Is this getting a bit out of hand? - RSV jabs

[MikeJhn]

Having a greatly reduced immune system I have been advised not have any jabs and to avoid crowds, what this has brought home to me is watching VAP smokers and the size/area of the cloud of smoke, this obviously contains water vapour from the person and possibly contains contamination virus/germs from them, it surprising how large the dense cloud is.

The strain on the Health Services is brought about by people taking advantage of the system, it amazed me how many people insist on being collected for treatment for the same problem that I have, Ambulance, crew, wheel chair with porter, same on return, but get up and walk to the treatment room, I don't think all of them are without a car or have access to one with driver.

 

[TRITON]

I feel comfortable accepting the advice of my doctor without question.

 

[johnb80]

I feel comfortable accepting the advice of my doctor without question.

Your opening post only refers to mortality levels which may be reduced. Presumably people also recover from RSV so the strain on health services reduces if the vaccine avoids them getting it in the first place?

Me too, I can never understand people that go to the doctor with an issue and then dont take the advice / meds.

 

[Agent_zed]

Me too, I can never understand people that go to the doctor with an issue and then dont take the advice / meds.

Whilst I don't distrust doctors, many people no longer have a single GP over many years. GPs literally have a few mins to scan each patient file and 10 mins to listen to your ailment (assuming you can describe it accurately) and make a diagnosis/write a prescription.

The father of a family friend (long since past) was on meds that were messing with other meds he was on. Nobody had bothered to review ones he was already on before prescribing additional drugs, caused a few problems before they realised the issue.

That's not to say you should ignore or distrust a doctor, but a bit of a sense check after the visit isn't completely ridiculous. Doctors are people after all, and often overworked it would seem, everyone can make mistakes

 

[Jacob]

And how does that answer my question?

you asked why I persist. That's why.

 

[RobinBHM]

If Mr Biden has been putting pressure on you to remove certain content from your platform

I hadnt realised Joe was a fellow wood worker

I wonder if he loses more pencils than me

 

[Sideways]

That's not to say you should ignore or distrust a doctor, but a bit of a sense check after the visit isn't completely ridiculous. Doctors are people after all, and often overworked it would seem, everyone can make mistakes

This is absolutely my view. The only person wholly invested in your health is yourself.
Treat doctors as respected professionals who's job is to give you expert advice, but weigh up that advice and the final decision is always on you.
If you ask doctors intelligent questions, they tend to give you intelligent balanced answers.
Sadly their administration systems are a long way from fool proof so you need to be proactive to make sure regular checks, monitoring and follow ups happen as they should.

 

[mcostello]

The "USA world view" is made by the Government, it does not represent the views of a lot of it's citizens. We have many with different opinions, but You are supposed to not know about them. Latest campaign message was stated "We do not have the PRIVILEGE to speak" because it is against what They think is approved.

 

[Yorkieguy]

The main reasons, as I can see, for providing this voluntary, free vaccine is to reduce the debilitating effects of this disease, especially in the very young & older suffers, & reduce the impact on the NHS. As this is voluntary I cannot see any objections.
You seem to question the use of the term 'could' when dealing with effectiveness & response. One is dealing with viruses & humans .....there is little scope for using...'it will'
I wish you all a happy & healthy winter......

I'm 85, and I'm puzzled as to why the RSV vaccine has been restricted to 75 - 79 year olds.

Are over 80s immune to RSV or are we being 'phased out'? I say that because in the winter of 2023 I had a persistent dry cough which was in my throat area - not my chest. It got on everybody's nerves including mine, wore me down, and because I'd worked with asbestos from age 15 to 25 I did wonder if it had caught up with me. Quite rightly, my wife badgered me to go to the Doc. Dr sound my chest - all clear, but arranged 2-week priority appointment for an X-Ray and a camera up my nose, and down into my chest. Thankfully, all clear. Back to the Doc and he said; 'it's viral - you'll just have to tough it out', so I did. It lasted 3 months then fizzled out. Same thing this year - mid Jan to mid April cough, cough, cough, cough till it ran its distance.

There's little doubt in my mind that it was RSV and if I am offered the ***, I'll have it.

My wife and I have got our Covid booster and 'Flu *** organised. The average number of flu deaths for the 5 years before the pandemic was 13,500 a year. In 2017 to 2018 season, here were 22,500 excess deaths associated with flu:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/excess-deaths-associated-with-flu-highest-in-5-years

The decline in vaccination of children in the UK is a case for real concern.

