Djeeez, what a fuss...doh
I've carried this Health Passport' on all my travels for more years that I can recall. I really cannot fathom what the problem is- if having it opens borders for me otherwise closed to those who don't carry theirs (or maybe a more modern equivalent such as an app?)- I'm good to go.

And as far as having vaccinations are concerned- it's just a little prik- and many should, by now, be used to having one :Beach:

I had the Pfizer in February, no ill effects beyond any other vaccination. Waiting to get date for second shot and hoping "supply issues" won't delay it.

A lot of people said the UK, after delaying the second shot to 3 months against the manufacturers recommendation of 3 weeks, would experience a shortage after 3 months as they needed to catch up on the delayed second doses after the initial sprint, and that's what is happening it seems. How much of an advantage the strategy will be is yet to be seen, but the fear is that giving partial immunity could let vaccine resistant strains emerge.

UK infection numbers are fairly stable as of today, but not declining despite the continuing lockdown. Probably due to schools having been sent back. They appear to be gambling that while young people may get infected, the number of serious cases is quite small. Though this logic didn't help back at the end of 2020 when infection numbers went rocketing as schoolkids brought the virus home to parents, who took it into workplaces.

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cp...mar-nc-002.png

That's how my sister in law caught it - she works in a school. She was fine while the schools were on hold but within a couple of weeks of them going back she got it - and still has long covid issues.

It's early days yet for the viral mutation problem but there is some evidence to show that the virus may be constrained in what viable mutations are possible. The same relatively small number of convergent evolution changes seem to be showing up again and again. If that pans out it may make the vaccine manufacturers future life a little easier. Popular science article on the subject via the link below if you're interested -

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...riable-so-far/

Cases vs Hospital Admissions vs Deaths
 

The statistics over the last few months have been that about 1 in ten of all new cases end up in hospital, and about one in three of those die. A sobering fact.

I wanted to see whether it was possible to measure the effect of the vaccine, so I took the 7-day rolling averages (smoothed) data for new cases, hospital admissions and deaths and plotted them. This didn't help much as the figures were so disparate, so I divided all the case figures by 21 and all the admissions by 2.5. In this way the start position of cases and admissions at the beginning of February was roughly level with the 1,150 deaths per day.

What you can see from the chart is that the blue cases line has reduced nicely due to a mix of lockdown and vaccinations, but the orange admissions line has reduced even more, and the grey deaths line more again. By measuring the difference between the blue (258) and grey (74) lines at the 25 March one might propose that the vaccine is currently saving 184 lives per day, or to put it another way, over 70% of deaths are being prevented.

It takes 2-3 weeks for the vaccine to become really effective and the effect of the vaccine on death rates will increase dramatically over the next couple of months as increasing numbers of the population are vaccinated.

I will admit this chart is REALLY crude as what I should have done is to factor in the typically ten day gap between reported new cases and admissions, and then the typically twenty days to death. But it was enough to satisfy my curiosity about the effectiveness of the vaccine.

Vaccine efficiency time line INFO direct from Astra Zeneca
 

I was told info below by Astra Zeneca this morning when I telephoned them with regards to the efficiency of the vaccine AFTER you have had your FIRST injection

If you have your SECOND shot of the AZ vaccine:

• at < 6 weeks from the first injection then it offers 55.1% efficiency
• at between 6 and 8 weeks from the first shot then 59.7%
• from 9 to 11 weeks from the first shot then 72.3%
• At > 12 weeks from the first shot then 80%

If anyone would like to call them as well their number is: 0800 783 0033 option 8
Disclaimer:
I am not a medical professional- just a glad recipient of this vaccine and passing the info on- make of it what you will

Interesting statistics and there seems little doubt that a longer interval is positive, which is what many medical professionals said would be the case.

I did read the study in the Lancet and didn't quite understand why the efficacy of a second dose is only 55.1% when the efficacy of a single dose is 76%.

