I’m just angry now

[BathFullOfEels]

They knew a vaccine would be the only way of getting us out of this mess. The country has already been locked down twice. Why, why, why didn’t they use this time to set up the logistics of distributing and administering these vaccines?

Why, why, why are the government allowed to decide who to prioritise to receive these vaccines when they were always going to distribute in a way that benefits them. Surely any government with an ounce of realism would be self aware enough to realise that they would make this vaccine distribution a political decision and instead allow the decision to be made by an independent third party who can distribute it in a way that would allow the country to get back to work. Instead it’s likely that months and months down the line we’ll all be forced to go back to work despite still be unprotected.

I have visions of pensioners being able to swan off on holiday over the summer while the workers of the country will still be unable to.

It’s an absolute fucking farce. Watching that press conference last night just finally made it snap for me - they genuinely don’t know what they’re doing at all

The vaccine has not been tested on children, mainly adults.

@Flyonawalk

as we repair devastated social structures

The 'social structures' are being ravaged by Covid deaths too

Whilst I agree with the OP on the gov having a logistics/distribution plan ready, I can't help but think the essence of this post is a tad 'them and us'.

I'm not sure if the government made the decision to do oldies first but rather based on a risk assessment done by medical advisers based on how the NHS wld cope - ie oldies > most sever cases, higher death rates and likely longer stays in hospital get seen first and, they certainly don't all live our youff vision of oldie world > On their own in a crumbling suburbian semi or even in care homes where they're too 'far gone' to care whether they have contact with their kids, grand/great grand kids! Many live in multi gen households, and some, god forbid still work and run businesses and are an asset to the economy.

I'm not sure where anyone, pensioners or others, would be swanning off to on hols at this time or this spring/summer, except for maybe China?? Reducing this to our ability to swan off on cheap all-inclusive hols so that we can lie on a beach for 2 weeks whilst passing on our variant strains to nations who won't be able to obtain, let alone distribute a vaccine until the end of this year or next, is so embarrassingly 1st world me, me.

My parents in their 80s are getting their vaccinations soon, they definately won't be swanning off on holiday. My dad has dementia and my mum is his carer.

@HelloMissus

It’s a hard choice between vaccinating the biggest spreaders or the most vulnerable. Logically you should choose the first group because that will stop spread to the second, but since it will take a lot of time to get through the first group and we don’t yet know if the vaccination even stops spread (it may just mitigate - which is actually worse for spread as so many won’t even know they have it) then we have to choose the second.

From what I read so far it's not clear if vaccines stop the spreading. Until it's clear there is no point to prioritise the spreaders.

tropical in a nutshell yes.

I'm not sure if the government made the decision to do oldies first but rather based on a risk assessment done by medical advisers based on how the NHS wld cope - ie oldies > most sever cases, higher death rates and likely longer stays in hospital get seen first and, they certainly don't all live our youff vision of oldie world > On their own in a crumbling suburbian semi or even in care homes where they're too 'far gone' to care whether they have contact with their kids, grand/great grand kids! Many live in multi gen households, and some, god forbid still work and run businesses and are an asset to the economy.

I don't think the priority has been on helping the NHS cope. The very elderly don't live for very long and won't be using NHS resources as much as younger vulnerable people (less likely to be intubated etc). The fact that care homes are prioritised over NHS workers further makes me think this is just a numbers game and the number they are interested in is people who die within 28 days of a positive test.

@whenwillthemadnessend

"""It may sound callous but I’d prefer an 80yo to have to spend a year inside than a 5yo.*"""

WOW that is callous. A five year old will forget. An 80 yo doesn't have many years left to enjoy and many people of that age do need as much care as a toddler. God help you when you get older!!!
*

Actually I see your comment as callous.

However I do think you have helpfully clarified the divide on this post.

"What is worse? A five year being asked to stay at home for a year (with some allowed outdoors breaks) or for an 80 year old being asked to stay at home for a year (with some allowed outdoors breaks)"

That's the nub of the issue and we all have our own opinions on it.

Why not an option of everyone restricted for 6 months ? Fairer all round . If everyone does it it's over quicker

How is it the 'nub' of the issue? They both should be staying at home.

midgebabe because you can’t restrict everyone for 6 months as key workers will always be required.

@hopsalong

There is a natural human desire to believe in meliorism

How about in a couple of years' time a bunch of youths come knocking at your door thinking you are on the wrong side of 40 (hence you've had your life and don't count), you and your children have 'meliorated' enough for their liking and they should strip you of what you have because, you know, it's only 'fair' right?

