To think the vaccine shouldn't be given out by age criteria?

[studychick81]

I know the data says that the majority of people who get the virus and are most seriously ill or die are the elderly, over 82. But I was quite surprised by the potential order of giving out the vaccine.

1. people in care homes and care home workers- fair enough.

2. over 80s and health care workers.

3. age order oldest- youngest.

4. I don't agree with this. Surely all health care workers should get it before all people over 80? Shouldn't those 50 plus who have underlining issues which means catching it could be deadly get it over a normally healthy over 80 year old?

5. should kids who live with vulnerable adults/grand parents get it before a fit and healthy 40 year old?

6. should teachers, education workers get it before a fit 40 year old?

There are quite a few jobs which are absolutely vital and where people who do them are putting themselves at quite considerable risk to do them, and I’m surprised they wouldn’t be prioritised.

Separately, whilst there’s been a lot of gratitude towards NHS workers and a huge amount of debate about whether teachers should have to work, there are still a lot of other people taking a significant amount of risk to do vital jobs on a daily basis, and it goes virtually unrecognised.

Just for example -

• Police. They aren’t routinely issued with PPE. They are regularly spat at and have to arrest people, which puts them at considerable risk.
• Criminal court staff and prison staff. The virus is rife in many prisons.
• Public transport workers, particularly bus drivers, given how many of them have died.
• Social workers, who still need to visit vulnerable people.

This is a bit like ‘clap for all key workers not just the NHS’ isn’t it?

Next thing, somebody will come along to argue that health workers shouldn’t get priority. When it’s a health issue.

Well... a large chunk of them have had it already, a vaccine is probably wasted on them...

(I’m joking!!)

@BeyondsConstantBangingHeadache

Well... a large chunk of them have had it already, a vaccine is probably wasted on them...

(I’m joking!!)

The fuckers have spent the whole of Covid making Tiktok videos and watching Netflix. And getting free takeaways. My friend told me.

@studychick81

If we vaccinate teachers will the problem of sending bubbles home go away anyway? If children are super spreaders even if the teacher is vaccinated will bubbles have to be sent home anyway as children are infecting each other? Will it actually solve the problem?

No. Vaccinated teachers will not stop children from picking it up as most transmission is child to child. So bubbles will still get sent home. Schools will still have to close.

Health workers are prioritised so the NHS doesn’t go into freefall if too many staff go off ill. It is part of all pandemic and epidemic plans. Until recently NHS had their own occupational health which provided vaccination services. Alas it has become another casualty of the cost saving bean counters axe. A bit like the PPE stockpile debacle.
Many lessons will have be relearned this year only to be forgotten next year when the NHS commissioners do their annual staff shuffle next year. It has become obvious to me, over the years, that as soon as someone becomes effective in their roll they are moved in case it becomes obvious how utterly useless the rest are.
In 2007 there was a pandemic plan in place, we were briefed well in advance of the impending swine flu outbreak and we all knew what would happen. Some idiot obviously misfiled this plan at some point in the last ten years because the current crop of managers/commissioners had absolutely no idea what to do this time round. After nearly two months of working on “the plan” they came up with a master plan which “they “ had devised. It was a carbon copy of the 12 year old plan.

Just watching BBC news and mainly over 65 years old.... apart from care home and NHS front line.....makes perfect sense

@Reborn2020

Just watching BBC news and mainly over 65 years old.... apart from care home and NHS front line.....makes perfect sense

It doesn't make sense at all as many of the ECV are below 65.

Haven't read the thread.
Ok yeah let's not do it by age. How about instead we do it by moral attitude?

@Belladonna12
Just to add to the confusion even more, many of the most extremely vulnerable (as in biggest risk of serious illness or death) aren't officially described as ECV!

BBC seemed to be saying care homes and NHS, then by age down to 65 and the CEV - but it did not say whether the CEV come after the 65-70 yr old bracket, or at some other point.

The whole snag is that some vaccines work less well in the elderly (that's why there two types of injectable flu shot) and some may not be safe for all the CEV. Until that is properly established, they can't really finalise who gets it first.

