[Misc] Covid jabs and prioritising

[Simster]

My parents are in their early 80's, my Dad has an additional risk factor. They're desparate to get their vax's, other than an early morning bike ride when no one's about, they're virtually prisoners at home. They want to live so have spent the last 10+ months doing things by the book. But they miss getting a take away coffee, having a browse round Brighton city centre, trips to a garden centre and seeing family.

With the greatest respect, this applies to absolutely everyone who is trying to behave the right way. Life hasn't been a bed of roses for anyone, but at least your parents haven't had financial worry to live with on top of everything else.

This has not been at the expense of NHS staff. Family of mine working at Worthing Hospital in their 40's have been vaccinated as have 70% of all staff, they're on course for 100% assuming that pandemic deniers don't work for the NHS!

This must shirley mean that in this third lockdown, cancer treatment etc is far more likely.

But it has been at the expense of other people in the front line. My wife is a teacher, she is upset because she goes into school every day armed with just a mask. Where's her jab? She clearly needs it more urgently than my parents, in my view.

The economy and other aspects of society hit hard, unfortunately, have to take second stage to saving 10,000's, possibly a 100,000, lives of the over 65's.

Imho.

That seems to be the accepted view given the lack of fuss over prioritising. However, I still maintain that if the elderly were better protected in the first place we could at least have opened up the discussion. I am genuinely worried what a decimated economy is going to do to people's mental health once these boomers have sadly lost their lives to natural causes a few years from now.

 

[carlzeiss]

Somebody else can have my jab , would rather take a chance with the virus .

 

[Badger]

It's a tough one. I've had some discussion about this with my friends. One of them is of the opinion older/vulnerable people should get the jab first, even before most healthcare workers.

I'm not so sure myself. I do think vaccinating people in long term care homes should be a priority because that's where a lot of the outbreaks seem to be. After that, I wouldn't take issue with vaccinating people who work in warehouses/factories, teachers, even university students. I think we should try and prioritise the areas where the virus is likely to spread quickly.

As you point out [MENTION=232]Simster[/MENTION] old people having to stay at home in their houses, taking their pensions, can quite easily wait it out for a few extra months.

Canada still doesn't really have a clear priority list, partly because we have a bit of a shortage of supply. They've started with front line health workers and care home staff and residents. Although there's been some annoyance about admin staff who have little contact with anyone (even those WFH) getting the vaccine. There's definitely still discussions about who the vaccines should be distributed to next though.

Having said that, I do worry about my parents. I'll be happy when they get vaccinated and I know they're counting down the days until they get their jabs. My dad has had some health concerns recently, (possibly related to Covid which he may have had last spring), so perhaps there's a bit more justification for him getting it sooner rather than later.

 

[Chicken Run]

I don't know. Clearly if you are older, you are more likely to die from it, but you'd think it was easier for older people to be protected in the first place than for other groups who don't have pensions and their own homes, so need to go out and about to earn a living or learn a trade.

It could be argued that the government are hiding behind an inconvenient truth when vaccinated the elderly first - that the elderly haven't been protected well enough in the first place.

I tend to agree with you, my in laws are 75 and fall into exactly your description of boomers, my Mother is 87( Dad past 10 years ago) all of them retired all got their own props and decent pensions, I don’t have my own house have lost about 50 percent of my earnings over the last year and can’t work from home and would dearly love them to be confined to quarters in order to keep UK PLC going.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Simster]

I tend to agree with you, my in laws are 75 and fall into exactly your description of boomers, my Mother is 87( Dad past 10 years ago) all of them retired all got their own props and decent pensions, I don’t have my own house have lost about 50 percent of my earnings over the last year and can’t work from home and would dearly love them to be confined to quarters in order to keep UK PLC going.

There you go. As far as I'm concerned, maybe you should be considered a priority over someone who has lived their life and has absolutely no financial worries. That extra six months to a year could mean everything to someone like you.

Meanwhile, we are all worried about the NHS yet despite the worst rates since the pandemic, we still have these Nightingale hospitals sitting there idle.

