| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:48 - Jan 19 with 2980 views | Plums |
I just saw Sky report this too. It would be very untypical of our excellent government to screw up good news wouldn’t it?
My parents had dose one last week and are booked in for dose two on 31st March. Really hoping that happens. [Post edited 19 Jan 2021 22:49]
|  |
|  |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:49 - Jan 19 with 2969 views | ElderGrizzly |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:48 - Jan 19 by Plums |
I just saw Sky report this too. It would be very untypical of our excellent government to screw up good news wouldn’t it?
My parents had dose one last week and are booked in for dose two on 31st March. Really hoping that happens. [Post edited 19 Jan 2021 22:49]
|
Or just simply listen to the manufacturer who have been clear the vaccine should be used as they trialled.
52% efficacy on one dose and nothing proven beyond 21 days on one dose |  | | |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:51 - Jan 19 with 2961 views | NthQldITFC |
Look forward to seeing how/how quickly our mob respond to that. It may still be the most effective overall policy (so many factors to take into account), but looks less likely. Let's hope Johnson and Hancockup respond in a pragmatic and non-defensive manner, let's hope..., oh... |  |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:54 - Jan 19 with 2932 views | Churchman |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:51 - Jan 19 by NthQldITFC |
Look forward to seeing how/how quickly our mob respond to that. It may still be the most effective overall policy (so many factors to take into account), but looks less likely. Let's hope Johnson and Hancockup respond in a pragmatic and non-defensive manner, let's hope..., oh... |
You can whistle for that. They’ll just react as they always do. Lies and empty promises. |  | | |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:54 - Jan 19 with 2930 views | ElderGrizzly |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:51 - Jan 19 by NthQldITFC |
Look forward to seeing how/how quickly our mob respond to that. It may still be the most effective overall policy (so many factors to take into account), but looks less likely. Let's hope Johnson and Hancockup respond in a pragmatic and non-defensive manner, let's hope..., oh... |
There is clearly very short term benefit for one dose, but it is a very small window.
And if we get it wrong, we risk wasting 40 million doses and not protecting those who receive it in the way we and they hoped. | | | |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:57 - Jan 19 with 2922 views | J2BLUE |
We really should be listening to Pfizer on how to use their vaccine. Oxford/AstraZeneca are on board with the idea but Pfizer opposed it from the start and it's stupid not to listen to them. |  |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:01 - Jan 19 with 2889 views | ElderGrizzly |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:57 - Jan 19 by J2BLUE |
We really should be listening to Pfizer on how to use their vaccine. Oxford/AstraZeneca are on board with the idea but Pfizer opposed it from the start and it's stupid not to listen to them. |
Absolutely.
I honestly get why the Government have gambled, but it appears the mistake is revealing itself more and more each day.
Pfizer saying strongly there is no evidence and now real recipients seeing a less than satisfactory response. | | | |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:02 - Jan 19 with 2872 views | StokieBlue |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:54 - Jan 19 by ElderGrizzly |
There is clearly very short term benefit for one dose, but it is a very small window.
And if we get it wrong, we risk wasting 40 million doses and not protecting those who receive it in the way we and they hoped. |
It was always questionable decision not to follow what was actually tested and what Pfizer recommended.
There obviously was a lot of pressure given the rising cases and rising deaths but the evidence didn't ever really seem to be there to support the change in doses.
The issue has also now been compounded by the fact that we won't be getting as much Pfizer vaccine in the timeframes originally though so it might not even be possible to give everyone who had one dose a second one within 14 days even if they switch back to that dose regime.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:07 - Jan 19 with 2819 views | ElderGrizzly |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:02 - Jan 19 by StokieBlue |
It was always questionable decision not to follow what was actually tested and what Pfizer recommended.
There obviously was a lot of pressure given the rising cases and rising deaths but the evidence didn't ever really seem to be there to support the change in doses.
The issue has also now been compounded by the fact that we won't be getting as much Pfizer vaccine in the timeframes originally though so it might not even be possible to give everyone who had one dose a second one within 14 days even if they switch back to that dose regime.
SB |
The only hope I have is the Government does so many u-turns, this might be another one.
