Covid jab

[Fiz]

To be fair, the WHO has said that having the two together is safe and effective. PHE don't say otherwise, there advice to have a 7 day gap between vaccines is solely so that any reaction can be pinpointed to one vaccine, perhaps for data purposes only. But nevertheless it is conflicting advice.


And with the medical knowledge I have, I wouldn't want two vaccines with any live element in them together but as said, because I think the boosters will be Pfizer people won't be having two live vaccines so that's okay.


There's upset that we are giving our elderly and vulnerable boosters when the citizens in deprived countries haven't had any vaccines saying we should be giving out vaccines to those without before boostering our own. It's a point our government won't be able to please everyone on.

[Sunny Clouds]

A difficult balance.

I wonder whether it's really not possible to make larger quantities of vaccines to share.

[Fiz]

I can see both sides. We could have given away far more surplus vaccines and not provided boosters but I do also see that this pandemic has increased our countries debt mahusively and so can't make that massively worse which hits our poorest the most as proved with the rise in VAT plus the government want to keep the vulnerable and over 50's protected as many work and contribute into government coffers. The only vaccine made in the UK is the Asda-Vinegar and that has been sold to the NHS on a cost only basis with no profit and we've given away alot of Asda-Vinegar vaccines already but it's a drop in the Ocean compared to other countries needs. I tend to feel it's like oxygen masks on a flight, if we don't put our masks on first we are unable to help others in need.


Once countries are well covered, I think an international agreement for countries to help lower economic countries get vaccines is necessary and should be done.

[On the edge]

I'm thinking of the multiple jab thing.  Obviously there were all the scare stories about MMR that have left understandable concerns, but on the other hand I recall as a child having more than one vaccination together, I just don't remember which.

That being said, I fully accept that it's an issue that we might all ponder, when you look at what our bodies do or don't cope with and for me a key moment was a few years back reading a bit of research tht showed that most of the bus rails sampled on our local buses (in an urban area) had faecal matter with germs in it on them. 

As someone with weird all/nothing 'germ' panics that I have to constantly damp down, I got very worried when I read that.  But the more I thought of it, the more I went back to basics on it and overall quantity that in terms of the pandemic is being referred to as 'viral load'.  We wash hands and wear masks and avoid touching faces not with an expectation (if we're realistic) that we'll get rid of all traces of sars-cov-2, but that we'll reduce it to a level at which our bodies can get rid of it unharmed.

That then takes us back to ordinary health precautions against viruses, bacteria & fungi.  We don't mostly get rid of them all, we reduce to a level our bodies can fight them.  Indeed, that's what traditional vaccines do.

Ironically, our efforts to reduce our contact with germs has led to some clinical researchers to draw a connection between overly sterile babyhood and childhood leukemia, and they've developed what they nicknamed a 'gloop' (they'll probably give it a fancy name if it becomes widely used) that consists of a mix of bacteria to give to babies, to give their immune system a kick start so it functions properly.

On the other hand, research has also shown all sorts of connections between things like gut microbiota and obesity, and is now even showing links between things like a range of bacteria and viruses and some sorts of dementia, so the notion that we need to come into contact with some germs to be healthy isn't an argument that we shouldn't try to avoid too much contact, or that we shouldn't be warier with germs our bodies find harder to handle.

So it's actually perfectly natural for us all to have concerns about how much our bodies can cope with in terms of our immune systems, because we live in a world where we're surrounded with germs and other things our immune systems might react to as if they were germs (e.g. pollen, various foods etc.) and getting the balance between not enough and too much is difficult.

That being so, I won't scorn people's concerns about how many vaccines to have at once; but on the other hand, I try personally to weigh it against a few other things, including how much our bodies cope with all at once anyway in terms of types of germs at once as opposed to quantity of a single type of germ at once, and what's realistic in terms of an underfunded and short-staffed NHS giving out vaccines.

I may be wrong, but the way I see it is this.  Every time you split apart your flu and covid booster jabs, that's two appointments not one.  That then delays either your other jab as you go to the back of the queue, or delays someone else's jab.