 

[British Bulldog]

I've been having an interesting ongoing discussion with my wife about how prioritising Covid jabs has just been "accepted" by the population at large. My Dad had his first jab today and so it's prompted me to get a wider view, especially when I found out recently that Indonesia has started to vaccinate the economically active first.

There seems to be this acceptance that old people simply must be immunised first because they're most at risk in terms of mortality rates. But surely it's not as simple as that is it?

I'm looking at my two student age kids and my parents. My boomer parents have seen the world, made their money, had a life where university education was completely free, pensions were bulletproof, and mortgages easy to obtain. Now they're first in line for jabs. Meanwhile my student age kids have had none of that and are clearly exposed to potential mental health problems. Two years of A levels, along with college and student life completely written off will do that, and they're not being considered at all.

I look at my parents and wonder whether - having had full and fortunate lives - they should have been the ones staying inside, cared for by my generation (in terms of provisions) and other vulnerable sectors of society been at the front of the queue.

Just putting it out there - I find it very strange that whilst some things are vehemently debated, there is a widespread acceptance that the elderly should go first.

Who would you vaccinate first?

 

[Gazwag]

Isn't the main reason for working downwards because the old are far more likely to end up in hospital, with treatments so much better than last spring people are staying alive longer in hospital. Once the old are vaccinated this opens up many many beds for cancer patients to have operations, for early 20's car crash victims to be saved so basically the old getting vaccinated is as much for the young as for the old.

 

[Weststander]

With the greatest respect, this applies to absolutely everyone who is trying to behave the right way. Life hasn't been a bed of roses for anyone, but at least your parents haven't had financial worry to live with on top of everything else.


But it has been at the expense of other people in the front line. My wife is a teacher, she is upset because she goes into school every day armed with just a mask. Where's her jab? She clearly needs it more urgently than my parents, in my view.


That seems to be the accepted view given the lack of fuss over prioritising. However, I still maintain that if the elderly were better protected in the first place we could at least have opened up the discussion. I am genuinely worried what a decimated economy is going to do to people's mental health once these boomers have sadly lost their lives to natural causes a few years from now.

The last point has been covered by [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] many times. There was and is no way to isolate the 12m Brits over 65. Many live with extended family, or have working people younger than that in the house, many have to work to survive. Inherently they have to get to hospitals for treatment on a wide range of non-CV19 issues.

Many over 65’s are poor. It’s a stereotype where people paint the picture of all baby boomers sitting pretty with loads of home equity, no mortgage or debts, generous pensions.

I’d rather not comment on your wife, no one can make judgements on other families and their fears. In my own direct family I have a nurse, a school teacher, senior hospital administrator and a headteacher. Their own personal views are never to fret over Coronavirus, they haven’t worried about getting seriously ill from it. None are 60+. If anything, people wanted to “get it out of the way, to end the unknowing”. The standout comment is from the headteacher, who’s found the whole PPE, protocols and planning thing very hard work and quite stressful.

 

[dazzer6666]

The main challenge to your thoughts are that your children are unlikely statistically speaking going to be a burden on the NHS where your parents age group statistically are.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This is just about the complete answer in the UK I think - it's all about the NHS not being swamped. It's nigh on impossible to prevent the vulnerable being infected (as we've seen with all to horrible effect), so we have to get them immunised first otherwise the health service collapses.

The level of analysis globally on the handling of the pandemic are going to be fascinating. So, so many lessons to learn, good and bad.

 

[Simster]

Who would you vaccinate first?

You've put me on the spot, but I'll have a go:

NHS workers & teachers
Other key workers - need to think about who and how to prioritise this.
Then those people privately renting. They need an income or we are going to have an even bigger homelessness problem.
Then those with mortgages, tiered by what is owed. Below rentals in priority because banks can and should be able to offer payment holidays.

 

[Simster]

This is just about the complete answer in the UK I think - it's all about the NHS not being swamped. It's nigh on impossible to prevent the vulnerable being infected (as we've seen with all to horrible effect), so we have to get them immunised first otherwise the health service collapses.

The level of analysis globally on the handling of the pandemic are going to be fascinating. So, so many lessons to learn, good and bad.

I'm not denying the strain on the NHS, but what happened to those Nightingale hospitals. They are still lying dormant!

