Brexit, for once some facts.

[Jesus H Christ]

If they gave us half a dose, would that enable even more to get their first dose more quickly?

(A degree of flippancy given the trial data - but nonetheless, a genuine question/thought.)

I would say that strategy isn’t necessary. The objective was to get those most at risk of serious illness and death vaccinated within the shortest & safest timeframe. The single dose and second dose spaced at a maximum 12 week interval achieved that objective. The balance of risk and benefit probably started to tip the other way if things were pushed too much.

I think our medical experts calculated the current strategy just right and it’s looking like they hit the bullseye.

 

[flecc]

The inferior Oxford vaccine not only gives an impressive level of protection for up to 12 weeks, it’s also very effective at reducing transmission. And that’s after just one jab.

I saw your post and didn't bother to reply at the time. What you'd missed was the microbiology report the same day that the AZ first jab doesn't seem to work well beyond 21 days on the over 80s, so not so good on the worst affected.

I'm with Woosh on this, the Pfizer is clearly the vaccine of choice at present with the AZ falling short in some respects, and I take no notice of the propagandists like Matt Hancock on this subject.

If there was plenty of the Pfizer available everywhere we wouldn't even be using the AZ, since it's not compatible with the existing Pfizer for second jabs. It's only shortage that's driven us to the AZ and others.
.

 

[Jesus H Christ]

I saw your post and didn't bother to reply at the time. What you'd missed was the microbiology report the same day that the AZ first jab doesn't seem to work well beyond 21 days on the over 80s, so not so good on the worst affected.

I'm with Woosh on this, the Pfizer is clearly the vaccine of choice at present with the AZ falling short in some respects, and I take no notice of the propagandists like Matt Hancock on this subject.

If there was plenty of the Pfizer available everywhere we wouldn't even be using the AZ, since it's not compatible with the existing Pfizer for second jabs. It's only shortage that's driven us to the AZ and others.
.

As ever, I’ll be led by the most respected medical experts in the U.K. and not by amateur commentary.

There is great danger associated with consulting Dr Google whenever we develop perceived symptoms of an illness. Sometimes this thread becomes Dr Google.

 

[Woosh]

Of course it does, it’s not had British involvement in its development.

The inferior Oxford vaccine not only gives an impressive level of protection for up to 12 weeks, it’s also very effective at reducing transmission. And that’s after just one jab.

It looks like the one dose to as many people as possible strategy is another winner against this virus.

Covid-19: Study showing Oxford vaccine slows virus spread 'superb' - Hancock https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55913913

That study is written by collaborators in the AZ vaccine and the study is still not published.
We only have their summary findings, no data as such.
You can read it here:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3777268

From the study, after 12 weeks, the antibodies GMR drops to 66% of the level of 6 weeks, and yet, our government and the BBC still claim that the protection remains same.

As for the transmission reduction, the summary did not say what the finding was based on.
I think Matt Hancock is becoming a bit Bojo-esque nowadays.

QUOTE:
Findings: 17,177 baseline seronegative trial participants were eligible for inclusion in the efficacy analysis, 8948 in the UK, 6753 in Brazil and 1476 in South Africa, with 619 documented NAAT +ve infections of which 332 met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection >14 days post dose 2.The primary analysis of overall vaccine efficacy >14 days after the second dose including LD/SD and SD/SD groups, based on the prespecified criteria was 66.7% (57.4%, 74.0%). There were no hospitalisations in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21 day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group.Vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 post vaccination was 76% (59%, 86%), and modelled analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3 month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 day (GMR 0.66, 95% CI 0.59, 0.74).In the SD/SD group, after the second dose, efficacy was higher with a longer prime-boost interval: VE 82.4% 95%CI 62.7%, 91.7% at 12+ weeks, compared with VE 54.9%, 95%CI 32.7%, 69.7% at <6 weeks. These observations are supported by immunogenicity data which showed binding antibody responses more than 2-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with and interval of less than 6 weeks GMR 2.19 (2.12, 2.26) in those who were 18-55 years of age.

 

[flecc]

As ever, I’ll be led by the most respected medical experts in the U.K. and not by amateur commentary.

You are doing nothing of the sort, you are being led by the propagandists and have become one yourself in posting your amateur commentary on their utterances.
.

 

[oyster]

The objective was to get those most at risk of serious illness and death vaccinated within the shortest & safest timeframe.

That was only an interim objective. Having part of the population protected might result in more transmission as those who are protected feel less need to isolate themselves.

If the vaccine actually reduces transmission, then it might be better now to target 100% single dose - or even 100% half-dose!

 

[oyster]

As ever, I’ll be led by the most respected medical experts in the U.K. and not by amateur commentary.

From personal experience, I'll not rely on the experts. But nor would I rely on amateur commentary.

The number of papers I have read which were prepared by world-class experts, passed referees, published - yet contain egregious errors, is horrific. Worse, some remain among the most quoted and relied upon for decades.

I do put quite some reliance on some experts, sometimes. But am very wary and careful to consider what they say.

 

[flecc]

I do put quite some reliance on some experts, sometimes. But am very wary and careful to consider what they say.

Indeed, in a discussion with Zlatan when he said none of the scientists ever supported Herd Immunity (and of course they don't now), I didn't bother to reply.

But I have many examples of the government's advising scientists all supporting herd immunity that I can post, including the chief scientific advisor Patrick Valance in a video clip from March 2020 saying we needed herd immunity.

I'm not criticising them, they were being asked the impossible by the government demanding answers where there were none. So they were floundering and doing the best they could while trying not to disagree with what their bosses, the politicians, were saying.
.

