ER Editor: Is it ‘hundreds of thousands’ or far more?
We’re wondering if jab remorse from either having unexpected side effects oneself or knowing someone who has (or who has died) is the phenomenon accounting for this reluctance to have a second experimental genetic injection. We issue a severe MSM propaganda warning for The Guardian article below.
It’s hard to quantify this second-jab-reluctance phenomenon, but the graph presented in The Guardian article (see below) visually indicates the scope of the situation. Kudos to those who thought better of having a 2nd.
From the government’s perspective, this also indicates a problem for implementation of the vaccine pass, where not only 2 shots but now 3 are becoming required.
Hundreds of Thousands Have Not Come Forward for Second Jab in England
Most of the media focus on vaccines has centred around the ‘jabbing’ of children in recent weeks, but official data suggests that it is adults the Government should be worrying about given that hundreds of thousands of them have failed to come forward for their second dose.
The Guardian has the story.
Experts have repeatedly emphasised the need to receive both doses of the coronavirus vaccines as the second jab greatly increases protection against Covid.
But figures from Public Health England (PHE) suggest take-up of second doses is levelling off in older age groups, and is lower than for first jabs. The data, which extends to August 22nd, also shows take-up of first doses has essentially plateaued in almost all eligible age groups except the very youngest (ER: whom they’re targeting right now), and falls with age.
While nearly 21.4 million people aged 50 and over in England have had their first dose, just under 19.9 million have had their second – a difference of almost 1,500,000. That’s despite people aged 50-54 being invited for their first jab since March 17th, more than 23 weeks ago. In December, a 12-week gap between doses was recommended, which was cut to eight weeks for those aged 50 and over in May, a move later expanded to all eligible for the jabs.
Some over-50s may only recently have had their first jab and hence not yet be eligible for their second, but the appearance of reluctance to receive second doses is supported by other data.
According to figures from the U.K.’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, about 23.9 million second doses of the AstraZeneca jab had been given in the U.K. as of August 18th. This is far less than the 24.3 million first doses administered by May 26th – 12 weeks earlier – and the 24.5 million first doses given by June 23rd, eight weeks before. As noted by the Independent, this means between 400,000 and 600,000 Britons eligible for a second AstraZeneca jab have yet to come forward. …
Dr. Michael Head, a Senior Research Fellow in Global Health at the University of Southampton, [says] there were probably many reasons behind the figures. “This may include concerns over side-effects and also factors such as having been away on holiday over August or feeling that the second dose isn’t necessary,” he said.
Worth reading in full.
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.