Vaccine- who will have it?

[Andy Onchan]

1 hour ago, madmanxpilot said:

I would have thought group five would be getting first jabs a lot sooner than May...late March is what I have in my mind as we have been doing group three for the last couple of weeks.

 

The +70s have only just received letters to register fore the first jab.

[Andy Onchan]

58 minutes ago, Cambon said:

That means sticking with the 21 days schedule for Pfizer. 

No it doesn't.

[Roger Mexico]

13 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

No it doesn't.

Yes it does - the press release says:  The dose interval for the Pfizer vaccine remains 21 days but this is subject to ongoing review in line with emerging evidence.

(Last line)

[madmanxpilot]

12 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

The +70s have only just received letters to register fore the first jab.

So that's group four getting letters now, group three got letters three weeks ago, group five maybe within the month?

It took five days from receipt of letter to first vaccination for my parents in group three.

[Andy Onchan]

1 minute ago, Roger Mexico said:

Yes it does - the press release says:  The dose interval for the Pfizer vaccine remains 21 days but this is subject to ongoing review in line with emerging evidence.

(Last line)

The emerging evidence is now fact! 

[Cambon]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

Except the vulnerable haven't been the ones who have been getting the Pfizer vaccine.  65% of the doses given so far have been Pfizer, but only 58% of those to the 80+ group and a mere 34% of those 65-79.  In other words those most likely to have serious problems with Covid have been predominantly give the vaccine that hasn't been tested with that group.

In contrast 44% of vaccine doses (8077) so far have been given to the under 65s and 87% of those have been Pfizer.

At least those who have had their first jabs so far will receive their second one to the correct, manufacturers schedule, and get the 90%+ protection.

To hell with the rest of us

Edited February 23, 2021 by Cambon

[Cambon]

39 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

No it doesn't.

It does. The 21 day interval offers 90%+ after 35 days. No other interval offers that level of protection that quickly. 

[Banker]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

Except the vulnerable haven't been the ones who have been getting the Pfizer vaccine.  65% of the doses given so far have been Pfizer, but only 58% of those to the 80+ group and a mere 34% of those 65-79.  In other words those most likely to have serious problems with Covid have been predominantly give the vaccine that hasn't been tested with that group.

In contrast 44% of vaccine doses (8077) so far have been given to the under 65s and 87% of those have been Pfizer.

Well they gave all the health & charity workers the Pfizer jabs before any vulnerable were vaccinated .

[Newbie]

13 hours ago, Cambon said:

Because they are doing this 12 week interval gamble, they are going to have a massive second jab catch up excercise to do, which will stall the under 50s and some of the overs

The total number of jabs is the same whatever the dosing interval. Extending the interval for the Oxford vaccine will mean that a point in time will come when more second doses are due than would otherwise have been the case. But this is only because more first jabs will have been given to people who wouldn't have had them if the interval hadn't been extended, so it won't stall the programme

12 hours ago, Cambon said:

At least those who have had their first jabs so far will receive their second one to the correct, manufacturers schedule, and get the 90%+ protection.

To hell with the rest of us

AstraZenaca's recommended schedule is for the second dose to be administered between 4 and 12 weeks so extending it to 10 weeks is in line with that recommendations. DA said in the briefing that there was no intention of changing the dosage schedule for the Pfizer vaccine, but they would keep it under review, so again it will be in line with the manufacturer's recommendations. If you haven't had your first dose yet, you should now get it earlier than you would have otherwise. All good!

[John Wright]

Interestingly they’ve slowed down in England due to supply issues and apparently they’re stockpiling second doses there as well.

If you extend period between first and second doses you have to hold back more second doses ( if you operate the second dose in hand stockpiling policy ) so that slows down ability to deliver first dose.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/feb/23/number-of-uk-covid-vaccinations-falls-by-a-third-as-vaccine-supply-dips?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[Newbie]

30 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Interestingly they’ve slowed down in England due to supply issues and apparently they’re stockpiling second doses there as well.

If you extend period between first and second doses you have to hold back more second doses ( if you operate the second dose in hand stockpiling policy ) so that slows down ability to deliver first dose.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/feb/23/number-of-uk-covid-vaccinations-falls-by-a-third-as-vaccine-supply-dips?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

If vaccine supplies are reduced then that is obviously going to force a slow down, but whatever dosage schedule you use, the total number of doses is the same. The programme would have to slow down if the vaccine isn't available whether it was first doses or second doses that were being given. 

