Rapid responses are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on thebmj.com. Although a selection of rapid responses will be included online and in print as readers' letters, their first appearance online means that they are published articles. If you need the url (web address) of an individual response, perhaps for citation purposes, simply click on the response headline and copy the url from the browser window. Letters are indexed in PubMed.
I recently qualified for my shingles vaccine on the NHS.
Curiously the surgery seemed very secretive about the vaccine availability. Because of limited appointments I attended the day before my qualifying birthday and was told I shouldn't really have been given it.
It is bizarre that NHS England and PHE have such an ambivalent attitude to this vaccination.
No wonder only 41% of those eligible actually get the vaccine.
If it is thought that there is a cost benefit in preventing shingles in the elderly, surely the vaccine that is 87% effective (the recombinant adjuvenated zoster vaccine) should now replace the attenuated live vaccine, which is only 27% effective.
Canada Health are recommending those who have had the attenuated live vaccine should now be offered the recombinant vaccine as well.
I emailed the physician who is involved in the roll out of the vaccine policy for zoster but I was not blessed with a reply!