Also there's a load of variables discussed, "Important study limitations include the fact that these studies were not prospectively designed to establish whether vaccine efficacy would differ by dose interval; therefore, these post-hoc exploratory findings could be biased. Other limitations are that participants were not randomised to dosing interval, only one of the four trials was double-blind, and the single-dose recipients were self-selected. Furthermore, baseline characteristics between the single-dose and two-dose cohorts were substantially different, with an older median age, higher proportion of men and non-white participants, and a smaller proportion of health or social care workers in the two-dose cohort than in the single-dose cohort."

One of the criticisms of the Astrazeneca approval submissions is their somewhat random way of carrying out clinical trials, and it's difficult to ascertain reliable data.

conjectures about this vaccine are many and wide.
 

I personally prefer to speak to the manufacturer direct-
As I said in my previous post:
"If anyone would like to call them as well their number is: 0800 783 0033 option 8
Disclaimer:
I am not a medical professional- just a glad recipient of this vaccine and passing the info on- make of it what you will"


All it takes is a free telephone call. I've even provided the A.Z number...

The difference in efficacy of single and second dose only depends in the numbers of participating people and the control group.

By statistical reasons you can`t break down the numbers to compare the results one to one between first and second shot groups. These numbers are imho hidden in the study of your link in brackets behind the percentage value but without full text version I cannot analize and explain.

This videos explains why you can`t compare vaccines only by percentages. It all depend on the circumstances of the study and their (different!) numbers of vaccinated people and of the control group.

https://youtu.be/K3odScka55A

hth

I had the first AZ vax two weeks ago. Second jab scheduled for mid June (three months apart). No issues - bit of a sore arm, dull head for a day, bit tired for another day. Some of us who are "more mature" remember children at school who had Polio as a youngster. The vaccine and booster were later administered at schools. It is standard for all children these days. (BBC radio says (last month) polio is only in Pakistan and Bangladesh these days)

In the mid 70's I travelled throughout UK, all Europe and some communist countries in a old VW (LHD) sedan I bought in UK. (was half tempted to sell the car and buy a motorcycle in Holland - that is another story - never thought of shipping my bike).

In the mid seventies there was no internet, no GPS and no mobile phones (paper maps were very detailed). Crossing into most countries was interesting - as well as passport and vehicle insurance check it was often necessary to produce a small yellow folder detailing the vaccinations you have had. (After this was done it was then off to change currency).

Things are a bit easier these days which is a good thing

Proof of vaccination is today is achieved by a secure personal log into to an Government register.

Keen to minimise the virus so we can all get travelling again!

I don’t know where this “vaccination certificates have always been required” comes from. Proof of yellow fever vaccination, only, is required for about 18 sub Sarahan African countries, and for some countries if coming from a yellow fever area.

Also there is no real comparison between yellow fever, which has a risk of death or disability of about 1 in 8, of anyone that contracts it, young or old, current illness or not.
CDC infection fatality rate for Covid is .2%, by comparison, the average age of the deceased is over 80 with at least 2 other life threatening conditions.

Also no comparison with the vaccines, the yellow fever vaccine may give lifelong immunity and is tried and tested, whereas we are being told the Covid vaccines are good for a few months only, and (and there is no disputing this) none of the clinical trials finish until 2023 at earliest. They are being administered under emergency legislation and with the Pharma companies legally exempted from compensation claims.

And nowhere (apart from now Israel) requires a proof of health for anything other than travel; to create a health apartheid system is clearly wrong and anyone who thinks it will stop there, or ever go away, needs to read some history books.

I would definitely have a yellow fever vaccine, required or not, if travelling to a risk area. I am currently vaccinated for rabies, tbe, hep a and b, tetanus, typhoid and probably some I’ve forgotten, as a result of travel to countries where those diseases are a risk. So I’m not “anti vax” (stupid and lazy label) but no one should be forced to have a health intervention they don’t want or need.

