Wattie
Member
- Messages
- 8,640
Ok.
My understanding is less than 30% of the UK population is fully vaccinated at this time.
Seems a long way off being done to me.
Anyone had the jab yet?
- Thread starter alfatwo
- Start date
- Status
My understanding is less than 30% of the UK population is fully vaccinated at this time.
Seems a long way off being done to me.
MarkMas
Chief pedant
- Messages
- 8,893
Just over 30%, I think. But 55% with the first vaccine done.
And it appears that the first vaccination takes you from zero protection to around 85-95% protection, and the second vaccination the rest of the way to around 95-97%. So from a population perspective it is the first vaccine that really matters.
And at a rate of over 200,000 jabs per day, the UK is only about a month away from being vaccinated enough to contain the pandemic, and 2-3 months away from almost all individuals also being protected.
CatmanV2
Member
- Messages
- 48,694
Wattie
Member
- Messages
- 8,640
First dose protection seems a little sketchyJust over 30%, I think. But 55% with the first vaccine done.
And it appears that the first vaccination takes you from zero protection to around 85-95% protection, and the second vaccination the rest of the way to around 95-97%. So from a population perspective it is the first vaccine that really matters.
And at a rate of over 200,000 jabs per day, the UK is only about a month away from being vaccinated enough to contain the pandemic, and 2-3 months away from almost all individuals also being protected.
According to Australian science.....
Is it true? How long does it take to have immunity after vaccination?
Both the Pfizer (Comirnaty) and the AstraZeneca (Vaxzevria) vaccines require the full 2-dose course for the best immune response. Individuals may not have the best protection until 7–14 days after their second dose of the vaccine. Find out more below.
Swedish Paul
Member
- Messages
- 1,808
This Australian science you talk of. Is it mandatory to have several pints of Fosters and a barbie before coming to any conclusions?First dose protection seems a little sketchy
According to Australian science.....
Is it true? How long does it take to have immunity after vaccination?
Both the Pfizer (Comirnaty) and the AstraZeneca (Vaxzevria) vaccines require the full 2-dose course for the best immune response. Individuals may not have the best protection until 7–14 days after their second dose of the vaccine. Find out more below.www.health.gov.au
allandwf
Member
- Messages
- 10,982
Wha
What does Sir Les say?
MarkMas
Chief pedant
- Messages
- 8,893
First dose protection seems a little sketchy
According to Australian science.....
Is it true? How long does it take to have immunity after vaccination?
Both the Pfizer (Comirnaty) and the AstraZeneca (Vaxzevria) vaccines require the full 2-dose course for the best immune response. Individuals may not have the best protection until 7–14 days after their second dose of the vaccine. Find out more below.
No it does not 'seem a little sketchy', unless (yet again) you want to twist something to sound like it suits your preconceptions. FFS.
This Australian Government web page you have quoted simply says you need two doses for "the best immune response", and to "be fully protected". Which is also exactly what I said. The page you are quoting is absolutely not saying that first dose protection is 'sketchy'. How dare you misquote something like this to spread such misinformation?
This is a typical example of someone quoting a headline that says 'fully' or 'best' and implying that it means 'otherwise it is useless', or one that says 'possibly' and implying that it means 'probably'. And someone saying 'scientists' when quoting a public statement, and wanting to imply 'almost all scientists'.
Below is a link to a useful review by the BBC that quotes a very wide range of first dose effectiveness, and also talks about the lag after the first dose, and the difficulty of measuring effectiveness, which needs to be considered. But the general view of global science is that:
(a) first dose protection is 80-90% (roughly what I said)
(b) yeah, the best immune response comes from the full course (obvio)
How effective is a single vaccine dose against Covid-19?
