Can the 40-49 age group now book their vaccine?

[Summergirl76]

Sister’s boyfriend (43) was able today to book his vaccine by entering his details on the national booking site (he is Derby based). Sister late 30s tried too but it said she was not eligible. Her husband tried last week and was also not eligible. Just wondered if anyone else has tried in the 40s age group and been able to book?

Yes, I think that in areas of low hesitancy and high uptake, it takes longer to get through the population and to the next group. So for those in upper 40s still waiting and not seeing the jab rolled out to 40s in their areas, they are likely to be in more affluent areas with higher take-up. This, plus a higher amount if older people to start with explains why it’s taken longer to reach the 40s. The only consolation for those waiting,is that often these are areas with less Covid anyway. Such areas tend to have more home working, mor compliance with rules and less crowded living which means transmission ins lower. 40S who stick to the rules in those areas are probably reasonably safe now that rates of Covid are so low in such areas.

Those areas that rolled out to under 50s first are actually often those that had spare vaccine because people didn’t accept the jab so readily. They were being offered it several times but still not accepting it and so it was given to younger people. The overall proportions of jabbed people in each area are probably quite similar, but the distribution by age and risk level differs, partly due to demographics but also due to take-up. I’d think in geographical areas of low take-up, government was more happy for the unofficial rollout to younger groups to happen when older groups didn’t take it. They have been very worried about Covid becoming an issue of deprived areas, and actually boosting those vaccinated of any age in those areas, helps to reduce transmission. The younger people offered it might have got individual protection quicker, but may well live in areas which overall have greater risk flags and lower take-up overall. In the longer term, such areas are still going to see more Covid in all likelihood than the more affluent areas with higher take-up who might take longer to get to the 40s.

Government is always looking at the big picture and not just the individual person and their age group. Vaccines weren’t diverted from areas who couldn’t get any more over 50s to come forward, to be given instead to areas still working on 50s. Instead, they were kept in those areas of low take up, to boost the overall protection of that geographical area and reduce risk further to the unvaccinated. It’s about reducing overall risk and not just individual risk.

nhsproviders.org/news-blogs/news/easing-of-lockdown-restrictions-welcome-but-we-mustnt-be-complacent

@WombatChocolate spot on

It’s true that most of the population aren’t interested in the minutiae of whether it’s rolled out to 49s or 48s and 49s or 45+ or all 40s. Being very precise with info gives more scope for getting it wrong too....hence I don’t think we will see much more than ‘all adults by the end of July’ mentioned over and over again.

They won’t want to pin down when it will be 30s for example, as they know from bitter experience how supply can let them down. Best to have a very broad goal which has some flexibility within it so you can surge when possible and go slowly if needed and still hit the not too ambitious target.

It’s looking good for something about to happen though. And anything moving forward will rollout will be welcomed by those keen to be jabbed...it all brings it closer to each and every one of them...even if we don’t know how quickly.

RedToothBrush But that's just it. London has had one of the highest death rates. Certainty the most deaths at over 10,000 people. Together with Birmingham (also seemingly left behind in the unequal distribution) it's at higher risk for catching covid. International flights from red list countries arrive at Heathrow and Birmingham airport only in England. Passengers mix with non red list, who then travel home by public transport.

There's also a huge amount of deprivation with several London boroughs amongst the most deprived in the whole of the UK. Look up Newham. The Guardian did a report some months back.

When it comes to the elderly population. What often gets forgotten (as appears to have been the case with the vaccine rollout) is actual numbers. London might have proportionally a younger population but with 9 million residents, it has more total numbers of elderly than anywhere else.

Anyhow, if distribution was done by elderly proportion or by deprivation, I'd have expected the south west of the UK (an area with a large elderly population and high deprivation) to have extra supply. Going off posts here, it doesn't.

From what I've read and heard, the unequal distribution seems more localised than regional. Within regions some places seem to have had much more supply than others. There was a poster the other day. Her healthy 23 year old daughter in East London was jabbed. Just a few miles down the road in south east London, it was still over 50s. The surplus could easily have been transferred locally from east to south east to give to upper 40s.

