When will this shit end?

[shoptildrop]

13 minutes ago, oneeye said:

If it let's you select a date after entering your nhs number or personal details then your good to go, no idea on what type you'll get though 

didn't have his NHS number just his other details but yeah lets him select a date 🙂 

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, shoptildrop said:

didn't have his NHS number just his other details but yeah lets him select a date 🙂 

I was going to respond with the same as the above ... 

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

16 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

So confused by this claim they are spinning that young people don’t want to take it. From what I’ve seen, they’re desperate to get it but are just bottom of the list.

It was openly discussed in the media that covid checks at pubs and things was to nudge younger people into having the vaccine as there are fears that uptake will reduce as you go down the ages. 

Look at those photos in the new article all big groups of young people hundreds of them suggests they aren't scared of Covid or letting a lack of vaccine stop them socialising already. Scenes like this and other metrics are obviously giving the government concerns over uptake to feel the need to 'nudge' the younger generations. 

 

[oneeye]

13 minutes ago, shoptildrop said:

didn't have his NHS number just his other details but yeah lets him select a date 🙂 

Then he's good to go; party on

[Toilet Duck]

2 hours ago, onthebeach said:

I really think we need to be more transparent about this - even though it’s a rare event. In Canada people are advised what to be aware of, and in what timescale so people can seek advice and hopefully treatment. I totally get the anti vaxxers will jump on this but I also don’t believe it should be brushed under the carpet

You’ll be happy to know that AZ have updated the patient information leaflet to contain this and advice for healthcare professionals here is the same as what you have posted for Canada. So, even though extremely rare, it is being looked out for. I too agree that rigorous safety measures are required to maintain confidence in all vaccines not just these ones.

It’s understandable that people are fed up and see any challenge to our way out of this as doom mongering, but brushing stuff under the rug does nobody any favours in the long run. Vaccine programmes continue, we’re all making steady progress and as we learn about the real world use of these vaccines, we figure out even more about how to use them safely. That’s a good thing.

Remember, we may be using these vaccines in kids by the end of the year...given the tiny risk they have from the virus, would you risk a thrombotic episode in yours? Even if the risk of that were minuscule too? It would make me pause for sure, so we have to get this right and be completely confident in them especially when we are going to use them in very low risk individuals, a scenario that is not normally part of emergency use (and, again, I’m no anti-vaxxer, far from it, my little one has had every other vaccination she was scheduled to have in addition to her annual flu vaccine)...the benefits clearly outweigh the risks in older people and the argument for deploying in kids is to prevent the emergence of vaccine-resistant variants, but if such a thing doesn’t exist (we haven’t really found any yet and the same changes keep popping up in those that get selected) then do the benefits still outweigh the risks? Of course, forcing the virus to be an early childhood disease could have other unknown outcomes. Plenty to still be figured out yet and I wouldn’t criticise any vaccination committee that decides to take a cautious approach on this. 

[efcfanwirral]

19 hours ago, Toilet Duck said:

You’ll be happy to know that AZ have updated the patient information leaflet to contain this and advice for healthcare professionals here is the same as what you have posted for Canada. So, even though extremely rare, it is being looked out for. I too agree that rigorous safety measures are required to maintain confidence in all vaccines not just these ones.

It’s understandable that people are fed up and see any challenge to our way out of this as doom mongering, but brushing stuff under the rug does nobody any favours in the long run. Vaccine programmes continue, we’re all making steady progress and as we learn about the real world use of these vaccines, we figure out even more about how to use them safely. That’s a good thing.

Remember, we may be using these vaccines in kids by the end of the year...given the tiny risk they have from the virus, would you risk a thrombotic episode in yours? Even if the risk of that were minuscule too? It would make me pause for sure, so we have to get this right and be completely confident in them especially when we are going to use them in very low risk individuals, a scenario that is not normally part of emergency use (and, again, I’m no anti-vaxxer, far from it, my little one has had every other vaccination she was scheduled to have in addition to her annual flu vaccine)...the benefits clearly outweigh the risks in older people and the argument for deploying in kids is to prevent the emergence of vaccine-resistant variants, but if such a thing doesn’t exist (we haven’t really found any yet and the same changes keep popping up in those that get selected) then do the benefits still outweigh the risks? Of course, forcing the virus to be an early childhood disease could have other unknown outcomes. Plenty to still be figured out yet and I wouldn’t criticise any vaccination committee that decides to take a cautious approach on this. 