The World Health Organization (WHO) currently recommends that at least 95% of children are immunised against diseases preventable by immunisation and targeted for elimination or control (diphtheria, neonatal tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), Hepatitis B, measles, mumps and congenital rubella1 ). The routine childhood immunisation programme for the UK includes these immunisations recommended by WHO.

These are diseases which used to kill children in large numbers - prior to 1946 in the UK, an average of 4,000 children died from childhood diseases. (See graph).

95% has never been achieved and has steadily declined since 2012 due to the influence of 'anti-vaxxers'. Fifteen doses of eight vaccines are required to be administered from age 8 weeks to five years, including ‘booster jabs’.

MMR1 coverage at 5 years is 94.5%, down from 94.9% in 2017-18 and below the 95% target. MMR2 coverage (‘booster’ ***) at 5 years is 86.4% (down from 87.2% in 2017-18)

https://files.digital.nhs.uk/4C/09214C/child-vacc-stat-eng-2018-19-report.pdf

Before diphtheria vaccination was introduced in the UK in 1942, there were on average 55,000 cases of diphtheria annually leading to around 3,500 deaths each year (mostly children). The vaccine has been so effective, diphtheria has caused only four deaths in the UK in the last twenty years. All of these people were unvaccinated. Most cases of diphtheria that have occurred in recent years in the UK have been brought in from the Indian subcontinent or from Africa.

https://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/diphtheria#:~:text=The graph below shows that,in the last twenty years.

In a small cemetery in a village near to me is the saddest headstone I've ever seen. I've attached a picture, but the text might not be very legible. It states:

'In affectionate remembrance of four loved ones who were removed by diphtheria in three weeks. The loved ones of William and Ann Stewart of Brantingham Grange:

Mary Jane, died Dec 6 1874 aged five years 6 months.
James Hamilton, died 8 Dec 1874 aged 2 years 7 months
Daniel Charles died 13 Dec 1874, aged 6 years 11 months, 3 weeks.
Anne, died 27 Dec 1874 aged 9 months.

Imagine the grief of that family over Christmas time. Not a poverty-stricken family living in an unheated hovel, but a wealthy land owning family living in comparative comfort it a large manor house. A virus is no respecter of status - 'The rich man in his castle, the poor many at his gate'.

During my childhood every school, and sometimes every classroom, had children inflicted with diseases such as polio and diphtheria, and when vaccines came along, few would have debated the efficacy of them. TB claimed the life of my mother when I was five in 1944. A year later, streptomycin would probably have saved her.

When debating the possible 'long-term effects of a vaccine', it's worth thinking about the possible short-term effects of not having it. Here today - gone tomorrow.

Just saying.

David.

 

[Jacob]

I'm 85, and I'm puzzled as to why the RSV vaccine has been restricted to 75 - 79 year olds.

Are over 80s immune to RSV or are we being 'phased out'? I say that because in the winter of 2023 I had a persistent dry cough which was in my throat area - not my chest. It got on everybody's nerves including mine, wore me down, and because I'd worked with asbestos from age 15 to 25 I did wonder if it had caught up with me. Quite rightly, my wife badgered me to go to the Doc. Dr sound my chest - all clear, but arranged 2-week priority appointment for an X-Ray and a camera up my nose, and down into my chest. Thankfully, all clear. Back to the Doc and he said; 'it's viral - you'll just have to tough it out', so I did. It lasted 3 months then fizzled out. Same thing this year - mid Jan to mid April cough, cough, cough, cough till it ran its distance.

There's little doubt in my mind that it was RSV and if I am offered the ***, I'll have it.

My wife and I have got our Covid booster and 'Flu *** organised. The average number of flu deaths for the 5 years before the pandemic was 13,500 a year. In 2017 to 2018 season, here were 22,500 excess deaths associated with flu:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/excess-deaths-associated-with-flu-highest-in-5-years

The decline in vaccination of children in the UK is a case for real concern.

The World Health Organization (WHO) currently recommends that at least 95% of children are immunised against diseases preventable by immunisation and targeted for elimination or control (diphtheria, neonatal tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), Hepatitis B, measles, mumps and congenital rubella1 ). The routine childhood immunisation programme for the UK includes these immunisations recommended by WHO.

These are diseases which used to kill children in large numbers - prior to 1946 in the UK, an average of 4,000 children died from childhood diseases. (See graph).

95% has never been achieved and has steadily declined since 2012 due to the influence of 'anti-vaxxers'. Fifteen doses of eight vaccines are required to be administered from age 8 weeks to five years, including ‘booster jabs’.

