Boris Johnson Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 1 minute ago, Two-lane said: Ah, the Internet. Always entertaining. "A cowshed? We use t' dream o' being vaccinated in't cowshed. All we 'ad were a cardboard box in't middle o' road". You were lucky, .................... 1 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 1 hour ago, TerryFuchwit said: Where? The Villa, many church halls, empty schools, the Ramsey Courthouse, plenty if you put your mind to it. They don't need to be permanent facilities, just large enough to set up booths with areas for admin/computer terminals. The UK are doing it wherever they can, why do we have to do it in 5* surroundings? Because we are more fortunate in the levels of infection just didn't make sense. You can go into just about anywhere and set up a temporary facility. Like the annual flu jab where a GP practice will send their nurses to workplaces to give staff a jab if they want it. It is more complex than the flu jab, I get that, but a bit more flexibility would help rather than planning on a Rolls Royce solution. 7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 Can B12 injections be done at home. ? I know my daughter gets them, but a little shocked at the suggestion that they can be self administered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 7 minutes ago, dilligaf said: Can B12 injections be done at home. ? I know my daughter gets them, but a little shocked at the suggestion that they can be self administered. Yes. Kits are available and it's hard to get wrong with injector-ampoules. One such link... https://www.charlotteemma.co.uk/vitamin-b12-self-injection-home-kit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 7 minutes ago, quilp said: Yes. Kits are available and it's hard to get wrong with injector-ampoules. One such link... https://www.charlotteemma.co.uk/vitamin-b12-self-injection-home-kit Bit shocked tbh. Had not heard about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 (edited) 11 minutes ago, dilligaf said: Bit shocked tbh. Had not heard about that. Better to have laboratory confirmation that one has a B12 deficiency first though. Although the body only uses what it needs and gets rid of the excess naturally, too much B12 can cause acne, amongst other things. I discovered my deficit after developing an unscratchable itch, unbalanced diet and fatigue. It can creep up on you, especially drinkers. No insinuation intended, btw... 🤗 Edited February 1, 2021 by quilp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 15 minutes ago, quilp said: Better to have laboratory confirmation that one has a B12 deficiency first though. Although the body only uses what it needs and gets rid of the excess naturally, too much B12 can cause acne, amongst other things. I discovered my deficit after developing an unscratchable itch, unbalanced diet and fatigue. It can creep up on you, especially drinkers. No insinuation intended, btw... 🤗 My daughter is a nurse, so has a bit of insight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 Ha ha, just spotted the last bit. Is the B12 more or less than 37 % ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 12 minutes ago, dilligaf said: Ha ha, just spotted the last bit. Is the B12 more or less than 37 % ? Joking 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmanxpilot Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 (edited) Oxford University report that delaying the second dose of their vaccine to three months increases it's efficacy from 54.9% to 82.4%. Surely this warrants a change in IOMG's strategy? From Sky News: In the report, the university also said that a single standard dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is 76% effective from day 22 to day 90 after the jab. This means protection is not reduced in the three months between the first and second dose. The report supports the government's strategy that rolling out first doses - with a second dose after three months - is effective at reducing disease. After the second dose, efficacy is 82.4% - if the interval between jabs is three months. This compared to 54.9% for those where the booster was given under six weeks after the first dose. Professor Andrew Pollard, chief investigator of the Oxford Vaccine Trial and co-author of the paper, said: "These new data provide an important verification of the interim data that was used by more than 25 regulators including the MHRA and EMA to grant the vaccine emergency use authorisation. https://news.sky.com/story/oxford-vaccine-may-have-67-effect-on-transmission-and-protection-remains-for-three-month-jab-interval-12206734 Edited February 2, 2021 by madmanxpilot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 Convenient. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmanxpilot Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 10 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Convenient. Cynical. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 On 2/2/2021 at 7:27 PM, TheTeapot said: Convenient. Since the initial emergency authorisation, they have gathered further data and the results are based on the analysis of those data by the people conducting the trial, and supported by the company manufacturing the vaccine. I thought your objection to changing the dosing schedule, when it was recommended by the JCVI, was that it was not supported by the trial authors or the manufacturer? To me it makes sense, at least for the Oxford Vaccine, to extend the dosing interval if that achieves better immunity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 1 hour ago, Newbie said: Since the initial emergency authorisation, they have gathered further data and the results are based on the analysis of those data by the people conducting the trial, and supported by the company manufacturing the vaccine. I thought your objection to changing the dosing schedule, when it was recommended by the JCVI, was that it was not supported by the trial authors or the manufacturer? To me it makes sense, at least for the Oxford Vaccine, to extend the dosing interval if that achieves better immunity. They haven't gathered further data that I can see, just reanalysed their existing data. The problem is, as I pointed out on the other thread, is that the evidence is actually a lot weaker than is being portrayed - some of the confidence intervals are very wide. And there's always a danger with these post-experiment analyses of data dredging and seeing what you hope to see. The criticism of dosing schedule changes in any case referred to changes in that of the Pfizer vaccine not the Oxford-AZ one and even if the Oxford data justified changes to their schedule, it couldn't be transferred automatically to that for a different vaccine using a different mechanism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.