The decision to end restrictions is dangerous and premature, unethical and illogical.

Has anyone seen evaluations for these “test events”.? Are “test events” just a convenient cover to keep people happy I wonder?

Greeneyedgirl

Has anyone seen evaluations for these “test events”.? Are “test events” just a convenient cover to keep people happy I wonder?

No I was thinking that the other day.

The test event results were published several weeks ago, there was minimal infections, sorry I cannot recall the exact percentage.

*was should have been were

GrannyGravy13

The test event results were published several weeks ago, there was minimal infections, sorry I cannot recall the exact percentage.

Was that after the Brit Awards in May? I don't think there were any infections and the audience was made up of NHS staff and key workers who were working in the thick of it all.

No it was the night club in Liverpool (I think) for two nights and the snooker competition.

It was the higher level of T Cells in the young that was protecting them. The Johnson varient has found a way to sneak round them. The vacination may only be a partial answer now. Our government has relied on the natural higher number of T Cells in the young and basically ignored them as long as they could protect the elderly and older people to keep them out of the hospitals.

They basically seem to have no real plan, objective or leadership.

I agree with GrannyGravy, I do not think we are poles apart Whitewave. I have changed my position over the last couple of weeks in that I feel it may well be the better part of valour to continue as we are for a while, until all over 18s are fully vaccinated. Plus the ECV younger children who have been advised that medically it is better for them to have the vaccine despite it not yet being licensed for children. My life and the lives of others in my age group are not so very impacted by the current restrictions, but I am concerned for those who need to go out to work and have got to circulate, or those whose jobs are on the line without further opening up. It is such a dilemma, and difficult to know what is best for everyone. There are so many competing needs.

I thought that the Pfizer vaccine has been licensed for 12+ in the UK.

I would have thought that the results of the more recent 'test' events can't possibly have been analysed yet. And if they have, I don't recall them having been published. So that's not data we have to hand.

I did read somewhere that the post event testing was voluntary after the Liverpool night club event. If it was, that doesn't fill me with any confidence. But I couldn't find anything to confirm it. And, were they using the discredited Lateral Flow tests?

But we still come back to the fact that herd immunity is usually achieved by vaccination, not by mass infection. If it were, we'd be immune to all sorts of things that are currently vaccinated for...

What the scientists who are anti wholesale lifting of restrictions are saying is that this is like a huge experiment being carried out on a mass of people who haven't been asked to give, or have given, their consent. Any scientist surely knows that that is completely unethical? No proposal for a scientific study would be given the go ahead, or funding, if what was proposed was unethical.

If that’s the case Maizie then it will be up to parents to decide won’t it? I seem to have missed that up till today, but did see somewhere on Gransnet, it could be this thread, that Pfizer has been licensed for over 12s. Thank you for pointing it out.

The Pfizer vaccine has been approved for 12-15 yr olds in the UK but JCVI are still not advocating for this to go ahead.
I accept that they know more than I do on this.

And thank you for that information too GrannyGravy.

There is insufficient supply of Pfizer and Moderna to offer it to under 18s at the moment, although 16–17s can receive it in specific circumstances. My guess is JCVI will approve it for 12-17s after the end of July adult vaccine deadline.

I think I am correct in that all the current Covid vaccines used in the UK are not licensed they have only got emergency use approval as the clinical trials do not officially end until 2023. This approval absolves the drug companies from any/all claims against them in the event of side effects from the vaccines.

I have checked and cannot find any information to the contrary.

Casdon

There is insufficient supply of Pfizer and Moderna to offer it to under 18s at the moment, although 16–17s can receive it in specific circumstances. My guess is JCVI will approve it for 12-17s after the end of July adult vaccine deadline.

That surprises me as in our local area there have been walk-in Pfizer clinics for the last two weekends.

Yes, because they are trying to pick up the adults who have for whatever reason missed their original appointments GrannyGravy13. Based on the delivery contracts, there is only enough available each week to do a certain number, which is why the second vaccine for younger people can’t always be done in the now recommended 8 weeks- you can see it in the daily figures for second vaccinations. There’s plenty of AZ, but obviously they can’t use that on younger people.

Casdon

Yes, because they are trying to pick up the adults who have for whatever reason missed their original appointments GrannyGravy13. Based on the delivery contracts, there is only enough available each week to do a certain number, which is why the second vaccine for younger people can’t always be done in the now recommended 8 weeks- you can see it in the daily figures for second vaccinations. There’s plenty of AZ, but obviously they can’t use that on younger people.

Two youngest AC and DiL have had their second Pfizer inoculation brought forward by two weeks.

Our Health Board put information out about it - apparently they are redistributing the supply to parts of the UK with higher levels. My daughter is due her second next Friday, which will be 11 weeks after her first.

Here’s more information about the shortage.
www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/uk-discuss-pfizer-covid-vaccine-20795561

Ours will be eight weeks after as opposed to the ten week date booked at their first inoculation.
We are not in a high infection rate area.

I guess it must vary by area, it’s very rural where I am, and they have to ensure they use full vials - but there is definitely a supply issue nationwide. I copied the Wales Online explanation, but there are plenty of other reports online saying the same thing. I think the next group to be offered the vaccine will be 17 year olds so they can mitigate the predicted surge at Freshers weeks.

The U.K. government must reconsider its current strategy and take urgent steps to protect people and children.
Should not the UK government have possibly considered alternative ways of rolling out the vaccine from the start? Those urgent steps were decided at the time.
Many people, including lots of GNs, were in favour of the order of the vaccination, but there might have been some wisdom in allowing NHS workers and teachers to receive theirs sooner. People can't complain, there will significant impact on exhausted clinicians. Rising case numbers will inevitably mean more hospital admissions. Millions of people are waiting for procedures and many will die waiting when many of those concerned didn't receive their first vaccines until April/May. It is illogical to want one method at the time and then to be cross that things resulted in the way they have.
There will now be educational disruption, long waiting lists, new variants, more transmission etc. It's the path that was chosen, that's how it will be.

I agree Ellianne, I said at the time of the initial roll out that key workers should have been vaccinated first, but as you note, many Gransnetters did not agree with this. They said older people should be vaccinated first as they were/are more likely to become ill or die. No one can have it both ways!

Interestingly New Zealand have not chosen to vaccinate older people first. They have vaccinated all border force workers and the people they live with first. Then they started to vaccinate all key workers and their families, and only after that older and vulnerable people. Finally the rest of the population. Their vaccination programme is also held up because of supply issues of the Pfizer vaccine, the only one they are using.

Yes*maddyone*, judging by comments I've read older, vulnerable, more cautious people would actually have preferred to be locked up for longer anyway. Young, active, fitter people were more desperate to carry on working and resume normal lifestyles. The NZ method sounds pretty sensible to me. My cousin is a medic (locum) in Nelson and he was jabbed early on. His retired sister is still waiting and more than happy to do so.

I don’t believe older, vulnerable, more cautious people would have preferred to be locked up for longer anyway. There are a good deal of unacknowledged mental health problems amongst older people, and the pandemic has exacerbated this. It is often believed that older people may just be anxious and depressed because they are old, and therefore they don’t receive the support that they need.
The elderly were prioritised initially for vaccines because this age group were mainly overwhelming the hospitals.