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?

As it's such a new vaccine and not trialled and tested as much as normal for obvious reasons, are you all going to be happy to take it?

Not sure I am...

@Reborn2020 oh Christ do not bring dog owners into it!

I’d like to nominate dentists/ dental nurses and pharmacists/ pharmacy staff as essential healthcare (but not employed by the NHS). Personally I’m quite happy to wait and make sure there aren’t any unforeseen side effects

I’m a care worker but won’t be having it! Someone can have mine lol

In giving it to health staff first, hopefully any side-effects will be picked up on

Thought that needed to be reread in all of its entitled glory.

"Work your arses off and be guinea-pigs, and then I might condescend to be vaccinated myself"

Any sane roll-out of a vaccine must surely prioritise HCPs/care staff and then the most vulnerable demographic. Just to have a functioning health system at all.
Oh, and teachers should be prioritised above other vulnerable groups, imo.
But - guinea-pigs and cannon fodder. Right.

I am not an HCP, nor am I a teacher (your kids came home alive? There's your proof of the latter).

@dottiedaisee

TBH as a care home worker I would want to wait😳

Surely the point is that the vaccination would make you less likely to infect the people you care for. It's not for your benefit.

@Calmandmeasured1

The priority of those to receive vaccines has not been decided yet. Prof Van-Tam said It will be decided by The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) which is an independent expert advisory committee. They will surely determine who will get it first based purely on need. He said the priority could change from previously although he expects the older population to get it first.

Personally, I feel that it should be given to care home staff, hospital front-line workers, district nurses and GPs first. Then to CEV then to oldest population. In giving it to health staff first, hopefully any side-effects will be picked up on. I'd hate it to be given to over 85s or CEV first and find a problem that could seriously endanger their lives.

This above

Priority to be decided by clinically qualified people who take an objective view
Funny idea that🙄

I'm guessing this is just a first draft of a possible priority list?

This is what the Australian Government website says:

Vaccine doses will be made available as quickly and safely as possible.

The Australian Government has received preliminary advice from the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) on the priority groups for the first doses of a COVID-19 vaccination. This includes those who are at increased risk of contracting and spreading COVID-19, those who have an increased risk of developing severe disease or outcomes from COVID-19, and those working in services critical to our societal functioning.

The initial advice is consistent with guidance from the World Health Organization (WHO).

The ATAGI and the Australian Government are continuing to refine Australia’s prioritisation strategy, and is taking into account all available public health, medical and epidemiological data.

So it looks like Australia will be prioritising those who will spread it, and those who are vulnerable to severe side effects. I would assume the UK wouldn't be doing anything THAT different, when it comes down to it.

Lol I'll get it in 5 years then 😂

I am glad MN wasn’t around when people were trying to get on life boats on the Titanic.

The decision should be left to experts.

@Nanny0gg

As it's such a new vaccine and not trialled and tested as much as normal for obvious reasons, are you all going to be happy to take it?

Not sure I am...

It has been trialled and tested as much as any other vaccine, I believe. It's the rest of the process that has been and will be considerably sped up (funding, research and development, approval, etc.)

IMO it should be-

First: Care homes (residents and staff), medical staff in Covid wards, CEV & over 70s
Second: Essential workers, other medical staff and over 50s
Third: Descending according to age

But I know absolutely nothing and I trust they'll make the right decision. Hopefully they start rolling out soon so we can all try to rebuild.

@LastTrainEast
LastTrainEast
I do think teachers should be bumped up that list, but I am pleased that those people who kept saying that we should let the old people die will now be told that the old people get the vaccine before them smile

^

Ha ha, completely agree with you!

As a frontline NHS worker I hope that criteria is changed. I don’t agree for one second that young fit and healthy NHS staff should receive the vaccine before the CEV people. I would start with those, then elderly people and then move on to those at risk due to their profession. Protect the ones most likely to die should be the first priority.

Wonder if it will be available privately and if so, how much will it cost? It makes sense for the NHS to immunise people that are more likely to spread it to the vulnerable but other people could be willing to pay for it.

@Stripesnomore

I am glad MN wasn’t around when people were trying to get on life boats on the Titanic.

The decision should be left to experts.

So true.

I'm in social housing so worked the entire time, with thousands of tenants, many of whom are very vulnerable. However I wouldn't put myself on the list. The caretakers, who work in close quarters with vulnerable older tenants daily, I would. But that's too complicated.