@RedToothBrush I’m in the NW, in my 40s and have asthma needing steroid inhalers and I’m still waiting for the vaccine. Friends and families in parts of east and north London have had it and they’re in their 30s and 40s and healthy.

Some parts of London could have less and some parts of nw could have more but the opposite is true in some areas too.

There doesn’t seem to be any rhyme or reason to it.

It’s a lottery! My asthmatic sister hasn’t had one either but her husband has (he’s at a different surgery 5 miles away). They’re in the Midlands.

You’re right that there’s no transparency.

There's also the fact that both Birmingham and London have higher rates of hesitancy than other parts of the UK. That leaves unvaccinated upper 40s (and younger) at higher risk because they won't be benefiting from the herd immunity in areas with high levels of take-up.

Like Leafmap says the postcode lottery seems to be more localised than regional.

There's also the fact that both Birmingham and London have higher rates of hesitancy than other parts of the UK. That leaves unvaccinated upper 40s (and younger) at higher risk because they won't be benefiting from the herd immunity in areas with high levels of take-up.

London Covid prevalence per 100,000 population is now down to 20, 50% lower than the average for England (29.3). It is a pretty safe place to be in. For comparison, my MSOA used to be at 1,500+ at the end of December.

My guess is the vaccinated 23 year old from a different thread might have been incorrectly flagged in the system as having high BMI. According to my GP neighbours, this is the most frequent reason why some "young, fit and healthy" get contacted by their practices. The process is moving fast and no-one has got time to investigate details of patients' underlying conditions. If the computer says "yes", you get invited - no questions asked.

Vaccine hesitancy is also a factor but if there are unused vaccines GPs are now supposed to bring forward second doses for already vaccinated patients. If this fails, they contact neighbouring police, fire stations, schools, etc - whoever they can get hold of.

But the areas of higher hesitancy are the areas where the jab has tended to be given to younger people. The appointments which were available for 50s were not all taken up due to hesitancy....so they were offered to younger groups.

This was the choice....to keep the jab in geographical areas and ensure the geographical area got a decent number vaccinated, even if some were younger. They chose this, instead of deciding to take vaccine not used due to hesitancy and move it elsewhere to places which simply had higher uptake or more older people. Why not? Because in those areas with high uptake which are taking longer to reach the younger groups, it’s just a matter of time and supply before the 40s will get it in those areas. Those areas will end up with the very high proportions of the population jabbed in a few months. They are areas with less hospitalisations and less people with high BMI etc which result in high deaths.

The less affluent areas have long term problems. Firstly they have high Covid rates and continue to have higher Covid rates. Then they have less take up and more hesitancy. Those problems can be partly mitigated by jabbing younger people in those areas sooner. At least that way, bigger proportions of the local population are protected and that helps protect everyone including those who are vulnerable in those areas and still not accepting the jab. It’s a better long term use than diverting it to affluent areas and giving it to 40s who are personally perhaps at risk, but living in areas of low risk.

So in a household with several generations living together and an elderly person who is reluctant to be jabbed, their risk is reduced by the fact their much younger grandson who works in a factory is jabbed and protected and not bringing Covid home from his factory. Him being jabbed protects that vulnerable person, whereas that jab being transported 10 miles to be given instead to an affluent 49 year older instead won’t protect that vulnerable person in the multi generational house.

Do you see what I mean about it not just being about personal risk by age, but also about protecting the vulnerable in groups 1-9 who remain unvaccinated? It is they, who if they catch it will be hospitalised and possibly die...far more than the 40s who might catch it. So where vaccine is limited in supply, decisions are made to allocate the scarce resource to reduce deaths and hospitalisations and not purely to protect from catching Covid.

Yes, it’s then 40s in affluent areas who have had to wait. Yes, they have a risk of long Covid but far less risk of hospitalisation or death.