I'm out of upvotes but here's a virtual reply one 

Edited March 31, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[Homer]

2 hours ago, steviewevie said:

All those bbqs and garden parties planned for the weekend are going to get moved inside when people realise summer hasn't actually started yet.

Party's already started in Nottingham.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-56575135

[shoptildrop]

57 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

I was going to respond with the same as the above ... 

Fella feels like he's jumping the queue so he's going to wait until it states 40-49 on website or get an invite from GP

Given he's not left the house in a year and has high anxiety, I want him to get jab as soon as but has to be his call at end if day 

[onthebeach]

42 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

You’ll be happy to know that AZ have updated the patient information leaflet to contain this and advice for healthcare professionals here is the same as what you have posted for Canada. So, even though extremely rare, it is being looked out for. I too agree that rigorous safety measures are required to maintain confidence in all vaccines not just these ones.

It’s understandable that people are fed up and see any challenge to our way out of this as doom mongering, but brushing stuff under the rug does nobody any favours in the long run. Vaccine programmes continue, we’re all making steady progress and as we learn about the real world use of these vaccines, we figure out even more about how to use them safely. That’s a good thing.

Remember, we may be using these vaccines in kids by the end of the year...given the tiny risk they have from the virus, would you risk a thrombotic episode in yours? Even if the risk of that were minuscule too? It would make me pause for sure, so we have to get this right and be completely confident in them especially when we are going to use them in very low risk individuals, a scenario that is not normally part of emergency use (and, again, I’m no anti-vaxxer, far from it, my little one has had every other vaccination she was scheduled to have in addition to her annual flu vaccine)...the benefits clearly outweigh the risks in older people and the argument for deploying in kids is to prevent the emergence of vaccine-resistant variants, but if such a thing doesn’t exist (we haven’t really found any yet and the same changes keep popping up in those that get selected) then do the benefits still outweigh the risks? Of course, forcing the virus to be an early childhood disease could have other unknown outcomes. Plenty to still be figured out yet and I wouldn’t criticise any vaccination committee that decides to take a cautious approach on this. 

Thank you for bringing your professional and balanced comments to this discussion. So pleased to learn that the information has now been added to the leaflets. I really hope that this rare occurrence is found to be unrelated to the vaccine - it may turn out to be the suggestion that it’s linked to a very unfortunate coincidence of contracting Covid around the time immediately before/after the jab

[StuMalinas]

[Cherry Tree]

1 hour ago, shoptildrop said:

Does anyone know if you can select a date for a jab on the NHS website does that mean it's okay and you won't be turned away for not meeting all the criteria?

Just put fella's details in as nearly 49 for Manchester main vaccine centre and it's giving me tomorrow, but we're not sure whether to go ahead with it if we shouldn't be booking...

Also, anyone know if whether its the Oxford or the Pfizer one being dished out at that site?

I do voluntary shifts at a vaccine centre and a couple of weeks ago if you could book an appointment then you were let in. However last weekend as supplies tightened we have been asked to challenge anyone under fifty to justify their caring responsibilities or their underlying medical condition, we turned away 40-50 on Saturday.

If you answered all questions correctly then you will not have a problem, if you have ticked for caring responsibilities or underlying medical condition and don’t have them you may be challenged. My experience is that the level of challenge varies from centre to centre and even shift to shift.

On your second question any centre that I have done in the last fortnight has been the Oxford vaccine, Pfizer is mainly going to GP surgeries for over 80s 2nd doses.

[Funkyfairy!]

5 hours ago, steviewevie said:

Good news.

Are they vaccinating many people in rest of Indonesia?

They are , but the government are doing a drive in Bali as they are so reliant on tourism, with no business for a year(or only within Indonesia). As far as I understand it 80% of Balis income is from tourism of some type or another

[Funkyfairy!]

5 hours ago, efcfanwirral said:

Let me guess- canggu, ubud and kuta by any chance? 

Suprisingly no, my brother lives in Sanur and he's in one of the towns, I can;t remember the other two but they weren;t any of the above from memory. 

[efcfanwirral]

5 minutes ago, Funkyfairy! said:

Suprisingly no, my brother lives in Sanur and he's in one of the towns, I can;t remember the other two but they weren;t any of the above from memory. 

Ah I forgot about Sanur - only spent one night there before getting the boat to Nusa Lembongan for the weekend. Lots of older Australian tourists, felt somewhat like mallorca or somewhere like that, so that makes sense actually!