All depends how much the media pick it up or guess. Or Marcus Rashford. | | | |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:09 - Jan 19 with 2820 views | Trequartista |
Reports elsewhere put a figure on Israel's Pfizer 1st dose efficacy as 33% on the over-60s which is expected to rise to Pfizer's trial efficacy of 52% when younger people are vaccinated.
The first dose of either Pfizer or Astra Zenica vaccine will suppress serious illness and that's what we've gone with as we have the highest death rate in the world. It's a gamble - the Pfizer should, but is not proven to a) keep serious illness at bay during the 12 week interval between shots and b) have the same excellent efficacy of the 2nd dose after 12 weeks.
But a) and b) are unproven assumptions and i share your concerns. Personally I think we should have the 2nd dose of Pfizer after 3/4 weeks, and 2nd dose of Oxford after 12 weeks. It would *probably* mean more deaths, but we should go on hard evidence, not assumptions. [Post edited 19 Jan 2021 23:10]
|  |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:14 - Jan 19 with 2776 views | ElderGrizzly |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:09 - Jan 19 by Trequartista |
Reports elsewhere put a figure on Israel's Pfizer 1st dose efficacy as 33% on the over-60s which is expected to rise to Pfizer's trial efficacy of 52% when younger people are vaccinated.
The first dose of either Pfizer or Astra Zenica vaccine will suppress serious illness and that's what we've gone with as we have the highest death rate in the world. It's a gamble - the Pfizer should, but is not proven to a) keep serious illness at bay during the 12 week interval between shots and b) have the same excellent efficacy of the 2nd dose after 12 weeks.
But a) and b) are unproven assumptions and i share your concerns. Personally I think we should have the 2nd dose of Pfizer after 3/4 weeks, and 2nd dose of Oxford after 12 weeks. It would *probably* mean more deaths, but we should go on hard evidence, not assumptions. [Post edited 19 Jan 2021 23:10]
|
How much evidence will it need to change course.
This Government is obsessed with headline numbers, with the millions vaccinated a huge hard-on for them right now.
And they hope you focus on that figure, not the death figure now | | | |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:20 - Jan 19 with 2742 views | Trequartista |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:07 - Jan 19 by ElderGrizzly |
The only hope I have is the Government does so many u-turns, this might be another one.
All depends how much the media pick it up or guess. Or Marcus Rashford. |
I presume this has to be driven by a change of course by the JCVI first, and then its up to the Government to implement that.
There is always a delay between SAGE advice and the Government implementing it as the Government have to make the balancing act with the economy that SAGE doesn't need to consider. I presume there shouldn't be the same delay if JCVI change course. | |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:20 - Jan 19 with 2741 views | SuffolkPOSH |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 22:54 - Jan 19 by ElderGrizzly |
There is clearly very short term benefit for one dose, but it is a very small window.
And if we get it wrong, we risk wasting 40 million doses and not protecting those who receive it in the way we and they hoped. |
No worries, we've ordered over 300 million.
I think the bigger worry is the news that 18 people in Norway died after taking the Pfizer vaccine. NB: these were really frail people but no doubt the anti vaxxers will have fun & run with such news. [Post edited 19 Jan 2021 23:24]
|  | | |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:31 - Jan 19 with 2679 views | Trequartista |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:14 - Jan 19 by ElderGrizzly |
How much evidence will it need to change course.
This Government is obsessed with headline numbers, with the millions vaccinated a huge hard-on for them right now.
And they hope you focus on that figure, not the death figure now |
They certainly won't yet, there is no evidence in Israel that is either applicable to the 12-week delay or contradicts the Pfizer trial data which was already known.
It is only if those two assumptions I cited fall apart I would think. If they hold true we've taken a gamble and saved hundreds of lives. I don't like the words "gamble" and "most important vaccination program ever known" in the same sentence though. [Post edited 19 Jan 2021 23:32]
| |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:43 - Jan 19 with 2634 views | bluelagos |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:31 - Jan 19 by Trequartista |
They certainly won't yet, there is no evidence in Israel that is either applicable to the 12-week delay or contradicts the Pfizer trial data which was already known.
It is only if those two assumptions I cited fall apart I would think. If they hold true we've taken a gamble and saved hundreds of lives. I don't like the words "gamble" and "most important vaccination program ever known" in the same sentence though. [Post edited 19 Jan 2021 23:32]
|
No one is questionning the vaccines' safety, rather it's effectiveness from delaying the second dose to a period that was untested.