MMR1 coverage at 5 years is 94.5%, down from 94.9% in 2017-18 and below the 95% target. MMR2 coverage (‘booster’ ***) at 5 years is 86.4% (down from 87.2% in 2017-18)

https://files.digital.nhs.uk/4C/09214C/child-vacc-stat-eng-2018-19-report.pdf

Before diphtheria vaccination was introduced in the UK in 1942, there were on average 55,000 cases of diphtheria annually leading to around 3,500 deaths each year (mostly children). The vaccine has been so effective, diphtheria has caused only four deaths in the UK in the last twenty years. All of these people were unvaccinated. Most cases of diphtheria that have occurred in recent years in the UK have been brought in from the Indian subcontinent or from Africa.

https://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/diphtheria#:~:text=The graph below shows that,in the last twenty years.

In a small cemetery in a village near to me is the saddest headstone I've ever seen. I've attached a picture, but the text might not be very legible. It states:

'In affectionate remembrance of four loved ones who were removed by diphtheria in three weeks. The loved ones of William and Ann Stewart of Brantingham Grange:

Mary Jane, died Dec 6 1874 aged five years 6 months.
James Hamilton, died 8 Dec 1874 aged 2 years 7 months
Daniel Charles died 13 Dec 1874, aged 6 years 11 months, 3 weeks.
Anne, died 27 Dec 1874 aged 9 months.

Imagine the grief of that family over Christmas time. Not a poverty-stricken family living in an unheated hovel, but a wealthy land owning family living in comparative comfort it a large manor house. A virus is no respecter of status - 'The rich man in his castle, the poor many at his gate'.

During my childhood every school, and sometimes every classroom, had children inflicted with diseases such as polio and diphtheria, and when vaccines came along, few would have debated the efficacy of them. TB claimed the life of my mother when I was five in 1944. A year later, streptomycin would probably have saved her.

When debating the possible 'long-term effects of a vaccine', it's worth thinking about the possible short-term effects of not having it. Here today - gone tomorrow.

Just saying.

David.

I'm 79 and probably the last generation to see the effects of polio in people my age when I was a school kid back in the 50s. Virtually unknown now thanks to vaccines.
If people came on here promoting dangerous woodwork practices they'd soon get sorted out, but anti-vaxxers promote ideas which can lead to people dying, not just getting a nasty cut.

 

[jetsetwilly]

I'm 85, and I'm puzzled as to why the RSV vaccine has been restricted to 75 - 79 year olds.

Are over 80s immune to RSV or are we being 'phased out'? I say that because in the winter of 2023 I had a persistent dry cough which was in my throat area - not my chest. It got on everybody's nerves including mine, wore me down, and because I'd worked with asbestos from age 15 to 25 I did wonder if it had caught up with me. Quite rightly, my wife badgered me to go to the Doc. Dr sound my chest - all clear, but arranged 2-week priority appointment for an X-Ray and a camera up my nose, and down into my chest. Thankfully, all clear. Back to the Doc and he said; 'it's viral - you'll just have to tough it out', so I did. It lasted 3 months then fizzled out. Same thing this year - mid Jan to mid April cough, cough, cough, cough till it ran its distance.

There's little doubt in my mind that it was RSV and if I am offered the ***, I'll have it.

My wife and I have got our Covid booster and 'Flu *** organised. The average number of flu deaths for the 5 years before the pandemic was 13,500 a year. In 2017 to 2018 season, here were 22,500 excess deaths associated with flu:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/excess-deaths-associated-with-flu-highest-in-5-years

The decline in vaccination of children in the UK is a case for real concern.

The World Health Organization (WHO) currently recommends that at least 95% of children are immunised against diseases preventable by immunisation and targeted for elimination or control (diphtheria, neonatal tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), Hepatitis B, measles, mumps and congenital rubella1 ). The routine childhood immunisation programme for the UK includes these immunisations recommended by WHO.

These are diseases which used to kill children in large numbers - prior to 1946 in the UK, an average of 4,000 children died from childhood diseases. (See graph).

95% has never been achieved and has steadily declined since 2012 due to the influence of 'anti-vaxxers'. Fifteen doses of eight vaccines are required to be administered from age 8 weeks to five years, including ‘booster jabs’.