Ah I miss that travelling life 

Edited March 30, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[JoeyT]

 

[zahidf]

1 hour ago, Toilet Duck said:

You’ll be happy to know that AZ have updated the patient information leaflet to contain this and advice for healthcare professionals here is the same as what you have posted for Canada. So, even though extremely rare, it is being looked out for. I too agree that rigorous safety measures are required to maintain confidence in all vaccines not just these ones.

It’s understandable that people are fed up and see any challenge to our way out of this as doom mongering, but brushing stuff under the rug does nobody any favours in the long run. Vaccine programmes continue, we’re all making steady progress and as we learn about the real world use of these vaccines, we figure out even more about how to use them safely. That’s a good thing.

Remember, we may be using these vaccines in kids by the end of the year...given the tiny risk they have from the virus, would you risk a thrombotic episode in yours? Even if the risk of that were minuscule too? It would make me pause for sure, so we have to get this right and be completely confident in them especially when we are going to use them in very low risk individuals, a scenario that is not normally part of emergency use (and, again, I’m no anti-vaxxer, far from it, my little one has had every other vaccination she was scheduled to have in addition to her annual flu vaccine)...the benefits clearly outweigh the risks in older people and the argument for deploying in kids is to prevent the emergence of vaccine-resistant variants, but if such a thing doesn’t exist (we haven’t really found any yet and the same changes keep popping up in those that get selected) then do the benefits still outweigh the risks? Of course, forcing the virus to be an early childhood disease could have other unknown outcomes. Plenty to still be figured out yet and I wouldn’t criticise any vaccination committee that decides to take a cautious approach on this. 

I agree for the under 40s. My main issue is the ones suspending it for the 50-60 year olds because I think Covid is probably more of a risk than what they are investigating. Did you see this Welsh study as well?

 

i do agree we should be cautious, but I do think Germant banning it for the over 65s and then the under 60s is causing confusion amongst laypeople.

 

Of course, I'm a few weeks time when it will get to the under 40s, we will have more of an idea as to what the issues are. But I don't agree with the current actions undermining the vaccine really.

Edited March 30, 2021 by zahidf

[Toilet Duck]

4 hours ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Wasn't that based on knowing covid kills the vulnerable, but not knowing whether vaccines stop the spread?  Both of those variables have changed considerably.  Have I missed any other reasons?

 

Not that I think they'll do it. 

As it happens, vaccination programme was just changed here this evening. Previously had prioritised meat processing plants etc for the next phase, but switched to age-based in mass vax hubs now. Have obviously looked at the UK roll out and decided speed is the key priority (finally starting to get deliveries in the 100s of 1000s per week rather than in the 10s of 1000s...last few days the daily doses delivered would be equivalent to 400k+ in the UK, so pace is picking up now and is higher than needed to hit the targets set out at the beginning...J&J should speed that up even more with 2.2m doses due by the end of June and starting in a couple of weeks)...I agree that scientifically, a precision roll out targeting those most likely to be infected make sense now that we know the vaccines help suppress transmission, but I guess it’s back to your original point that simpler deployment can be more effective on a large scale. 

In other updates from this evening, fully vaccinated individuals in Ireland (2 weeks post 2nd dose) can now meet up with other fully vaccinated individuals indoors with no masks or social distancing, effective immediately...so that’s where we are heading!

[Toilet Duck]

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

I agree for the under 40s. My main issue is the ones suspending it for the 50-60 year olds because I think Covid is probably more of a risk than what they are investigating. Did you see this Welsh study as well?

 

i do agree we should be cautious, but I do think Germant banning it for the over 65s and then the under 60s is causing confusion amongst laypeople.

 

Of course, I'm a few weeks time when it will get to the under 40s, we will have more of an idea as to what the issues are. But I don't agree with the current actions undermining the vaccine really.

I think it’s a communication problem though. Properly communicated, it should increase confidence in the vaccines by taking their use seriously and adapting it based on safety data that accrues as they are used. There’s too much politics and silly buggers been dragged into it and that needs to stop really. The EU’s ongoing dispute with AZ doesn’t help, fix the bloody problem rather than bitching about it and issuing threats (AZ have under delivered in the UK by a large margin too, so they obviously have problems that they need an hand in sorting out)...