So yeah, there is a level of uncertainty, no ome would pretend otherwise. But they have been advised that by adopting the approach they are, there will be fewer deaths. They dont have the luxury of being able to test the vaccine's effectiveness over different time periods, that is just reality, as uncomfortable as that is.
If the sceintists say "our best estimate is delaying 2nd dose by 10 weeks will save X thousand lives" is anyone seriously suggesting they should ignore that advice? |  |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:52 - Jan 19 with 2608 views | bluelagos |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:43 - Jan 19 by bluelagos |
No one is questionning the vaccines' safety, rather it's effectiveness from delaying the second dose to a period that was untested.
So yeah, there is a level of uncertainty, no ome would pretend otherwise. But they have been advised that by adopting the approach they are, there will be fewer deaths. They dont have the luxury of being able to test the vaccine's effectiveness over different time periods, that is just reality, as uncomfortable as that is.
If the sceintists say "our best estimate is delaying 2nd dose by 10 weeks will save X thousand lives" is anyone seriously suggesting they should ignore that advice? |
The other thing I'd add is this is not about what makes Jo Bloggs safest, but what is the best for our collective selves.
So if, by vaccinating widely with 1 dose, we reduce the spread of the disease, people with some level of immunity wont get infected, people with fewer symptoms will infect less others....this will reduce the spread and hopefully save thousands of lives.
So when Geoff Boycott, Joan Bakewell state they would be better off with a second jab now, they are right. But by giving them their second jab now, there may well be others who get infected and die.
Just as for months we have been told to do xyz to protect others, seems to me this is a similar thing. It is about protecting as many people as we can, rather than worrying about our selves first. | |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:52 - Jan 19 with 2611 views | clive_baker |
It’s useful data for the modelling here. If it tips the balance in favour of prioritising dose 2 then so be it, it’s good to know that.
Ultimately there’s about 10m priority people we need to get 2 doses into, which should really move the needle if you’ll pardon the pun. On the basis the target was 15m jabs by mid Feb, then roughly speaking all of those 10m could be done twice by the end of next month, should that be the direction we go in. That would represent everyone in their late 60’s and over, who account for the vast majority of COVID deaths. |  |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:52 - Jan 19 with 2615 views | Trequartista |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:43 - Jan 19 by bluelagos |
No one is questionning the vaccines' safety, rather it's effectiveness from delaying the second dose to a period that was untested.
So yeah, there is a level of uncertainty, no ome would pretend otherwise. But they have been advised that by adopting the approach they are, there will be fewer deaths. They dont have the luxury of being able to test the vaccine's effectiveness over different time periods, that is just reality, as uncomfortable as that is.
If the sceintists say "our best estimate is delaying 2nd dose by 10 weeks will save X thousand lives" is anyone seriously suggesting they should ignore that advice? |
I haven't mentioned safety at all as i am satisfied that has been covered. The "gamble" i mention is the assumption the Pfizer vaccine will do things that wasn't tested in their trials.
As i said, i think on the balance of probability the assumptions will prove correct and we will save hundreds of lives.
A final point that i haven't mentioned which provides comfort is that the 52% efficacy quoted by Pfizer is over the whole 3 week period between doses. Now an immune response doesn't actually start until day 10, so the efficacy figure they had for the final week between doses (days 15-21) is 89%. [Post edited 19 Jan 2021 23:54]
| |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:57 - Jan 19 with 2589 views | bluelagos |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:52 - Jan 19 by Trequartista |
I haven't mentioned safety at all as i am satisfied that has been covered. The "gamble" i mention is the assumption the Pfizer vaccine will do things that wasn't tested in their trials.
As i said, i think on the balance of probability the assumptions will prove correct and we will save hundreds of lives.
A final point that i haven't mentioned which provides comfort is that the 52% efficacy quoted by Pfizer is over the whole 3 week period between doses. Now an immune response doesn't actually start until day 10, so the efficacy figure they had for the final week between doses (days 15-21) is 89%. [Post edited 19 Jan 2021 23:54]
|
I think calling it a gamble is somewhat misleading. There is a level of uncertainty, but the scientists will have analysed / modelled the implications of delaying the second dose very thoroughly.
