Would you take the vaccine?

[Bantamzen]

From the news, it appears that a vaccine (if/when it becomes available) will only be offered to those >50.
All this time, they have been giving us the impression (e.g. from the number of doses purchased in advance from pharmaceutical companies) that every one who wants it can get it.

This comes after the schoolboy error with Excel spreadsheets for track and trace. What a shambles.

This was always going to be the case, sometimes you have to look beyond the political rhetoric and look at the logistics. If/when a vaccine passes all testing and certification, it will take a while for stocks to be built up, remembering that more or less the entire globe will be scrambling for it. So getting 65-70 million vaccinations will not happen overnight, it will likely take months at least. So it is right and proper to say those most at risk, and those that take care of them get absolute priority. Everyone else will just have to wait for the option to have it.

If that's the case then why delay in easing restrictions for those under 50? Could it be because the strategy is now to wait until a vaccine becomes available and then only vaccinate those over 50 whilst at the same time removing restrictions for those under 50?

Probably because it is not so easy to implement an age-based restriction, in fact it probably would be very undesirable as it could cause serious issues to the economy & industry. Turning 50 doesn't suddenly make you more vulnerable, these age bands are simply statistical markers to break down the data.

 

[AndyY]

This was always going to be the case, sometimes you have to look beyond the political rhetoric and look at the logistics. If/when a vaccine passes all testing and certification, it will take a while for stocks to be built up, remembering that more or less the entire globe will be scrambling for it. So getting 65-70 million vaccinations will not happen overnight, it will likely take months at least. So it is right and proper to say those most at risk, and those that take care of them get absolute priority. Everyone else will just have to wait for the option to have it.

Did you read the article? It is not "Everyone else will just have to wait for the option to have it" - it is "Everyone else will not have the option to have it".

So the young are being shafted by the social restrictions imposed on them (by the old farts), by being disproportionately affected by job losses. Once the old will be vaccinated, they will be shafted again by being told that their only option is to acquire herd immunity (and probably not able to travel abroad because they do not meet vaccination requirements). I can really imagine that going down well - if I was just starting out in my life I would be livid.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So the young are being shafted by the social restrictions imposed on them (by the old farts), by being disproportionately affected by job losses. Once the old will be vaccinated, they will be shafted again by being told that their only option is to acquire herd immunity (and probably not able to travel abroad because they do not meet vaccination requirements). I can really imagine that going down well - if I was just starting out in my life I would be livid.

It astonishes me that, in just about every way possible, "Boomers" and older "Gen X" seem to have such utter contempt for the future of their own children. It's utterly, utterly bizarre.

 

[Bantamzen]

Did you read the article? It is not "Everyone else will just have to wait for the option to have it" - it is "Everyone else will not have the option to have it".

So the young are being shafted by the social restrictions imposed on them (by the old farts), by being disproportionately affected by job losses. Once the old will be vaccinated, they will be shafted again by being told that their only option is to acquire herd immunity (and probably not able to travel abroad because they do not meet vaccination requirements). I can really imagine that going down well - if I was just starting out in my life I would be livid.

Like I said, it was always going to be the case that the most vulnerable would absolute priority, and for the most part these are the older generations. I'm not sure why anybody would be surprised at this, the vast majority of under 50s have practically nothing to worry about save getting a bit badly at worst.

 

[bramling]

It astonishes me that, in just about every way possible, "Boomers" and older "Gen X" seem to have such utter contempt for the future of their own children. It's utterly, utterly bizarre.

Must admit I’m, sadly, rapidly coming to that conclusion. That comes from someone who’s sort of in the middle who can see both sides of it, but I must admit to starting to feel pretty shafted too.

 

[Trackman]

Possibly slightly OT but I just got my annual flu vaccine shot. The fancy name is: FLUBLOK QUAD 2020-2021 PFS -INTRAMUSCULAR

I'll never have a flu jab every again.
I was that ill I thought I was dying.
That's why I voted no, god knows what a covid vaccine would do to me.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I'll never have a flu jab every again.
I was that ill I thought I was dying.
That's why I voted no, god knows what a covid vaccine would do to me.

I really am sorry to hear that. Incidentally the 1st time I had the flu jab was October 1987 - guess what - I got true full blown influenza and in bed for 10 days January 1988.

 

[DustyBin]

Did you read the article? It is not "Everyone else will just have to wait for the option to have it" - it is "Everyone else will not have the option to have it".

So the young are being shafted by the social restrictions imposed on them (by the old farts), by being disproportionately affected by job losses. Once the old will be vaccinated, they will be shafted again by being told that their only option is to acquire herd immunity (and probably not able to travel abroad because they do not meet vaccination requirements). I can really imagine that going down well - if I was just starting out in my life I would be livid.