[zahidf]

4 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

As it happens, vaccination programme was just changed here this evening. Previously had prioritised meat processing plants etc for the next phase, but switched to age-based in mass vax hubs now. Have obviously looked at the UK roll out and decided speed is the key priority (finally starting to get deliveries in the 100s of 1000s per week rather than in the 10s of 1000s...last few days the daily doses delivered would be equivalent to 400k+ in the UK, so pace is picking up now and is higher than needed to hit the targets set out at the beginning...J&J should speed that up even more with 2.2m doses due by the end of June and starting in a couple of weeks)...I agree that scientifically, a precision roll out targeting those most likely to be infected make sense now that we know the vaccines help suppress transmission, but I guess it’s back to your original point that simpler deployment can be more effective on a large scale. 

In other updates from this evening, fully vaccinated individuals in Ireland (2 weeks post 2nd dose) can now meet up with other fully vaccinated individuals indoors with no masks or social distancing, effective immediately...so that’s where we are heading!

Yeah I don't really understand the thinking behind not letting vaxed people meet up

[zahidf]

Just now, Toilet Duck said:

I think it’s a communication problem though. Properly communicated, it should increase confidence in the vaccines by taking their use seriously and adapting it based on safety data that accrues as they are used. There’s too much politics and silly buggers been dragged into it and that needs to stop really. The EU’s ongoing dispute with AZ doesn’t help, fix the bloody problem rather than bitching about it and issuing threats (AZ have under delivered in the UK by a large margin too, so they obviously have problems that they need an hand in sorting out)...

Yeah I agree its a communication problem for sure. AZN have made mistakes, but they are doing the vaccine at cost, and some of the stuff from the EU does seem to be blame shifting IMO

[shoptildrop]

1 hour ago, Cherry Tree said:

I do voluntary shifts at a vaccine centre and a couple of weeks ago if you could book an appointment then you were let in. However last weekend as supplies tightened we have been asked to challenge anyone under fifty to justify their caring responsibilities or their underlying medical condition, we turned away 40-50 on Saturday.

If you answered all questions correctly then you will not have a problem, if you have ticked for caring responsibilities or underlying medical condition and don’t have them you may be challenged. My experience is that the level of challenge varies from centre to centre and even shift to shift.

On your second question any centre that I have done in the last fortnight has been the Oxford vaccine, Pfizer is mainly going to GP surgeries for over 80s 2nd doses.

I didnt have any questions on whether a care worker just name, DOB, postcode and whether had flu jab

It then let me put postcode in and I could select nearest centre

Date given is tomorrow but didn't select further than this as fella felt he shouldn't 

He's nearly 49 so I wonder with his age and postcode they let him... I just don't know tbh

[Paul ™]

28 minutes ago, Funkyfairy! said:

Suprisingly no, my brother lives in Sanur and he's in one of the towns, I can;t remember the other two but they weren;t any of the above from memory. 

Loved Sanur, we stayed there in 2018 for a week when travelling SE Asia for 11 months. So much quieter than the other side of the south in Kuta.

[tigger123]

14 minutes ago, shoptildrop said:

I didnt have any questions on whether a care worker just name, DOB, postcode and whether had flu jab

It then let me put postcode in and I could select nearest centre

Date given is tomorrow but didn't select further than this as fella felt he shouldn't 

He's nearly 49 so I wonder with his age and postcode they let him... I just don't know tbh

If the system let him book it without carer/health worker questions, then he is eligible. I'd def encourage him to take it up, the system is essentially saying its his turn!

[Cherry Tree]

3 minutes ago, shoptildrop said:

I didnt have any questions on whether a care worker just name, DOB, postcode and whether had flu jab

It then let me put postcode in and I could select nearest centre

Date given is tomorrow but didn't select further than this as fella felt he shouldn't 

He's nearly 49 so I wonder with his age and postcode they let him... I just don't know tbh

That is interesting, it looks like they have opened to the next group in your area, there tends to be a couple of days where the site still states the official age qualification but they unofficially open up the site to the next age group, this is so they can balance the supply with demand. If you have a booking and have not ticked the carer of other medical condition buttons then I think you can go ahead.

There are also some links going around for a site that is for NHS and Care Home staff only, I am assuming that this is not the site you are using.

[shoptildrop]

16 minutes ago, Cherry Tree said:

That is interesting, it looks like they have opened to the next group in your area, there tends to be a couple of days where the site still states the official age qualification but they unofficially open up the site to the next age group, this is so they can balance the supply with demand. If you have a booking and have not ticked the carer of other medical condition buttons then I think you can go ahead.

There are also some links going around for a site that is for NHS and Care Home staff only, I am assuming that this is not the site you are using.

Just using the NHS link people keep posting on here

I'm trying to reassured him but as it's coming up with tomorrow I don't think he's quite accepted it