If you assume we need around 130,000 doses to fully vaccinate the adult population on the IoM, and it takes say 9 months for that number of doses to be delivered, that is how long the vaccination programme will take. The difference is that if you spread out the dosage interval, more people get protected earlier, and that is better provided that the extended dosing doesn't affect the ultimate efficacy, which for the AZ vaccine, the latest data suggests it doesn't.

One potential fly in the ointment is that it may be harder to predict how many doses you will have available in 12 weeks rather than predicting how many doses will be available in 4 weeks. On the other hand, allowing more flexibility as to when the second dose is given is a good thing if there are fluctuations in supply

[John Wright]

14 minutes ago, Newbie said:

If vaccine supplies are reduced then that is obviously going to force a slow down, but whatever dosage schedule you use, the total number of doses is the same. The programme would have to slow down if the vaccine isn't available whether it was first doses or second doses that were being given. 

If you assume we need around 130,000 doses to fully vaccinate the adult population on the IoM, and it takes say 9 months for that number of doses to be delivered, that is how long the vaccination programme will take. The difference is that if you spread out the dosage interval, more people get protected earlier, and that is better provided that the extended dosing doesn't affect the ultimate efficacy, which for the AZ vaccine, the latest data suggests it doesn't.

One potential fly in the ointment is that it may be harder to predict how many doses you will have available in 12 weeks rather than predicting how many doses will be available in 4 weeks. On the other hand, allowing more flexibility as to when the second dose is given is a good thing if there are fluctuations in supply

You’ve missed the point. If you vaccinate 4000 a week, and have a 3 week gap, and insist on having the second dose in hand for everyone who has had the first dose yo have to stockpile 12,000 doses. If the gap is 10 weeks and yo retain the in hand policy you end up with 40,000 in stockpile.

If there are supply issues that slows you down and you can’t deliver 4000 a week.

[Newbie]

13 minutes ago, John Wright said:

You’ve missed the point. If you vaccinate 4000 a week, and have a 3 week gap, and insist on having the second dose in hand for everyone who has had the first dose yo have to stockpile 12,000 doses. If the gap is 10 weeks and yo retain the in hand policy you end up with 40,000 in stockpile.

If there are supply issues that slows you down and you can’t deliver 4000 a week.

I get what your saying, but in the press briefing DA said that they were looking at the expected delivery schedules of vaccine in light of the new dosage schedule which suggests that they are not planning on stockpiling that number of vaccines, but will rely on the later supplies to deliver the second doses.

I agree that there would be no benefit at all to the overall programme if that number of doses were stockpiled, although even doing that shouldn't slow it down, as it would simply mean that for every 2 doses of vaccine received into stock, one would be administered as a first dose and one retained as a second, as happens now. You would need a much bigger fridge however!

The whole point of extending the dosage interval is to give you that flexibility to allow you to deliver more first doses at an earlier stage, and not stockpiling huge quantities

[Roger Mexico]

1 minute ago, Newbie said:

The whole point of extending the dosage interval is to give you that flexibility to allow you to deliver more first doses at an earlier stage, and not stockpiling huge quantities

It' worth adding that the drop in supply in February (which was warned about in advance) is so that manufacturing capacity can increase.  So that if the Island continues to get pro-rata supplies, using up stockpile now will mean we get more to compensate later on.

[John Wright]

4 minutes ago, Newbie said:

I get what your saying, but in the press briefing DA said that they were looking at the expected delivery schedules of vaccine in light of the new dosage schedule which suggests that they are not planning on stockpiling that number of vaccines, but will rely on the later supplies to deliver the second doses.

I agree that there would be no benefit at all to the overall programme if that number of doses were stockpiled, although even doing that shouldn't slow it down, as it would simply mean that for every 2 doses of vaccine received into stock, one would be administered as a first dose and one retained as a second, as happens now. You would need a much bigger fridge however!

The whole point of extending the dosage interval is to give you that flexibility to allow you to deliver more first doses at an earlier stage, and not stockpiling huge quantities

I’m all in favour of a cushion. But every dose in stockpile is a dose not in someone’s arm, until you get to the last cohort of second doses.

Im hearing rumours of a shortage of pfizer supply, which is logical. They’re short in UK and that will reduce our 0.13% in number terms