WHO experts weigh in on COVID-19 vaccine dose interval

The World Health Organization (WHO) vaccine advisory group today (1/5/2021) weighed in with recommendations for delivering the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine , urging the vaccine doses be given 21 to 28 days apart in most circumstanc es, but in certain situations allowing for an interval of up to 6 weeks.

"Countries experiencing exceptional epidemiological circumstances may consi der delaying for a short period the administration of the second dose as a pragmatic approach to maximizing the number of individuals benefiting from a first dose while vaccine supply continues to increase. WHO?s reco mmendation at present is that the interval between doses may be extended up to 42 days (6 weeks), on the basis of currently available clinical trial d ata. Should additional data become available on longer intervals between do ses, revision of this recommendation will be considered. Countries should e nsure that any such programme adjustments to dose intervals do not affect t he likelihood of receiving the second dose.

d in with recommendations for delivering the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, urg ing the vaccine doses be given 21 to 28 days apart in most circumstances, but in certain situations allowing for an interval of up to 6 weeks.

onsider delaying for a short period the administration of the second dose as a pragmatic approach to maximizing the number of individuals benefiti ng from a first dose while vaccine supply continues to increase. WHO? ?s recommendation at present is that the interval between doses may be extended up to 42 days (6 weeks), on the basis of currently available cli nical trial data. Should additional data become available on longer inter vals between doses, revision of this recommendation will be considered. C ountries should ensure that any such programme adjustments to dose interv als do not affect the likelihood of receiving the second dose."

Is that an apology for the followup comment you made about my saying that Dr. Gottlieb may have a valid point that he was tweeting about?

If so, then apology accepted. See? I am easy to get along with!

John :-#)#

I have upgraded and my old pick and place machine is available. I am in the St. Louis, MO area, the machine is a Philips CSM84 (made by yamaha) in 1995. It is an old-school machine with centering jaws, but built like a tank, and in perfect working condition. I have 50 assorted feeders for it, and some feeder rails from a scrapped machine that you can use to make a feeder storage cart or shelf. It also has a mechanical alignment station for large chips and a vibratory feeder for parts in tubes. It is very easy to program, too.

Any interest?

Jon

I have upgraded and my old pick and place machine is available. I am in the St. Louis, MO area, the machine is a Philips CSM84 (made by yamaha) in 1995. It is an old-school machine with centering jaws, but built like a tank, and in perfect working condition. I have 50 assorted feeders for it, and some feeder rails from a scrapped machine that you can use to make a feeder storage cart or shelf. It also has a mechanical alignment station for large chips and a vibratory feeder for parts in tubes. It is very easy to program, too.

Any interest?

Jon

You might do well to ask on the eevblog forums. Surely someone there will want to one-up someone else who has a smaller pick and place machine, whether or not they can use it.

One thing I have learned is that old assembly equipment is pretty much wort hless just like chair lifts. If the original owner has no use for it, then it is either so out of date as to be not worth the bother of using it, or it is worn out enough that it will never work well enough to pay its way.

In any event, why break into a thread that is completely unrelated to post this? The thread is off topic and many who peruse these posts won't even b other reading an off topic thread. Why not make a post with a subject of " For sale:..."?

That's a polite way of saying, "What the f*ck is wrong with you?"

d in with recommendations for delivering the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, urgin g the vaccine doses be given 21 to 28 days apart in most circumstances, but in certain situations allowing for an interval of up to 6 weeks.

onsider delaying for a short period the administration of the second dose a s a pragmatic approach to maximizing the number of individuals benefiting f rom a first dose while vaccine supply continues to increase. WHO?s recommendation at present is that the interval between doses may be extende d up to 42 days (6 weeks), on the basis of currently available clinical tri al data. Should additional data become available on longer intervals betwee n doses, revision of this recommendation will be considered. Countries shou ld ensure that any such programme adjustments to dose intervals do not affe ct the likelihood of receiving the second dose."

Not sure, but it does mean the UK plan and proposed US plan do not conform with WHO guidelines. Dunno about UK, but US FDA may have problems authorizi ng any plan deviating from WHO recommendation. And this may be grounds for public interest advocates to sue both those governments to hold their wildl y unscientific plans.

m with WHO guidelines. Dunno about UK, but US FDA may have problems authori zing any plan deviating from WHO recommendation. And this may be grounds fo r public interest advocates to sue both those governments to hold their wil dly unscientific plans.

Fred's idea of what "wildly unscientific" means has to be reconciled with h is somewhat bizarre ideas about what the science is.

Slowing down vaccination because there are discussions about the best inter val between two shots of vaccine isn't a remotely good idea, and any ration al court is going to throw out any such frivolous case.

orm with WHO guidelines. Dunno about UK, but US FDA may have problems autho rizing any plan deviating from WHO recommendation. And this may be grounds for public interest advocates to sue both those governments to hold their w ildly unscientific plans.

his somewhat bizarre ideas about what the science is.

erval between two shots of vaccine isn't a remotely good idea, and any rati onal court is going to throw out any such frivolous case.

LOL- well that's just it. The plan is not real vaccination, and will most c ertainly exacerbate the damage because it will produce several hundred mill ion idiots who will think they are protected and act accordingly which will be catastrophic.

Those are not great pictures, more about the ordeal of getting it in that the machine itself. I can supply better pics if there is interest.

Jon

I have, got a few inquiries, but nobody took it. That was several months ago. I really want to get it out of here.

Jon

Here are some better pics :

Hmm, a message seems to have gone away.

Here are some better pics :

Also, I wanted to mention that this machine could be an excellent base to start a retrofit with a modern control and vision. Since it will come with over 50 feeders, you don't need to fool around with mickey-mouse strip feeder contraptions.

Jon