[Misc] Covid jabs and prioritising

[Simster]

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.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I’ve just posted this in the Coronavirus sub forum but it works just as well as a reply here:

Just heard a pretty sobering story from my daughter. The entire family of a friend of hers have Covid. The father was in ICU a long way from home as all the London hospitals were full. He was discharged as soon as he could breathe as they needed the bed. Taken home by ambulance at 4 am. He and the rest of the family are now all at home and really unwell.

That’s the reason. We cannot afford for our NHS to collapse under the weight of Covid. In my family only my Mum (aged 80 and unwell) and one of my daughters (in her 20s and works for the NHS) have been vaccinated. Seems fair to me.

 

[LamieRobertson]

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.

What do your parents think? Interesting post by the way

 

[BNthree]

I know more essential frontline workers (in NHS/healthcare/opticians) that have got dates for their jabs than I do old folk. Personally think those most at risk of dying from covid should get vaccinated first. There is no ideal way of doing it and whichever way is taken there will be naysayers.

 

[Chicken Run]

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.

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

 

[Simster]

What do your parents think? Interesting post by the way

I haven't asked them so I'm not sure they have a view. Regardless, it's more of an observation on the population at large who have just accepted the priorities. I have no idea who decided these priorities. If [MENTION=34242]Neville's Breakfast[/MENTION] is to be believed, maybe it was from the health experts?

 

[beorhthelm]

theres been a lot of assumptions on priorities. the fact that elderly have disproportionate impact has made some of those easier to accept and vaccines is certainly there.

if you vaccinated other groups you'd probably prolong restrictions until the at risk groups were immunised anyway. so this is faster way to lower restrictions.

 

[Chicken Run]

I guess if a ship was sinking within a swimable distance to shore you wouldn’t put those that can swim in the lifeboats first?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[wolfie]

I tend to agree with you - and I'm in the top 4 priority categories. I'd rather see people like teachers get it early, so my grandchildren can get back to school asap. I can stick it out for as long as is necessary for a jab, get my 2 hour bike ride in every day and don't have too much trouble with keeping isolated, other than missing the grandkids. However, I think the main priority all along is to keep us oldies out of the hospitals !

 

[Simster]

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.

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.

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

I think one of the major reasons that the Government are prioritising the elderly and other more at risk amongst us, is to try and ease the burden on the NHS. It's people from those categories who are generally far more likely to require urgent hospital treatment as they can't fight the symptoms.

 

[Hamilton]

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.

I think it is about practicalities as well. While younger people are getting COVID it's the older lot that are still most at risk and most likely to clog up the NHS so we get them done first and protect the NHS meaning that those doctors can focus on other cases.

Why teachers are not a priority I don't know. We need to get our kids back to school so that everyone can become economically more active.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I haven't asked them so I'm not sure they have a view. Regardless, it's more of an observation on the population at large who have just accepted the priorities. I have no idea who decided these priorities. If [MENTION=34242]Neville's Breakfast[/MENTION] is to be believed, maybe it was from the health experts?

I think the figures suggest a disproportionate number of elderly people suffer effects that put them in ICU so in that sense then presumably yes

 

[Hamilton]

I tend to agree with you - and I'm in the top 4 priority categories. I'd rather see people like teachers get it early, so my grandchildren can get back to school asap. I can stick it out for as long as is necessary for a jab, get my 2 hour bike ride in every day and don't have too much trouble with keeping isolated, other than missing the grandkids. However, I think the main priority all along is to keep us oldies out of the hospitals !

I just want to thank you for that post. Top banana!

 

[LamieRobertson]

I haven't asked them so I'm not sure they have a view. Regardless, it's more of an observation on the population at large who have just accepted the priorities. I have no idea who decided these priorities. If [MENTION=34242]Neville's Breakfast[/MENTION] is to be believed, maybe it was from the health experts?

I asked as I have spoken to a few ‘older’ people and having lived there lives (as they see it) they’d have rather seen the jabs go to other groups .. that’s not to say they were representative of their generation...it did remind me of a phone in on a radio show where the daughter rang in about her 97 year old mum not getting her second jab and being concerned as it might cut her life short

 

[LamieRobertson]

I tend to agree with you - and I'm in the top 4 priority categories. I'd rather see people like teachers get it early, so my grandchildren can get back to school asap. I can stick it out for as long as is necessary for a jab, get my 2 hour bike ride in every day and don't have too much trouble with keeping isolated, other than missing the grandkids. However, I think the main priority all along is to keep us oldies out of the hospitals !

Off topic u taking your camera out on your bike ride?

 

[drew]

What do your parents think? Interesting post by the way

Reading the OP that was my initial thought.

As they say, you can pick your friends but you can't pick your family!

 

[Weststander]

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.

I think the UK have got this spot on. Working down the age groups.

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.

I think the right balance has been struck, in an inevitably imperfect world.


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.

 

[wolfie]

Off topic u taking your camera out on your bike ride?

Only the one on my phone. That is a bit off topic isn't it ?

 

[Kosh]

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.

Totally agree with everything you're saying [MENTION=232]Simster[/MENTION] - Both my parents are into their 70s, and my dad is technically vulnerable - he agrees, education in particular should have been prioritised alongside the clinically vulnerable from day one. The fact it hasn't been for me is a great shame, the damage to my 9 y/o daughter this past year has been very real and very, very difficult for us to deal with... I'm not referring to lost learning here, but moreover the very evident psychological damage that has been wrought from primary education being both shut and when open a rather surreal and frankly scary environment - especially for children becoming more aware of the 'world' at large.

Getting the schools open is frankly a massive priority and getting them open with teachers who a.) want to be there and b.) don't frighten children in their care with their own covid fear and normality paralysis. Vaccination for teachers et al (if indeed, it works!) is surely a huge priority. At a fit 39 I'd forgo my jab forever frankly if it meant the children getting back to normality and fast... Not after Easter, not May, not next year - as near to now as 'war effort' possible.