WHAT!?

[Workingman]

Talk about dangerous mixed messages.

On New Year's Eve the government told NHS medics that if a person had received their first jab and went back for their second but the same type was not available then it is "reasonable" to offer a dose of another vaccine.

Public Health England (PHE) has just said it does not recommend mixing vaccines from different suppliers, and should only happen on "rare occasions".

"If your first dose is the Pfizer vaccine you should not be given the AstraZeneca vaccine for your second dose and vice versa."

The PHE version sounds the most correct given that no clinical trailing or testing has been done on mixed vaccination and the practice has not been approved. Not only are the two vaccines being used in the UK from different manufacturers they work in biologically different ways.

Some days if feels like I am sailing on the ship of fools with this bunch in charge.

[medsec222]

Also Frank, we are now being told that for anyone who has already had the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine, it is now acceptable for them to wait for up to 12 weeks for the second dose. Having been consented for treatment consisting of one dose of vaccine followed by the second in three weeks' time, this seems to go against the ethics of consent for treatment, as it is appears that the delivery of treatment is being changed mid-way without the consent of the patient or the patient's GP. Are the Government now qualified to say that the Pfizer vaccine will work with a three month interval instead of a three week interval even though the vaccine has not been tested for a twelve week gap.

[miasmum]

The first Pfizer vaccine gives you 91% cover increasing to 95% with the second. Therefore apart from the very elderly and very vulnerable it is actually more sensible to forgo a second vaccine for most and get everyone vaccinated with one dose. They can then vaccinate twice as many people in half the time.

We are learning as we go with this, we have to accept that

[Workingman]

We are learning as we go with this, we have to accept that

We certainly do and that is why I reluctantly agree with the 12 week move whilst agreeing with the points Meds raises. And if we can also get to the two million doses per week figure as argued for by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), et al, then we can hit the "herd immunity" % by mid June. That really would take the pressure off.

As for the other... It is true that we do use mix-and-match of almost identical vaccines for some diseases, but the BP and OA vaccines are light years apart. One uses genetic code from the actual coronavirus to boost the immune system. The other uses a genetically modified coronavirus that causes a common cold in monkeys. Nobody knows what effect combining the two different approaches to the same problem will be.

In mid December the government was said to be planning to start trials on mix-and-match, but nothing so far. A large group of volunteers of all ages, ethnicities and so on would have to be assembled. Once the inoculations began they would have to be clinically monitored throughout the trial as in P2 and P3 for the individual vaccines. Assuming nothing untoward the method would then have to be formally approved. It is not a quick fix.

I certainly will not be having one of each unless a lot of research is completed.

[cromwell]

The first Pfizer vaccine gives you 91% cover increasing to 95% with the second. Therefore apart from the very elderly and very vulnerable it is actually more sensible to forgo a second vaccine for most and get everyone vaccinated with one dose. They can then vaccinate twice as many people in half the time.

We are learning as we go with this, we have to accept that

MM, thank you for this. It is nice to have some reliable information; some of the stuff in the papers and on the TV is I think deliberately confusing.

[medsec222]

Personally I feel that if patients have already been consented, then the second dose should be given at three weeks. If there is to be a re-working of the vaccine roll out, then all should be made completely clear government website for patients and health care professionals alike. Patients will then be in a position to know exactly what to expect.

[miasmum]

As far as I am aware they expect to continue with the current two vaccine programme for those already vaccinated as they are the over 80's

[debih]

Not here MM.

As far as I am aware they were telling everyone this weekend not to come back for their next appointment and that someone from their GP surgery would be in touch. What a logistical nightmare.

Logic dictates that you’d leave those already booked in as they are and make the change from the next group of patients.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Workingman]

Shell, please have a read of these and see what you think. Both published on Dec 30th:

C001559 under ACTIONS NOW REQUIRED
https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/ ... r-2020.pdf

and

Statement from the UK Chief Medical Officers
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/stat ... 9-vaccines

It seems that from Monday the 4th the programme will be stretched from 3-4 weeks out to 12 weeks for all with the only caveat being; "(with clinical discretion applied locally if needed)"
* 2nd para under Actions

Maybe I am not reading things correctly, or am I?

Debih, whenever did TPTB do logic?

[Workingman]

As Debih suggests a good case can be made for sticking with the original dose regime and then starting afresh from the 4th. The thing has only been going about three weeks so in three weeks time those already done will have washed out of the system completely and for good, hopefully. Then we can really concentrate on the new regime and get that rolling programme going unhindered: KISS.