Jump to content

Opinions on when we will be able to freely in Europe travel again.....


Message added by Andy,

This topic has now been closed, with discussion continuing on the below thread  

 

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, colin said:

Not correct.

AZ vaccine is approved for under 65s and is being used already to vaccinate health workers. As of this week it is also available to GPs for over 50, under 65s with GPs choosing who to prioritise. Press coverage of the lower efficacity compared to Pfizer, the slanging match over UK and EU contracts, and reports of side effects form health workers who have had it, have had a negative effect on public confidence. A relatively small proportion of GPs put their hands up to receive supply. Initial plan was 1 vial of 10 doses, but due to less take up than anticipated, they are receiving 2.

Because of the under 65 restriction and the rollout thus far being aimed at 65+, it will take a week or 2 to smooth things out and get numbers up.

Avoiding any politics in this but just making sure we don't stray away from facts.

It is sadly regrettable that now we have scientific evidence that the first AZ vaccine jab offers more protection against transmission & hospitalisation to those vulnerable and the over 65's than Pfizer, there hasn't been a change of focus especially as France has a greater number of over 65's than the U.K.

French vaccination is pushing 4 million now which compared to 700,000 only 2 weeks ago is a very positive move in the right direction. Last time I checked nearly 1.5 million had also had both doses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think at the moment there is little to choose between the various vacines in terms of overall effectiveness. No vaccine will be 100% effective and how well it protects may well depend on the individ

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, jonno said:

It is sadly regrettable that now we have scientific evidence that the first AZ vaccine jab offers more protection against transmission & hospitalisation to those vulnerable and the over 65's than Pfizer, there hasn't been a change of focus especially as France has a greater number of over 65's than the U.K.

French vaccination is pushing 4 million now which compared to 700,000 only 2 weeks ago is a very positive move in the right direction. Last time I checked nearly 1.5 million had also had both doses.

I agree that the AZ vaccine has seen some good reports, particularly on hospitalisations after vaccination, though I have not seen authoritative information stating better results on transmission. We need to bear in mind the constraints on these reports caused by size samples between vaccines and age groups. I hope and think we will find that both mentioned are doing a good job, but more exact assessments will follow.

Different strategy in France and later start. It is possible that over time the programs will narrow the gap in roll out, but what matters is that everyone works together to get the world vaccinated as soon as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, colin said:

I agree that the AZ vaccine has seen some good reports, particularly on hospitalisations after vaccination, though I have not seen authoritative information stating better results on transmission. We need to bear in mind the constraints on these reports caused by size samples between vaccines and age groups. I hope and think we will find that both mentioned are doing a good job, but more exact assessments will follow.

Different strategy in France and later start. It is possible that over time the programs will narrow the gap in roll out, but what matters is that everyone works together to get the world vaccinated as soon as possible.

There's evidence in the test data from November to indicate the AZ vaccine also cuts transmission due to 'observed reduction in asymptomatic infections'.  COV-2 works differently to many of the other well known respiratory viruses which have an obvious, visual incubation period when carriers are most likely to spread an infection. 

COV-2 asymptomatic carriers are the reason why Covid is a pandemic, they shed and spread the virus far more rigorously than those showing outward signs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The advantage of allowing all vaccine types for all ages is that no one gets the chance to choose. Generally the clinics get what they are given and the patient doesn't generally know until it is in the arm and the tatty bit of cardboard handed over with the safety sheet.

I think that if given the choice with the information up to a week or so ago, most would have chosen Pfizer, however we get what we are given !

I think that the Johnson and Johnson one jab vaccine may be better for the young or disorganised in the months to come.

ps I got AZ.

Edited by David Williams
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jonno said:

There's evidence in the test data from November to indicate the AZ vaccine also cuts transmission due to 'observed reduction in asymptomatic infections'.  COV-2 works differently to many of the other well known respiratory viruses which have an obvious, visual incubation period when carriers are most likely to spread an infection. 

COV-2 asymptomatic carriers are the reason why Covid is a pandemic, they shed and spread the virus far more rigorously than those showing outward signs. 

I do not for one moment claim to be an expert .... I have read reports which "suggested" that data on the ARn/RNA vaccines showed better results on lowering transmission than the more conventional types, but we are still so early in this that I only ever try to suggest balance, as it will be some time before proper empirical data is available.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, David Williams said:

The advantage of allowing all vaccine types for all ages is that no one gets the chance to choose. Generally the clinics get what they are given and the patient doesn't generally know until it is in the arm and the tatty bit of cardboard handed over with the safety sheet.

I think that if given the choice with the information up to a week or so ago, most would have chosen Pfizer, however we get what we are given !

I think that the Johnson and Johnson one jab vaccine may be better for the young or disorganised in the months to come.

ps I got AZ.

