Pfizer vaccine approved

[Yorick]

Viruses mutate (they always have) so how effective is the vaccine now?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55308211

Most mutations are unsuccessful.

Woo hoo. I added something useful .

Double back somersault to celebrate.

[millemille]

You need 2 injections to immunise a person, spaced 3 weeks apart, so after the initial 3 weeks of injecting for no net result the productivity of the system (injections administered vs. immunisation achieved) is 0.5.

200,000 injections a day gives you 100,000 immunised people per day. 1 million is 10 days and we need, it appears, somewhere between 60 and 75% of the population immunised to achieve herd immunity. Worst case this means 50 million people need to be immune, but the vaccines appear to have 90% - or thereabouts - efficacy so you need to immunise 55 million or thereabouts to be sure. 550 days of non-stop vaccination at 200,000 injections per day on average to achieve this.

While the test centres do have a high throughput of tests bare in mind they are doing very little other than acting as hand out/collection points for the tests - which are largely self administered - and paperwork and that the test centres do not process the samples. The processing of the samples is done in industrial laboratories and is highly automated and done in large batches, not something you can do when administering injections.

We can't be in a situation where immunisation comes at the expense of all else, in terms of health service provision. We're already in the position where COVID has impacted upon the NHS's ability to do its day job and lives have/will be lost - to what extent is unclear - as a result. So can the existing infrastructure be asked to accommodate such a massive undertaking or does new need to be created?

The problem I foresee, although I may well be wrong, is that vaccination is going to rely on several different "brands" of vaccine and everyone will have to be given the correct pair of injections and, from the limited exposure I've had to NHS IT and record integrity/stability through my wife's past jobs as a hospice nurse, I don't think the existing NHS medical record system is up to administering 152 million new records/entries in a way that absolutely 100% guarantees everyone gets the correct injection at the correct time. So I can't see every GP surgery being capable of administering vaccinations because the record keeping/access won't allow it. The vaccination process will rely on a different IT system I would presume.

But of course I could be talking out of my hoop and the government has got it all planned and under control and it'll be a cinch....

I think you under estimate the number of vaccines that will be administered daily ...my numbers are theoretically conservative and come in at 1.5 million a day ... with the likely take up of around 70% we would need to do 45 million people ...that’s around 60 days .. as Wheelnut says the issue will be quantity of vaccine rather than ability to issue it ... as the key target seems to be key workers, the vulnerable and the over 50s I think it perfectly possible to get them done by Easter if the doses are manufactured at the same pace. ?

Record keeping could be as simple as marking the vaccine card with the correct vaccine type and scribbling the date if the next appointment ...it doesn’t need to be rocket science although I expect some one will spring for an all singing database that will cost millions and be ready the day after the virus has been eliminated ..

I hope you're right, but I'd be willing to have a bet (£10 to a charity of choice?) that they don't ever get above 200,000 injections administered per day...

Given they've only managed to administer 140,000 injections in 8 days, less than 20,000 per day, so far it's going to be one hell of a ramp up to achieve 200,000 per day let alone 1,500,000 per day.....

[weeksy]

I think you under estimate the number of vaccines that will be administered daily ...my numbers are theoretically conservative and come in at 1.5 million a day ... with the likely take up of around 70% we would need to do 45 million people ...that’s around 60 days .. as Wheelnut says the issue will be quantity of vaccine rather than ability to issue it ... as the key target seems to be key workers, the vulnerable and the over 50s I think it perfectly possible to get them done by Easter if the doses are manufactured at the same pace. ?

Record keeping could be as simple as marking the vaccine card with the correct vaccine type and scribbling the date if the next appointment ...it doesn’t need to be rocket science although I expect some one will spring for an all singing database that will cost millions and be ready the day after the virus has been eliminated ..

I hope you're right, but I'd be willing to have a bet (£10 to a charity of choice?) that they don't ever get above 200,000 injections administered per day...

Given they've only managed to administer 140,000 injections in 8 days, less than 20,000 per day, so far it's going to be one hell of a ramp up to achieve 200,000 per day let alone 1,500,000 per day.....

Well yes, but things will take a while to get running to full capacity, you can't just go from 0-200,000 in a week. Getting the infrastructure in place will take a bit of time.

[Horse]

Given they've only managed to administer 140,000 injections in 8 days, less than 20,000 per day, so far it's going to be one hell of a ramp up to achieve 200,000 per day let alone 1,500,000 per day.....

I think someone posted that there were limits on how many could be done at the start.

Rather than an average over the eight days, day-by-day figures might give a better indication of the implementation.

FWIW, my mother was phoned several days ago to attend at a centre set up in a a hotel (by a ring road, with alarge car park), so scaling up is happening.

