UKC

I know this is an unusual situation, but this seems a little extreme to me?  

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/distributing-vaccines-and-treat...

I also feel that no matter what anyone says they will do what they want anyway.  

Of course the anti vaxx nutters will love this. 

Given the random people who are allowed to inject members of the public with Botox and worse, I can’t see the problem with dentists and vets (and pharmacists given a bit of training) giving a simple subcut jab. 

Anyone used to taking blood is positively over-qualified.

Edit: I'd be perfectly happy for our vet student daughter, who can take blood from anything from a kitten to rhinoceros, to immunise me!

I thought it has to be a nurse for botox?  Not that I have any interest in it!

I would be happy with a vet or dentist so that seems fair. 

I don't understand enough about the licensing process to know if it's a good idea to cut through red tape or a bad idea.  

Taking blood seems to be quite a skill. I've had several nurses and doctors not be able to get mine and send me to someone else.  I try to avoid anyone who isn't good at it now.  

Pharmacists already do do flu jabs, don't they?

Anyone undertaking a round of IVF will be injecting themselves a few times a day. Diabetics also administer their own insulin via injection.

As you suggest there is no black art to subcutaneous injections, stick the needle in, press the plunger, job done. Taking blood or intravenous injections are trickier, but as you point out, there are plenty of people who can do that, including those injecting recreational drugs etc, if a heroine addict desperate for their next fix can do it I imagine it would be fairly easy to find plenty of people to employ to administer a vaccine.

Having read that, I think I need to clarify that I am not advocating the government hire an army of heroine addicts to spearhead a mass vaccination programme. Although as this saga goes on less and less is surprising me, so I'm going to say, you heard it here first!

Of the things they are consulting on:

* authorising temporary supply of an unlicensed product

* civil liability and immunity

* expanding the workforce eligible to administer vaccinations

* promoting vaccines

* making provisions for wholesale dealing of vaccines

Expanding the workforce is the least scary for me.

What they are asking for power to do is buy unlicensed vaccines in vast quantities from their mates, run a propaganda program with oversimplified arguments about safety and avoid any liability if the sh*t hits the fan and the unlicensed product has nasty problems.

I don't think 'anti-vax nutters' is an appropriate comment.  It assumes that all vaccines are equally beneficial and safe.  We are talking about new vaccines with no medium or long term safety data being given to unprecedented numbers of people.  Imagine you gave 40 million people a vaccine and a year later they started getting serious health issues.   The pharma companies are a lot more cautious about these new vaccines than the science fanboys in the government.   

My mother-in-law was able to give my father-in-law regular injections so he didn't have to go to the hospital every day for them - training by a qualified nurse took less than an hour, I think.

I'm sure my Mum (senior practice nurse) could train me to do it in about 10 mins!

Yes pharmacists do give the flu jab.

Lots of people self administer, eg my partner is on immuno suppresants and she uses an epipen type injector

I'm sure she could, but could she also train you in how to deal with a patient in anaphylactic shock and how to maintain their airway? Of course an anaphylactic reaction is extremely rare with vaccines, well it is in licensed vaccines that have undergone full testing. 

Have you read the supporting literature?
Or, have you you just gone straight into your usual anti-Tory attack mode?
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/distributing-vaccines-and-treat...

Most vaccinations are not subcutaneous, they're intramuscular. Still not rocket science but a little trickier all the same, and are you aware of how many IV drug users have to have limbs amputated every year? 

I was really only considering the mechanics of actually giving an injection.

However, my first aid at work qualification already covers anaphylactic shock - got my re-qual in a couple of weeks.

I know I'm being slightly flippant and I recall you're a paramedic

I've just gone straight into my usual anti-Tory attack mode.

That is my default setting, they have lied so much about so many things they have no credibility whatsoever and  I don't even bother to read their sh*t any more.  Maybe what they say in their literature sounds plausible.  It will bear no resemblance to what they actually do.  They have enough of a track record now to be fairly sure of that.

I can't get enough of Katniss Everdeen, but I'm not sure what that's got to do with giving injections...

I'm not sure that goes against what TiE said.  It explicitly highlights that liability won't apply to drug companies if a vaccine is authorised but unlicensed.  Regardless, this does sound a hugely risky course to me because a) we are talking about 10s millions of vaccinations.  If there is a hidden problem, that's potentially the entire country's health f*cked, and b) even a much more minor issue will allow anti-vaxers to object all future vacinnes, regardless of wider benefits and minimal or zero side effects.  

And we just know this contract will be awarded GoveCumminshon Ltd with share capital of £1.

To be clear when I refer to anti vaxx nutters I'm talking about the people who tell me I'm not autistic, I'm vaccine damaged.  Despite the fact that I'm too old to have been MMR vaccinated and it has been proved safe anyway.  

I met some of them at a protest and they are several sandwiches short of a packed lunch.  They would rather their children die of preventable illnesses than be like me.  

I'm not in favour of people using unlicensed vaccines.  That seems a sensible precaution.  

Having heard from people who know more than I do I agree that there isn't a massive implication for expanding the criteria for allowing people to give vaccines as long as it is in sensible place like a doctors surgery.  

I thought diabetics have special pens to use rather than a syringe?  

It's not the daftest thing I've heard this week!!

Former addicts perhaps?  

A high proportion of those in the Army RAMC have had jab training

I've no idea what level of training clinicians administering vaccines receive. I do know that anaphylaxis is one of the big concerns and in severe cases intramuscular adrenaline is the immediate go to. We can also administer chlorphenamine, hydrocortisone and nebulised salbutamol as well as IV fluids in case the patient's blood pressure crashes. More importantly, we're trained to recognise when stuff is about to go badly pear shaped. How much of that does first aid at work cover?

I'm not denigrating first aiders at work (I used to be one), what I'm saying is that the combination of an unlicensed, relatively untested medication being run out on mass and administered by none clinicians, makes my blood run cold. But hey, it's the government, they must know what they're doing. I mean, just look at their track record...

I discovered today that there's a GSK Barnard Castle...

Hurray, ODPs get a mention... Sorry.

They're are taking about midwives, ODPs, Physiotherapists... Currently not licensed to give vaccination, but most already able to give pain relief by iv, cannulate etc. It would be the next step for some of these. 

Covered by HCPC or NMC or similar licensing authority. 

Maybe a step towards ODPs to prescribe in the future... After suitable training. 

Aaah, ODPs. Living the dream. If only I’d had the good sense to retrain in your field.

I've only had one lecture so far, so assume I know nothing.

Most people don't seem seen to know of them.

You make the anaesthetists look good (and nudge them when they fall asleep)

I thought I had to bring coffee... Is that the second year?

Somebody has to be at an appropriate depth, even if it’s not the patient.