 

[sjpt]

If they gave us half a dose, would that enable even more to get their first dose more quickly?

(A degree of flippancy given the trial data - but nonetheless, a genuine question/thought.)

Perhaps they could water it down to homeopathic levels. Lots of doses for everyone, and they may even get the anti-vaxers to take part.

(I assume extra water is OK in a jab?)

 

[oldgroaner]

As ever, I’ll be led by the most respected medical experts in the U.K. and not by amateur commentary.

There is great danger associated with consulting Dr Google whenever we develop perceived symptoms of an illness. Sometimes this thread becomes Dr Google.

You mean you will go for the Government propaganda as usual and switch off your critical faculties, and not for the first time, is it?
And it can also be said than some on here try to make this thread the propaganda organ of the Conservative Party

 

[flecc]

Perhaps they could water it down to homeopathic levels. Lots of doses for everyone, and they may even get the anti-vaxers to take part.

(I assume extra water is OK in a jab?)

Even if it's not, under the 28 day ruling plus expediency it's likely they'd often be put down as Covid deaths, so no problem !
.

 

[Danidl]

As ever, I’ll be led by the most respected medical experts in the U.K. and not by amateur commentary.

There is great danger associated with consulting Dr Google whenever we develop perceived symptoms of an illness. Sometimes this thread becomes Dr Google.

"As ever, I’ll be led by the most respected medical experts in the U.K. and not by amateur commentary".... Wise words indeed, and in the opinion of the MEDICAL community that is the experts in the Jenner, and then the validation committee, which authorized its use, based on their MEASUREMENTS.
The comment about going to even quarter doses is flippant, but with a definite logic and impossible to defend against,if you disregard the original measurements

 

[Wicky]

If they gave us half a dose, would that enable even more to get their first dose more quickly?

(A degree of flippancy given the trial data - but nonetheless, a genuine question/thought.)

Hancock will be soon be diluting it like a homeopath!

Edit: I see sjpt beat me to it

 

[Jesus H Christ]

You mean you will go for the Government propaganda as usual and switch off your critical faculties, and not for the first time, is it?
And it can also be said than some on here try to make this thread the propaganda organ of the Conservative Party

Warning. The above is harmful material likely to have an adverse affect on your health!

 

[Jesus H Christ]

Everybody, stop trying to think you know better than people who’s lives have been spent working on virology and vaccination. They have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of public wellbeing. They aren’t going to suddenly do an about turn and deliberately publish information designed to harm you.

None of you on here come close to matching their expertise. You know FA.

If you want something to do, grab a Horlicks, sit in the high-backed chair and get Bob Ross on the telly.

But most importantly, stop causing harm to people.

 

[Danidl]

As ever, I’ll be led by the most respected medical experts in the U.K. and not by amateur commentary.

There is great danger associated with consulting Dr Google whenever we develop perceived symptoms of an illness. Sometimes this thread becomes Dr Google.

There is an underappreciated problem with underdosing. It is more understood with bacteria, but likely also with viruses. That of encouraging successful mutation. If one does not hit the infection long and hard and kill off ALL the bugs, a fraction ,who have a marginal protection against that dose level soon become the dominant strain,since their competitors have been eliminated. Bad clinical practice especially underdosing or terminating treatment early encourages this.

 

[oyster]

(I assume extra water is OK in a jab?)

Depends on what the water remembers.

Maybe it knows it was once in Julius Caesar's body?

Maybe it was in a lizard? Or arrived from space?

 

[Danidl]

Everybody, stop trying to think you know better than people who’s lives have been spent working on virology and vaccination. They have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of public wellbeing. They aren’t going to suddenly do an about turn and deliberately publish information designed to harm you.

None of you on here come close to matching their expertise. You know FA.

If you want something to do, grab a Horlicks, sit in the high-backed chair and get Bob Ross on the telly.

But most importantly, stop causing harm to people.

View attachment 40591

And that exactly is what we are trying to warn you about. God knows we all wish there was a magic bullet to make this go away.. and we kind of have it now. But ineptitude could yet blow it away. You have strongly aligned yourself with a Government position ... Not State ,not Establishment ,not the Learned Societies ,but the Government position. The UK Government has not covered itself in glory over the last year, so its recent track record id poor.

 

[Jesus H Christ]

There is an underappreciated problem with underdosing. It is more understood with bacteria, but likely also with viruses. That of encouraging successful mutation. If one does not hit the infection long and hard and kill off ALL the bugs, a fraction ,who have a marginal protection against that dose level soon become the dominant strain,since their competitors have been eliminated. Bad clinical practice especially underdosing or terminating treatment early encourages this.

I bet no one has ever thought about that or taken it into consideration. It’s taken a bicycle forum to come up with that groundbreaking theory.

 

[flecc]

Everybody, stop trying to think you know better than people who’s lives have been spent working on virology and vaccination. They have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of public wellbeing. They aren’t going to suddenly do an about turn and deliberately publish information designed to harm you.

None of you on here come close to matching their expertise. You know FA.

If you want something to do, grab a Horlicks, sit in the high-backed chair and get Bob Ross on the telly.

But most importantly, stop causing harm to people.

View attachment 40591

As Oyster posted:

"I do put quite some reliance on some experts, sometimes. But am very wary and careful to consider what they say."

And as I've posted above, expediency or even just plain error does sometimes take precedence in expert utterances, so I take a questioning approach to everything they say.

Recent history is littered with the human disasters due to experts, and often exposed by watchful amateurs using rational thought in lieu of data. It's why we have philosophers using rational thought to create another kind of evidence.
.