To all those who say "protect the vulnerable and let everyone else gets back to normal.

[Confuzzlediddled]

Stop talking rubbish!

My friend has lost her husband yesterday due to covid, he had underlying conditions and was shielding, hasn't left the house for months and just before Halloween his daughter tested positive after catching it at school.

He caught it from her and is now dead at 45, leaving a wife and 2 teenage children.

This is why everyone needs to do their bit, and you can't just let a deadly virus rip through and lock away the vulnerable, they have families, children who bring it home from school!!

Wear a mask, wash your hands and follow the damn rules people!!

This BBC article is quite good about it all and does say those with a weak immune system will not be able to have this vaccine which I was not aware of until I read the article.

"What is the new vaccine and how effective is it?

The vaccine trains the immune system to fight coronavirus.

It is a new type of vaccine called an RNA vaccine and uses a tiny fragment of the virus' genetic code. This starts making part of the virus inside the body, which the immune system recognises as foreign and starts to attack.

It is given in two doses - three weeks apart - and early data suggests it protects more than 90% of people from developing Covid symptoms.
Has this type of vaccine ever been used before?

There are no RNA vaccines that have been approved for use in humans.

The concept has been researched before and people have been given them in clinical trials for other diseases.

The vaccine will be considered by regulatory agencies around the world, and they will decide whether the jab can be approved for use. "
... www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-54880084

"We do not know if the vaccine stops you catching and spreading the virus or just stops you from getting ill. We also don't know how protective the vaccine is in different age groups. "

@Xenia

This BBC article is quite good about it all and does say those with a weak immune system will not be able to have this vaccine which I was not aware of until I read the article.

"What is the new vaccine and how effective is it?

The vaccine trains the immune system to fight coronavirus.

It is a new type of vaccine called an RNA vaccine and uses a tiny fragment of the virus' genetic code. This starts making part of the virus inside the body, which the immune system recognises as foreign and starts to attack.

It is given in two doses - three weeks apart - and early data suggests it protects more than 90% of people from developing Covid symptoms.
Has this type of vaccine ever been used before?

There are no RNA vaccines that have been approved for use in humans.

The concept has been researched before and people have been given them in clinical trials for other diseases.

The vaccine will be considered by regulatory agencies around the world, and they will decide whether the jab can be approved for use. "
... www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-54880084

"We do not know if the vaccine stops you catching and spreading the virus or just stops you from getting ill. We also don't know how protective the vaccine is in different age groups. "

That's interesting! I have an autoimmune disease and take steroids 10 years and counting now. My immune system stupidly attacks my body so the steroids quell it. My lungs are damaged by this disease.

I am in serious trouble if I get COVID but it doesn't sound as though the vaccine will be the answer for me either.

Yes, I was disappointed to read that about the Pfizer vaccine although other vaccines may come out that do not work in that way - giving you a bit of CV19 DNA and making a bit of CV19 in your body so your body then attacks it. It sounds a bit like in my non scientific mind I remember about Robert Jenner's small pox vaccine in the 1700s in the UK - gave you a bit of or a similar disease to make you immune from worse.

If the vulnerable cannot have the vaccine and the very old are not out and about much that might reverse what we normally do - normally the flu vaccine goes to the vulnerable and old (plus NHS workers). However I think they want to roll it out similarly other than those too vulnerable to have it so probably starting with over 70s and NHS workers and perhaps teachers?

This BBC article is quite good about it all and does say those with a weak immune system will not be able to have this vaccine

The BBC is both getting ahead of itself there and over-simplifying. There are many types of 'weak immune system'

There needs to be further investigation on what sort of response mRNA vaccines produce in the elderly, in those with co-morbities etc. Some vaccines are safe for these with compromised immune systems (depending on the nature of the compromise, and exactly how the vaccine works). We simply do not yet know how effective this one will be. There is no obvious reason, at this stage, to say it cannot work. But because it is yet to be studied, neither can one say it will

I am so sorry for their loss. Covid is unfortunately endemic in some secondary schools at the moment. I think children with ECV family members need the option to stay home for lockdown, and serious consideration needs to be given to how we can "reset" the problem in some schools.

There are no right answers and there is so much pain and suffering whichever angle you come at this from I agree that covid is a serious issue that warrants a severe response. However that needs to be balanced against the health, wellbeing and life chances of the whole population. The measures currently in place are valid, imo, but are extremely limited and should not be dismissed by "sit on your sofa and watch TV" type memes.

Limiting not limited. Proportionate given what's going on but represent a huge loss of personal freedom.

scaevola, that is useful. The Radio 4 item I heard yesterday on it did raise the issue - the public will not believe a simplified gross generalisation education campaign about the vaccine so it has to be fairly detailed to get public trust. BUT they also said the message cannot be so complicated only a scientist can understand it or it utterly fails as a campaign. It is how to get that balance right that is difficult.

I suppose with cv19 right back since January there have never been good and bad solutions - just ones that might be less bad to some people than others.

@TheDailyCarbuncle

That's a sad situation, but all it shows is that even without everyone being 'back to normal,' the risk is still there. Even with restrictions and lockdowns and vulnerable people taking precautions, people still catch covid and die. That's because covid is a highly infectious disease that is very very hard to detect. Short of making every single person stay at home 24/7 indefinitely there is literally no possible way to be 100% safe. It makes sense to take precautions but locking down and ensuring that people who are not vulnerable also suffer makes no sense - it doesn't help vulnerable people one bit, it just creates more and more and more problems and extends the difficulties caused by the virus beyond the actual effects of the virus itself - it blows the situation up rather than dealing with it.

Even if every single person followed every rule, people would still get infected. One of the main sources of infection is hospitals, where the rules are followed most carefully. Believing that we can somehow magically 'control' this virus is sending people dolally, it's making them feel responsible for things that they are simply not able to control. That man's daughter did not do anything wrong, and yet she gave her dad covid. I really hope she doesn't blame herself, because it isn't her fault. It's also not the fault of any other human being that they, by virtue of their biology, are susceptible viruses and can pass those viruses on. Being human is not a crime, being subject to illness is not a failing, wanting to engage with life is not morally wrong. People who happen to get infected with covid are not bad people. Following rules is not a magic solution to our vulnerability as living beings.

Surely you see that the more people who follow the rules, the less transmission? It’s not a case of “people are still getting it so we don’t need to follow rules” it’s more - these are the things that our government have deemed the minimum to reduce transmission?

so essentially you're saying what? That he deserved to die? That his life doesn't matter? You cold hearted specimen

She didn't say anything of the sort. And she makes a valid point. This lockdown is killing other groups of people. Their lives matter too.

I'm sorry for your friend who lost her husband.

The trouble is OP that even with most of us following the rules, washing hands, wearing masks etc your friend’s husband still died.

So either we close schools or we allow DC with ECV parents not to attend. But perhaps your friend wanted DC in school?
I’m not sure what the answer is.
But until the vaccine is rolled out, ECV people will die of Covid. And probably some will continue to die because they can’t have it or it doesn’t work for them.
It’s horrible. Utterly horrible.