3 ms·

At least where I am (UK), yes. They added to article 174 of the Human Medicines Regulations, allowing an unlicensed vaccine to be advertised in some circumstanc

by ppf 6y ago

At least where I am (UK), yes. They added to article 174 of the Human Medicines Regulations, allowing an unlicensed vaccine to be advertised in some circumstances, as well as allowing a broader range of people to administer the vaccine, and provided legal protection in law to the developers of the vaccine in case of any issues. This is in addition to the existing powers of article 174, which allows an unlicenced medicine to be rolled out in exceptional circumstances.

JamisonM 6y ago
Seems like very silly changes that won't help anything very much but serve a narrative that the government is bending the rules. Very stupid and unfortunate.
- ppf 6y ago
  No, not silly, but potentially justified, in the case of a pandemic. However, these changes obviously increase the risk to the recipient of the vaccine. There's a higher chance of something going wrong with the actual injection, as a broader spectrum of people are administering it (where I live, there was a call for volunteer vaccinators in the local paper), and also very little legal recourse if something is found to be harmful with the vaccine itself. For those reasons, along with the lack of any information as to whether the vaccine has a meaningful effect on reducing transmission, I have decided that the risk (relative to the reward) to me is too high.
  - JamisonM 6y ago
    You are making a very bad choice, that is unfortunate.
    - ppf 6y ago
      What is incorrect about my reasoning?
      - ceejayoz 6y ago
        This bit is incorrect: > along with the lack of any information as to whether the vaccine has a meaningful effect on reducing transmission There's substantial evidence coming out on his front. Not enough for the CDC to tweak recommendations yet, but I expect that in the next few months: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-israel-vaccine-int/israeli-studies-find-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-reduces-transmission-idUSKBN2AJ08J https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-israel-va... "Data analysis in a study by the Israeli Health Ministry and Pfizer Inc found the Pfizer vaccine developed with Germany’s BioNTech reduces infection, including in asymptomatic cases, by 89.4% and in syptomatic cases by 93.7%." "More research is needed to draw a definitive conclusion, but the studies are among the first to suggest a vaccine may stop the spread of the novel coronavirus and not just prevent people getting ill."
        ppf 6y ago
        So far, there is one pre-print of a non-peer reviewed study suggesting this is the case. As you (and the article) say, much more research is needed.
        ceejayoz 6y ago
        At least do me the favor of reading the link; "two Israeli studies" is in the very first sentence, and the second study is published: > A separate study by Israel’s Sheba Medical Center published on Friday in The Lancet medical journal found that among 7,214 hospital staff who received their first dose in January, there was an 85% reduction in symptomatic COVID-19 within 15 to 28 days with an overall reduction of infections, including asymptomatic cases detected by testing, of 75%. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00448-7/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... edit: This just came across my feed, published today. See Fig 1 for a chart that doesn't need deep stats knowledge to understand. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2102153#.YFoyawObmOY https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2102153#.YFoyawOb... > As shown in Figure 1A, the percentages of persons who became infected differed according to vaccination status, with infections in 234 of 8969 nonvaccinated employees (2.61%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.29 to 2.96), 112 of 6144 partially vaccinated employees (1.82%; 95% CI, 1.50 to 2.19), and 4 of 8121 fully vaccinated employees (0.05%; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.13) (P<0.01 for all pairwise comparisons). > The effect of vaccination on the preservation of our workforce has been dramatic. We observed a greater than 90% decrease in the number of employees who are either in isolation or quarantine.

by ppf 6y ago

JamisonM 6y ago

Seems like very silly changes that won't help anything very much but serve a narrative that the government is bending the rules. Very stupid and unfortunate.

ppf 6y ago
No, not silly, but potentially justified, in the case of a pandemic. However, these changes obviously increase the risk to the recipient of the vaccine. There's a higher chance of something going wrong with the actual injection, as a broader spectrum of people are administering it (where I live, there was a call for volunteer vaccinators in the local paper), and also very little legal recourse if something is found to be harmful with the vaccine itself. For those reasons, along with the lack of any information as to whether the vaccine has a meaningful effect on reducing transmission, I have decided that the risk (relative to the reward) to me is too high.
- JamisonM 6y ago
  You are making a very bad choice, that is unfortunate.
  - ppf 6y ago
    What is incorrect about my reasoning?
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
      This bit is incorrect: > along with the lack of any information as to whether the vaccine has a meaningful effect on reducing transmission There's substantial evidence coming out on his front. Not enough for the CDC to tweak recommendations yet, but I expect that in the next few months: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-israel-vaccine-int/israeli-studies-find-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-reduces-transmission-idUSKBN2AJ08J https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-israel-va... "Data analysis in a study by the Israeli Health Ministry and Pfizer Inc found the Pfizer vaccine developed with Germany’s BioNTech reduces infection, including in asymptomatic cases, by 89.4% and in syptomatic cases by 93.7%." "More research is needed to draw a definitive conclusion, but the studies are among the first to suggest a vaccine may stop the spread of the novel coronavirus and not just prevent people getting ill."
      - ppf 6y ago
        So far, there is one pre-print of a non-peer reviewed study suggesting this is the case. As you (and the article) say, much more research is needed.
        ceejayoz 6y ago
        At least do me the favor of reading the link; "two Israeli studies" is in the very first sentence, and the second study is published: > A separate study by Israel’s Sheba Medical Center published on Friday in The Lancet medical journal found that among 7,214 hospital staff who received their first dose in January, there was an 85% reduction in symptomatic COVID-19 within 15 to 28 days with an overall reduction of infections, including asymptomatic cases detected by testing, of 75%. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00448-7/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... edit: This just came across my feed, published today. See Fig 1 for a chart that doesn't need deep stats knowledge to understand. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2102153#.YFoyawObmOY https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2102153#.YFoyawOb... > As shown in Figure 1A, the percentages of persons who became infected differed according to vaccination status, with infections in 234 of 8969 nonvaccinated employees (2.61%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.29 to 2.96), 112 of 6144 partially vaccinated employees (1.82%; 95% CI, 1.50 to 2.19), and 4 of 8121 fully vaccinated employees (0.05%; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.13) (P<0.01 for all pairwise comparisons). > The effect of vaccination on the preservation of our workforce has been dramatic. We observed a greater than 90% decrease in the number of employees who are either in isolation or quarantine.