@Reborn2020

Just watching BBC news and mainly over 65 years old.... apart from care home and NHS front line.....makes perfect sense

Wonder what percent the 'majority' was. Majority can be anything above 50%. Could be 95% of the deaths, or it could be 51%.

The risk isn't just about death. Long Covid seems to be especially hitting middle-aged (40s plus) women.

One of the biggest concerns wrt ECV.
1 in 4 of the deaths have been in people with diabetes. That, together with hypertension (another extremely high risk to Covid condition), is not on the official UK government decided ECV list.

yep

I love that someone upthread said classrooms should be ventilated.
The other day there was a great thread with parents complaining their children were cold cos those damn teachers wanted the windows open.
Never mind these kids on any normal day refuse to wear a coat

The entire thing will be ran by the NHS
Yeah, of course it will - or be outsourced to Mitie, Serco, G4S, Boris's best mate..... or anyone who doesn't have a clue.
That's why we have a woldbeating track and trace system that can barely trace, let alone track, 50% of those it should be, and contracted emergency ferry duties post brexit to a ferry company that didn't own a single ferry.

@Reborn2020

Just watching BBC news and mainly over 65 years old.... apart from care home and NHS front line.....makes perfect sense

Given the speed of testing, I doubt that many trial participants will have been in the vulnerable groups anyway.

I think the logic is that more seemingly healthy 80 year-olds have died of Covid-19 than 40/50 year olds with underlying conditions. I think the risk of death for a healthy 80 year old who contracts Covid is 1 in 5. There are probably some conditions where the risk is higher though so it must be tricky to work out who should get it first.

@SheepandCow

Haven't read the thread. Ok yeah let's not do it by age. How about instead we do it by moral attitude?

Like as in if you eat your kids chocolate that’s morally wrong so you go to the bottom of the list? Makes more sense than some of the other queue jumping arguments on this mad thread.

Given the speed of testing, I doubt that many trial participants will have been in the vulnerable groups anyway

I didn't get selected but signed up for one. They were testing on a diverse group of people. Aged between 18-84, and including people with health conditions.

I think it's right that we vaccinate the most extremely vulnerable (to hospitalisation or death) first.

So,over 80s and frontline health and care staff.

Then over 65s and all extremely vulnerable over 40/45.

Definitely including people over 40 with diabetes (1 in 4 of all the deaths) and hypertension.

Then vulnerable under 40 (as less risk of death even if ECV).

Finally, everybody else (healthy under 40s).

It looks fine to me. The risk of dying tracks age. As far as I am aware, we don't have anything like enough analytics to break down on comorbidities in lower age groups.

Another thing they should do is to start vaccinating in deprived urban areas (still in order of clinical vulnerability).

The socioeconomic risks should be taken into account as well as the clinical risks.

An affluent 55 year old living in a rural village is at less risk (both of catching it, and of dying) than a 45 year old living in a deprived urban area.

I think health workers first yes.

But as a clinically vulnerable person I’m
Really worried being way down the list. I’m already stuck at home in fear of kids and oh bringing it home to me. OH will be one of the first to get it because of his job. I’ve been shielding since March. Rarely leave the house. Thoroughly miserable & terrified of it killing me. Prekids I wouldn’t have bothered about it but now I worry about leaving them behind. I’m productive in society or was prelockdown and contributed to the economy now I’m a waster stuck at home. My fit and healthy father will get it before me because of his age and that upsets me. My illness causing me to be vulnerable will cut my life short and I’m so upset that my kids memories will be of us all pissing each other off in a too small house during a wet and cold lockdown instead of long walks, and meals with friends or holidays in the sun. Yes it’s selfish, I get that. I don’t think I care any more.

I’ve been shielding since March

Shielding eased in June, paused in August and is now back only in 'lite' form. You might want to start looking for help/support because going so far above what is advised just doesn't sound healthy and you sound miserable

But I agee with you that the CEV should be a couple of steps higher on the priority ladder, and consideration given to immediate cohabitants of the CEV (as no jab is guaranteed to take, and those who were worth months of food parcels are still worth protecting now)

Plenty of consultants advised we continue to shield when it was “officially paused” though. That the risk if we caught it was no less, there was just slightly less risk of catching it