[slowsider]

Well yes, but things will take a while to get running to full capacity, you can't just go from 0-200,000 in a week. Getting the infrastructure in place will take a bit of time.

If they'd started on the infrastructure when they started the vaccine research they would have had 10 months to get it in place.

[weeksy]

Well yes, but things will take a while to get running to full capacity, you can't just go from 0-200,000 in a week. Getting the infrastructure in place will take a bit of time.

If they'd started on the infrastructure when they started the vaccine research they would have had 10 months to get it in place.

yeah, because until then they were all just sitting round doing bugger all.

[slowsider]

Well yes, but things will take a while to get running to full capacity, you can't just go from 0-200,000 in a week. Getting the infrastructure in place will take a bit of time.

If they'd started on the infrastructure when they started the vaccine research they would have had 10 months to get it in place.

yeah, because until then they were all just sitting round doing bugger all.

Front line staff don't do infrastructure planning.
The NHS already had vaccination programmes in place, the only thing different here is the scale.

[cheb]

And the longer the vaccine took to develop the longer they would have had to prepare for administering it. Win win really.

[weeksy]

If they'd started on the infrastructure when they started the vaccine research they would have had 10 months to get it in place.

yeah, because until then they were all just sitting round doing bugger all.

Front line staff don't do infrastructure planning.
The NHS already had vaccination programmes in place, the only thing different here is the scale.

clearly, so what's your point ?

Did they know when it was coming ? How it needed to be handled ? Where it was coming from ? How the infection rate would be when it arrives ? Which areas needed to be first ?

It's so easy sitting at home saying "they should have been better prepared", but i doubt the reality is anything like that. Who will have trained these people ? Would that have been easy with a global pandemic on ?

Lets say they had buildings costing £1,000,000 a week and thousands of staff costing the same, all sitting there waiting and the vaccine had been rejected and not arrived for another 6 months, would you have been OK with that, all the buildings and people sitting there doing nothing for 6 months ?

[Mr. Dazzle]

Given they've only managed to administer 140,000 injections in 8 days, less than 20,000 per day, so far it's going to be one hell of a ramp up to achieve 200,000 per day let alone 1,500,000 per day.....

That figure is from a standing start though isnt it. 130,000 jabs from the 200 clinics which got up and running this week. There are thousands more currently standing up...

[DefTrap]

My youngest (21) just got the results of an antibody test. He has antibodies so likely got it when a stoodent housemate brought it into their house in Bristol and tested positive. He didn't bother getting a nasal test himself at the time, as he was obliged to isolate by proximity to his housemate. He had some very mild cold like symptoms for about a day (probably so mild he wouldn't have put down to anything else) a few days after that, subsequently half a dozen (negative) nasal tests before and after he came back to us for holidays.

TL etc
Fascinating how a disease so deadly to some barely touches others (other than their desire not to pass it on ...)

[millemille]

I hope you're right, but I'd be willing to have a bet (£10 to a charity of choice?) that they don't ever get above 200,000 injections administered per day...

Given they've only managed to administer 140,000 injections in 8 days, less than 20,000 per day, so far it's going to be one hell of a ramp up to achieve 200,000 per day let alone 1,500,000 per day.....

Well yes, but things will take a while to get running to full capacity, you can't just go from 0-200,000 in a week. Getting the infrastructure in place will take a bit of time.

Given they've only managed to administer 140,000 injections in 8 days, less than 20,000 per day, so far it's going to be one hell of a ramp up to achieve 200,000 per day let alone 1,500,000 per day.....

I think someone posted that there were limits on how many could be done at the start.

Rather than an average over the eight days, day-by-day figures might give a better indication of the implementation.

FWIW, my mother was phoned several days ago to attend at a centre set up in a a hotel (by a ring road, with alarge car park), so scaling up is happening.

Not disagreeing with either of you, but what you are saying supports the point I was trying to make several pages ago that immunisation is not going to be a quick fix and we have many months, if not years, of restrictions on personal freedom before we can return to normal.

The government, IMO, is not being honest with the public or is being impossibly optimistic about how long immunisation will take.

From their own figures there are 25 million people in the prioritised at risk categories already announced and they have said that they want the majority of these people immunised by March/April. To achieve that over 370,000 injections are going to have be administered, on average, every day between now and the end of April.

And every day they don't achieve that target means every remaining day has to achieve a higher average and so on...

My estimate of 200,000 injections per day is based on my strictly amateur view (although my wife is a health care professional and I have friends who are managers in the NHS, consultants, GP's and paramedics) of the logistics of supply chain, resources, cost, manpower etc. involved in a program like this and our governments woeful inability to deliver pretty anything it has set out to do in relation to COVID. But I think it's realistic.

[gremlin]

Spoke to my mate who's in hossie with the 'Rona at the moment. I told him I had mixed emotions about him still being alive as, much as I'd miss him, if he croaked I'd be one place further up the waiting list to get the vaccine.

