Vaccine

Casdon

On the same news bulletin - more than 90% of those who have died so far are over 65, and Phase 1 of the vaccine is going to people aged 60 and over, so had it been available now that poor teacher would have received it, as would the other man who was highlighted, who was in his late 70s. A life is a life.

How old was the teacher? Did he have a health condition?

Callistemon

^I'd love to just be able to get on with my job without worrying.^

That is why people who are working, supporting families, should be in the first swathe to receive the vaccination.

And of course care home workers should be in the first line too.

The aim is to stop so many people dying. That's why those most at risk are first in line.

I think my company may well
A. Try
B. Have a valid reason to restrict my work (or "let me go") if I don't have it.

growstuff I caught the date on the screen 1959-2020 I think.
I missed the whole report (because the dog was up to no good in the garden).

Casdon

On the same news bulletin - more than 90% of those who have died so far are over 65, and Phase 1 of the vaccine is going to people aged 60 and over, so had it been available now that poor teacher would have received it, as would the other man who was highlighted, who was in his late 70s. A life is a life.

Phase 1 of the vaccine is not going to those over 60.

This is the current list of priorities:

"This interim ranking of priorities is a combination of clinical risk stratification and an age-based approach, which should optimise both targeting and deliverability. A provisional ranking of prioritisation for persons at-risk is set out below:

1 older adults’ resident in a care home and care home workers
2 all those 80 years of age and over and health and social care workers
3 all those 75 years of age and over
4 all those 70 years of age and over
5 all those 65 years of age and over
6 high-risk adults under 65 years of age
7 moderate-risk adults under 65 years of age
8 all those 60 years of age and over
9 all those 55 years of age and over
10 all those 50 years of age and over
11 rest of the population (priority to be determined)

The prioritisation could change substantially if the first available vaccines were not considered suitable for, or effective in, older adults.

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

Ellianne I agree, and Oopsminty’s son is correct in that the fewer ill people there are, the more ability to care for those who are ill.
However, ensuring that the 40 - 65 age group can continue to work is crucial, if they’re ill, they’re not in hospitals caring for the sick, nor in schools educating children, nor working in shops, nor delivering goods, nor caring for the old, nor policing the country, nor nor nor. The workforce needs to be healthy for us. These jobs don’t do themselves.

maddyone

Ellianne I agree, and Oopsminty’s son is correct in that the fewer ill people there are, the more ability to care for those who are ill.
However, ensuring that the 40 - 65 age group can continue to work is crucial, if they’re ill, they’re not in hospitals caring for the sick, nor in schools educating children, nor working in shops, nor delivering goods, nor caring for the old, nor policing the country, nor nor nor. The workforce needs to be healthy for us. These jobs don’t do themselves.

But it's the health authorities' duty to prioritise clinical need not to sort out the economy.

If the economy continues to suffer due to workers spreading sickness and not being able to work, would those who are prioritised for the vaccine over them be willing to take a cut in pension to help the economy and help the workers? Everyone pulling together to spread the load and challenges.

I think I will be in group 11 and I am happy to stay there.

Growstuff see for yourself on BBC News online. phase 1 of the vaccine is being given in the priority order as defined, but there is sufficient for all over 60s in Phase 1.

OceanMama

If the economy continues to suffer due to workers spreading sickness and not being able to work, would those who are prioritised for the vaccine over them be willing to take a cut in pension to help the economy and help the workers? Everyone pulling together to spread the load and challenges.

I think I will be in group 11 and I am happy to stay there.

Before someone gets upset that I have suggested making financial sacrifices, we gave up a good chunk of income that could have been ours, and would be very helpful right now, so that someone else could keep a job.

I don't have the annual flu vaccine and I won't be having this one either. More than 99% of people survive covid; that's good enough statistics for me. If you believe vaccines protect you then you don't have to worry about those who don't want to have them. If you complain about people who don't want to have vaccines then you have no trust in vaccines so why have them!!!

This thread has got a bit surreal......

Without an economy there is no one paying into the Heath authorities.

An economy is essential to “going back to normal”.

All age groups are equally important, but I struggle to see how condemning today’s children to a broken economy is seen as acceptable to some.

Alegrias2 you’re right, it’s like watching Logan’s Run play out.

Alegrias2

This thread has got a bit surreal......

I’ve completely lost the plot - I think I’ll retire to a dark room with a cold cloth on my forehead.

growstuff
Where did I say that it’s the health authorities job to sort out the economy?

Can anyone explain why they have decided to vaccinate the least mobile people first who will require the most assistance to even attend the gp's surgery? That age group will require a disproportionate amount of time and effort, necessitating transport and carers to accompany them, let alone how much longer it might take to prepare each patient for the jab. I'm not saying all 80 or 90 year olds are slow, but we have to acknowledge that many have mobility issues or maybe even dementia. A time and motion study would tell us that they could prpbablu vaccinate ten 50 year olds in the time it takes to do one elderly immobile 80 or 90 year old. If we want to roll the vaccine out quickly and efficiently let's start at the other end with 50+s. Time is of the essence and yes, those at the other end do have time to wait.

What I did say was if you want medical staff there to treat you, teachers to be available to teach children, shop assistants to be filling up shelves with the things you want to buy, delivery drivers to be available to bring you your shopping or online orders, the police to be available to police, etc then these people need to be healthy, not either ill or dead from Covid, so that they can fulfill your needs.

There would also be the issues surrounding consent to be vaccinated, proving that consent was given, or proving that the person is unable to consent. (Which should be assessed by an independent agency or person)

Unless, of course, all these long awaited and much needed policies won't count anymore?

Good post Ellianne I totally agree.

I think it’s to get the deaths down Ellianne, because the daily deaths are published every day, and make unpalatable news for the government. If the deaths come down, then the government will be seen to be making progress.
That’s my opinion anyway.

Are you thinking of people with dementia MissAdventure?

"We've done a cost benefit analysis Mrs Smith, and I'm afraid you're just too slow. I know you think your life is valuable but we'd have to get you into a taxi and Mrs Brown down the road really needs to get back to her job at Amazon. So sorry, you're off the list"

Ellianne

Can anyone explain why they have decided to vaccinate the least mobile people first who will require the most assistance to even attend the gp's surgery? That age group will require a disproportionate amount of time and effort, necessitating transport and carers to accompany them, let alone how much longer it might take to prepare each patient for the jab. I'm not saying all 80 or 90 year olds are slow, but we have to acknowledge that many have mobility issues or maybe even dementia. A time and motion study would tell us that they could prpbablu vaccinate ten 50 year olds in the time it takes to do one elderly immobile 80 or 90 year old. If we want to roll the vaccine out quickly and efficiently let's start at the other end with 50+s. Time is of the essence and yes, those at the other end do have time to wait.

They will be vaccinated in the care homes of course, how else?

And if many of the nurses and gps are going to be taken away from their surgeries to chase around the neighbourhood administering vaccines to the elderly in care homes or in their houses, won't they have considerably less time to deal with the ailments of the younger patients at their practice who may have serious issues that need diagnosing? Once again it's a lose lose situation for them.

People in care homes, generally, maddyone.
Even with dementia, it is best practice to always attempt every possible way to communicate with the person and explain.

It is often known that a person is totally unable to comprehend, but it is no longer acceptable to make a blanket assessment that someone can't understand anything, ever.