Even if it wasn't my other jab that was delayed and even if I didn't care about that other person whose jab was delayed, I have a vested interest in as many people as possible getting their jabs and boosters, because I reckon personally that the risk to my health of having flu and covid jabs together is less than the risk to my health of sitting next to someone on a bus that is still waiting for their first or second jabs whilst those of us onto boosters get them.

On the politics of it, personally I feel that if someone doesn't want both boosters together, they should be the one that goes to the back of the queue after the first one behind others that are still waiting.  I think that that would be a fair compromise.

I feel that way about a Christmas event I'm thinking of booking a place on.  Some performances are specifically socially distanced + immunity passport only.  I've applied for my NHS letter and I'll book for one of those performances.  A nice compromise between those of us that want to be more wary and those that don't.

MMR is a moot point with me.  My child became autistic.  Like all responsible parents, I agree to have my son have his essential jabs like MMR.  My son shut down in 47 hours.  Prior to the jabs he was happy babbling baby into everything, overnight he stopped totally communicating or taking an interest in anything.  He had regular checks and they said he had been progressing very well.


After MMR I had a different child entirely with huge issues.  Obviously, medicos insisted MMR had nothing to do with it at all, he was born autistic and symptoms/behaviour didn't kick in immediately that's all.  Others suggested tough, a percentage of vaccinated will get an adverse reaction no vax is 100%, just bad luck.


The reality is we were never really told about how/why 'instant' shutdowns occur. What else were we to think, that the only common factor was the MMR jab. We were suss everybody defended MMR because the alternative was worse for most, that didn't explain if the MMR jab was responsible in some way at all, just more questions than answers.  Worse was to come the respective health services wanted to know why he shut down and quizzed us like we are responsible for it.  We were treated like criminals the first few months.


At the time autism was just viewed as bad behaviour or bad parenting.  Being deaf I had to fight a lot of people for a very long time to keep my son.  I won through but the trauma of it all was horrific.  He had a breakdown was taken to the hospital and 4hrs in,  they just told me to take him home he was disrupting the ward, 5am I had to take him home no treatment or referral the dr said 'we treat broken bones here not broken minds..'


I think many parents now can think themselves fortunate autism is better understood than it was then.  However the nagging thought at the back of my mind, was, MMR, did it trigger something?  There was no similar case that was comparable and no explanations given. Medical areas just wanted to blame someone or something else.  If I had time again I would not have agreed to MMR.  I don't think shut up and accept collateral damage is always possible was a viable explanation.  I had none really.

[Sunny Clouds]

I can understand why people would be concerned about MMR.  Personally, if I'd only seen the original research, I'd also be concerned.

Wakefields's study did provoke a lot of thought, such as yours, as to unanswered questions.   The problem is, though, that it was a very small sample (a cohort of seven) and made no distinction between causation and correlation.  There were other problems with it.

There have been quite a few studies since then and none have been able to show any causation, so personally I'm with those that believe the later more detailed and careful research.

I think a lot of things like this are difficult, and we each have different thought processes.  You see, life functions best if usually we take the shortest route to understanding something, and look for the familiar and obvious.  That literally saves lives.  Doctors are also taught to take that approach as a starting point "Look for horses not zebras."

I'm the sort of person that's the opposite, which can annoy people, but at the same time has my use in contexts where analysis and hair-splitting are useful. 

That being said, given that throughout history we've tried to make sense of things, there'll always be a clash between those that have different views on the cause of something.  If people didn't challenge the status quo, we'd never learn anything.

I do believe that there are factors in relation to autism that aren't understood and could be.  Whether they will be will depend, I cynically believe, on whether anyone (or should I say which big company or government) will fund it.  I suspect that given that drug companies probably don't see money in it, research will probably be funded by government in a different sort of country from ours or by crowdfunding or personal sponsorship.

You can tell that the focus of my cynicism isn't so much on the value of research as on which research is carried out and which is pushed by financial and other interests.  Not quite the same as your concerns, but not polar opposites.

I went through a phase in the pandemic when I had great hopes that the new long-covid movement, many people working together and liaising with groups with existing problems, would trigger a load of research into and understanding of the aftermath of inflammation.  That could help people with a whole range of conditions, physical and mental, especially those that get written off dismissively.

