Wattie
Member
- Messages
- 8,640
Ok.it's 38 now
View attachment 85649
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.
Ok.it's 38 now
View attachment 85649
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.
Hip measurement in “imperial” (am I allowed to say that now)?
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.
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
What does Sir Les say?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
“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.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...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.
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.Oh calm down.
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?
“ So from a population perspective it is the first vaccine that really matters”- not according to the above which states that nowhere.
Well you won’t see this either then.I haven’t been seeing all the messages on here, because I have someone blocked! But this was nice to read today…
View attachment 85655
It is not those that are refusing to get vaccinated that are prolonging this situation.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.
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.
Evolution.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
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
This is a frankly ludicrous statement.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.
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!