 

[dazzer6666]

I'm not denying the strain on the NHS, but what happened to those Nightingale hospitals. They are still lying dormant!

Not sure what you mean....we don't really WANT to use them do we ? Also, we don't have enough staff to fill them anyway...............

 

[Sheebo]

Have to look at who it will kill first as that’s far more important than education or even mental health, harsh as it sounds. Very very few younger people are dying from it. Have to look at key NHS workers first too. I think they’ve got it right. Last hurdle to take and then we’re on the home straight.

 

[mr sheen]

My understanding from local NHS leaders is that the prioritising has been decided on at national level on the basis of choosing the model that will save most lives.

 

[Simster]

Not sure what you mean....we don't really WANT to use them do we ? Also, we don't have enough staff to fill them anyway...............

Absolutely, but I guess I'm wondering a) how far are we from swamping our NHS when we are still not using these hospitals, and b) maybe I need more convincing that the NHS would be any less swamped if the elderly, or perhaps specifically the elderly who fall into the "financially secure with family support bubble in place" bracket were actually put at the back of the queue.

 

[dazzer6666]

You've put me on the spot, but I'll have a go:

NHS workers & teachers
Other key workers - need to think about who and how to prioritise this.
Then those people privately renting. They need an income or we are going to have an even bigger homelessness problem.
Then those with mortgages, tiered by what is owed. Below rentals in priority because banks can and should be able to offer payment holidays.

What is owed is a bit irrelevant....affordability is a much bigger issue. The vast majority of the biggest mortgages will be held by city workers and the like on big (and secure) salaries, on properties with large equity. Also, administering as you suggest would be an absolute nightmare - DOB is by far the simplest as virtually everyone's is recorded somewhere. I'd agree re keyworkers and teachers being near the very top.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

Listening to radio 2 the other day when they were discussing this subject.

Chap came on and made the similarity to the aircraft safety demonstration which clearly says [in the event of cabin pressure loss] "put your own oxygen mask on first so that you are then able to help others".
If this were adopted, we'd have our NHS workforce protected with numbers back to work ASAP, including, perhaps, enough staff to take in patients at the Nightingale hospitals too.

Education is a concern too mind, I reckon most kids are all 6+ months behind the curriculum across all ages now. Can see anyway of catching this up either unless they do "overtime" and/or cancel the Summer holiday.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I don't know. Clearly if you are older, you are more likely to die from it, but you'd think it was easier for older people to be protected in the first place than for other groups who don't have pensions and their own homes, so need to go out and about to earn a living or learn a trade.

It could be argued that the government are hiding behind an inconvenient truth when vaccinated the elderly first - that the elderly haven't been protected well enough in the first place.

My take (and I only got this far on the thread so far so apologies for any repetition) is that by vaccinating those more likely to go to hospital you stop the lockdowns, which are really to protect the NHS.

I think things should start going back to normal-ish once ICUs start emptying out again as they did mid summer.

 

[Simster]

Have to look at who it will kill first as that’s far more important than education or even mental health, harsh as it sounds. Very very few younger people are dying from it. Have to look at key NHS workers first too. I think they’ve got it right. Last hurdle to take and then we’re on the home straight.

This is clearly the prevailing view, sheebo.

But as I say: so many of the elderly are financially secure and have a loving family for support. They absolutely don't need to be at the front of the queue, surely?

In ten years time, when we possibly have suicides thanks to an ailing economy with massive unemployment and record homeless levels owing to people not able to pay their rents, I wonder whether the wisdom of blanketly vaccinating everyone on the basis of old age will be questioned.

Of course I'm painting a very gloomy outlook there, and it might not happen. I just think that getting everyday folk with financial burdens back into work is the best way of preventing that.

 

[Iggle Piggle]

I was chatting to an old dear on my dog walk the other day as her dog tried to murder mine - or in her phraseology - 'being playful' . She lives in a big house, in an affluent area and was chastising some poor lad working in Sainsburys for not following social distancing properly before talking about booking up holidays and getting the vaccine. Whether it's right or wrong that the elderly get the vaccine first is a matter of debate but I wish some - and I stress some - of them could be a bit more grateful and less entitled to some of the younger generations who have put their lives on hold to protect them.