Let the professionals get us vaccinated as sensibly as possible, as quickly as possible. Age and HCPs is the easiest way to make as many people safer, more quickly. Let's not argue about whether the deli worker at Asda sees more people than the cashier at Waitrose.

@Madwife123

As a frontline NHS worker I hope that criteria is changed. I don’t agree for one second that young fit and healthy NHS staff should receive the vaccine before the CEV people. I would start with those, then elderly people and then move on to those at risk due to their profession. Protect the ones most likely to die should be the first priority.

I'm worried if you work in the NHS that you don't know why. They will vaccinate NHS staff so they don't spread it to already vulnerable patients, not to protect the staff themselves.

Please tell me you're admin or support, not health staff.

Why are they not going it to children as a priority like they do with flu vaccine. I’m sure I was told the reason why they immunise children again flu is to stop them spreading the virus? So why not do the same (and protect the school staff at the same time)

There are specific protocols for this sort of thing which have nothing to do with the personal opinions of the general public. Although I’m sure that once the definitive list emerges those professional protesters who show up for every protest instead of having actual day jobs will organise a protest somewhere where they’ll show up without masks to protest on how unfair it is.

Bear in mind that the currently high instances of absence aren’t actually down to those people having COVID, a large amount of it is because of people having symptoms or having been exposed to someone with either symptoms or COVId so having to self isolate. How many people do you know who have actually had COVID? And how many do you know who have had symptoms or had to self isolate and been tested negative. The latter by far outweighs the former.

Vaccinate a 3rd of the population and you are going to reduce that risk significantly to the extent that extended periods of self isolation/absence will no longer be necessary to this extent.

People will always catch COVID, just as people catch flu. And people will always take time off work because of it. But we don’t have instances of people taking time off because their mum has the flu and they don’t want to give it to Granny, because Granny has been vaccinated and is less likely to be at risk. Once the elderly and the severely vulnerable are vaccinated the need for isolation will be reduced, and by definition so will the amount of absence.

FWIW young healthy people aren’t dying routinely of COVID. Of the people falling seriously ill and dying, 92% still have underlying health conditions.

Coldwinter I mentioned upthread that I am not certain if this applies to every vaccine in development but I heard that no vaccination of children is planned for the foreseeable as no children have been part of the trials.

I think the priority order depends a little on how quickly they think they can work their way through the population.

If it is going to be a matter of a few months then going for a logistically easy priority list makes more sense. Less chance of missing people, easy for the vaccination to be given out by all sorts of sites, not just through GPs and clinics. Easy for the public to understand who can get it. etc. without over running service provision and being a focus of ire for many people's inability to get it immediately.

If it's going to take a couple of years then it makes more sense to focus on the clinically vulnerable and those most likely to give it to the clinically vulnerable and move through the population in order of likelihood of bad outcomes.

@Coldwinterahead1

Why are they not going it to children as a priority like they do with flu vaccine. I’m sure I was told the reason why they immunise children again flu is to stop them spreading the virus? So why not do the same (and protect the school staff at the same time)

Because COVID isn't the flu and it behaves differently. Children may not spread COVID in the same way they spread the flu.

[quote Hercwasonaroll]@Wigeon Interesting that they've only just started asking for occupation when you book a test so who knows where that data came from.

They are burying infection rates in children, they're changing categories so you cannot compare like with like.

I don't think teachers should be anywhere near the top of the list. They should be above some jobs though.[/quote]
I took a test a month ago and it definitely asked for occupational then

It hasn't been tested "as much as any other vaccine". There's never been an mRNA vaccine before! There is no long term data at all about causing the body to create its own virus proteins rather than providing them in the vaccine. It's certainly a fascinating area and worth investigating, but to imagine that it's the same as any other vaccine is simply not true. We don't know if despite generating their own immune response, the people receiving it are also contagious. Pfizer's research only tests them if they become symptomatic. We know that many carry and spread without symptoms. Starting with teachers could be disastrous!

horizon-magazine.eu/article/five-things-you-need-know-about-mrna-vaccines.html

If they put teachers near the top of the list surely people that work in food manufacturing like the chicken factories should be near the top as they are very likely to catch it but they are rarely mentioned, why teachers and not factory workers