I think that I remember reading that the vaccine companies had been exempted from legal recourse, meaning if the vaccine does fuck you up there is nothing you can do.
1 Like
Yes I think that is the same everywhere, in Singapore, the companies have been waiver off liabilities but on the government end, they will have payouts for people adversely affected by serious side effects or death, was asking whether its the same elsewhere
It would never be scientifically proven anyway as they don’t use science!
Maybe they should have put the research firmly with Everton MMA FC…
They used to be known as the ‘School of Science’ didn’t they 
1 Like
2 Likes
Bloomberg 24 hours slower than me at breaking news 
Admittedly I’m spending waaayyyy too much time reading stuff about the pandemic at the moment!
1 Like
Firstly I am 100% committed to the vaccination program - it is a triumph of science.
I am concerned though - as my vaccination appointment comes ever closer - about the affect this will have on me. I have had one flu vaccination in my life - approx 10 years ago - the following day I was admitted to hospital for the first and only time in my life. I and the emergency room staff initially thought that I was having a heart attack. I spent 3 days on a drip and on occasions had to be given oxygen.
I am, without doubt, going to have the Covid19 vaccination but I will admit I am very anxious about it. But my desire to travel, to do the right thing and to see family and friends trumps that anxiety
As with all medicines, for some people there are going to be side effects - its just the luck of the draw I guess. The drug companies cannot be held responsible for the 0.001% who experience side effects.
1 Like
I think most people will be anxious about it even if they believe in it. I am too simply because we are all tentative about the unknown. Some people might paint it as a gamble but to me, without a doubt, as more people take the vaccine, there would be cases of serious side effects or even deaths but there is only one way forward as of now, the benefits are just outweighing the cons. Take care and hope it all go well for everyone.
1 Like
It seems with Mr Johnson’s plans for exit out of lockdown where hospital admissions and not infections are an influencing factor for easing, I think its safe to say they are banking on infections between adults and children from this point assisting in herd immunity.
With schools going back (phased), I do wonder about my wife who is a teacher. Lockdown would have been an ideal time to have her vaccinated and shielding while in lockdown. Now she will be thrown into the fire at schools, and it wont be until after school finishes at the end of July that there will be an opportunity for her to be vaccinated. Ironic given how essential they are to this government and their plans for a return to the economy that teachers will be the very last to be vaccinated at the end of July - its probably the only reason that the end of July target exists.
What the hell happens with teachers in their 40’s to 50’s that are probably in the next priority group? They have to wait 5 months? I’ll speak nothing of the fact that every non-teacher adult will likely be out of vaccination shielding for the summer holidays while teachers will be just entering it. No travelling for them then?
If this is not throwing teachers under the bus then I don’t know what is.
This finding was unexpected,
By the fourth week after receiving the initial dose, the Pfizer and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines were shown to reduce the risk of hospitalisation from Covid-19 by up to 85 per cent and 94 per cent, respectively.
Assuming it has been reported correctly. However, one area of concern remains the over 80s,
Among those aged 80 years and over - one of the highest risk groups - vaccination was associated with an 81 per cent reduction in hospitalisation risk in the fourth week, when the results for both vaccines were combined.
[…]
The study team says the findings are applicable to other countries that are using the Pfizer and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines. They caution that the data does not allow for comparisons between the two.
It seems odd that they can distinuish between the efficacy in preventing hospital admissions between the two vaccines in all age groups but for some reason cannot do so in the over 80s? That seems odd - I hope it isn’t an attempt to suppress information that might reveal that one is particularly ineffective in the over 80s age group because you would think that they must know how the two vaccines differed in their impacted on that cohort.
My 83 year old grandma was kicking off about kicking off about this even when they were putting the needle in her arm. She says School teachers should have been the number 1 priority. It’s the blindingly obvious place to start. The over 70s can shield a bit longer. It’s no skin off their nose.
My opinion is Teachers and NHS, then over 70s.
The cynical part of me thinks prioritising teachers and nurses would have sent the wrong kind of message about how critical these jobs are.
I’m honestly torn on this issue.
The UK has been utterly woeful at protecting its elderly population from the virus but on the other hand you are right - NHS and services like teachers etc. should also be top of the pile.
Proper sticky wicket to be honest.
1 Like
Health and social care workers have already been offered the jab, haven’t they? They were in the first 16 million cohort that were able to be vaccinated by 15 February, weren’t they?
On the basis that those in that top priority group have all been able to be vaccinated I agree that the next step is for teachers to be prioritised, along with the more vulnerable under the age of 70.
I am not arguing the vaccination of the elderly and co-morbidities group as first priority. But I’m quite certain the government have vaccinated the those two groups now and are working down into age groups at a much lower risk.
I would think if you are sending schools back where you are guaranteed that teachers are unavailable for vaccination until the last week of July then you really need to prioritise those in the older age bracket of teachers so that they are brought forward in the vaccination programme, especially as they will be the first out of lockdown and the most exposed to the virus.
1 Like
Yes. That’s the argument though isn’t it? Should we have vaccinated other groups first, before the over 80’s etc.
That’s where I’m torn as there’s valid arguments for both sides.
The study I posted above has now been published and people have been going through the numbers. The Pfizer efficacy they mentioned in the headline at week 4 (85%) appears to be as good as it gets as the Pfizer efficacy reduces into weeks 5 and 6 (68%, 64%) with no figures after that yet.
No figures beyond week 4 (94%) yet for AZ as the roll-out started later.
https://publichealthscotland.scot/news/2021/february/vaccine-linked-to-reduction-in-risk-of-covid-19-admissions-to-hospitals/
1 Like
That’s only because the response has been, in general, a shambles.
We’ve ended up with a third strong lockdown because they’ve spent a year dithering, shitting themselves over the economy and having internal fights between the two wings of the party (gives a shit if people die v doesn’t give a shit if people die).
I said at the beginning that I felt these sorts of national issues ought to be addressed on a cross-party basis. It would have been great if the best parts of Labour proposals had been combined with the best part of the Conservative’s. We may have seen an earlier and more effective lockdown, a better Test and Trace, better measures at the borders, helping the poorest and the vulnerable earlier and more fully (without the need for famous footballers raising awareness), whilst at the same time benefitting from world leading vaccine development, procurement, production and distribution. The world-leading sequencing which has also played a significant role would have been there regardless, of course.
The danger would be that the decisions a collective may have taken might have combined the worst of both worlds, rather than the best, but I do think that a national crisis ought to mean a national (cross-party) response.
1 Like