COVID vaccinations! Have you gotten yours?

[mongers]

If people can't work through the misinformation when their own lives are on the line, what chance do we have of collectively addressing climate change? 

>0%,  <0.001%.

[Tamas]

If they end up forcing 12 min. weeks for my wife that's going to be serious problem with making it to our families before the end of summer. They are really dropping the ball for the end.

What's their problem with 4 weeks? Are they afraid it admits they were only doing the 12-8 weeks stuff to optimise first round availability? I don't think anyone would have a problem with that retrospectively, and it's been pretty obvious from the start.

[Sheilbh]

If they end up forcing 12 min. weeks for my wife that's going to be serious problem with making it to our families before the end of summer. They are really dropping the ball for the end.

I think they're trying to enforce 8 weeks.

I slightly wonder if part of it is that they are having less success getting younger people in the doors for the first dose (for the reasons I listed earlier - they're less likely to have a good NHS record because they're less likely to be in contact with the NHS regularly, they are less likely to be at the right registered address and they're less at risk). So I wonder if there's a fear that this is sort of a displacement activity from keeping to the schedule of second doses and instead of trying to get people through the door for an early second dose, the focus should be on trying to drive take-up for younger people/doing more outreach with young people?

What's their problem with 4 weeks? Are they afraid it admits they were only doing the 12-8 weeks stuff to optimise first round availability? I don't think anyone would have a problem with that retrospectively, and it's been pretty obvious from the start.

The UK wasn't the only - I think Canada is stil 12-16 weeks, I think Denmark also delayed second doses in a similar way.

My understanding is that the JCVI have said that basically there's evidence that the antibody response strengthens for about 8-12 weeks (although most of it is in the first 3 weeks), so there is a benefit in waiting that long to get your next dose.

They might be relying on unpublished data, because Garbo said that I think there's only one quite small study showing that - and I thnk it's more true of AZ (so older people) than the mRNA vaccines.

Edit: Of course the most likely explanation is that it's just a "computer says no" automatic application of process and rules without looking at the wider context.

[garbon]

I felt like they had already said before the 12 weeks was to make sure that supply could be stable.

[Sheilbh]

I felt like they had already said before the 12 weeks was to make sure that supply could be stable.

Yeah. That was definitely why they did it at the start and then moved it up to 8 weeks. But right now I assume there aren't the same supply issues any more, they've certainly talked about it in terms of effectiveness not supply:

Prof Wei Shen Lim, the chair of Covid-19 immunisation at the JCVI, said: "The JCVI advises that preferably the second dose of currently approved Covid-19 vaccines should be given eight to 12 weeks after the first dose. The latest evidence indicates that a longer dose interval of eight to 12 weeks is likely to provide higher levels of protection than a shorter dose interval of three to four weeks."

Obviously I still think if the choice is sticking to a schedule or wasting doses - give it to anyone!

[garbon]

I felt like they had already said before the 12 weeks was to make sure that supply could be stable.

Yeah. That was definitely why they did it at the start and then moved it up to 8 weeks. But right now I assume there aren't the same supply issues any more, they've certainly talked about it in terms of effectiveness not supply:

Prof Wei Shen Lim, the chair of Covid-19 immunisation at the JCVI, said: "The JCVI advises that preferably the second dose of currently approved Covid-19 vaccines should be given eight to 12 weeks after the first dose. The latest evidence indicates that a longer dose interval of eight to 12 weeks is likely to provide higher levels of protection than a shorter dose interval of three to four weeks."

Obviously I still think if the choice is sticking to a schedule or wasting doses - give it to anyone!

Yes I read that article but then when searching found no documented support beyond that Birmingham study. Seems incredibly irresponsible if no other evidence. Actually had my husband's friends arguing that people shouldn't get second jab sooner because of that article.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah agreed - there is the possibility that they've seen data from one of the nations' public health bodies to back that up.

But if it is just that single study then agreed - especially because the second dose makes a big difference with the delta variant (although primarily with AZ which I imagine isn't really being used too much now we're into younger age groups). Especially if it's leading people to be turned away because I think most people will try and get it but, especially with younger people who are less at risk, I think there is more of a risk of not going back.

[Barrister]

The UK wasn't the only - I think Canada is stil 12-16 weeks, I think Denmark also delayed second doses in a similar way.

As soon as there was sufficient supply you could book a second dose after 4 weeks.

[Malthus]

Just got my second dose. I was originally scheduled to get it in September - but as additional supplies came in, bookings have been opened up, and I re-booked.

Uptake seems pretty good in Toronto.

[Grey Fox]

Quebec offers appointment after 8 weeks but walk-ins are 4 weeks.

I get my 2nd dose next Sunday.

My 80 year old aunt will get hers tomorrow after 16 weeks because she never wanted to reschedule.

[Josquius]

If people can't work through the misinformation when their own lives are on the line, what chance do we have of collectively addressing climate change? 

IMO effective climate change action doesn't depend on individuals taking actions within their regular ambits (i.e. making consumer choices), but governments making policy and regulatory changes that affect long-term structural changes.

To give one example, if we rely on individuals to chose to fly less to lower CO2 emissions from the travel industry, it's not going to work. But if governments incentivizes the development of low emission aircraft and (or) heavily disincentivize routine air travel then individual behaviour will follow.

So...  we have a reasonable chance, I think. Not that it's guaranteed we won't flub it, of course.

It does abstract the decision making a bit which helps. In the UK at least I think we are safely in the "fuck climate Change" camp.
But opinions of regular people do matter. The US is particularly worrying here with the republicans tendency to appeal to the extremes in certain issues, happy to expect those who disagree there to just look elsewhere.

[Legbiter]

Got my second jab last week. Party atmosphere complete with a DJ playing in the vaccination hall, almost an impromptu carnival outside.



Over 80% of everyone age 16+ has now been vaccinated at least once.

[Malthus]

Goddam the second shot hit me hard. Sick as a dog now.

[clandestino]

Got the second shot yesterday (both Pfizer). So far so good, even my arm soreness is lesser than with the first jab.

[Legbiter]

Goddam the second shot hit me hard. Sick as a dog now.

What did you get?