I think this explains why some areas have been ‘allowed’ or encouraged to push on with under 50s - they had the supply due to low take-up if older groups, plus the use of it in younger people in those areas of low take up, was seen as a positive for those areas which already have higher Covid rates.

This will incense some people though. There is a lot of feeling that if people decline the jab, it’s their choice and they must take their chances. However, the NHS won’t see it like this. Health inequality needs addressing for those who are in deprivation, but also for the impact it has on all aspects of wider society too. But it’s not popular, so probably not spoken about public ally too much.

Tealights and Leafmap it depends on how its being allocated to what level of local authority. If its by regional rather than council level you might get more problems.

Both of you are saying completely contridictary things. It suggests its a regional distribution which then isn't being relooked at in finer detail.

Its wrong, but it could also simulataineously be justified as 'fair' too.

It sucks. I don't know what the alternative is. It depends on whether the infrustructure for distribution is and how putting it at a lower local authority level might slow things down anyway or make the system more inefficient in other ways.

There do seem to be certain hubs which are being prioritised though. Its smaller hubs which are getting more uneven and patchy supply.

A friend who got a Pfizer jab through a GP was telling me that she's been told shes likely to get called for her second jab before her 12 weeks is up because they are only expecting two deliveries between now and June and they are going to try and do everyone they can in that batch. She can't book her second jab through the NHS portal as it doesn't recognise that she's had one jab for some reason and has to wait until she is called. Another friend was told they couldn't book a new appointment through the NHS hub for a couple of days as they had been told there every single one released at that particular hub was booked for the next 12 weeks solid (though they could try and get one at another hub). They did get one for AZ a couple of days later. (Both had 1st jabs at the end of March and are in the NW).

So it seems very odd and not consistent.

There's definitely a problem in some parts of London with second vaccine shortage. A vulnerable elderly family friend in north London had her second Pfizer dose cancelled the night before the appointment. She eventually got it last week at 13 weeks. She's not the only one it happened to.

It's not just London. There's a thread about second Pfizer doses. The OP is in another part of the country. It seems the distribution postcode lottery has happened with second as well as first doses.

@WombatChocolate In London it's definitely not affluent areas waiting. Central London seems to be doing 30s and 40s (based on anedotes from here). Greenwich and Lewisham have high rates of deprivation and are still on over 50s.

There doesn't seem to be much reason behind the lottery tbh. It seems to be happening across the country and within regions.

I think it will always be difficult to explain every local difference. Decisions are being made at CCG level and PCN level too.

However, if you look at areas overall which have seen larger rollout to younger groups.....rollout beyond just a spare diesel at the end of the day, it more of a sustained effort to get the jab to 40s and even to 30s, in most cases, it is in areas where the take-up hasn’t been so high. They are areas where worry remains about Covid and large numbers of vulnerable people remaining unvaccinated in groups 1-9 and they are keen to protect the areas and vulnerable in that ever way they can...and protecting more of the other people is a way to do this.

We will all be able to find areas and individuals who don’t fit any of the bigger patterns, and drawing wider conclusions is quite difficult because we don’t always know if people or areas are mostly using the national booking system or GP led systems, and we don’t always know the break down of take up or of supply.

I like Israel's way of doing it. A centralised health system. I'd like us to end the postcode lottery full stop (not just with vaccines). I want centralised healthcare but I might be in the minority. I don't know if it's an unpopular thing in the UK?

Two south London boroughs (Lewisham and Greenwich) have the lowest proportion of over 50s done. I'm guessing many parts of London (except central) will be left to wait longer. Despite the higher risk of catching of in London. However, as I said, hopefully I'm wrong.

Lewisham currently has a covid case rate of 9.8. Its one of the lowest in London. Greenwich is also below the national average with 15.6.

Meanwhile Bolton where rates have remained stubbornly high since the end of the very first lockdown is at 55.6. Also see Blackburn and Darwen which is still at 65.5. Indeed if you look at the NW, the only places with a lower number of cases than Greenwich are Wyre, Blackpool, Carlisle, South Lakeland and Eden. We know that Blackpool was one of the very worst hit places in the country in the Winter Peak too.