MMR1 coverage at 5 years is 94.5%, down from 94.9% in 2017-18 and below the 95% target. MMR2 coverage (‘booster’ ***) at 5 years is 86.4% (down from 87.2% in 2017-18)

https://files.digital.nhs.uk/4C/09214C/child-vacc-stat-eng-2018-19-report.pdf

Before diphtheria vaccination was introduced in the UK in 1942, there were on average 55,000 cases of diphtheria annually leading to around 3,500 deaths each year (mostly children). The vaccine has been so effective, diphtheria has caused only four deaths in the UK in the last twenty years. All of these people were unvaccinated. Most cases of diphtheria that have occurred in recent years in the UK have been brought in from the Indian subcontinent or from Africa.

https://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/diphtheria#:~:text=The graph below shows that,in the last twenty years.

In a small cemetery in a village near to me is the saddest headstone I've ever seen. I've attached a picture, but the text might not be very legible. It states:

'In affectionate remembrance of four loved ones who were removed by diphtheria in three weeks. The loved ones of William and Ann Stewart of Brantingham Grange:

Mary Jane, died Dec 6 1874 aged five years 6 months.
James Hamilton, died 8 Dec 1874 aged 2 years 7 months
Daniel Charles died 13 Dec 1874, aged 6 years 11 months, 3 weeks.
Anne, died 27 Dec 1874 aged 9 months.

Imagine the grief of that family over Christmas time. Not a poverty-stricken family living in an unheated hovel, but a wealthy land owning family living in comparative comfort it a large manor house. A virus is no respecter of status - 'The rich man in his castle, the poor many at his gate'.

During my childhood every school, and sometimes every classroom, had children inflicted with diseases such as polio and diphtheria, and when vaccines came along, few would have debated the efficacy of them. TB claimed the life of my mother when I was five in 1944. A year later, streptomycin would probably have saved her.

When debating the possible 'long-term effects of a vaccine', it's worth thinking about the possible short-term effects of not having it. Here today - gone tomorrow.

Just saying.

David.

Well put David - it's hard to imagine that family's experience. It reminds me of a recent comment by Bill Gates, who said that vaccine uptake is only a problem in developed countries - in the developing world, where the population still has firsthand knowledge of the ravages of preventable diseases, vaccine uptake is simple not an issue.

I also wondered about the 75-79 age range - it seems oddly tight. The US CDC had the same range but has recently rationalised it to 75+, which seems saner and kinder. I think the only reason for the JCVI ruling out those over 80 can be cost/benefit, which seems a bit harsh to me. Hopefully they'll revise it

 

[jetsetwilly]

I will be taking my annual flu *** this year...as long as it is not an mRNA one.

Why wouldn't you take an mRNA vaccine?

 

[Jacob]

Why wouldn't you take an mRNA vaccine?

I'd guess because he is mildly infected with antivax propaganda.

 

[Yorkieguy]

Why wouldn't you take an mRNA vaccine?

A good question - I don’t see a reason to object to it but as with those on mumsnet who won’t have their children vaccinated with the MMR (measles, mumps rubella) because Karen know better than scientists, once people become fixated with a point of view, rumour, myths and superstition trumps science.

MRNA is ‘messenger ribonucleic acid’.

This explains all we need to know about it:

https://ukhsa.blog.gov.uk/2024/03/11/what-are-mrna-vaccines-and-how-do-they-work/

A snippet:

Quote:

mRNA vaccines largely came to public awareness during the pandemic with the success of both the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines. These are the main vaccines used in the UK’s COVID-19 vaccination campaigns. However, researchers have been studying this method of creating vaccines for decades.

mRNA, or messenger ribonucleic acid, is a component of all life on earth and has been in cells for billions of years. Its job in the human body is to provide a mechanism by which the instructions in our genes (DNA) can be used to make specific proteins in our cells. When used in vaccines, mRNA delivers the instructions for making a harmless piece of protein identical to one found in a particular virus or bacterium, to the ‘protein factories’ of our cells.

End quote.

 

[NickDReed]

RSV is globally the leading cause of severe respiratory illness in infants, and an important disease in the elderly, and there have been attempts for over 50 years to develop a vaccine, so don't make the mistake of thinking it's some flash-in-the-pan attempt to profit from a perceived 'vaccine boom'

Clearly your work history gives you deeper understanding of the mechanism by which these drugs are supposed to work. I did some brief reading about the history of RSV and particularly vaccine development and read a bit about the vaccine developed in the 60s that ended up causing vaccine enhanced disease in children. I had assumed that the newly approved drug would work on an entirely different mechanism, you may be able to advise different.

Early attempts to develop an RSV vaccine failed because the technology wasn't there. But actually a monoclonal antibody drug has been used to protect very-high-risk groups for decades and has proved safe and effective, but far too costly and inconvenient for widespread use.

