Covid vaccines consultation

I went and looked at this post. It was going ok until she used the phrase "so called vaccine" and said of her contacts "Most have to work undercover." I won't be changing my mind because of these opinions.

Perhaps you might check out the opinion of Tillybell in the Snitch discussion.

Ayse I have read the entire document, I wouldn't comment otherwise. I’m not a specialist in pharma, not at all. But I read the document from the perspective of an educated non-specialist and have seen many posts that have completely missed the intent of the proposals.
It’s not solely in preparation for us leaving the EU although that is indeed covered. I am happy for specially trained people to vaccinate me, why would I not be? The non-liability is to protect pharmaceutical companies from liability if they are creating vaccines, or as you say other drugs, which have been approved by the licencing authority but not yet licenced. This puts them in the same legal position as the manufacturers and marketing authorisation holders. I think that’s fair. You of course may disagree with all that. You are entitled to your opinion.
But stating that unlicenced vaccine would is a trial vaccine is incorrect and that could mislead people about what the process actually is. I don’t trust the current government either, but until proved wrong I will trust the JCVI and the licencing authority. We do indeed live in a free country and you would be quite entitled to refuse an unlicenced drug, or any drug, I wouldn’t try to dissuade you. But everyone should take that decision with the facts.

Algerias. I take it you have read the document concerned? This is in preparation for us no longer being regulated by the EU. TBH as I said before, I do not trust this government or the pharmaceutical companies. The regulations are being amended for a number of reasons and some of this to is to allow specially (non medics) trained people to vaccinate others, to roll out mass vaccinations as quickly as possible and to provide non-liability. It also opens the door for other medicines in the future. The only time I would agree to unlicensed medicine being used was if my doctor or consultant specifically discussed it with me first!

BTW, I was responding to the discussion on page 1 of this thread.

I’m obviously speaking from my point of view only. Perhaps I may not have fully grasped the significance of this consultation. Fortunately in this country for the time being I am entitled to my opinion.

Ha ha!

aquagran. I hope you are feeling a little better and of course the donkey's ears!

I'm sure this will shock you, but yesterday I volunteered for the vaccine trials for Covid.It’s the one that was created in Russia.Got the first shot yesterday at 4pm, and I’m feeling pretty good with иo side effects whatsoeveя, and that I feelshκι χoρoshό я чувствую себя немного странно и я думаю, что вытащил ослиные уши

I appreciate that you are entitled to your opinion, of course, but you have misunderstood the point of the consultation. They are proposing to strengthen the legislation about unlicensed products. A new precedent will not be set because the rule about using unlicensed products in an emergency already exists. And unlicenced doesn't mean untested; did you see that bit in the thread?

I posed about this a few weeks ago and yes I have read most of the thread. I’ve also just glanced at the GMC guidance for prescribing unlicensed medicines.

If this goes ahead the drug companies cannot be held responsible for any vaccine damage! The USA has a specific fund for damage caused by vaccines.

Having read other articles about treatments for Covid I’m very happy to wait for a licensed product. If others want to trial vaccines, take them if offered that is up to them. I’m just stating my point of view.

This proposed change would set a precedent if it was for the whole population and that is not a precedent I would wish to see. If you read the GMC advice regarding unlicensed medicines the GMC suggests that additional insurance may be appropriate.

Well, I would rather risk the vaccine when I think of the possible alternative.

x-post, suziewoozie

Did you read the thread Ayse? Its your right to refuse it, of course, but I think you have missed the point.

That’s a different point ayse. I trust the scientists involved in the trials and I trust the regulatory/licensing authorities and their normal procedures. It’s if the government changes that process there’s an issue. So far it is all being done per normal protocols

I’m certainly not going to have any vaccine that is not licensed. I don’t trust either this government nor the pharmaceutical industry.

There are excellent trials going on investigating a range of therapeutic treatments as well as the vaccine research. It’s a pity you didn’t listen to the Sarah Gilbert programme Bluebell to better understand the Oxford trial rather than repeating false rumours about the process being rushed.Wheres you evidence for saying that?.

Well I won’t be first in the queue that’s for sure certainly won’t trust such a rushed through vaccine I ll take my chances with the virus It will wear itself out at some point and as long as they invest in medications to help with the illness itself I think that’s where the Trials should concentrate

Pfizer is working with BioNTech, a German technology company, on a vaccine. Oxford Uni is working with AstraZeneca.

I wouldn't believe a word Trump says either. The pharma companies have a vested interest in promoting their products (and might just be over-optimistic) because they want people to invest in "their" trials and they want to keep their shareholders happy.

Pfizer and BioNTech say they could be ready to distribute by the end of 2020, so I don't know where Trump is getting the idea it will be ready in October.

www.thepharmaletter.com/article/progress-on-biontech-and-pfizer-s-covid-19-vaccine-candidate-bnt162b2

Crafty what’s you source for that? I wouldn’t believe a word Trump says about the vaccine. Remember voting has opened in the US now.

If I am not mistaken, Oxford Uni are working closely with Pfeizer on the vaccine. They have had very good results from thousands of humans in the trials.
In a press conference, Trump states that they are already manufacturing the vac (Pfeizer and others) ready for the first lot of vaccines to be given to HCA and the vulnerable, then the general public, hopefully starting at the end of October.
The troops will be distributing thoughout US as well as other countries. They are just waiting for the go-ahead.
I don't know if UK will be using it before January because of EU directives on vaccinations.
I will be at the front of the queue though! I am fed up with being isolated.

Facts'r'us

Thanks everyone. Much further forward.

www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-guidance-for-doctors/prescribing-and-managing-medicines-and-devices/prescribing-unlicensed-medicines

This from the GMC covers what I had in the back of my mind- an individual patient and individual doctor. Alegs post clarifies the issue re mass vaccination. Between us we’ve nailed it I think ?#GNfactcheckersruleok

Thanks Alegrias. It makes it all a bit clearer.

I believe new legislation will be required because of the vast scale of things- and the fact the people receiving an unlicensed treatment are not actually sick.

We have young friends with a child with a terrible degenerative disease, and they have fought very hard for him to be given an unlicensed drug, as it is his only hope- without it he will be totally uncapacitated and die within a couple of years. With it, he may keep more capacity for a better life for a few more years.

my feelings exactly growstuff- as expressed in another thread where I was accused of scaremongering for no reason.