Pretend it didn't happen – expert advice on how to behave after receiving a single dose of any of the Covid-19 vaccines.
www.bbc.com
And here is some forking science:
Covid-19: Infections fell by 65% after first dose of AstraZeneca or Pfizer vaccine, data show
Infections of SARS-CoV-2 fell by 65% after a first dose of the Oxford-AstraZeneca or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, preliminary results from a large UK surveillance study indicate. Reductions increased to 70% after a second dose of the Pfizer vaccine, data from the UK Covid-19 Infection Survey show...
EDIT: Let me add an edit to say:
(a) some research (including some mentioned in the BBC article) suggests that the first dose of some vaccines only gives around 50% protection, but mostly its much better than that.
(b) notice that even the BBC article has a somewhat deceptive sub-head suggesting you should act as if the first dose is useless, and begins with a case of someone getting COVID after the first jab, even though the data in the body of the article suggests that you have a lot of protection after a couple of weeks.
(c) the other complicating factor is whether you are measuring effectiveness as 'not getting severely ill' or 'not having the disease at all'. Of course the former is most important personally, and the latter for population-level infectiousness.
Last edited:
mjheathcote
Centenary Club
- Messages
- 9,037
The Mrs has just taken our Daughter for her first jab.
She was 16 just over a week ago.
No we don't live in Bolton, and no she has no medical conditions.
She was 16 just over a week ago.
No we don't live in Bolton, and no she has no medical conditions.
Wattie
Member
- Messages
- 8,640
“How dare you” - Oh calm down.No it does not 'seem a little sketchy', unless (yet again) you want to twist something to sound like it suits your preconceptions. FFS.
This Australian Government web page you have quoted simply says you need two doses for "the best immune response", and to "be fully protected". Which is also exactly what I said. The page you are quoting is absolutely not saying that first dose protection is 'sketchy'. How dare you misquote something like this to spread such misinformation?
This is a typical example of someone quoting a headline that says 'fully' or 'best' and implying that it means 'otherwise it is useless', or one that says 'possibly' and implying that it means 'probably'. And someone saying 'scientists' when quoting a public statement, and wanting to imply 'almost all scientists'.
Below is a link to a useful review by the BBC that quotes a very wide range of first dose effectiveness, and also talks about the lag after the first dose, and the difficulty of measuring effectiveness, which needs to be considered. But the general view of global science is that:
(a) first dose protection is 80-90% (roughly what I said)
(b) yeah, the best immune response comes from the full course (obvio)
How effective is a single vaccine dose against Covid-19?
Pretend it didn't happen – expert advice on how to behave after receiving a single dose of any of the Covid-19 vaccines.
And here is some forking science:
Covid-19: Infections fell by 65% after first dose of AstraZeneca or Pfizer vaccine, data show
Infections of SARS-CoV-2 fell by 65% after a first dose of the Oxford-AstraZeneca or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, preliminary results from a large UK surveillance study indicate. Reductions increased to 70% after a second dose of the Pfizer vaccine, data from the UK Covid-19 Infection Survey show...www.bmj.com
EDIT: Let me add an edit to say:
(a) some research (including some mentioned in the BBC article) suggests that the first dose of some vaccines only gives around 50% protection, but mostly its much better than that.
(b) notice that even the BBC article has a somewhat deceptive sub-head suggesting you should act as if the first dose is useless, and begins with a case of someone getting COVID after the first jab, even though the data in the body of the article suggests that you have a lot of protection after a couple of weeks.
(c) the other complicating factor is whether you are measuring effectiveness as 'not getting severely ill' or 'not having the disease at all'. Of course the former is most important personally, and the latter for population-level infectiousness.
Sketchy- “
adjective- not thorough or detailed.
"the information they had was sketchy
Both the Pfizer and the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines require the full 2 dose course for the best immune response. Whilst partial protection against COVID-19 may be as soon as 12 days after the first dose, this protection is likely to be short lived. The second dose encourages the body to create stronger protection (immunity) against the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.
Individuals may not be fully protected until 7-14 days after their second dose of the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine.
Does this sound like immunisation is thorough” after a first dose?
“ So from a population perspective it is the first vaccine that really matters”- not according to the above which neither implies nor states that anywhere.