And there is lots of evidence from prior vaccines that will help them make an informed decision based around what they think the level of efficacy will be. | |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:59 - Jan 19 with 2586 views | Trequartista |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:52 - Jan 19 by bluelagos |
The other thing I'd add is this is not about what makes Jo Bloggs safest, but what is the best for our collective selves.
So if, by vaccinating widely with 1 dose, we reduce the spread of the disease, people with some level of immunity wont get infected, people with fewer symptoms will infect less others....this will reduce the spread and hopefully save thousands of lives.
So when Geoff Boycott, Joan Bakewell state they would be better off with a second jab now, they are right. But by giving them their second jab now, there may well be others who get infected and die.
Just as for months we have been told to do xyz to protect others, seems to me this is a similar thing. It is about protecting as many people as we can, rather than worrying about our selves first. |
I totally accept the logic IF the Pfizer jab does as we expect. If the Pfizer jab is useless if the second dose doesn't come within 6 weeks (it almost certainly won't be useless, but no-one has proven that), it will unravel. | |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 00:00 - Jan 20 with 2579 views | Trequartista |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:57 - Jan 19 by bluelagos |
I think calling it a gamble is somewhat misleading. There is a level of uncertainty, but the scientists will have analysed / modelled the implications of delaying the second dose very thoroughly.
And there is lots of evidence from prior vaccines that will help them make an informed decision based around what they think the level of efficacy will be. |
Yes "level of uncertainty" is fair. I meant a literal gamble where the odds may be 1/100 in your favour, which is still a gamble, as opposed to throwing money onto a roulette wheel. | |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 05:04 - Jan 20 with 2398 views | Ryorry |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:59 - Jan 19 by Trequartista |
I totally accept the logic IF the Pfizer jab does as we expect. If the Pfizer jab is useless if the second dose doesn't come within 6 weeks (it almost certainly won't be useless, but no-one has proven that), it will unravel. |
IF the Pfizer vaccine is only 32% effective for the over 60s & even that degree of immunity such as it is lasts for only 21 days, and if no 2nd jab within Pfizer's recommended time frame of 3-4 weeks were available, then speaking as an over 70s with underlying health conditions that first jab would be completely pointless as far as I'm concerned - I'd never risk stopping shielding & going out for a couple of weeks if I was still 68% unprotected by a vaccine. |  |
| |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 08:04 - Jan 20 with 2103 views | gordon |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:20 - Jan 19 by Trequartista |
I presume this has to be driven by a change of course by the JCVI first, and then its up to the Government to implement that.
There is always a delay between SAGE advice and the Government implementing it as the Government have to make the balancing act with the economy that SAGE doesn't need to consider. I presume there shouldn't be the same delay if JCVI change course. |
Is JCVI just going to just be run by some horseracing mate of Matt Hancock? Ex-CEO of Screwfix or something? |  | | |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 08:36 - Jan 20 with 2013 views | ElderGrizzly |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 23:57 - Jan 19 by bluelagos |
I think calling it a gamble is somewhat misleading. There is a level of uncertainty, but the scientists will have analysed / modelled the implications of delaying the second dose very thoroughly.
And there is lots of evidence from prior vaccines that will help them make an informed decision based around what they think the level of efficacy will be. |
The MRNA vaccines, such as Pfizer are new though.
Pfizer say they behave differently to ‘regular’ vaccines, so it is a leap to follow the path that does seem tested for the AZ vaccine.
The two points medics don’t appear to be able to shake is the manufacturer says there is no evidence of protection beyond 21 days on one dose and that one dose only gets to 52%.
Now a real life study, not a trial, is showing 33% on one dose.
The data isn’t going in the right way | | | |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 08:45 - Jan 20 with 1988 views | hype313 |
| “One Pfizer dose is not as effective as we hoped” on 08:36 - Jan 20 by ElderGrizzly |
The MRNA vaccines, such as Pfizer are new though.
Pfizer say they behave differently to ‘regular’ vaccines, so it is a leap to follow the path that does seem tested for the AZ vaccine.
The two points medics don’t appear to be able to shake is the manufacturer says there is no evidence of protection beyond 21 days on one dose and that one dose only gets to 52%.
Now a real life study, not a trial, is showing 33% on one dose.
The data isn’t going in the right way |
You can see it now, they are going to have to start again, and offer the second dose within 3 weeks to the elderly and vulnerable. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