@trulydelicious Meliorism is the belief that humans can improve the world through our actions. It would be odd to decide someone has ‘meliorated enough’.

trulydelicious I agree it's an outragious thought, and distasteful, but it is possible. I'm being incredibly cynical, not usually one of my traits but born out of a total lack of confidence and trust in our government. I wouldn't put anything beyond them!

@Flaxmeadow

The hatred towards elderly people on here is mind blowing

Indeed !

If you can't cope with what is going on now you really wouldn't like to be left with a country without a safe and functioning NHS service.

@mrshoho that’s what you will be left with when there are millions unemployed and unable to pay our taxes to fund the NHS. Enjoy!

The issue about who should stay inside (5 year olds or 80 year olds) completely fails to recognise and respect that a five year old child is not fully developed.

The might well ‘forget,’ however the problem was t ever them ‘remembering’ it. The problem is lack of opportunity to develop as a small human, an opportunity that was never denied to that 80 year old.

I’m very sorry for 80 year olds having their lives restricted, but I’m also happy that medical science and improvement in standards of living has afforded them 80 years already. The vaccine should afford them more.

However, I am much more concerned for the five year old child, who is being denied their essential developmental experiences (particularly the need to socialise with peers). Cannot believe people can’t see this basic argument.

I was thinking the same thing. If they want the workers to get back to work then they really need to be focusing on them having the vaccine!

@Belladonna12 actually it is the JCVI who came up with the priority list. Comprised of professors and doctors who advise health departments in the uk.

Or you could just recognise and discard an invented comparison which serves nothing but to stir up division

And instead decide that we all want and need to be getting out and about as soon as possible, and working out the best way to achieve that

And it’s by removing the crisis pressure on NHS by vaccinating relevant staff and those who are most likely to be hospitalised and possibly die, essentially, protecting the vulnerable by turning their risk from Covid into one similar to a healthy person under 50

Because when the highest priorities on the current priority list are fine, there is the real prospect of durable relaxation of restrictions.

But if we don’t remove the real (now Alert 5) risk to NHS, everyone gets stuck with extensive restrictions got even longer. And the backlog in other NHS services grows worse, and the consequences of poverty become more widespread as economy is stalled for longer

People are now inventing scenarios. People should be isolating, regardless of age. Yes it will be hard on the 5 year old, but it needs to be done. There is no escaping from it. I know it makes people feel more in control and powerful by thinking they have better ways of handling a global pandemic but we can't escape this. Somethings have to give. We can't protect everything. The hospitals providing healthcare is very important. Go and look at history is you want an idea of what it was like was like without a healthcare system or the ability for people to receive treatment.

i'm confused as to how it's taken gross, misshandling and neglectful recklessness of a global pandemic for people to finally say 'they know not, what they are doing'

when have govts/politicians ever worked for anything other than the interests of the few and self and the preservation of the status quo. this is how it has and always will be, without great spcial upheaval

@CountessFrog

The issue about who should stay inside (5 year olds or 80 year olds) completely fails to recognise and respect that a five year old child is not fully developed.

The might well ‘forget,’ however the problem was t ever them ‘remembering’ it. The problem is lack of opportunity to develop as a small human, an opportunity that was never denied to that 80 year old.

I’m very sorry for 80 year olds having their lives restricted, but I’m also happy that medical science and improvement in standards of living has afforded them 80 years already. The vaccine should afford them more.

However, I am much more concerned for the five year old child, who is being denied their essential developmental experiences (particularly the need to socialise with peers). Cannot believe people can’t see this basic argument.

I agree. The cynic in me tells me that politicians are motivated to act by a desire to remain popular in order to stay in power. So it's the 70+ age group and those in care homes who are most likely to die from covid and bump up the death rates, making them look bad (in a country which presses DNR orders on people and makes heavy use of the Liverpool Pathway).

So let's concentrate on vacvcinating them first, because children and younger people are statistically highly unlikely to die from it. And they'll continue to live without the vaccine, so never mind of we raise a generation with stunted reading and writing skills or social difficulties. Of course some kids can't catch up socially - look what happens to even babies or toddlers whose parents' behaviour badly affects their development.

Well said, it's embarrassing how many adults are so selfish, it's "what about me, I need this more than someone else because"... Get over yourselves! I thought we were all in this together. How would you lot have managed in the blitz, or your little darlings were going off to war, dealing with the black death, the bubonic plague etc? Probably the same people that are panic buying. It's bloody selfish.

As for the poster...get well soon

It is laughable that in the early days of this virus people were saying 'but it only affects the old and vulnerable' and now they're saying 'sod them, the rest of us need it more!' Are you actually for real? The old, vulnerable and hospital workers should get it first.