If anything it states the importance of 2.....with a “may not be fully protected until...... “ caveat.
Last edited:
Saigon
Member
- Messages
- 778
Read the first couple of lines, then the last ones, couldn’t be bothered to read in between. Bottom line, of course just my opinion, but everyone who has the opportunity and the luxury to get vaccinated needs to get vaccinated. It’s those who refuse to get the vaccination in the UK that are prolonging this situation.
Wattie
Member
- Messages
- 8,640
Well you won’t see this either then.
The fear mongering headline above Harry makes absolutely no reference to the basis of the study.....nothing.
Just “jab cuts the risk of dying by 80%.......”- as if it applies to ALL.
Nope, you’ve got to read through the data to discover the headline relates to 80 year olds plus!!!!
The real story is that this has been done.
“BBC - The rollout has expanded after the UK government hit its target of offering a first jab to everyone in the top priority groups - all those over the age of 50, plus those in high-risk categories - before 15 April.
These groups account for 99% of coronavirus deaths so far”
Once again a totally misleading, spread the fear headline, which inaccurately represents the necessity for a huge swathe of the population to rush out and get vaccinated against dying......but then some people don’t wanna hear that.
Last edited:
Wattie
Member
- Messages
- 8,640
It is not those that are refusing to get vaccinated that are prolonging this situation.
For a start that includes kids......let alone those who have no access to vaccines (globally) as they’re being used elsewhere on huge numbers of young healthy. people who are at very little risk.
That sort of phrase Is “discriminatory and inflammatory ” and there is no proof in what you say.......if that’s where we’re headed it’s pretty troubling.
Last edited:
Bladerunner
Member
- Messages
- 438
How does that work if the website is saying vaccine bookings are open to over 38’s if no medical conditions etc….unless living in a high infection risk area?
Apparently it opens out to over 37’s from tomorrow
Wattie
Member
- Messages
- 8,640
Evolution.
When I was a lad most girls aged 12 looked around 22.
Now 16 year olds look 38.
mjheathcote
Centenary Club
- Messages
- 9,037
Word got out that the last 100 or so jabs at the local vaccination centre were open to anyone over 16, first come, first served.
The Mrs jumped onto the NHS Web site at 4:50 booked it, she was jabbed with the PZ at 5:10, along with most of her school mates who's parents also got the nod!
Blox
Member
- Messages
- 1,057
This is a frankly ludicrous statement.
I used to love coming on here when it was witty and mostly about cars. These kind of comments though make this a pretty unpleasant place to hang out.
Sorry guys but I’m off....
Over and out.
Blox
Zep
Moderator
- Messages
- 9,202
This, everyone, is why there is no benefit to bouncing off the walls all the time about this stuff.
We all have our views, they aren’t the same, and neither should they be.
The world is a serious place at the moment, let’s make SM a sanctuary from it, not a place where it is concentrated.
We all have our views, they aren’t the same, and neither should they be.
The world is a serious place at the moment, let’s make SM a sanctuary from it, not a place where it is concentrated.
Bladerunner
Member
- Messages
- 438
Nice one, similar thing happened locally and was shared on social media so several hundred people turned up and they were turning people away.
Just got my 1st one booked for tomorrow as age has prevailed!
Rwc13
Member
- Messages
- 1,668
Travelling to the UK tomorrow to see my 14 year old daughter for the first time in 10 months. Simply can’t wait to see her and get a bloody great big hug. Obviously, doing tests before and within two days after flying and also on the way back next week. But it will be worth it. Also have my first vaccine booked here in Portugal on 29th May. They are into the over 55s here now.
Situation here in Portugal seems very stable at the moment, very few in ICUs or even hospitals now, and first tourists from UK and Netherlands arrived yesterday.
Situation here in Portugal seems very stable at the moment, very few in ICUs or even hospitals now, and first tourists from UK and Netherlands arrived yesterday.
- Status