But are the young being shafted should they not be offered the vaccine? Personally, and I can only speak for myself here, I’m far more worried about compulsory vaccination, so the suggestion that I’d not qualify for the vaccine is very welcome indeed.

 

[158756]

Did you read the article? It is not "Everyone else will just have to wait for the option to have it" - it is "Everyone else will not have the option to have it".

So the young are being shafted by the social restrictions imposed on them (by the old farts), by being disproportionately affected by job losses. Once the old will be vaccinated, they will be shafted again by being told that their only option is to acquire herd immunity (and probably not able to travel abroad because they do not meet vaccination requirements). I can really imagine that going down well - if I was just starting out in my life I would be livid.

This is how the flu jab works as well - it's not cost effective for the NHS to pay for low risk people to have it, and if the risk to you is very low it might actually be more dangerous to have the vaccine - all medicines have side effects. I don't recall ever hearing any young people complain about not getting the flu vaccine, or anyone over about 25 now complain about not getting the new meningitis vaccine. Maybe in time it'll be available to buy privately, but every dose likely to be produced in the next year at least is probably already spoken for.The

The idea of requiring a Covid vaccine for travel is bonkers, but if you want to kill off what's left of the airlines and tourist industry go ahead.

 

[Jonny]

This is how the flu jab works as well - it's not cost effective for the NHS to pay for low risk people to have it, and if the risk to you is very low it might actually be more dangerous to have the vaccine - all medicines have side effects. I don't recall ever hearing any young people complain about not getting the flu vaccine, or anyone over about 25 now complain about not getting the new meningitis vaccine. Maybe in time it'll be available to buy privately, but every dose likely to be produced in the next year at least is probably already spoken for.The

The idea of requiring a Covid vaccine for travel is bonkers, but if you want to kill off what's left of the airlines and tourist industry go ahead.

My thoughts exactly - vaccines will likely never be zero risk - after all, they work by modulating the immune system. In fact, most people are probably better off without it. I also recently read an article on what to ask a healthcare professional, and the questions were (quite logically)

• Is this really necessary?
• What are the risks?
• Are there other options?
• What happens if I don’t do anything?

Source:
https://ideas.ted.com/prevent-unnec...y-asking-your-doctor-these-4-questions-first/

https://ideas.ted.com/prevent-unnecessary-medical-care-by-asking-your-doctor-these-4-questions-first/

Prevent unnecessary medical care — by asking your doctor these 4 questions first

By raising questions and taking on a more active role in decision making, patients can do their part to avoid needless medications, tests, treatments or procedures, says neurosurgeon Christer Mjåset.
(article continues)

I think that on an individual or meta-individual group, a vaccine would not have significant uptake among at least half of the population, especially going on "What are the risks"?

 

[furlong]

A good explanation of the role of vaccines and 'herd immunity'.

Matt Hancock is wrong about herd immunity

In a nutshell, the development of immunity through natural infection is a common feature of many pathogens, and it is reasonable to assume that Covid-19 does not have any tricks up its sleeve to prevent this from happening — it would pose a very serious problem for the development of a vaccine if it did. Having said this, the Covid-19 virus belongs to a family of viruses which do not typically give you lifelong immunity against infection
...
One important reason why these corona cousins do not kill large numbers of people is because even though we lose immunity and can be reinfected, there is still always a decent enough proportion of immune people in the population to keep the risk of infection low to those who might die upon contracting it.

 

[Yew]

A good explanation of the role of vaccines and 'herd immunity'.

Matt Hancock is wrong about herd immunity

I think this is an interesting one, I wonder if it might help discussions to talk about "suppressive herd immunity" (or perhaps "regulatory") where the virus is kept at a low level through natural immunity; and "eliminatory herd immunity" where a vaccine is used to either go from a low level in most endemic illnesses, or a higher level in this case, to local or global elimination. As I think a few of us have been stumbling over these two this evening.

 

[Jonny]

I think this is an interesting one, I wonder if it might help discussions to talk about "suppressive herd immunity" (or perhaps "regulatory") where the virus is kept at a low level through natural immunity; and "eliminatory herd immunity" where a vaccine is used to either go from a low level in most endemic illnesses, or a higher level in this case, to local or global elimination. As I think a few of us have been stumbling over these two this evening.

It depends on the level of exposure to the antigen. The trouble is that you will never be able to persuade enough people to take the vaccine to achieve it that way alone. A blended strategy involving shielding of the vulnerable is more effective.

 

[WestRiding]

Yes, if its the difference between being able to go abroad again or not.

 

[Peter Kelford]

Personally, I'd expect not to take it at least for a good while so that:
1] It can be established as actually 'doing what it says on the tin'.
2] So that any lasting side effects can be efficiently monitored and researched (e.g. risk of cancer, which develops over a long period of time).