But I now don't think that'll happen unless a big drug company thinks there's money in anti-inflammatory meds, and even then, that'll probably narrow thinking not widen it.  And with a government that's made it clear by its behaviour that it's privatising as much as it can of health services, there are a lot of conditions, not just those with an inflammatory effect, but others we don't fully understand, like autism, that are seen as too expensive or too much hassle to treat.  (Unless you can pay a private company with friends in parliament to lock people up.)

Random example of area of research that had support then lost it politically - certain politicians such as IDS got terribly interested in epigenetics when it suited their idea that benny-scrounging chavs (other insulting terms are available) were changing genetically to become lazier or more antisocial or whatever, and that they then passed this down the generations.

There were problems with this notion, not least because it then poses nasty questions about how far politicians like that would go with eugenics.  But it's all gone quiet on that front publicly - maybe wasn't as useful to those politicians as they hoped?

So research into not just our genetics, but what triggers particular genetic traits could be really helpful yet really dangerous.  And that's not the only sort of research one could say that of.  Ugh, messy.

Which brings me back to autism and MMR.  I remember how much impact it had on me when I encountered a fight back of a different sort.  Neuroatypical people speaking out with a challenging thought I'll encapsulate as "So you think autism is worse than death?"  I thought how if I had a child, I'd prefer autism to death, but I'm not sure how I'd feel now thinking of how our society treats people with autism and similar & related conditions.

After all, a challenge for you and me - where MMR is given, parents are more likely to complete the course than if you give the three jabs separately.  Each disease carries different risks.  Maintaining herd immunity against rubella protects mothers from it, reducing the number of deaf babies.  Hmm.  Deafness versus autism?  Well, you'd be in a better position to compare which people get treated worse by society.  And that's without considering the level of risk, or risk of other conditions, or even that when you choose whether to have your baby vaccinated, hopefully either way, you're there to fight their corner whatever the outcome, but if you reduce herd immunity, it's someone else that has the problem.  Ah, but if it's your baby that has the problem, what if you can't look after them?  Still someone else's problem.

Aargh!  So as I say, whilst I disagree with your interpretation of the overall research into MMR & autism, I think we'd agree that these are horrible decisions for parents to make.

I use that as an example of how whilst I disagree with your interpretation of the MMR & autism research,  I think we'd agree that there are always lots of vested interests when it comes to looking into things like causes, triggers, treatments etc. of health, impairment & difference issues.

[Sunny Clouds]

On a different note, having had my flu jab, and based on what I've recently said on here, I mused about alternative approaches.

What if I'd said "Not yet, call me when I can have both flu and covid booster, and give this appointment to someone who needs it more."  I think that would just have messed up the system.  If you can call it a system.

GPs in a mess over shortages & delays in flu jabs, some weird messy system over where and when to get booster jabs. 

So there's not really much say anyway. When I got my first covid jab, I said "If there's any choice, give me the one others don't want" but there wasn't a choice anyway.

I wonder how many people like me who'd have been perfectly happy to have flu jab and covid booster together are having them separately whilst others who want to be more cautious are only offered the jabs together?  Daft. 

[Fiz]

I found out the difference between a third primary Covid vaccine and the boosters. The third primary is the standard dose but the boosters are half doses. So the Covid boosters we are getting are half the strength of the original vaccines. They clearly think that lower dose will top up our protection enough. I can see why the immunosuppressed will be getting a third vaccine so the full dose rather than a booster too.

[lankou]

I am getting my 3rd "jab" next week, the venue is however 25 miles away.

[On the edge]

On a different note, having had my flu jab, and based on what I've recently said on here, I mused about alternative approaches.

What if I'd said "Not yet, call me when I can have both flu and covid booster, and give this appointment to someone who needs it more."  I think that would just have messed up the system.  If you can call it a system.

GPs in a mess over shortages & delays in flu jabs, some weird messy system over where and when to get booster jabs. 

So there's not really much say anyway. When I got my first covid jab, I said "If there's any choice, give me the one others don't want" but there wasn't a choice anyway.

