Banker Posted February 19, 2021 Author Share Posted February 19, 2021 More information that Ashie 3/4 weeks for Oxford is against scientific evidence but suppose he knows best😂 Three-month gap between doses of Oxford vaccine gives higher levels of protection, study suggests Research indicates that with three months between the first and second doses there was overall efficacy of 81%, compared with 55% for a six-week interval. The first dose offered 76% protection in the three months between doses, according to the Oxford University research published in The Lancet. It will be welcome news for UK officials, who made the decision to have a 12-week gap in between doses in order to give as many people a first dose as quickly as possible. The move had been criticised by some scientists, but backed by the government's scientific advisers and the MHRA. It confirms results from an earlier pre-print report which suggested a three-month gap between doses does not lower protection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 19, 2021 Share Posted February 19, 2021 1 hour ago, Banker said: More information that Ashie 3/4 weeks for Oxford is against scientific evidence but suppose he knows best😂 Three-month gap between doses of Oxford vaccine gives higher levels of protection, study suggests Yeah...I mean him being a health professional....i mean accountant or whatever. What a farce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted February 19, 2021 Share Posted February 19, 2021 4 hours ago, Banker said: More information that Ashie 3/4 weeks for Oxford is against scientific evidence but suppose he knows best😂 Three-month gap between doses of Oxford vaccine gives higher levels of protection, study suggests Research indicates that with three months between the first and second doses there was overall efficacy of 81%, compared with 55% for a six-week interval. The first dose offered 76% protection in the three months between doses, according to the Oxford University research published in The Lancet. It will be welcome news for UK officials, who made the decision to have a 12-week gap in between doses in order to give as many people a first dose as quickly as possible. The move had been criticised by some scientists, but backed by the government's scientific advisers and the MHRA. It confirms results from an earlier pre-print report which suggested a three-month gap between doses does not lower protection. It is rubbish. It is a document trying to vindicate the irresponsible government actions. It is wrong. Both Pfizer and AZ state that the recipient has over 90% protection after six weeks if the 3/4 week interval is followed. That is the best anyone can get. Why can people not get this through their thick heads? 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted February 19, 2021 Share Posted February 19, 2021 Did this statement from LibVan/Paul Wetherall feature in any of our local media? Don't remember seeing it anywhere. From Guernsey's local rag... https://guernseypress.com/news/2021/02/18/isle-of-man-government-urged-to-follow-guernsey-in-extending-vaccine-dose-gaps/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 14 hours ago, quilp said: Did this statement from LibVan/Paul Wetherall feature in any of our local media? Don't remember seeing it anywhere. From Guernsey's local rag... https://guernseypress.com/news/2021/02/18/isle-of-man-government-urged-to-follow-guernsey-in-extending-vaccine-dose-gaps/ He is correct. The R rate in the uk has fallen significantly, because the UK has been in lock down for two months. What did he expect? It certainly is little or nothing to do with vaccinations, yet. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 16 hours ago, Cambon said: It is rubbish. It is a document trying to vindicate the irresponsible government actions. It is wrong. Both Pfizer and AZ state that the recipient has over 90% protection after six weeks if the 3/4 week interval is followed. That is the best anyone can get. Why can people not get this through their thick heads? How do they possibly know this as they only tested up to 4 weeks didn't they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 They tested to six weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 56 minutes ago, Cambon said: They tested to six weeks. Interesting. Both companies? What was the difference in the results? Significant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 7 minutes ago, Happier diner said: Interesting. Both companies? What was the difference in the results? Significant. My rudimentary research (bmj) tells me Pfizer only tested up to 21 days. OAZ tested at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. But this is only very recently and on a small sample. Seems AZ shows indications of improved efficacy at 12 weeks but not to a significant degree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 6 minutes ago, Happier diner said: Interesting. Both companies? What was the difference in the results? Significant. You can take the evidence and apparent success from the live trial of Israel that the Pfizer vaccine works as designed and recomended by the manufacturer. The Ox one is a bit more difficult to get your head around as their trials have been dubious from the start. I'd argue that it has been massively rushed. As it is in use it does appear a longer dosing interval works better, but even the latest research isn't quite as clear as it could be. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted February 20, 2021 Author Share Posted February 20, 2021 See Ashie was complaining that staff are driving around to vaccinate some who’ve claimed to be housebound but turns out they weren’t, just couldn’t be arsed going to hubs, probably Ramsey lot!! should’ve have charged them or refused vaccinations Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 3 minutes ago, Banker said: See Ashie was complaining that staff are driving around to vaccinate some who’ve claimed to be housebound but turns out they weren’t, just couldn’t be arsed going to hubs, probably Ramsey lot!! should’ve have charged them or refused vaccinations Yes. They should be instructed to walk away. Some people have no shame.....or should I say a disappointingly large number of people have no shame at all. Walk away, send them a bill for the time. No payment, no vaccine. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 5 hours ago, Banker said: See Ashie was complaining that staff are driving around to vaccinate some who’ve claimed to be housebound but turns out they weren’t, just couldn’t be arsed going to hubs, probably Ramsey lot!! should’ve have charged them or refused vaccinations Israel are offering a free shot for a shot to attract people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmanxpilot Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 Another cruise line mandates vaccination as a condition of travel. https://www.crystalcruises.com/advisory-alerts/covid-19-vaccine-requirement Although Crystal is a high end and relatively small line, I'd wager that the major lines will follow suit in the coming weeks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted February 21, 2021 Share Posted February 21, 2021 (edited) 15 hours ago, Banker said: See Ashie was complaining that staff are driving around to vaccinate some who’ve claimed to be housebound but turns out they weren’t, just couldn’t be arsed going to hubs, probably Ramsey lot!! should’ve have charged them or refused vaccinations Poor as this is, you do have to wonder at the outset who thought it a good idea to start with the airport and expect the oldest demographic to go there in mid winter! or indeed have to be pressured into the realisation that the more convenient the vaccination hubs the more they will be effective. Whilst I have no sympathy for those cynical enough to do this, the issue could have been lessened by some logistical thought. After all we are not talking about the young here. Edited February 21, 2021 by asitis 3 1 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.