Covid vaccine - only half the population and not for under 18s (FT article)

[snowballer]

Don't know if this has already been mentioned elsewhere but thought it was worth posting. I've read quite a few posts where people have been musing about whether or not they would vaccinate their children. The article says adults only, and of those adults only those over 50 plus healthcare workers and those who are vulnerable.

It's not clear whether it would be available privately to those outside these groups or whether the vaccine is not formulated for children (I'm no scientist so don't know if this is even a thing!)

Pic of article below - fingers crossed it posts.

Hmm not sure that was readable - in case not here it is again cropped

Thanks for posting. Interesting article going by the headline, but the picture is too fuzzy for me to read, on my tablet.

I'm sure they would roll the vaccine out to the most vulnerable people first, that makes sense. It's known that the vast majority of children who catch Covid19 only get mild symptoms, but hopefully they would also vaccinate children who are vulnerable due to other health issues. I hope the vaccine starts to roll out by New Year, even if only to medics and the extremely vulnerable, as that would give hope that we are at the beginning of the end of this awful pandemic.

This makes sense as no need for everyone to have the vaccine, only those at most risk.

Thanks for 2nd pic - I have managed to read it now. So, for adults only, and a comment that it might cause some "freak harm" to younger people... mmm. Maybe that's something to do with the heightened immune response that it might trigger, which might be similar to what happens in the very serious cases, where the immune system seems to go into overdrive and that affects vital organs? I'm sure some medically knowledgeable people will come along soon to enlighten us.

picture is too fuzzy for me to read, on my tablet.

Try: storify.com/services/proxy/2/RlIzyKvZnYCimzurDG1jvg/https/media.fyre.co/hU7GPky1SyMsI3qRMWCf_pink-1front-20201005-300_1601844722_001.png

Hmm, I thought the JCVI’s latest approach to prioritising says that vaccinating healthy under-50s would be decided on a risk/benefit calculation? Not sure you can make the call of risks and benefits of a vaccine when you don’t yet know what the vaccine is.

At any rate, if this gets interpreted as “herd immunity for the under-50s” it’s going to go down like a lead balloon...

Who should be first in the UK to receive a vaccine against COVID-19? Who makes that decision, and on what basis? Neil McNeil talks to Kate Bingham, chair of the UK Vaccine Task Force, Doctor Mary Ramsay, Head of Immunisation at Public Health England, and Dr. Na’eem Ahmed of NHS England about the many essential criteria that must be considered before a decision is reached.
podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/uk-vaccine-strategy/id1527299221?i=1000490629830

Pretty shocking re the age risk. It's a giant fuck you to the 40 to 50 age group - particularly the over 45s, which is the age when the risk really starts to increase according to SAGE (and world statistical data).

Yesterday it was all over the news that every one would be vaccinated by Easter. Today it's suddenly only the over 50's. I hope this has been misinterpreted somehow. What would be the point of leaving such a large percentage of the population totally vulnerable if a vaccine does become available?

Not only does the risk of death start to increase at 40 (or at a push, 45) and not 50, but that policy would condemn all the under 50s to the risks of potential long-term disability including heart damage. Long Covid is affecting plenty of under 50s.

Vaccinating 30 million (or nearly 50% of the population) should be enough to produce herd immunity, when added to those who have already been infected.
It hasn't been trialled on children yet, so it would be unethical to offer it to them.

If everyone is entitled to and gets the vaccine, how long will that take? Considering we dont know about immunity so if you've had covid would you get a vaccine? Do you have to self isolate or have a negative test before seeing the nurse or doctor for an injection? This could take a looooong time to do everyone....

@Ugzbugz

If everyone is entitled to and gets the vaccine, how long will that take? Considering we dont know about immunity so if you've had covid would you get a vaccine? Do you have to self isolate or have a negative test before seeing the nurse or doctor for an injection? This could take a looooong time to do everyone....

They're talking about 3 months to vaccinate everyone who needs it.