I will be happy with any authorised vaccine. Thus far I am having to rely on Ricard, common sense, and luck ....

By authorised, I mean by our Hate Autorité de Santé or the equivalent in countries with open and honest systems like the UK. I may have less confidence in Hungary ....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, colin said:

I do not for one moment claim to be an expert .... I have read reports which "suggested" that data on the ARn/RNA vaccines showed better results on lowering transmission than the more conventional types, but we are still so early in this that I only ever try to suggest balance, as it will be some time before proper empirical data is available.

Didn't use the word suggested, I believe the terms were 'evidence' and 'observed'.

If a vaccine stops you catching something, it stops you transmitting it too. You can't transmit what you don't have.

The wife is an expert.

.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think at the moment there is little to choose between the various vacines in terms of overall effectiveness. No vaccine will be 100% effective and how well it protects may well depend on the individual.

The encouraging news is that most, if not all of them appear to  protect very well against hospitalisation and death which, when it comes down to it, is what really concerns many of us as it really does reduce the overall perceived risk level.

People (and the press) are always looking for cast iron certainties but you are never going to get that. If I can be sure that if I catch the bug then there is a 95% chance that I will not end up in hospital or in a box then that is good enough for me!

Taking a step back, the very existence of all these vaccines is a huge scientific and technological achievement which is likely to yield major benefits in many situations other than Covid 19.

Various authorities in th EU are behaving irresponsibly by rubbishing the AZ vaccine in my opinion. It has been proven to do no harm but could do a lot of good, so sitting on millions of unused dosages is culpable really. They should use what they have got as it is a one way positive bet. If something better comes along later in the year then people can be given that as well. What's not to like?

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jonno said:

If a vaccine stops you catching something, it stops you transmitting it too. You can't transmit what you don't have

Whilst I would love that to be true .... why are so many scientists studying whether a vaccinated person can still transmit?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, colin said:

Whilst I would love that to be true .... why are so many scientists studying whether a vaccinated person can still transmit?

It's because there's no trial data, if there was the question wouldn't even arise.

The is an AZ results study on transmission impact which hasn't been published yet which shows the vaccine has a significant effect on transmission.

It also shows that leaving the 2nd booster jab for 12 weeks makes it more effective.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Transmission is not an absolute yes / no binary but a scale and every person is different. Some people will spread lots (comparatively) asymptotically while others with full symptoms will hardly spread at all. Ditto when vaccinated.

What the vaccines have been shown to do is reduce that transmissibility for a very high percentage of the population down, in many cases, to a level that the viral load is below a level to be effective when transmitting the virus.

Plus the body is ready for this particular incoming threat, reducing the infectious phase time, so you have the double positive effect of low transmission plus less time to transmit. There are some good books on the probability rates of transmission and for the simpler view (IIRC) one of Hannah Fry’s R. I. Christmas Lectures demonstrated the non vaccinated to vaccinated and herd immunity (view on YT?).

The second shot is really a belt and braces jab to make sure and prolong the effect. Nobody knows how long one shot will be effective for, whether it be like flu annually, tetanus primary then 5 and 10 years and so on. J&J’s vaccine is the same technology as AZ’s vaccine and it has been licensed for a single shot in the US.

Double shot was part unknown and part the pharmaceutical companies going why sell one when you can sell two for double the price. There is discussion of whether younger people actually need a double dose to be effectively protected.

Still a moving viral feast.

Edited by Shipping Forecast
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, colin said:

Whilst I would love that to be true .... why are so many scientists studying whether a vaccinated person can still transmit?

Undoubtedly, vaccination reduces transmission but I don't think the medical companies are ever expecting it to stop it. The question therefore will be how much impact it does have. Of course, the primary reason for vaccination is to reduce the impact of those who have been vaccinated.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210203-why-vaccinated-people-may-still-be-able-to-spread-covid-19

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, VikingVoyager said:

Undoubtedly, vaccination reduces transmission but I don't think the medical companies are ever expecting it to stop it. The question therefore will be how much impact it does have. Of course, the primary reason for vaccination is to reduce the impact of those who have been vaccinated.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210203-why-vaccinated-people-may-still-be-able-to-spread-covid-19

Thanks. If you online search any combination of the words "can a vaccinated person still be infectious or transmit" or similar you immediately find a host of authoritative reports that state the lack of data on this and therefore the uncertainty.

As I already said, I am no expert, but not thick either .... Quoting unpublished reports is not transparent. And "a significant effect" is not elimination. Let's not get in a stupid argument please.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wortley said:

Mrs Merkel is quoted today as saying it's going to be many months before a decision is taken about opening EU borders to tourists. 

Good job that it is up to the individual Countries to decide, the EU can only recommend.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Andy locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...