I wonder how many people like me who'd have been perfectly happy to have flu jab and covid booster together are having them separately whilst others who want to be more cautious are only offered the jabs together?  Daft.

My GP doesn't seem to want to know us anymore lol Covid jabs are 5 miles away, flu jabs we heard nothing, but locally the Chemist will do them for free so I will go for that.  Had my 3rd or is it 2nd (?!?!) jab Wednesday no issue and nil reactions either but they said no double jabs with the usual flu, so they are avoiding that.


Today trying to pick up a repeat prescription was a nightmare and I couldn't get it in the end, they suddenly changed a 48-hour (2 day wait), to a 5 day one for some unexplained reason, which has left my partner with no medication for 4 days and the chemist and GP don't operate on weekends.  Taking advice she can manage 48 hours without some tablets but it gets debatable for 4 days.  I will have to go to the GP again on Monday to try and get tabs earlier, but today they didn't want to know and the surgery is like Fort Knox and they are shouting through masks, not helpful when I cannot hear!


I've lost faith in the NHS to be honest.  I think the staff are all burned out and don't want to know now.

[Sunny Clouds]

I find it scary about the NHS.  But the dismantling of it started years ago so the only way we'd get it back or something equally comprehensive would be something that would scare the government big time.  I seriously believe the only reason we have the modern welfare state, introduced in two steps after the two world wars, is fear by politicians that returning military personnel would start a revolution if not given proper welfare.

That being said, I think our current politicians would be more frightened of losing their money than their political positions or their lives.  The pandemic didn't do that.  I wonder whether the global fuel crisis, coupled with all sorts of issues surrounding property as a form of investment might do it.

In the meantime, there's not much we can do in relation to jabs except trying to get what we need as best we can.

But as regards healthcare in general, my hope for the future is people pulling together, providing the care that the politicians should be spending taxes on, if they taxed the mega-rich fairly, but won't.  For me what symbolise it are two things I  keep mentioning to people. 

(1) 3D printed mechanical hand/arm prosthetics based on a Victorian design with a sort of pulley system that apparently works quite well.  The people that came up with the modern design have made it so you can download the stuff you need for free.  (I don't have the jargon, but I think of it as the 'recipe'.)

(2) the current project trying to develop a way of making insulin that can be patented as open source for non-profit use only.  (You can't patent insulin, only the means of production.) 

No, it's not as good as a comprehensive welfare state, but I cling onto it.  Who knows but that maybe in the not terribly distant future, someone will design what I'll call a 'free to download vaccine recipe'.

[Fiz]

That's really poor ote. I've read that pharmacists can dispense emergency prescriptions for up to 48 hours without a script but have never heard of anyone ever doing that so I have no idea if it's true.


I ended up without a Buprenorphine patch on for a few days as my pharmacy hadn't got my dose and needed to order it in. I'm due for my GP to send my 4 weekly script through to the chemist this Thursday and although I will still have 2 patches I think I am just going to ask for my 4 patches so that in future I am never without one should there be lack of stock again. It's a scary place to be. I'm only just on an even keel because the patches take 72 hours to build up to full plasma Buprenorphine levels so it was a difficult few days. With me, it was a pharmacy failure rather than my GP, I am so thankful for a good GP. At times I briefly consider moving areas but my GP isn't one I would choose to lose though she only works 2 days a week.


My GP surgery is a long way from pre-Covid care though. I would normally see more GP fortnightly but have seen her twice in 19 months and phone calls are just about what medications I need whereas my GP had previously been an amazing help with sorting out my mental health problems but there's no time for that now.

[Sunny Clouds]

Having had problems with scrips in the past, I now try to remember to re-order when I've got at least two week's supply left.  I shouldn't have to do that, though.

A few years back, I had a problem with a couple of scrips going missing in the post, one at Christmas, and I went on a moody website with a scream of "Help! Anyone got any [names of several meds]?"

Stuff arrived through the post, not all from the UK. 

I had a laugh when the following Christmas, an envelope arrived from a friend in Ireland.  It had something in it.  Ooh, had she sent me more of her lovely tomato seeds?  I opened it and inside the card was a strip of thyroxine tablets. 

