World-first vaccine rolled out across England amid record levels of infection
The initiative comes after cases of the sexually transmitted infection (STI) in England reached a record 85,000 in 2023, the highest since records began in 1918.
Available free of charge from Monday at sexual health clinics, the jab is being offered to those at highest risk.
This includes gay and bisexual men with a recent history of multiple sexual partners or a bacterial STI.
The vaccine, an existing jab known as 4CMenB, is currently used to protect against meningococcal B disease, which can cause meningitis and sepsis.
It is used in the routine childhood programme and given to babies at eight weeks, 16 weeks and one year.
Officials anticipate the programme will save the NHS £7.9 million over the next decade.
The programme could prevent up to 100,000 cases of gonorrhoea, according to doctors.
The STI disproportionately impacts specific communities, such as those in deprived areas, people of black Caribbean ethnicity, and gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men, according to the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI).
Patients getting the gonorrhoea vaccine will also be offered jabs for mpox, human papillomavirus (HPV), and hepatitis A and B at their appointment.
'Rolling out this world-leading gonorrhoea vaccination programme in sexual health clinics in England represents a major breakthrough in preventing an infection that has reached record levels,' Ashley Dalton, the minister for public health and prevention, said.
'This government's world-first vaccination programme will help turn the tide on infections, as well as tackling head-on the growing threat of antibiotic resistance.
'I strongly encourage anyone who is eligible to come forward for vaccination, to protect not only yourselves but also your sexual partners.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
a few seconds ago
- Daily Mail
Experts say no more covid jabs in the UK
Health chiefs were today begged to re-examine the UK's Covid jab policy after ditching plans to offer the jabs to under 75s this winter. Invites won't be dished out to up to six million pensioners aged 65-74, who were eligible during the pandemic. Scientists were alarmed last month after a new Covid variant dubbed 'Stratus' and believed to to be more infectious than previous Covid strains, soared to dominance in the UK. But the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI), which guides ministers on jab rollouts, argued that additional Covid doses provide 'very limited, if any, protection against infection' given the 'high population immunity' to the virus. Dr Leyla Hannbeck, chief executive of the Independent Pharmacies Association, said the JCVI's decision was a 'hugely concerning, a reckless decision'. She added: 'By restricting access to jabs this autumn ahead of peak Covid season, there is a serious risk that Covid cases in this age group increase compared to previous years putting even greater pressure on the NHS. She also said it was 'madness' for the UK to restrict jabs, when other nations including Germany and the United States were still recommending the vaccines for all pensioners. 'To deny millions of seniors their COVID jab this year is to take an unacceptable risk with patient health and risks producing a winter crisis the NHS simply won't be able to cope with,' Dr Hannbeck added. A Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) spokesperson said: 'This decision is based on expert advice from the JCVI, which continuously monitor and evaluate emerging scientific evidence on Covid vaccines. 'The autumn 2025 vaccination program will target people who are at the highest risk of serious illness to protect the most vulnerable. We encourage anyone who is eligible for Covid vaccination to come forward for vaccination this autumn.' In the UK, ministers have repeatedly said they won't resort to imposing lockdowns unless a doomsday Covid variant appears. A wall of immunity among the population—built up by repeated waves of infection and vaccine rollouts—has given officials confidence to consign pandemic-era measures to history.
