COVID Vaccine !
- Thread starter kingrollo
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
lane
Veteran
Nottingham was absolutely bonkers when the students came back. Trams packed like sardines for literally hours when they all went into town to go round the pubs; even had a big Fresher ball so i am told. Not many students impacted but it soon went up through the age groups and within weeks hospital was under pressure and Nottingham went from a low rate to highest in the country.
lane
Veteran
Just so I understand. For Nottingham that graph shows the current rate not cumulative? It shows it started low in September, went higher, then there was a short gap that was lower after the November lockdown ad Tier 4, then went back up and has only very recently started to reduce?
lane
Veteran
Some very good news reported in the Guardian:
Nearly 95% of adults happy to get Covid jab
Positive attitudes towards the coronavirus vaccine have increased, with nearly 95% of adults saying they have either received the jab or would be likely to have it if offered, new data shows.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures, published on Friday, show 94% of adults surveyed between February 17 and 21 reported they had now either received the vaccine or would be very or fairly likely to have it if offered, PA news reports.
This is up from 91% the previous week and has risen from early December 2020 when around eight in 10 (78%) adults indicated they would be likely to accept the vaccine if offered it.
Of the adults who said they would be unlikely to have the vaccine or had decided not to have it, the most common reasons were being worried about long-term impacts on their health (43%), being concerned about the side effects (37%) and waiting to see how well it worked (34%).
Nearly 95% of adults happy to get Covid jab
Positive attitudes towards the coronavirus vaccine have increased, with nearly 95% of adults saying they have either received the jab or would be likely to have it if offered, new data shows.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures, published on Friday, show 94% of adults surveyed between February 17 and 21 reported they had now either received the vaccine or would be very or fairly likely to have it if offered, PA news reports.
This is up from 91% the previous week and has risen from early December 2020 when around eight in 10 (78%) adults indicated they would be likely to accept the vaccine if offered it.
Of the adults who said they would be unlikely to have the vaccine or had decided not to have it, the most common reasons were being worried about long-term impacts on their health (43%), being concerned about the side effects (37%) and waiting to see how well it worked (34%).
It's case rates. As in some places like the guardian/wikipedia/PHE there are some issues with scaling and discerning the details, which that colour chart isn't the friendliest. You can always visit the site and track along to get the numbers.
PHE has said in the autumn about it starting in younger age groups and climbing upwards, it's just you can see clearly from these coloured diagrams, but precisely why things are different in different places no one knows. Brighton didn't have a massive outbreak despite case cases in 15-19 going very high. Where I live it climbed up the age ranges to those in their 80s and 90s, then the 80s and 90s stayed high and it came right back down the age groups for a second hump of the camel. So in my area a theory about infection might go along the lines of if you vaccinate health, social care, those over 70 and so on those cases drop and then it stops a third hump of the camel/would have stopped a second one. But what about other mechanisms? There are multiple infection mechanisms in society though. In some areas the second wave arrived first in age groups in the 40s for example. If you look at 40 or 50 of these coloured diagrams you can see for some time now some strong hints that the vaccines are working in all the noise.
PHE actually publishes cumulative case rates for boroughs as a whole (why I put a picture of Havering in) but a lot of people don't regard this as that useful. PHE has separately done antibody testing and comes to a very different conclusion to some here that in many areas the over 80s now show the most antibodies (from vaccine + infections). In other words there are vast numbers of 'younger' people for virus to be a gigantic reservoir on, just in the same way that it's killed loads of people in their 80s x3 occasions.
PHE also tracks antibodies. Although a healthworker study suggested that after 6 months only 15% recaught covid, how realistic this is for the real world we still don't know. I have an acquaintance in their 20s who has just caught covid for the 2nd time.
lane
Veteran
Very interesting. Looks like 15-19 year olds got hit first whens schools returned and then slightly later 20-24 when universities returned. 20-24 went down in November lockdown - maybe students left Nottingham to go home?
One thing i am aware of though is, that until quite recently, people tested positive were recorded at where they were registered with a GP. Many students in Nottingham were recorded at their home location rather than Nottingham so actual rates among students was probably quite a bit higher than shown.
However, more on topic, it does look like form the data the vaccine has had a positive impact on the quite old just recently.
Bazzer
Setting the controls for the heart of the sun.
- Location
- On the edge of reality
Youngest daughter had hers this morning. Far from sparkling this afternoon and evening, but the alternative is potentially far worse. Just Mrs B tomorrow and that's our household with a set of first jabs.
Now looking forward to eldest daughter being jabbed.
Now looking forward to eldest daughter being jabbed.
