UK Public Health Services Condemns Misleading Cancer Patients in Covid Jab | Coronavirus

The UK public health agency has been accused of providing hundreds of thousands of cancer patients with “misleading and dangerous” advice on the level of protection they can expect after receiving the Covid vaccine.

I got a call yesterday Chris Whitty, England Chief Medical Officer Intervenes and Revises Statement, Widely Reported by the UK Public Health Service (PHE), stating that double vaccination is “very effective in clinical risk groups” ..

In a ferocious letter seen by the observer, Blood Cancer UK CEO Gemma Peters said he was “deeply anxious” in a press statement outlining the results of a recent study of vaccine response. She said her “confident and definitive claim” about the level of protection given to 230,000 blood cancer patients in the United Kingdom is still supported by “wide evidence of vaccine efficacy in immunodeficiency.” Said not.

She warned that patients with vulnerable guarantees were at risk of giving “false guarantees that could take dangerous risks.” She added: “I can’t say how disappointed to see the public authorities responsible for protecting the health of those who act recklessly to endanger the health of the most vulnerable people in our country.

“Given all of the above, the UK Public Health Service believes that people with blood cancer are obliged to withdraw this study publicly as soon as possible and contact all journalists dispatched. To be clear, we have no problem with the research itself, but with the way it was expressed in the media and subsequent media coverage. “

A PHE press statement released Friday stated in the headline that the vaccine was “very effective in the clinical risk group.” However, Blood Cancer UK has revealed that the studies on which it is based require more studies in immunodeficiency groups, “justifying such a drastic and definitive headline. Is impossible. “

He also states that the vaccine, like other risk groups, provides similar protection against immunodeficiency, saying: [vaccine efficacy] Within the immunodeficiency group, the VE of this group was much higher after the second dose and the confidence intervals overlapped those of the non-risk group. “

The press release does not warn of sample size, despite a study involving only a relatively small number of immunocompromised people. Charities also said that, if not, liberation treated all immunosuppressed people in the same way with respect to their risks.

When contacted by a charity, it is understood that PHE initially stated that it supported the original press statement. “I urge you to change your mind,” says Peters. “I’m worried that media coverage from your press release is already damaging important public health messages, but I believe a quick withdrawal can mitigate much of that damage.”

The novelty of Covid-19 means that there remains a lot of uncertainty about how effective the vaccine is for them, but people with blood cancers are less likely to be against other types of vaccines. It is known not to show a strong reaction.

Last night, PHE partially revised the press statement. “Within these clinical risk groups, there will be people with more severe illnesses who may be less responsive to the vaccine, especially in immunosuppressive groups. Their specialists.” But the risky groups are protected. He said it was important to know that it was worth two vaccinations because there was evidence that he could provide.

Blood Cancer UK welcomed the explanation, but said the overall release remained misleading.

According to PHE sources, the studies underlying the release showed that immunosuppressed individuals had a vaccine efficacy of 74% after the second dose, similar to those who did not belong to the risk group. Defense was seen. This increases from 4% after the first dose.