Daily Mail
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Hospital allowed to force-feed anorexic woman who weighed as little as a five-year-old, Court of Protection rules in landmark judgement
Hospital staff have been told they can force-feed an anorexic woman by a High Court judge in a legal first. 'Patricia', 25, whose real name can't be used for legal reasons, developed the eating disorder when she was 11 and her weight has plummeted as low as three stone – the same as a five-year-old child. It has left her so weak she has been unable to walk unaided for the past two years. She has also developed osteoporosis and bedsores. Patricia has received treatment at Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital but regularly refused to eat or accept other interventions to gain weight. The hospital, based in Norwich, rejected requests from her family to feed her via a nasograstric tube under restraint without her consent. Her parents and aunt challenged this decision at the Court of Protection in March, where Mrs Justice Arbuthnot has now ruled Patricia, who has autism, can be made to eat. It is the first eating disorder case in the court – which makes decisions for adults who lack the mental capacity to do so themselves - where it has reversed a previous order that prevented access to life-saving treatment. In 2023, Mr Justice Moor held that Patricia lacked the capacity to make medical treatment decisions but that it was not in her best interests to receive nasogastric feeding or other treatment against her will. Since then, her condition has worsened and she was 'on the brink of death' in March this year. Between that month and May, High Court judge Mrs Justice Arbuthnot, sitting as a judge of the Court of Protection, heard evidence over eight hearing days. Doughty Street Chambers barrister Oliver Lewis, representing Patricia's family, argued that her values and beliefs were nuanced and 'ought to be understood through the lenses of anorexia and autism'. In her judgement, the judge wrote: 'Having considered the balance of the immediate risk of death, versus the harm which will be caused psychologically and emotionally by the lifting of the orders, the balance is in favour of trying to save her life. 'The removal of the orders will allow the clinicians to work out what is best for Patricia, without the restrictions that currently prevent this.' The legal tussle began when Patricia – who was not aware of the proceedings – was mistakenly emailed details by a hospital worker. She then made repeated requests for the 2023 order to remain in place. During the hearings, consultant psychiatrist Dr Ali Ibrahim, on behalf of the family, acknowledged the psychological distress forced treatment could cause. But he provided the court with examples of people who turned a corner and were later grateful for life-saving treatment they resisted at the time. Mr Lewis argued the earlier judgement interpreted a patient's autonomy in a 'thin sense' and left clinicians wearing a 'metaphysically-loaded straightjacket'. The court also heard how, despite her condition, Patricia had repeatedly said she wanted to live and fulfil her dreams. In a text message to her aunt on February 28 this year, she wrote: 'I don't want to die…I want to go on holiday, I want to walk up mountains. 'I want to swim in the sea. I want cuddles and kisses. I want to party and have fun… please help me more.' In a 2022 email to her psychiatrist, following a short period of nasograstic feeding, she said: 'I'm feeling so, so positive about things moving forward… I don't know why on earth I didn't have the NG when I first came in!' Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norfolk and Waveney Integrated Care Board and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust were all taken to the court by Patricia's parents over their 'unconscionable' stance towards her care. The NHS organisations argued that force-feeding Patricia would be futile - although this goes against NHS guidelines that state anorexia is not a terminal illness and should be treated. Katie Gallop KC, representing NNUH, said her client had been put in a 'very difficult' position and it would be 'unethical' to feed Patricia until a specialist eating disorder unit was available to move her to afterwards. CPFT counsel Sophia Roper KC added it was 'tempting' to 'do whatever it takes to keep her alive' but it didn't follow it was the right thing to do. In her ruling last week, Mrs Justice Arbithnot acknowledged Patricia's concerns that being force-fed would be 'torture' but said the position of the previous judge had failed. She added: 'What struck me was how wrong it was that a potential life-saving option, open to every other anorexic in the country, was not available to Patricia. 'The orders in 2023 had been shown to have failed. Without a change to the orders, there was no doubt that Patricia would die. Patricia's will to live remains strong.' Speaking after the ruling, her parents said they were now waiting for a bed to become available in a specialist eating disorders unit so she can 'get the treatment for anorexia she desperately needs'. Chelsea Roff, executive director of eating disorder charity Eat Breathe Thrive, added: 'At the heart of this case is a young woman who has lived with a severe illness for many years, who is dearly loved by those around her, and who deserves treatment and care. 'This judgment will give hope to the many families who are still fighting for loved ones, and the many people with eating disorders who are still here, fighting for the treatment they need and deserve.' A spokesman for the three NHS organisations they welcome 'the clarity this Court of Protection ruling provides'.
The Independent
30 minutes ago
- The Independent
Shares fall after weight loss pill disappoints in trial
Eli Lilly 's experimental weight-loss pill, orforglipron, achieved an average 12.4 per cent body weight reduction in patients over 72 weeks, according to a new study. The results led to a 14 per cent drop in Lilly's shares, as they fell short of competitor Novo Nordisk 's injectable Wegovy, which showed a 14.9 per cent weight loss. Orforglipron is a small molecule pill, which is hoped to provide a convenient and pain-free alternative to injectable treatments. Lilly plans to file for regulatory approvals before the end of 2025, aiming for the pill to be used for early intervention and long-term weight management. While common side effects were mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal issues, the drug also showed benefits in lowering heart disease risk markers.
