COVID-19 vaccines

So no one comments on @Jimm comments of just turning up at a vaccine place.

.

It's alright @Jimm. The uptake and therefore the likelihood of overspill ad hoc vaccine seems to vary by location.
For example- our local centers seem to have pretty epic queues, and seem to be fully booked-from ride-bys - but I know elsewhere has had reduced uptake and therefore have been keen to fill slots/ use supply. Certainly the volunteer vaccinators are pretty likely to want to utilise stock- rather than throw it out, and I feel there's a little competitive streak in there too. cf countless news pieces on Janet X who vaccinated 200 people today, etc.

FWIW -anecdotally- the roll-out for 'frontline' staff was rolled out similarly- with extra supply being sent with a vaccinator to departments to ad hoc vaccine anyone who met criteria.

Second dose Pfizer was a brute, for me. But it settled down soon enough.

Get your vaccine, don't be a dick in either direction- either judging others for seizing an opportunity in a system rife with inefficiency- or being that jackass who demands a jab in their local A+E.

Also- The jingoistic bullshit of putting 'people receiving 1 dose' as any sort of helpful metric is madness.
The UK's fully vaccinated vaccination programme is behind the US, Chile, Hungary, Bahrain, Serbia and Israel.
With thanks to ourworldindata: Totally vaccinated numbers vs one dose.

The continued use of the single dose numbers in the press is misleading and problematic- and leads me to expect a spike in cases within the next few months +/- repeat LD.

I need to actually sit and do the statistics, but the visual interpretation seems to make sense.

2 Attachments

The second dose phase of invalids over 45 receiving their second dose is on the way. I've got to book my second this week.

a system rife with inefficiency

Is it really fair to call it that given the numbers being achieved?

I'm sure it could be more efficient, especially given there seem to be umpteen ways to get invited to have a jab, but in the wider context...

The UK's fully vaccinated vaccination programme is behind the US, Chile, Hungary, Bahrain, Serbia and Israel.

It was a conscious decision though right? Give as many people as possible as quickly as possible the first dose to minimise deaths and hospitalisations?

But yeah - we've vaccinated fewer than 9.5 million people.

Good news. I've spent too long playing around in Excel and failing to find a good way to model/ forecast the Exponential curve of the UK's vaccine programme.
I suspect I might need some more statistically minded people, and I need to go to work.

(/million)

Date	       US     	UK
15/01/2021	 1.6   0.447
20/01/2021	  2.1	    0.464
25/01/2021	3.3  0.472
30/01/2021	  5.26  0.491
04/02/2021 6.93	0.505
09/02/20219.84	0.519
14/02/2021	   14	   0.539
19/02/2021	   17	   0.604
24/02/2021	20	0.7
01/03/2021	27.8	1.03
06/03/2021	29.8	1.12
11/03/2021	33.9	1.45
16/03/2021	39	1.76
21/03/2021	44	2.28
26/03/2021	48.7	3.3
31/03/2021	54.6	4.5
05/04/2021	62.4	5.5
10/04/2021	70.7	7.47
15/04/2021	78.5	8.93

@Fox
I hypothesised that earlier. However it is the jingoism that is irking me. How can we be providing a less efficient roll-out than the privatised, failed HC system of the US?
So yes- the effort individually is incredible, but nationwide must be rife with inefficiency.

I heard rumours local GP was doing informal walk ins. I went to investigate last night at 5.30 and walked out 20 mins later with my first dose of AZ. The main condition was I was over 30 and a resident of the borough.

Good news. I've spent too long playing around in Excel and failing to find a good way to model/ forecast the Exponential curve of the UK's vaccine programme.

The second dose totals tally closely to the first dose totals from ~11 weeks ago, as expected. So if you want to predict the number of "fully vaccinated" on a given date just look at the first dose total from 11 weeks before.

How can we be providing a less efficient roll-out than the privatised, failed HC system of the US?

The UK rollout is supply constrained. The distribution seems fine, or at least adequate for the volume of supply we have to distribute.

The UK rollout is supply constrained. The distribution seems fine, or at least adequate for the volume of supply we have to distribute.

All programs are subject to similar constraints.

Re 11 weeks. It works up until a point- that point is the interesting part. If your point of supply is as big a factor as you think, then we cannot expand to cover effectively.

If we can, and my assumptions so far have been that the people in charge have factored that into it.

In general- a see my posts previously- I have huge amounts of faith in a system I work in. I just don’t think we’re where the public thinks we are, and this is a problem.

Further, our reopening up has been predicated on first dose number, with predominant mixing in non-vaccinated age groups. This leads to a good assumption that before we get a chance to roll out vaccines to that age range, we will repeat a spike of spread.

Further, our reopening up has been predicated on first dose number, with predominant mixing in non-vaccinated age groups. This leads to a good assumption that before we get a chance to roll out vaccines to that age range, we will repeat a spike of spread.

Worrying. EVERY pub in sight was rammed yesterday.

Re 11 weeks. It works up until a point- that point is the interesting part. If your point of supply is as big a factor as you think, then we cannot expand to cover effectively.

What does this mean? The number of vaccines available - by all reports - will continue to increase over the coming months (and years). Additionally, what does "effectively" mean?

