WHO urges Britain to pause covid jabs after treating the vulnerable

[Jay2020]

Link

www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/30/who-urges-britain-to-pause-covid-jabs-after-treating-vulnerable

I am beyond broken if this means we can't get to any kind of normality.

If the WHO are criticising us for successfully adhering to our vaccine rollout plans, I think a perfectly acceptable response is to criticise them for not having approved AZ and other vaccines for Covax program yet. Surely that would help out a whole lot more! Talk about hypocrisy!

I'm not sure however if the WHO are actually criticising us or if this is just the Guardians spin on it.

Also, I think what many pp are forgetting is the time element.
I am ECV and had a text yesterday to say my gp would be in touch within 2 weeks. Then several weeks until my booster, so let's call it end of April. As quickly as things are changing, who knows what new situations will present themselves by then (new variants, data from Israel that could change treatment, all manner of environmental or political issues) so our government would be nuts to make any promises to other nations at this point.

It is a virus that is starting to slam the younger ones, hard

I don't think that is actually correct, infact its completely wrong, there is some small extra risk.

www.ft.com/content/811dd66e-f045-4815-b717-3f1d076a0f35

For healthy children and young adults, who are extremely unlikely to die from Covid-19, the additional lethality of B.1.1.7 would have a tiny effect on their absolute risk
Sir Patrick took men in their 60s as an example. The average risk was that about 10 in every 1,000 would be expected to die from the infection with the old virus; with the new variant, 13 or 14 would die

@Bluesername

On planes the emergency protocol is that you put your own oxygen mask on first, then you can help others.

Roll out the vaccine in the UK as planned. Some of the benefits will be (in no particular order) 1) get people back to work to boost the economy 2) get children's education fully underway again 3) enable the NHS to treat those who have had their treatment postponed due to Covid 4) Benefit the mental health of our population

When we are back to more of a normal way of life we will have more strength, money and resources which we can choose to use for the benefit of others.

AstraZeneca generously chose not to profit from its vaccine at all, so the 'greedy big pharma' trope isn't even true here.

If anyone thinks others in this country should forefeit their own vaccination, I think that's like giving a charity goat present. You're getting someone else to give something up but you claim the credit.

I agree now is a very good time to be unselfish but I think the best way is to contribute individually to charities or initiatives who are involved with getting more vaccines to those in need around the world.

Yeah but the rule on planes isn’t put on your oxygen mask first, then get yourself off the plane first and call emergency services is it?

Vaccinating our most vulnerable is the equivalent of putting our oxygen masks on first.

Vaccinating everyone in the country before those who are especially vulnerable elsewhere is like getting the first class passengers off, letting everyone else crash and burn when we could have saved many more.

Well yes, if it were the other way around and we were begging for help, I don’t imagine that they’d be falling over themselves. I dare say it’d be a smug case of ‘You made your Brexit bed, now you can lie on it.’

I voted Remain, too, albeit holding my nose to some extent, since I never saw the EU as the haloed beacon of sanctity so many Remainers seemed to see - especially not after hearing from fairly near the horse’s mouth of the most profligate waste of EU money, much of which was ending up in corrupt pockets.

Urged or have to?

Does that mean critical workers have to wait until after the 2bn are done m

Then what age do we pause? Many in ICU are under 60 (about half of total)

Is Israel pausing?

It's not necessarily the selfishness I take umbridge with (and again, no it's not human nature) it's the fact that it's a selfish and unscientific view.*

Certainly seemed like you took umbrage with it. I think it's human nature to protect your own loved ones above others so we will have to disagree on that.

If we want the best for us in the long run we need to do the best for everyone.

Undoubtedly a global solution is needed long term.
I'm just not so sure if we yet know what the best is for everyone & what the impact of just stopping after vaccinating the vulnerable here & the associated impacts of that eg economy, mental health, etc.

"Covax hasn’t distributed a single dose so far"

As a spin-off of the WHO among others, I wouldn't necessarily have expected it to - but they've had (plenty of) our money, so if the "poorer countries" have an issue with how it's being handled they can take it up with them
Unwelcome as it may be to some, it isn't the UK's job to solve everything, for everybody, all the time

And I'm not interested in morality lessons from an organisation quite so keen on cosying up to the Chinese regime

Unbelivable apparently loads of countries crowing about the suceess and how we should follow there lead.
So why when we get it do we have to stop how much have NZ thrown at a vaccine and manufacture it .

@TheYearOfSmallThings

I disagree with the WHO, mainly because the countries which are slow off the mark will continue to be so, and the countries who are proceeding quickly would be pausing (at risk to their citizens) for an uncertain benefit. I also think, given the shockingly high death rate in the UK, that it is hard to argue vaccination should not proceed as quickly as possible.