In the meantime, I'm quite happy not to go to restaurants/bars/pubs/shopping mall or anything of that ilk, but I would hope that travel to the near continent for work and leisure (again respecting the idea of not going to many public spaces) is not too affected.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In the meantime, I'm quite happy not to go to restaurants/bars/pubs/shopping mall or anything of that ilk, but I would hope that travel to the near continent for work and leisure (again respecting the idea of not going to many public spaces) is not too affected.

It would amaze me if it didn't become a condition of entry for most countries.

 

[Bantamzen]

It would amaze me if it didn't become a condition of entry for most countries.

Even the most authoritarian of countries would struggle to justify requiring having taken a vaccine that is not yet available as an condition of entry, particularly those whose economies rely on tourism.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Even the most authoritarian of countries would struggle to justify requiring having taken a vaccine that is not yet available as an condition of entry, particularly those whose economies rely on tourism.

When it's available, obviously. I can't believe it was even worth typing that.

 

[Bantamzen]

When it's available, obviously. I can't believe it was even worth typing that.

Well, there is a point in there that you've missed. Even if/when a vaccine comes onto the market, how long do you imagine it will take to distribute worldwide, and would countries that are particularly dependent on tourism really mandate that proof of vaccination is required, especially when in countries like ours full priority will be given to the more vulnerable? Sorry to ask difficult questions, but you seem to have a habit of suggesting things without thinking about the fine details.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well, there is a point in there that you've missed. Even if/when a vaccine comes onto the market, how long do you imagine it will take to distribute worldwide, and would countries that are particularly dependent on tourism really mandate that proof of vaccination is required, especially when in countries like ours full priority will be given to the more vulnerable?

Well, they do mandate Yellow Fever vaccines in many such countries, so there is precedent.

Sorry to ask difficult questions, but you seem to have a habit of suggesting things without thinking about the fine details.

I think you probably go to too fine a level of detail in an imperfect situation.

 

[Bantamzen]

Well, they do mandate Yellow Fever vaccines in many such countries, so there is precedent.

In some countries where it is prevalent, covid is a world-wide virus.

I think you probably go to too fine a level of detail in an imperfect situation.

Good way of ducking difficult questions, you'd do well in politics.

 

[big_rig]

Good luck to any country mandating a vaccine as condition of arrival given the ever increasing reports that nobody who isn’t an old person or healthcare worker will be getting a whiff of one before the back end of 2022.

 

[43066]

Even if/when a vaccine comes onto the market, how long do you imagine it will take to distribute worldwide, and would countries that are particularly dependent on tourism really mandate that proof of vaccination is required, especially when in countries like ours full priority will be given to the more vulnerable?

This point has come up before. It’s very hard to imagine Spain or Greece, for example, preventing Brits from entering for a further year or more from the date the vaccine is approved, and starts to be rolled out. That would make even less sense if we end up with a vaccine which reduces symptoms but does little to stop transmission.

 

[kristiang85]

I can see a situation where if you don't have the vaccine certificate, you instead get a rapid test at the port of entry. I could live with that.

 

[AndyY]

Like I said, it was always going to be the case that the most vulnerable would absolute priority, and for the most part these are the older generations.

Again, this is *NOT* what the article says. https://www.ft.com/content/d2e00128-7889-4d5d-84a3-43e51355a751
The under 50s are not going to be offered the vaccine *at all*, not just at the back of the queue for vaccination.
If there is an effective vaccine, it is not extraordinary to imagine countries which vaccinate their entire population to *require* vaccination for anyone coming in abroad (akin to S. American countries which require yellow fever vaccination), then young people will find their live chances reduced unless they can somehow get hold of the vaccine privately, probably at an inflated price.

If there is no plan to vaccinate the whole population, why buy so many doses? Are they reserved for a country which the UK has a "special relationship"?
Why are young people asked to behave and make sacrifices, yet not benefit from any potential vaccine?

I'm not sure why anybody would be surprised at this, the vast majority of under 50s have practically nothing to worry about save getting a bit badly at worst.

Most people who get Japanese encephalitis have "practically nothing to worry about" too, but it does not stop countries in East Asia vaccinating their population.

would countries that are particularly dependent on tourism really mandate that proof of vaccination is required, especially when in countries like ours full priority will be given to the more vulnerable?

If they do not want sick COVID patients overwhelming their health system (note: not everyone <50 who gets COVID will be bouncing full of beans after 2w isolation), or not getting their expenses back from treating uninsured/underinsured COVID patients, they could well do so.

But are the young being shafted should they not be offered the vaccine? Personally, and I can only speak for myself here, I’m far more worried about compulsory vaccination, so the suggestion that I’d not qualify for the vaccine is very welcome indeed.

