KARFA

Indeed as noted in my post. Is it a gamble, yes but with the chips extremely heavily stacked in our favour. It would be extremely surprising if doing the second vaccine at 12 weeks either gave no boost from the 52% level. Even if that boost somehow was only up to 80% rather than the 95% achieved in trials, it would still be fine. There is absolutely no basis to suggest there would be any negative effect. Multiple dose vaccines actually tend actually work better with a longer gap.

In terms of why extending the second dose is being done - I posted in this in the local lockdown thread but I am just copying it in here. it is from Prof David Salisbury who was the Director of Immunisation at the Department of Health and chaired the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunisation for the World Health Organisation.

13901

Again, I'm not disputing that there is method in why the UK is doing this and I won't pretend to be a doctor, a public health official, a data scientist or whatever. I'll leave calculations on whether you are 50% protected, or 60% or, 80% to those who have studied the subject.
All I'm merely saying there is potential for issues in recognising the validity of one's vaccine due to the way it's administered. Until the fine folks at the WHO, or the EMA etc rule that the 12 week interval is OK there is potential for countries not to recognise the vaccine's validity as in the case of Iceland.

Misco60

It should become apparent in a matter of weeks whether the UK's approach is correct: the number of deaths should start to fall very quickly once all vulnerable groups have been vaccinated.

The fact that the various drug trials did not test the efficacy of vaccine doses given many weeks apart does not mean that it makes the vaccine less effective. There is plenty of evidence that longer gaps are actually better, particularly in the case of vaccines of the type that AstraZeneca's is.

The problem, really, is that the British government has by its past action and inaction destroyed its reputation and credibility and no-one is willing any longer to give them the benefit of the doubt.

OverTheHorizon

Fixed that for ya 😊

Misco60

Not true. There are governments that have dealt with this unprecedented and unpredictable crisis with some skill.

KARFA

I think to be fair the second dose at 12 weeks was recommended by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation which is made up of scientists, some of whom are also not based in the UK - i.e. not politicians

mikeyfly

This is so omni

GBOAC

I think Adz will approve the 12 week dosing, it was I believe based on part of their trial data and will hopefully be a way of boosting the effectiveness. I can't see any country restricting travel unduly for a dosing regime that is signed off by the manufacturer
The more worrying thing is the Pfizer vaccine - this is against manufacturers advice. It may or may not be effective, and Pfizer may or may not be willing to sign off on the revised dose regime.
If it isn't effective, then we have bigger probelms like how do we re-vaccinate the population given the extended dose. If it is effective, but not approved, and other countries don't recognise it, then a subset of the UK population will have continued restrictions due to improperly given vaccines. Where will redress lie - my relatives signed up to the authorised dose and had their interval doses changed, without their permission after one jab. If they cannot freely travel due to this unilateral change (while the rest of the population can), will they have claim for compensation against HMG. Will the government be able to buy tier points for them to retain status in the 6-12 months extra that they can't travel while this mess is sorted out? What about lost work and social opportunities they would have had, had the jab been administered as per mfg recommended regime.

The UK Gov has a lot to answer for, and unlike the vaccine manufacturers, has not got a liability waiver!

T8191

Whilst the Thread has, perhaps, strayed from the OP’s intended course, I would suggest that vaccine factors (along with testing) are extremely germane to the plot! Especially to those of us who have been Pfizered, it now appears!

Confus

On what grounds? What is the law that says governments must facilitate overseas travel? To my knowledge there isn’t even one that says they must vaccinate their populations. It’s the epitome of ‘compensation culture’ that this question is even raised at all.

Cathay1101

That they administered the vaccine improperly (not in accordance with the manufacturer's guidelines.) Personally I'd prefer to trust Pfizer's findings on the time-related efficacy of their vaccine versus a government desperate to roll them out at any cost.

I expect such a case would have little credence, though, particularly given the far greater policy failures Johnson's government have executed over the past year and the likelihood that they'll be dragged over the coals for those instead once this all dies down.

Cathay1101

O, to have been Pfizered! One can dream, but that's what happens when you leave Brussels in charge...!

Gastrocnemius

Unless one is rather fortunate enough to have been Pfizered twice within the 28 day window...

fdem

luckily my 91 year old mum had the two doses but think she might be one of the last sadly!

SKRan

No EU261s on mis-vaccine/denied boarding for HMG (post brexit)? We must let the Guardian know.