Not sure how 50% would establish herd immunity. It’s a very infectious virus, you’d need more.

It’s reasonable not to vaccinate children until it’s been sufficiently tested on children. But all the vaccines in development have/will be tested on, eg, healthy adults in their 20s and 30s, so the government’s going to have quite a hard time getting healthy adults in their 20s and 30s to accept increasingly unpopular suppression measures if the end message is that they still won’t get a vaccine at the end of it but that’s okay because the government’s happy to let them get the virus then.

The government said months ago that any vaccine wouldn't be licensed for children.

Vaccinating 30 million (or nearly 50% of the population) should be enough to produce herd immunity, when added to those who have already been infected.

This is probably untrue. The higher the reproduction rate, the more of the population needs to be vaccinated for herd immunity to be a thing. So measles, which has a very high R0 needs to be in the 90%+ vaccinated/immune range to be effective. COVID could have an R0 of 4 which means you'd need 75% of the population either vaccinated or immune. We don't even know if those who have had it are immune (or what the actual R0 is) so it's very hard to tell.

Add to this that if they vaccinate the very old or frail first, the likelihood is that you'd need more people vaccinated for herd immunity since all the young would be the ones mixing. School/work etc.

Here's the FT article

www.ft.com/content/d2e00128-7889-4d5d-84a3-43e51355a751

I'm unsurprised, to be honest. This govt says one thing then does another.

All the vaccines under consideration will need 2 doses. That will be a massive task to get everyone done.

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at <a class="break-all" href="https://www.ft.com/tour" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.ft.com/tour</a>.
<a class="break-all" href="https://www.ft.com/content/d2e00128-7889-4d5d-84a3-43e51355a751" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.ft.com/content/d2e00128-7889-4d5d-84a3-43e51355a751</a>

“People keep talking about ‘time to vaccinate the whole population’, but that is misguided,” she said. “There’s going to be no vaccination of people under 18. It’s an adult-only vaccine, for people over 50, focusing on health workers and carehome workers and the vulnerable.”

Some public health experts said the fact that many British people believed a vaccine would be taken by the entire population pointed to a lack of clarity in government messaging about what the public could expect.

The Times has s being a bit slow!

The JCVI updated its advice on 25 September (was mentionined in threads around them too)

The current interim list is in this:

www.gov.uk/government/publications/priority-groups-for-coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-advice-from-the-jcvi-25-september-2020/jcvi-updated-interim-advice-on-priority-groups-for-covid-19-vaccination

The caveat - all depends on suitability of the vaccine for the very elderly and the exceptionally vulnerable - is an important one.

Interesting for the economy then as under 50’s likely to continue working from home then. But the over 50’s can go and buy coffees and travel to work? Retired people can go out to lunch but not families?

Coincidentally hardly anyone under fifty votes Conservative

It's the flip side of the view that you shield the old and the vulnerable, and everyone else gets on with life.

Implicit in that is that the u50s do not need protection.

So why are schools and education so disrupted every time a child has a confirmed case? Children and parents, usually under 50, will have to constantly self isolate then?

@Cloudburstagain

So why are schools and education so disrupted every time a child has a confirmed case? Children and parents, usually under 50, will have to constantly self isolate then?

Presumably not once the oldies are vaccinated, they can just leave younger people to take their chances

At least Gp’s will have to see people face to face as I guess they will get the vaccine! Even if it is only over 50’s who can see them! Oh well, just under 10yrs wait for me then!!

@Cloudburstagain

So why are schools and education so disrupted every time a child has a confirmed case? Children and parents, usually under 50, will have to constantly self isolate then?

I would imaging these things will get dropped once over 50s vaccinated. We are in our 30s with 3 young kids and have followed every rule and have to admit when reading this my first thought was why am I bothering. What a message to send to younger people who have lost jobs, now have mental health issues, are constantly having to isolate and disrupt their lives. I wouldnt blame people for thinking fuck it if they are going to just get covid anwyay!