Ajax Bay
Guru
- Location
- East Devon
We have seen the JCVI Recommendations for after the first phase (Gps 1-9, 9 is over 50s) which are just based on age: 40-49, then 30-39, then 18-29. The foundation for that is that the primary correlation with risk of severe illness is age.
It seems likely that the Government will agree/adopt these, for implementation from late April, slowly for 2 months (because of the second dose demand from then) and then at pace in July.
"However, no occupations will be prioritised. The JCVI has considered whether groups such as teachers and police officers should be vaccinated next, but concluded that the most effective way to prevent death and hospital admission is to carry on prioritising people by age."
Professor Wei Shen Lim, COVID-19 Chair for JCVI, said:
"Vaccinations stop people from dying and the current strategy is to prioritise those who are more likely to have severe outcomes and die from COVID-19. The evidence is clear that the risk of hospitalisation and death increases with age. The vaccination programme is a huge success and continuing the age-based rollout will provide the greatest benefit in the shortest time, including to those in occupations at a higher risk of exposure."
From a purely health PoV I'm sure the JCVI is right, and I expect the Government to follow on. By doing so (as opposed to introducing complications which have politico-economic aspects) they can keep good cover behind the concrete wall of the trusted medics/science. The other element of the JCVI thinking is that the NHS have advised that shuffling down by age is straightforward and anything more complicated (see below) is liable to slow down vaccine delivery. The 'phone for a jab' system seems to be working quite well: I can't really see why that would create friction or introduce inefficiency.
Once below 50 with their lower risk, the health aspects are proportionately less important to the country as a whole, imo, compared to a combination of risk of catching, risk to others of transmission and age-based vulnerability. The categories I list below (and there will be other equally justifiable groups) represent less than 2 days vaccinations' worth (700k). So I'd effectively delay the 40-49 year olds by two whole days.
I am surprised that various employment categories have not been nominated at the front of those cohorts: workers who have 'public facing roles' eg: police, prison officers, public road transport and taxi drivers, secondary school teachers. Not on the health basis, but because practically and politically there seems merit.
It seems likely that the Government will agree/adopt these, for implementation from late April, slowly for 2 months (because of the second dose demand from then) and then at pace in July.
"However, no occupations will be prioritised. The JCVI has considered whether groups such as teachers and police officers should be vaccinated next, but concluded that the most effective way to prevent death and hospital admission is to carry on prioritising people by age."
Professor Wei Shen Lim, COVID-19 Chair for JCVI, said:
"Vaccinations stop people from dying and the current strategy is to prioritise those who are more likely to have severe outcomes and die from COVID-19. The evidence is clear that the risk of hospitalisation and death increases with age. The vaccination programme is a huge success and continuing the age-based rollout will provide the greatest benefit in the shortest time, including to those in occupations at a higher risk of exposure."
From a purely health PoV I'm sure the JCVI is right, and I expect the Government to follow on. By doing so (as opposed to introducing complications which have politico-economic aspects) they can keep good cover behind the concrete wall of the trusted medics/science. The other element of the JCVI thinking is that the NHS have advised that shuffling down by age is straightforward and anything more complicated (see below) is liable to slow down vaccine delivery. The 'phone for a jab' system seems to be working quite well: I can't really see why that would create friction or introduce inefficiency.
Once below 50 with their lower risk, the health aspects are proportionately less important to the country as a whole, imo, compared to a combination of risk of catching, risk to others of transmission and age-based vulnerability. The categories I list below (and there will be other equally justifiable groups) represent less than 2 days vaccinations' worth (700k). So I'd effectively delay the 40-49 year olds by two whole days.
I am surprised that various employment categories have not been nominated at the front of those cohorts: workers who have 'public facing roles' eg: police, prison officers, public road transport and taxi drivers, secondary school teachers. Not on the health basis, but because practically and politically there seems merit.
Last edited:
Politically it's hard to sell as it pleases nearly no one. Unless they do proceed at breakneck speed in March/April/May/June and then most people would probably be more or less all right with it. Up to Stevens has gone through this stuff before, it's whether it's delivered. I don't think they can do an average of 1 million jabs a day sustained as claimed. If they do then the summer could be much better than hoped.
lane
Veteran
Prioritisation for occupations may make less sense than age as the economy opens up more April onwards and people mix more regardless of occupation. However I agree with @Ajax Bay given the actual impact of prioritising occupations is relatively minor - and i don't think the admin would be that insurmountable - it would make sense to do so.
Ajax Bay
Guru
- Location
- East Devon
Early 50th birthday present for you then, in May(be).
Julia9054
Guru
- Location
- Knaresborough
From the number of people on here who have already had their vaccine, I would say that turning 50 makes you a youngster round hereCompletely off topic but I feel bleedin ancient now50 in June ! However we reading this thread I’m soon to be in the dodgy group !
