THERE is no 'immediate' need to introduce a fourth jab to protect the vulnerable against coronavirus, health experts have said, and priority should be given to rolling out first booster doses.
The latest research shows that booster doses are continuing to provide high levels of protection against severe disease from the Omicron variant among older adults.
New figures, from the UK Health Security Agency, reveal that around three months after they received the third jab, protection against hospitalisation among those aged 65 and over remains at about 90%.
With just two vaccine doses, protection against severe disease drops to around 70% after three months and to 50% after six months.
The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) has taken this latest evidence into account in their ongoing review of the booster programme and have advised that there is no immediate need to introduce a second booster dose, or fourth jab, to the most vulnerable.
However, the timing and need for further booster doses will continue to be reviewed.
Professor Wei Shen Lim, the JCVI’s chair of COVID-19 immunisation, said: "The current data shows the booster dose is continuing to provide high levels of protection against severe disease, even for the most vulnerable older age groups. For this reason, the committee has concluded there is no immediate need to introduce a second booster dose, though this will continue to be reviewed.
"The data is highly encouraging and emphasises the value of a booster jab.
"With Omicron continuing to spread widely, I encourage everyone to come forward for their booster dose, or if unvaccinated, for their first two doses, to increase their protection against serious illness."
The latest study looked at booster doses in those aged over 65, who were among the first to be eligible when the booster rollout began in mid-September.
Whilst with a booster dose, the duration of protection against severe disease remains high, protection against mild symptomatic infection is more short-lived and drops to around 30% by about three months.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel