when to take it, read the manufacturer's instructions on the little leaflet in the box, and then go ahead and ignore all that information?... Isn't that what the government is doing? The doctors are telling us when to take it, so are the manufacturers, but apparently we're not going to listen to them.

Well, they're confident, still, that we'll all get "done" in the time frame they quoted, so..

I did think I heard "by the end of february" on the briefing last night, when it was previously the "middle", but I could be wrong (as I often am!)

MissAdventure not a problem. ??
I was suddenly sent a link from our local surgery to click on and book with appointments up to 2 weeks away. Last time I heard the news they hadn’t even got all the way through the over 80s in our area, never mind vaccine for the vulnerable.

Sorry, that was a bit a abrupt, and I didn't intend it to be.

Also, I'm pleased that at long last some acknowledgement has been given regarding the vaccine gap.

There is nothing wrong with people wanting clarity.

Good luck with that then.
It just says no appointments when I try.

The briefing yesterday said the decision had been made to vaccinate more people further apart so that more people would have at least some protection.
That’s what was said, no ifs or buts; it was to afford more people at least some protection rather than fewer people potentially greater protection.

Because I’ve just been sent a link so I can book an appointment for my first dose, I am obviously happy about this decision, even knowing that there is dispute about the distance between vaccines.

Maddyone the idea of being forced into making a choice one way or the other is a bit oxymoronic isn’t it?

Good posts growstuff.

Daisymae As far as I can tell, there isn't any solid empirical data and there won't be for some time. There's been so much written and it's difficult to cut through all the cr*p because it's obvious that a political decision was made and there's lack of transparency about supply issues. There are also commercial interests to consider. Joe Public can have an opinion but it's not likely to be well-informed. I'm becoming increasing sceptical about anybody who pushes an opinion and selective use of data.

So many magic bullets have been promoted and I just hope that this one doesn't go the same way as the rest.

I don't understand the angst, surely people are entitled be voice an opinion? What is coming across loud and clear is that scientific opinion divided and it's reasonable to listen with an open mind to differing opinions.

I think I'd rather read about what those with some expertise in vaccines know.

Alegrias1

Israel have upgraded their 33% to 60% plus after one week. Evidence: twitter.com/segal_eran/status/1352696337477890049?s=21
Small study? 200,000 people.

FT article about what this means for the UK decision: www.ft.com/content/4d9fe80d-e604-4bbe-b0f8-fd4b8df9b7f1

89% immunity evidence: www.fda.gov/media/144416/download Graph on page 29

The list of people were those who made the decision, not those who supported it. But I guess you're right, a bunch of people on Gransnet and some doctors who have no responsibility for drug approval or public health are in a good position to cast doubt on all their attempts to save lives.

Bit subjective, from a scientist???

Israel have upgraded their 33% to 60% plus after one week. Evidence: twitter.com/segal_eran/status/1352696337477890049?s=21
Small study? 200,000 people.

FT article about what this means for the UK decision: www.ft.com/content/4d9fe80d-e604-4bbe-b0f8-fd4b8df9b7f1

89% immunity evidence: www.fda.gov/media/144416/download Graph on page 29

The list of people were those who made the decision, not those who supported it. But I guess you're right, a bunch of people on Gransnet and some doctors who have no responsibility for drug approval or public health are in a good position to cast doubt on all their attempts to save lives.

Somebody asked a question about it on the IndieSage presentation yesterday. The answer was that nobody knows.

People shouldn’t be forced into choosing not to have the vaccine. That is a totally unethical suggestion.
The BMA have come out loud and clear saying the vaccination programme shouldn’t be changed to a twelve week gap. There is no evidence at the moment to support that change, and a small amount of evidence from Israel to suggest its potentially harmful. Apparently the Israeli study suggests only 33% efficacy after the first vaccine, whereas some British scientists were advising that it would be nearer to 89%. This is a guess, there is no evidence. I asked for evidence yesterday and simply received a long list of names of those who support the change. That is not evidence I’m afraid, it is a list of people who think they know but have absolutely no direct evidence. The only evidence is the small study in Israel.

Whitewave I totally agree with you and thank you for adding your daughter’s opinion as I know she has been working on/with the British/Italian vaccine programme.

Sorry didn’t mean to repeat the last sentence.

Esspee doctors opposed to experiments being made with the health of the old and vulnerable in this nation
In a sense, most medical interventions are experimental and are based on available evidence and current recommendations.
These change all the time as new evidence comes to light.
Look at tonsillectomy for example. A whole generation of children in the 50’s and 60’s were ‘experimented’ on when they had their tonsils out.
Then it was realised that in most cases, the dangers of surgery (fatal haemorrhage) outweighed any perceived benefit and tonsillectomy became a comparatively rare procedure reserved for cases of repeated and intractable infection.
Every time you sign a consent form you are basically saying that you understand the risks of the intervention and accept that you as an individual are being experimented on.
Nothing is risk-free.

But the solution is simple. Just don’t have any medical interventions.
Your choice.
Your choice.