Overall London is doing much better than further north. For the most part the places with the highest rates are all along the M62 corridor and thats been the case since we came out of the first lockdown (with some minor exceptions to this rule and the early part of the December wave). London's problem seems to have been acute and short lived whereas the North's has been been chronic and prolonged.

@Tealightsandd

I like Israel's way of doing it. A centralised health system. I'd like us to end the postcode lottery full stop (not just with vaccines). I want centralised healthcare but I might be in the minority. I don't know if it's an unpopular thing in the UK?

Thats fine. Nice idea. But practical reality doesn't lend itselt easily to that. Israel is tiny in size compared to the UK and the population much smaller (and therefore easier to manage fairly). The logistics of rolling out to more rural communities or urban ones with poor transportation make that a none starter.

Also we already have a centralised NHS. Its far more centralised than virtually any other Western Country.

Do you really think centralising would help if we were sending people living in St Helens to a cancer specialised clinic in Birmingham?

I think even within the boroughs vaccination rates are different depending on which GP surgery you are registered with - I live in one of the London boroughs mentioned and at least one or two surgeries were inviting (healthy) people in their early 40s in March as they were so far ahead - I assume they had invited the groups 1-9 and had a lot of people not take up the invite though. My friend who is 44 had her invite around 25th March I think, and said all her local friends the same age and registered with a particular GP also were all having their first jabs that week. Maybe there was vaccine stock with short use by dates or something, I'm not exactly sure.

Do you really think centralising would help if we were sending people living in St Helen's to a cancer specialised clinic in Birmingham?

Well no. That's no good for people in St Helen's or Birmingham (who don't need added numbers to their waiting lists for care). Which is exactly what I meant about wishing (perhaps unrealistically) for an end to the postcode lottery of healthcare.

I interpret (perhaps wrongly) centralisation as everywhere having the same good and easy access to local healthcare centres and hospitals. Access is currently reliant on a postcode lottery.

Anyway I don't want to derail the thread with talk of which healthcare system is best. Perhaps another thread some other time. The vaccine distribution lottery got me going. Sorry to over 40s wanting to discuss the vaccine wait.

How many times have you tried to book today? I have tried more times than I can remember!!!!

Red toothbrush, yes I think there is a feeling that Covid will remain stubbornly in certain areas. These aren’t in London. Given these areas are often those with more vaccine hesitancy and the underlying health issues which make poor outcomes from Covid, are more common, getting the jab to ANYONE in those areas who will take it, becomes more important than ensuring a totally fair age-based rollout across the whole country.

But that’s not an easy message for Comms is it! And it’s not an easy message for people in their upper 40s waiting for the vaccine in the Home Counties.
And even within more and less affluent counties there are pockets of affluence and deprivation, often living within a few miles of each other. Life expectancy can differ by over 10 years within a couple of miles. It is complex and within broad brush systems of rollout, which we have, there are nuances whuchbus as the public will never know about and ar so many and varied, it would be too much to fully grasp no doubt.

Greenwich and Lewisham have high rates of deprivation and are still on over 50s.

Greenwich and Lewisham have got decent uptake in 50+ category (by London standards).

If you live on the council border, Tealightsandd, I assume you are close to Blackheath? It is a typical example of an area where the demand for vaccines would be very strong. Leafy streets, middle class health conscious population very keen on getting their jabs.

@WombatChocolate
Were all the media reports about London having the highest rates of hesitancy wrong? Or have things changed? Perhaps more people have been persuaded to change their minds in London? The study below is a month or so old. I guess it might be different now.

www.openaccessgovernment.org/uk-vaccine-hesitancy/104702/

I don't live in Greenwich or Lewisham. I have friends who do. It was reported in their local paper (about the two boroughs lagging behind other areas in the UK). Don't know how accurate?