Vaccine

[wildebus]

simple maths...
What's better? protecting 10 million people with a 70% effectiveness, or 5 million with a 95% effectiveness?

If you are one of the 5 million, you might say 95% please. If you have the choice of being one of the other 5 Million who can choose 70% or 0%, think you might opt for the 70% for the 10 million option

Taking the helicopter view, protecting 10 million is a lot better than 5 million albeit with a lower protection level as 70% is still damn good.
I saw Tony Blairs suggestion when he first mooted it and thought it made total sense. Glad that this sense has prevailed.

 

[colinm]

It is a gamble, Pfiser are basically 'washing their hands of it', saying they have no data to show how effective it is if left to long and .gov will have to monitor it themselves.
The BMA are also not convinced as it will leave the most vulnerable still fairly vulnerable.
BMA says decision to delay follow-up dose of Pfizer vaccine ‘grossly unfair’ to thousands of at-risk patients in England, as appointments are rescheduled - BMA media centre - BMA
At the end of the day either it will be lauded as saving thousands, or it will be added to list of putting CV-19 infected patients into care homes, and telling care homes they must label all residents DNR.

 

[Fazerloz]

As Wintonian once said to me. " The trouble with simple maths is you rarely get the right answer. For starters you would not be protecting 10 million it would only 7 million protected leaving 3 million people without protection. etc. Sometimes too simple maths is simply too simple.

 

[wildebus]

3 million without is less than 4.95 million without.

simple.

 

[yorkslass]

The Pfizer vaccine producers have said they don't know how The vaccine will work if the second dose is given more than four weeks after the first. Don't know whether it's legal to change the time either if you have already had your first jab. When you are given any new treatment you have to sign a consent form.....don't see how they can change the terms. TBH if i am given a jab then left waiting for the second, I won't be doing anything different to what i'm doing now.

 

[Fazerloz]

3 million without is less than 4.95 million without.

simple.

I can't dispute that simple statement. Give me a clue to where the 4.95 comes from please.

 

[wildebus]

I can't dispute that simple statement. Give me a clue to where the 4.95 comes from please.

95% of the 5 million who would get 2 shots = 4.95 (95% effectiveness)

So actually, I should have made it 10 Million - 4.95 Million = 5.05 Million

So 3 Million unprotected is even bigger gap than 5.05 Million unprotected.

Simple

 

[Fazerloz]

The Pfizer vaccine producers have said they don't know how The vaccine will work if the second dose is given more than four weeks after the first. Don't know whether it's legal to change the time either if you have already had your first jab. When you are given any new treatment you have to sign a consent form.....don't see how they can change the terms. TBH if i am given a jab then left waiting for the second, I won't be doing anything different to what i'm doing now.

I think it was only given its OK on it been a two dose vaccine and the timeline between doses. I would have thought it illegal for the Gov to change that.

 

[Fazerloz]

95% of the 5 million who would get 2 shots = 4.95 (95% effectiveness)

So actually, I should have made it 10 Million - 4.95 Million = 5.05 Million

So 3 Million unprotected is even bigger gap than 5.05 Million unprotected.

Simple

Isn't 95% of 5 million = 4.75 million ......... ............ But then I have been drinking.

 

[wildebus]

Isn't 95% of 5 million = 4.75 million ......... ............ But then I have been drinking.

It is indeed. My Bad.

but would you confirm that 3,000,000 is a lot less than 5,250,000? those the numbers that count.

 

[Fazerloz]

Yes it is less. Only the 3,000,000 are unprotected whereas the 4,750,000 are protected.
Have a good new year.
I need more Beer .

 

[trevskoda]

I get lost after i have run out of fingers and toes.

 

[witzend]

i think the new policy is to give single dose to as many as possible giving more protection , figures quoted were first dose gives 91% protection 2nd dose gives 96% so rather than 2.5 million on 96% going for 5million on 91% 2nd dose can be given up to 12weeks after first

Thats what Tony Blair was suggesting after he had his

 

[colinm]

The facts are that as you move down the age range the vaccine is needed less, giving a single dose to 30-40 y.o.s will save considrably less lives than giving two doses to 70-80 y.o.s, but would be roughly the same total number of doses. Only 388 people under 60 with no underlying symptoms have died of CV-19 in hospital, and only 44 where under 40!
388 people under 60 with no underlying conditions died of Covid in hospitals | Metro News
I'm too tierd at moment to do the maths, but I hope someone in government has done the maths

 

[trevskoda]

Well im about no 6 on the list so so as father ted would say, drink wemen sex if i survive.

 

[wildebus]

The facts are that as you move down the age range the vaccine is needed less, giving a single dose to 30-40 y.o.s will save considrably less lives than giving two doses to 70-80 y.o.s, but would be roughly the same total number of doses. Only 388 people under 60 with no underlying symptoms have died of CV-19 in hospital, and only 44 where under 40!
388 people under 60 with no underlying conditions died of Covid in hospitals | Metro News
I'm too tierd at moment to do the maths, but I hope someone in government has done the maths

And there are around 20 million or so people over 60 years old and/or with underlying conditions.

I am sure they have done the Maths and with more information than you and I have.

 

[maingate]

Maybe I have missed something but as far as I know the Pfizer vaccine will be administered as recommended. It is the Oxford vaccine that can be more flexible.

 

[colinm]

Maybe I have missed something but as far as I know the Pfizer vaccine will be administered as recommended. It is the Oxford vaccine that can be more flexible.

The government said both, but as Pfizer have since issued a statement saying even they don't know if it will work, then I think there will be a quiet change of mind.

 

[maingate]

The facts are that as you move down the age range the vaccine is needed less, giving a single dose to 30-40 y.o.s will save considrably less lives than giving two doses to 70-80 y.o.s, but would be roughly the same total number of doses. Only 388 people under 60 with no underlying symptoms have died of CV-19 in hospital, and only 44 where under 40!
388 people under 60 with no underlying conditions died of Covid in hospitals | Metro News
I'm too tierd at moment to do the maths, but I hope someone in government has done the maths

Not necessarily these days. The new variant is more effective on younger people.

My Daughter works on the Covid Ward instead of taking her days off and I was told that they had some 30 and 40 year olds who were not expected to make it. This puts a lot more of the population into the 'at risk' category.

 

[Robmac]

Not necessarily these days. The new variant is more effective on younger people.

My Daughter works on the Covid Ward instead of taking her days off and I was told that they had some 30 and 40 year olds who were not expected to make it. This puts a lot more of the population into the 'at risk' category.

Quite right Jim. My daughter (care worker) is suffering from long CovID now she's 38 and that was from the original strain. But apparently the new strain is more dangerous for youngsters and nobody should be complacent.