No one is talking about compulsory vaccination, so this is a strawman.

 

[DustyBin]

No one is talking about compulsory vaccination, so this is a strawman.

It isn’t a strawman at all, I didn’t state compulsory vaccination was being considered or even talked about, merely that for me personally it is a concern. I think it’s a perfectly valid concern in the current climate to be honest....

 

[yorkie]

I can't see any vaccine becoming mandatory; the failure of certain individuals to rule it out has given ammunition to the anti-vax brigades and is understandably causing some people to be concerned.

People like Vaughan Gething and Matt Hancock have scored own goals (as is to be expected of them) and are irresponsible for not ruling it out.

Mandatory coronavirus vaccine scheme in Wales considered by Welsh Government | ITV News

Speaking on ITV Wales' political programme Sharp End Vaughan Gething said the Welsh Government are considering a range of options for delivering the vaccine. | ITV News Wales

www.itv.com

Health Minister Vaughan Gething has said he ''wouldn't rule out'' introducing a mandatory coronavirus vaccine scheme in Wales when one becomes available.

Speaking on ITV Wales' political programme Sharp End, the minister said the Welsh Government are considering a range of options for delivering the vaccine.

Gething said mandating a vaccination was at the ''more extreme end'' of those options.

Coronavirus vaccine UK: Can UK make COVID-19 vaccination mandatory?

Correction: A previous version of this article carried the sentence which said: "The US plans to make vaccination mandatory for residents". This is not the case. The article has now been amended to explain "the New York State Bar Association passed a resolution urging the state to consider...

www.express.co.uk

In May, Health Secretary Matt Hancock was questioned about mandatory vaccinations.

Mr Hancock did not confirm if the vaccine would be compulsory but did not rule the option out either.

Even if they won't rule it out, I'm absolutely confident it won't be legally mandated. It just isn't going to happen!

Edit: Hancock has form for this:

Hancock wrong on compulsory child vaccinations - top doctor

Experts say holding clinics at supermarkets and music festivals would make a bigger difference.

www.bbc.co.uk

The health secretary is wrong to think compulsory child vaccination will help tackle falling immunisation rates in England, a leading doctor says.
Matt Hancock has said he is "looking very seriously" at the option.
But Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health expert Dr David Elliman said it could be counter-productive and make people more suspicious.

Some people never learn...

 

[bramling]

I can't see any vaccine becoming mandatory; the failure of certain individuals to rule it out has given ammunition to the anti-vax brigades and is understandably causing some people to be concerned.

People like Vaughan Gething and Matt Hancock have scored own goals (as is to be expected of them) and are irresponsible for not ruling it out.

Mandatory coronavirus vaccine scheme in Wales considered by Welsh Government | ITV News

Speaking on ITV Wales' political programme Sharp End Vaughan Gething said the Welsh Government are considering a range of options for delivering the vaccine. | ITV News Wales

www.itv.com

Coronavirus vaccine UK: Can UK make COVID-19 vaccination mandatory?

Correction: A previous version of this article carried the sentence which said: "The US plans to make vaccination mandatory for residents". This is not the case. The article has now been amended to explain "the New York State Bar Association passed a resolution urging the state to consider...

www.express.co.uk

Even if they won't rule it out, I'm absolutely confident it won't be legally mandated. It just isn't going to happen!

I don’t think it will be mandated, but I’d never be surprised if people were given a certificate or something upon being vaccinated, and we then find some businesses saying “no entry without certificate”, to both customers or even worse employees. I can imagine Bridgnorth Cliff Railway taking delight in doing exactly that.

Of course this supposes that under 50s get it at all, and an even more cruel twist would then be denying them access to places whilst oldies get free reign with their vaccine certificates. I wouldn’t put anything past Cummings.

 

[takno]

I don’t think it will be mandated, but I’d never be surprised if people were given a certificate or something upon being vaccinated, and we then find some businesses saying “no entry without certificate”, to both customers or even worse employees. I can imagine Bridgnorth Cliff Railway taking delight in doing exactly that.

Of course this supposes that under 50s get it at all, and an even more cruel twist would then be denying them access to places whilst oldies get free reign with their vaccine certificates. I wouldn’t put anything past Cummings.

To be honest I struggled to get excited by the Bridgnorth Cliff Railway when I was 5. If it became over 50s only I don't think anybody would be missing out.

Making it clear that under 50s won't be vaccinated (because of the health risks to them, not just because we don't have any spare vials), does stop a lot of potential silly behaviour in its tracks.

 

[A Challenge]

As long as the solution isn't keep under 50s under lockdown because they don't get allowed to have the vaccine (because lockdown is only released for those who have a vaccine, as their safe), given the government seeming to only care about older people. I wouldn't want this to happen, but the way the government is going it wouldn't surprise me!