And this sort of plays into my point, which isn't that all vaccines are bad and people should stop taking them contrary to what some have twisted this thread into becoming as it is easier to label and deride than it is to discuss alternate opinions or views.

If there is a safe and effective treatment for people who are at the highest risk of the disease such as the children with congenital heart disease in the 1990s trail. Is in not reasonable to believe providing this medication to that cohort of patients in not far more targeted than providing a different prophylactic treatment to every pregnant mother or adult aged 75-79?

If as you point to maybe the case, the primary driver of this decision is convenience and cost, in my opinion that falls below a standard that I believe should be expected from healthcare providers and drug manufactures.

There have been issues with approved drugs in the past (thalidomide has been mentioned), and there have been well-publicised scandals involving regulators who have been browbeaten or straight bribed (US opioid crisis springs to mind). It would be a catastrophic mistake to conflate these with the rollout of partially-effective Covid vaccines and decide that 'it's getting out of hand'.

You may have greater insight than me, but it appeared at first glance that the new RSV vaccine offers no more effective prevention to its targeted virus than the partially effective Covid vaccines you refer to? It does not seem to remove the risk of infection, or stop illness caused by the virus and what protection from severe illness there is drops off over a reasonably short period of time.

So if for the vast majority of cases the illness presents as cold like symptoms, is it not reasonable to identify and treat those in the population who are at highest risk ie with comorbidities or genetic or congenitally predisposed to a more severe effect of the virus?

 

[Jacob]

Clearly your work history gives you deeper understanding of the mechanism by which these drugs are supposed to work. I did some brief reading about the history of RSV and particularly vaccine development and read a bit about the vaccine developed in the 60s that ended up causing vaccine enhanced disease in children. I had assumed that the newly approved drug would work on an entirely different mechanism, you may be able to advise different.


And this sort of plays into my point, which isn't that all vaccines are bad and people should stop taking them contrary to what some have twisted this thread into becoming as it is easier to label and deride than it is to discuss alternate opinions or views.

If there is a safe and effective treatment for people who are at the highest risk of the disease such as the children with congenital heart disease in the 1990s trail. Is in not reasonable to believe providing this medication to that cohort of patients in not far more targeted than providing a different prophylactic treatment to every pregnant mother or adult aged 75-79?

If as you point to maybe the case, the primary driver of this decision is convenience and cost, in my opinion that falls below a standard that I believe should be expected from healthcare providers and drug manufactures.


You may have greater insight than me, but it appeared at first glance that the new RSV vaccine offers no more effective prevention to its targeted virus than the partially effective Covid vaccines you refer to? It does not seem to remove the risk of infection, or stop illness caused by the virus and what protection from severe illness there is drops off over a reasonably short period of time.

So if for the vast majority of cases the illness presents as cold like symptoms, is it not reasonable to identify and treat those in the population who are at highest risk ie with comorbidities or genetic or congenitally predisposed to a more severe effect of the virus?

Reads like confused antivax pseudo science. I don't believe you have any important insights into these things.
Antivax, along with climate change scepticism and a number of other issues, are a particular phenomenon - a syndrome. There's probably a name for it!

 

[Jacob]

.... This is about trust in the system and whether people are able to accept a narrative without question.

......

Take advice from the medical establishment on matters of illness, life and death, or from some geezer on a woodwork chat group?

Maybe @NickDReed could pick his way through this and point out the mistakes?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-adults-jcvi-full-statement-11-september-2023

 

[mcostello]

Wife got the covid *** and got so sick She said never again. I have had covid twice and maybe Rsv.

 

[johnb80]

The problem with people who are anti-vax is there actions endanger everyone else by allowing the viruses to survive. Pure coincidence, I just received my invitation for my Covid Booster, Flu and first shingles *** which i have accepted without question. I'm grateful that these drugs are made available to me.

 

[Dave Moore]

Why not mRNA vaccines? I just searched for the sceptical view but couldn't find much. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine
There's just the usual backdrop of anti vax non science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine_misinformation_and_hesitancy

Well Dr Robert Malone who holds many of the MRNA patents as he was active in the research and development of them and is in fact damaged from the Covid ‘vaccines’ , actually has stated that the technology is not safe to be used in the way that it has been used in making these ‘vaccines’. In fact the official labelling of vaccines was changed because the MRNA vaccines did not fit the official definition. Only this week research from South Korea and Japan has revealed that some unrecognised nano structures are growing in human blood that contains the Covid vaccine. https://m.facebook.com/story.php?st...gKv5Mhxspv44LUZAGABrKuExdBCwsJ5l&id=643852289