Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Gnatty]

Is anyone a bit concerned about this? I thought all the studies had shown a much greater efficacy with the longer 12 week gap for this vaccine. Why then would we want to risk this by going sooner ie 8 weeks?? I can't find any decent discussion about this online. My feeling is that I can choose to keep my distance from people for a few more weeks and then get the second jab at the right time! For sure there may be some small benefit if having to go out regularly but the studies seemed to show that a 12 week gap gave protection of 82.5% whereas a 6 week gap was only about 56%. It seems strange....

[Aprilflower]

Is anyone a bit concerned about this? I thought all the studies had shown a much greater efficacy with the longer 12 week gap for this vaccine. Why then would we want to risk this by going sooner ie 8 weeks?? I can't find any decent discussion about this online. My feeling is that I can choose to keep my distance from people for a few more weeks and then get the second jab at the right time! For sure there may be some small benefit if having to go out regularly but the studies seemed to show that a 12 week gap gave protection of 82.5% whereas a 6 week gap was only about 56%. It seems strange....

But which vaccine??

I don't think anything is known definitely.  The gap between my AZ jabs will be 10 week.  My husbands Phyzer was less.  I think the original rationale for the bigger gap was to give as many people as possible their first jab.

I really wouldn't worry.

[sheila99]

I was wondering this too. I've been asked to book my 2nd AZ jab and it's 8 weeks. Think I'm going to be a bit slow to book it. I'm not sure they know properly as they haven't tested many intervals.

[Gnatty]

Hi Aprilflower, I was referring to the Astrazeneca in the title. Phizer, for sure, there is a good argument to get it sooner. Not so I think with Astra.

Yes Sheila I have been asked to book but am not going to just yet in the absence of more info. It seems the only intervals tested were 6 and 12 weeks. Well in my mind 8 weeks is a bit too close to the much lower efficacy rates of the 6 week interval for my liking.

[CLKD]

There was a report in the Sat. papers that the longer the gap between vaccines, the better immunity we have. 

As no one has been particularly affected by any of the vaccines available, it may be worth simply keeping to what is recommended 4 a particular area.  Initial, due to so many requiring vaccines in order to get on top of the Virus, the gaps between appts. were lengthened so that more people got a dose ASAP.

What worries U the most?

[Gnatty]

I'm not worried  particularly, but goodness we have waited for these vaccines long enough and I want optimum protection not mediocre...which may well happen with Astrazeneca if second dose taken too close to first dose!

[CLKD]

OK - so how much protection does the annual 'flu jab provide ? 

[Gnatty]

I don't think that's a helpful comparison! I'm just trying to say that if the efficacy of a vaccine rises by nearly 30% if you have a twelve week gap, why on earth would you choose an 8 week gap?

[Barnacle]

I had my first AZ 8 weeks ago and am booked in for the 2nd on 11th June. I have no intention of trying to get an earlier one.

[ElkWarning]

Timings have changed because they want as many fully vaccinated as possible. New variants are of massive concern. While you might get a couple of % more overall protection with additional wait time, they want you to have that 25% + additional protection of both jabs (as opposed to single dose) ASAP.

[CLKD]

It's about 65% ........ and as stated, the gap was increased in order to jab as many people in the UK as possible.

[Gnatty]

Yes the gap was extended to vaccinate max no of people. Subsequent to that it was discovered this conferred a much greater benefit to those vaccinated by Astra Zeneca.

ElkWarning you  say it's only a couple of percent increase, great if that's true but could you point me towards the evidence for that please as it seems completely counter to what I have seen myself.

[CLKD]

It would be impossible 4 me 2 quote every article that I read for/against the gap between vaccines ............ I read the Guardian/Telegraph/times  at weekends.  Sometimes the pages go on and on and .......... so my mind drifts off to other issues 

Local vaccine stations seem well keyed up.  I never thought to ask why there was a gap, it is what it is.  Fortunately I didn't react at all to the 2nd one.

[Ju Ju]

I think they are very worried about the Indian variant and want as many people as possible to get as much protection as possible in as short a time as possible in order to stop the spread. Some protection is better than none at all. When the spread of infection is limited, then that is the time to space the vaccines out in the most effective way. If I hadn’t had both vaccines and lived in or near an affected area I wouldn’t hesitate. No vaccine will give complete immunity, but it can reduce the effects on the body. Yes, look at the flu vaccine. It doesn’t guarantee you won’t catch flu, but it can prevent less serious illness. As someone who has experienced difficulty in breathing, not knowing how to take the next breath, you really don’t want to go there if you can avoid it.

[Kathleen]

Hello ladies.

I agree that the authorities  are worried about the Indian variant and want as many people vaccinated as possible.

I could be wrong but I think that in the Astra Zeneka trials the second dose was given after thirty days and still gave an added thirty percent protection. Perhaps anyone worried about this could do some  research.

I have my second jab on Saturday and fortunately I live in a low risk area so I am not unduly concerned.

Take care ladies.

K.