I just don’t think we’re where the public thinks we are, and this is a problem.

The reality, I suppose, is no one knows where we are. You have insights I don't so I'm certainly not going to dismiss your experiences or knowledge. However, there are other people with other specialities saying very different. Tim Spector reported last week that we're likely approaching herd immunity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pD7V26exJuE

Further, our reopening up has been predicated on first dose number, with predominant mixing in non-vaccinated age groups. This leads to a good assumption that before we get a chance to roll out vaccines to that age range, we will repeat a spike of spread.

I'm sure you know this, but no one has claimed this isn't the case. The question is who gets those infections, how widely they are able to spread, and what sort of strain they do (or don't) put on to the NHS. The evidence shows that, as things have opened up, cases have plateaued and/or gone up in some groups (younger people), but continued to drop in at risk groups. The likely (and reportedly statistically significant) cause of this is the vaccine. Hopefully this trend continues as the easing of restrictions continues.

What does this mean?

Our vaccine rates are exponentially growing.
I’m not arguing that there is a supply issue, but logically if we have an exponential expansion in 1st dose and an additional requirement to vaccinate the second dose, how does our ramp up manage and at which point is there a slow down in first dose.

Tim Spector reported last week that we're likely approaching herd immunity.

equally all three of medical journals in this country that I subscribe to ran stories last week suggesting the exact opposite. (Actually I think one was a the new scientist)
Who knows who’s right.
I’d rather err cautious since I’ve spent the past year dealing with the consequences of not.

I am not an epidemiologist, and will fully and do fully countenance my posts with my limitations and I apologise if I’m not clear enough on them- because they are many.

However, I’m using a publically available dataset to suggest that the blind faith in the numbers provided aren’t representative of vaccine immunity in the community.

I am also raising my own concerns that as previously the reopening is based on poor data, and assumptions that have failed before.

Anyhow, my main point is: go get vaccinated.

My second point is- can anyone with better data handling prove me wrong, because I want to be wrong.

All programs are subject to similar constraints.

No, the US seems to have much more supply than us. More than demand in a lot places.

Re 11 weeks. It works up until a point- that point is the interesting part. If your point of supply is as big a factor as you think, then we cannot expand to cover effectively.

The expansion has already happened. See how big the pink bars (second doses) on the right hand half of this graph are.

Obviously I can't know the future, but we've consistently had 300-500k doses available per day for several months, and if that continues we'll have no problem keeping up with second doses, although first doses have now slowed to a trickle.

Further, our reopening up has been predicated on first dose number, with predominant mixing in non-vaccinated age groups. This leads to a good assumption that before we get a chance to roll out vaccines to that age range, we will repeat a spike of spread.

All over 50s (who want to) have had at least one dose, and everyone in the most vulnerable groups has had both doses. Absolutely there'll be more spread but the consequences will be very different, though obviously it sucks if you're a younger person (like me) and get a serious case.

(And can we stop this shite about one dose meaning "not vaccinated"? The efficacy numbers for a single dose are better than we might have hoped for from any vaccine a few months back)

Our vaccine rates are exponentially growing.

Looks linear to me, but you're right that those handling distribution absolutely need to ensure incoming stocks meet second doses. And of course there's no guarantee shipments will always come. Geopolitics and manufacturing problems are both realities we've seen in the rollout already.

equally all three of the major medical journals in this country that I subscribe to ran stories last week stating the exact opposite.

Fair. And of course there was the UCL report last week that said we are probably there now, which was immediately criticized by others (probably in those three reports you mention). It should be noted that ZOE (probably) have access to more data than almost anyone else in the UK on this, so that's something of a reassurance when it comes to their reports.

I’d rather err cautious since I’ve spent the past year dealing with the consequences of not.

This is an absolutely legitimate stance. I err on being optimistic with this shit to keep myself from going insane. But I'm not blindly optimistic. There's lots of hopeful news coming from experts which needs to be weighted against the less hopeful reports.

.

how does our ramp up manage and at which point is there a slow down in first dose.

I'd argue there is already a slow down in first dose. If we had continued at the previous 1st dose roll out we would have started to vaccinate over 45s a couple of weeks and over 40s about now. We got stuck at 50 for a while.

1 Attachment

What are you trying to.model @lowbrows?
When we might have given double doses (a full vacc) to the whole 70 (ISH) mill of the UK? Or just the adult pop?

I done made a chart. Data before April 16th is real, data after is speculative.

Assumptions:

• Steady supply of 3 million doses / week
  
• 52 million adults
  
• 100% uptake of first and second doses
  
• Second doses issued 74 days after first dose, and then as fast as supply allows after all first doses are done.
  

1 Attachment

@ 2 doses US data Linear, UK not.
Thanks for the graphs @grams.
@Chalfie- Just trying to remember how to forecast in Excel, pre-shift, half-arsedly.

@ 2 doses US data Linear, UK not.

I'm not sure what the US looks like. Here are total UK doses though. The move to second doses is balanced by drop in first. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

2 Attachments

This is from ourworldindata's datapack:
Y axis is number recieved both doses.

1 Attachment