[weeksy]

Spoke to my mate who's in hossie with the 'Rona at the moment. I told him I had mixed emotions about him still being alive as, much as I'd miss him, if he croaked I'd be one place further up the waiting list to get the vaccine.

He got any nice bikes to claim Dibs on?

[Horse]

Not disagreeing with either of you, but what you are saying supports the point I was trying to make several pages ago that immunisation is not going to be a quick fix and we have many months, if not years, of restrictions on personal freedom before we can return to normal.

The government, IMO, is not being honest with the public or is being impossibly optimistic about how long immunisation will take.

I don't think anyone, whether in No 10 or general public (caveat - who has actually thought about it) thinks that immunisation of the entire country is going to be swift. Indeed, politicians have been strenuously making the point that restrictions and care will be necessary for a long time.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Yeah what Horse said...if you think the government is trying to say vaccination will fix it all by Christmas you've been watching very different news stories to me

[slowsider]

yeah, because until then they were all just sitting round doing bugger all.

Front line staff don't do infrastructure planning.
The NHS already had vaccination programmes in place, the only thing different here is the scale.

clearly, so what's your point ?

Did they know when it was coming ? How it needed to be handled ? Where it was coming from ? How the infection rate would be when it arrives ? Which areas needed to be first ?

It's so easy sitting at home saying "they should have been better prepared", but i doubt the reality is anything like that. Who will have trained these people ? Would that have been easy with a global pandemic on ?

Lets say they had buildings costing £1,000,000 a week and thousands of staff costing the same, all sitting there waiting and the vaccine had been rejected and not arrived for another 6 months, would you have been OK with that, all the buildings and people sitting there doing nothing for 6 months ?

Are they building a million quid facility to deliver the vaccine now then? I'd missed that.

[weeksy]

Front line staff don't do infrastructure planning.
The NHS already had vaccination programmes in place, the only thing different here is the scale.

clearly, so what's your point ?

Did they know when it was coming ? How it needed to be handled ? Where it was coming from ? How the infection rate would be when it arrives ? Which areas needed to be first ?

It's so easy sitting at home saying "they should have been better prepared", but i doubt the reality is anything like that. Who will have trained these people ? Would that have been easy with a global pandemic on ?

Lets say they had buildings costing £1,000,000 a week and thousands of staff costing the same, all sitting there waiting and the vaccine had been rejected and not arrived for another 6 months, would you have been OK with that, all the buildings and people sitting there doing nothing for 6 months ?

Are they building a million quid facility to deliver the vaccine now then? I'd missed that.

No, they'll be renting them. They're not just going to do it in a gazebo at the local park are they ? They'll have facilities/locations for storing it, supplying it, trucks, warehouses, staff, lihgting, heating, distribution, they'll have doctors, specialists, nurses, they'll have support staff, admin staff.

[millemille]

Not disagreeing with either of you, but what you are saying supports the point I was trying to make several pages ago that immunisation is not going to be a quick fix and we have many months, if not years, of restrictions on personal freedom before we can return to normal.

The government, IMO, is not being honest with the public or is being impossibly optimistic about how long immunisation will take.

I don't think anyone, whether in No 10 or general public (caveat - who has actually thought about it) thinks that immunisation of the entire country is going to be swift. Indeed, politicians have been strenuously making the point that restrictions and care will be necessary for a long time.

The government has stated that the majority of the 25 million vulnerable/at risk people already prioritised will be immunised by March/April.

Speaking earlier with a friend who's a senior manager at one of the largest NHS trusts outside of London and I asked him for his view on achieving this publicly stated target and he started typing a long and detailed reply and then gave up and typed "In summary: bollocks".

[weeksy]

Not disagreeing with either of you, but what you are saying supports the point I was trying to make several pages ago that immunisation is not going to be a quick fix and we have many months, if not years, of restrictions on personal freedom before we can return to normal.

The government, IMO, is not being honest with the public or is being impossibly optimistic about how long immunisation will take.

I don't think anyone, whether in No 10 or general public (caveat - who has actually thought about it) thinks that immunisation of the entire country is going to be swift. Indeed, politicians have been strenuously making the point that restrictions and care will be necessary for a long time.

The government has stated that the majority of the 25 million vulnerable/at risk people already prioritised will be immunised by March/April.

Speaking earlier with a friend who's a senior manager at one of the largest NHS trusts outside of London and I asked him for his view on achieving this publicly stated target and he started typing a long and detailed reply and then gave up and typed "In summary: bollocks".

well yes... likely complete bollox.. But that's what they're trying to do. The reality is likely to be very different. But what do you suggest ? You can't magically just make it happend because you want to. I expect all countries will miss targets and deadlines, not just ours.