I have travelled extensively and have never had to show proof of vaccination, since DRC isn’t high on my list of places to go, so saying this is the same as needing proof of health to go to France or the pub is nonsense.

Oh, and I see the MHRA is about to recommend against the AZ vaccine for the under 30’s due to risk if ADR’s, and so I genuinely hope everyone who has had it is OK, and the government doesn’t end up paying millions as compensation in the same way they are currently doing with the Pandemrix claims.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are a number of reasons why I suspect that it will be likely that COVID-19 vaccination certificates will become the norm in many parts of the world.

The transmissability of the disease person-to-person is far higher for COVID-19 than it is for Yellow Fever and whilst the fatality rate is lower it is possibly for the disease to rip through a community very quickly infecting many people. So whilst the fatality rate is a little lower than Yellow Fever depending on your age group and where you are being treated far more people infected and so more people die.

It is an easy, cheap fix to ensure that people coming in are less likely to be bringing in the virus - why wouldn't you take an easy option?

The duration of the immunity that is offered is unknown at thsi is point but the duration of similar vaccines is around 18 months - the expectation is that the COVID-19 vaccine will follow a similar timeline for efficacy. This may mean that we will all have to have a routine vaccination to boost the levels and to introduce immunity for new strains as they emerge.

As for forcing people, well when you visit a country you have to play by their rules and it may be that they say "no vaccination, no entry". No one is forcing you to go to that country, it is your choice. Whether that country is France or the DRC is irrelevant, it is their rules. It may be that the government stipulate that requirement for pubs / restaurants for a period of time - given a choice between limited opening for those that have had the vaccine or closed completely I will go for the partial opening.

As regards the stopping of giving the AZ vaccine to under 30s well our middle child (21 years old) has had her first dose as she is classified as extremely vulnerable (she has a dodgy immune system but this vaccine is OK for her - not all are) and she will be bhaving the second dose as planned. The highest risk for her is if she gets COVID - as the risk of the clot is lower then she will minimise the overall risk by getting the vaccine.

I had my first Pfizer shot 3 weeks ago, zero side effects, no discomfort, arm wasn't even sore. Getting my second shot today, glad to have it done.

I've been fortunate. My wife was ill with Covid last March for over 6 weeks and I didn't contract it (unless I was totally asymtomatic) and I even tested afterwards for no antibodies.

Looking forward to a motorhome road trip, with motorcycle in tow, from Utah to Virginia soon to visit my 84 year old mom. :-)

Sent from my SM-A716V using Tapatalk

Our youngest was meant to be getting his first jab the other day but it was cancelled due to a lack of vaccines and has been rescheduled for next Friday. He is getting it relatively early as his sister is classed as clinically vulnerable.

There seems to be a significant number of younger people that are planning on not having the vaccine as if “only kills older people”. A particularly callous viewpoint as well as inaccurate. The view others have taken is that they don’t want to risk getting a blood clot when they, if they are female, ignore the higher risk of getting a blood clots from they go onto the pill. it is all about risk perception.

On the other hand I know of people in their sixties and seventies that have decided against having it because they are in good health and they consider themselves too fit to be affected. Again, inaccurate.

I had my first AZ jab on Friday (age 54) felt a little crap the next day but soon recovered. :D

To me getting vaccinated is a no brainer, anti vaxxers, anti maskers, 5G towers, QAnon what`s next? idiots.

Mezo.

It seems to me that there is a great deal of muddled thinking going on around this issue.

If a person takes the vaccine then they are protected from infection and the health issues that the virus causes.

Therefore unvaccinated people pose no health threat to the vaccinated and it should be irrelevant to the vaccinated what the unvaccinated choose to do.

Consequently, an infected and contagious unvaccinated person can only be a potential health threat to another unvaccinated person or people.

If the above statements are to accepted as correct then there is no need for anyone to know who is vaccinated or who is not and as such "Vaccine Passports" are unnecessary.