I think it would be better to focus on increasing production, especially of the vaccines which are easiest to administer correctly.

Well said. Telling countries to slow down and pause a vaccine programme seems wrong. Especially if it means prolonged lockdown.

For me, the fact we are doing so well at vaccinating just shows how selfish we are

The self hatred on this site is high already but this takes the prize

Even if you draw the line at a low level, it's better than nothing. Boris was talking about vaccinating ALL adults in the UK by August or something. I'm 32 and perfectly healthy – I'd happily not get vaccinated if it meant a more vulnerable person in another country could be.

And I'm not interested in morality lessons from an organisation quite so keen on cosying up to the Chinese regime

Quite. WHO have shown themselves to be lacking in integrity and transparency from the beginning, and have given bad advice. Why should we start listening to them now?

My thoughts on hearing that were 'jog the fuck on'

I am very happy we play a huge role in Covax, I'm happy to pay more tax to enable more if the world to get vaccinated.

BUT start at the middle of the circle and vaccinate out...

I feel like the best thing we can do for global public health is get the numbers in the uk under control to hopefully reduce the likelihood of another shitty varient emerging.

Whilst a new shitty varient or three or four get wildly out of control in a country who haven't recieved any vaccines yet to even start innoculating their older/clincally vulnerable population (and putting at jepordy the progress of the entire global vaccination programme).

Once all the vulnerable in this country are innoculated then we will have the virus more under control. So, what the WHO is asking regards diverting vaccines from healthy/young members of society to enable poorer countries to get the virus under control in their vulnerable populations is a perfectly reasonable and sensible request that shouldn't really need to be asked in the first place.

Agree entirely Wildswim

Another organisation that has gone down in esteem. They have not come out of this well.

If the WHO are criticising us for successfully adhering to our vaccine rollout plans, I think a perfectly acceptable response is to criticise them for not having approved AZ and other vaccines for Covax program yet. Surely that would help out a whole lot more! Talk about hypocrisy!

Yes, this needs looked into.

I agree at @Puzzledandpissedoff it's actually a very colonial attitude to think the UK can solve the problems of the world.
I'm just going to focus on obeying the rules and hope that our successful programme will ease pressure on the NHS. I'm sure the superior posters here will have better ideas for solving the world's problems :)

If we do, when this is over, these countries wont forget how we intentionally let them die

Could you be specific about exactly which countries you are referring to, and your rationale for choosing them?

There are over 7 billion people in the world, many of them in low income countries. There are under 70 million people in Britain. Why should Britain be singled out here, and not, say, much more populous countries like China or the US?

Once all the vulnerable in this country are innoculated then we will have the virus more under control.

Why would it be under control? And what age are you diverting at?

That means teachers and police don’t get it and we continue to see 48 year olds in ICU. That’s if you cut off at 50. Higher then even more - maybe enough to need high restrictions for a long time.

@MarshaBradyo

Urged or have to?

Does that mean critical workers have to wait until after the 2bn are done m

Then what age do we pause? Many in ICU are under 60 (about half of total)

Read this, the risks are not really any worse than in the first wave, there are higher infections now.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55586994

@stripeyIIIIItscmsfkmf

Even if you draw the line at a low level, it's better than nothing. Boris was talking about vaccinating ALL adults in the UK by August or something. I'm 32 and perfectly healthy – I'd happily not get vaccinated if it meant a more vulnerable person in another country could be.

Yes, but would you "happily" return to your normal life? I.e. work without social distancing, screens, etc? Pubs & restaurants as normal? Crowded public transport?

We can't afford (mentally and financially) to stay in lockdown or even semi-lockdown for much longer. We really have to get rid of most of the restrictions by Summer, and be back to as near normal as possible by, say, September.

If the under 50's are happy to let other countries have vaccines, then they need to accept they'll have to return to pretty much the normal lives, and risk themselves getting covid.

Umm no thanks. If this Government has done one thing right, it’s vaccinations. It needs to carry on as we have one of the smallest health care systems (bed wise) in the western world. With the huge death toll, no we can’t wait.

The WHO can get back on their bike & do one. Perhaps they should refocus their energies on developing a little more integrity within their own organisation. Perhaps they should be focussing on that report they’re drawing up in respect of the Wuhan Viral Institute -spell checks, grammar & accurate, independent conclusions of course.

FFS

iI's actually a very colonial attitude to think the UK can solve the problems of the world

It certainly is, and however well intentioned our actions we'll instantly be accused of it if we try, and then something doesn't quite suit

FWIW I'm one of those who would like to share any spare vaccines once our own vulnerable have had theirs. Certainly we can take advice in this, but we shouldn't be doing it just because a compromised and highly political organisation have clicked their fingers