Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pfizer Covid vaccine approved for use next week in UK

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 766 posts

Re: Pfizer Covid vaccine approved for use next week in UK

#371

Post by DanBC »

ksec wrote: post #179
DanBC wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We had excellent Public Health test and trace departments who had a wealth of experience of tracing people for sexual health purposes. But we still chose to give the contract to Dido Harding despite her poor record at NHS Improvement. And I saw what happened to NHS Logistics, which was one bit of the NHS that wasn't losing money. It was running well. It was privatised to DHL in 2006 for purely ideological reasons, an…

From a high level overview and global perspective, what the OP is saying, or meant , is that comparatively speaking UK is much better than possibly 80% of developed countries. Not to say NHS is without flaws, far from it. But if you step outside and look around the world many are surprised how awful public health services and logistics can be. So to put it another way, It is not that NHS is good, it is just the other…

Yep, sure. But we said that about pandemic preparedness and yet here were are with a minimum of 60,000 excess deaths.

Re: Pfizer Covid vaccine approved for use next week in UK

#372

Post by cr1895 »

J-dawg wrote: post #314
spuz wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I agree. The maths says that we need about 70% of the population to take the vaccine in order for it to no longer be a threat. We also have polling that says about 53% will refuse to take the vaccine. So we're already at the point where something else must be done such as adding incentives, a passport system or better advertising etc. OR continued lockdown measures and enforcement of mask wearing. It's n…

> The maths says that we need about 70% of the population to take the vaccine in order for it to no longer be a threat ...to no longer be a threat to an unvaccinated person. This isn't like the childhood vaccines, where we need herd immunity to protect the children who are too young to be vaccinated. Provided that everyone who wants the vaccine can get it, I don't see the problem with letting everyone else make their…

>This isn't like the childhood vaccines, where we need herd immunity to protect the children who are too young to be vaccinated.

It's not only too young children who might not be legitimately unvaccinated...some people who are immunocompromised or otherwise medically unable to take certain vaccines must also rely on herd immunity for protection.

Re: Pfizer Covid vaccine approved for use next week in UK

#373

Post by CodeGlitch »

ChrisRR wrote: post #218
DanBC wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Developed country with great logistics. Please don't under-estimate our ability to fuck this up, probably by giving the distribution contracts to a crony.

I'm sure logistics will be sold to a friend of the tories whose company assets consist of a single computer

See my previous comment about this [1]

If the private company does a good job does it matter that they are mates with a tory? Seems little short-sighted of you if I must say.

[1] https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/britains-innovati...

Re: Pfizer Covid vaccine approved for use next week in UK

#375

Post by graeme »

shusson wrote: post #71

Out of curiosity, how do people on HN rate the risk of long term side-effects?

I’m not aware of any vaccine that had long term side effects that were not also apparent in the short term.

E.g. I believe it was the swine flu vaccine that caused narcolepsy in a small percentage of people receiving it. But that was apparent immediately.

To my knowledge no one has identified any slow acting consequences of a vaccine that would not have been obvious from the first rollout of a vaccine.

So this question is mostly academic. Unless you’re someone in the UK slated to get the first dose, you probably won’t even have an opportunity to get the vaccine before the effects in early groups become known. And for those in high risk early groups, the risk of covid surely outweighs the risk of vaccine.

Nothing has shown up in trials so far so I’m not expecting side effects beyond the known effect of short term flu like symptoms for a couple days.

Re: Pfizer Covid vaccine approved for use next week in UK

#376

Post by astura »

shusson wrote: post #71

Out of curiosity, how do people on HN rate the risk of long term side-effects?

For me, from a strictly individual perspective, the health risks from a vaccine is almost certainly less than the long term (and short term) risks of COVID-19 infection.

Re: Pfizer Covid vaccine approved for use next week in UK

#377

Post by jonny_eh »

majewsky wrote: post #206
shusson wrote: post #71

Out of curiosity, how do people on HN rate the risk of long term side-effects?

Not a doctor, just a member of a risk group. The continued spread of Covid poses a rather high risk to me, both because of mortality and because of potential long-lasting aftereffects ("Long Covid"). Even if the vaccine turns out to have longterm side effects, I find it very unlikely that those will be more significant than Long Covid. Therefore the risk tradeoff makes any vaccine a complete no-brainer to me.

Very true. This vaccine doesn't exist in a vacuum.

Re: Pfizer Covid vaccine approved for use next week in UK

#379

Post by tim333 »

Camas wrote: post #367
mkolodny wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the CDC: "People who have gotten sick with COVID-19 may still benefit from getting vaccinated. Due to the severe health risks associated with COVID-19 and the fact that re-infection with COVID-19 is possible, people may be advised to get a COVID-19 vaccine even if they have been sick with COVID-19 before." https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/vaccine-b... .

>Some early evidence suggests natural immunity may not last very long. Doesn't the evidence so far suggest the exact opposite?

I think so. The antibodies drop off rapidly but that's normal with viruses. Sars 1 patients still have T cell response 17 years later.

Re: Pfizer Covid vaccine approved for use next week in UK

#380

Post by kazinator »

cr1895 wrote: post #372
J-dawg wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The maths says that we need about 70% of the population to take the vaccine in order for it to no longer be a threat ...to no longer be a threat to an unvaccinated person. This isn't like the childhood vaccines, where we need herd immunity to protect the children who are too young to be vaccinated. Provided that everyone who wants the vaccine can get it, I don't see the problem with letting everyone else make their…

>This isn't like the childhood vaccines, where we need herd immunity to protect the children who are too young to be vaccinated. It's not only too young children who might not be legitimately unvaccinated...some people who are immunocompromised or otherwise medically unable to take certain vaccines must also rely on herd immunity for protection.

Where I live, two-month-olds are scheduled for a comprehensive vaccination.

https://immunizebc.ca/sites/default/files/graphics/vaccine-s...

Post reply on HN