[On the edge]

That's really poor ote. I've read that pharmacists can dispense emergency prescriptions for up to 48 hours without a script but have never heard of anyone ever doing that so I have no idea if it's true.


I ended up without a Buprenorphine patch on for a few days as my pharmacy hadn't got my dose and needed to order it in. I'm due for my GP to send my 4 weekly script through to the chemist this Thursday and although I will still have 2 patches I think I am just going to ask for my 4 patches so that in future I am never without one should there be lack of stock again. It's a scary place to be. I'm only just on an even keel because the patches take 72 hours to build up to full plasma Buprenorphine levels so it was a difficult few days. With me, it was a pharmacy failure rather than my GP, I am so thankful for a good GP. At times I briefly consider moving areas but my GP isn't one I would choose to lose though she only works 2 days a week.


My GP surgery is a long way from pre-Covid care though. I would normally see more GP fortnightly but have seen her twice in 19 months and phone calls are just about what medications I need whereas my GP had previously been an amazing help with sorting out my mental health problems but there's no time for that now.

Well, today (Wednesday) and 8 days since I asked for a repeat prescription I still don't have it, but am promised today I will.  Alarmingly they are saying they haven't had enough deliveries to fill the scripts lately and apparently my partner's medication is not on the 'priority' listing, and because I had extra insulin for her that made the delays longer.  It means basically BP and heart tablets were not deemed priority medication or others needed them 'more'.  Not the NHS as I knew it.  The surgery has poor recognition from diabetic patients too, with nurses lecturing people to diet and take exercise quite aggressively.  I understand the point of that but telling people off, puts them off returning for checks or new issues, my partner refused to go there anymore, but I managed to get regular consultant checks instead at a nearby hospital.


It wasn't until this week I understood they had re-opened the door to people, so that meant phone calls were being ignored and people encouraged to que again at reception, but all the faces are new as are chemist staff and it's chaotic.  Obviously, regular staff have taken a break or left for the quiet life so new people have yet to get used to the system.  The chemist is a minimum 15 min wait inside and can be 30 min outside all weathers. At height of lockdown 2 hours I stood there.

[Sunny Clouds]

It sounds like you need some big hugs there, OtE.

 

As for supplies of meds, two that I've been on for years as 'mood stabilisers' (quotation marks indicate my cynicism as to psychotropic medication) are also used as anti-epileptics and as immunosuppressants.  A consultant neurologist has been campaigning since the referendum to get the government to address supply problems.  To say how bad they were before brexit, pandemic etc., at one point, I had five different brands of one in a two-month supply, each with a different level of bioavailability.  I'm still getting mixed brands of the other.

I was already reducing them because they were a key factor in my ataxia, and then I halved one just before the pandemic took off.  It wasn't that I thought I'd be clinically better off without it, just that I don't want to end up going cold turkey if supplies don't get through.

That was just as well because (a) there are supply problems and (b) doctors have discovered that its immunosuppressant effects can be useful to deal with the cytokine storm in covid-19, further affecting supplies.

Never mind whether the problem is brexit, pandemic or something else, our government should have got a grip years ago with supply issues.  Being blunt, our current politicians have plenty of cronies with bigpharma and international supply influence.  Even if they messed up a lot like they did with things like ppe, it could still have been better than this mess.

[On the edge]

Well, I managed to get medication after 8 days but told I will have to apply for repeats at least 9 DAYS before the other runs out.  I said this creates issues as two weekends equals 4 days where nobody dispenses anything anyway, and the week, is 5 days long and they are being a  bit pedantic about the time scales.  So by return, I reapplied the same day lol. 


Took my partner for her B12 jab and the surgery which has 4 Dr's to serve a few 1,000 patients but only provides seating for FOUR people, and you cannot arrange any appointment at the actual surgery you have to 'phone' which suggests I am going to have access issues I didn't have pre-covid because new staff had no idea I had special arrangements being deaf there. 


I think they have engaged a woman to answer calls with strict instructions to deter anyone who isn't actually at death's door, and if they are, to go to A&E not them.  I did point out A&E have just shut shop again here so?  The NHS is no more......