When will this shit end?

[Vulpes vulpes]

7 minutes ago, phimill said:

Sorry if i have missed this - but do we know how many people are in the 45-49group and the 40-44 group?

4.4 million 45-49 or there abouts 

Just over 4 million 40-45’s

Edited April 13, 2021 by Vulpes vulpes

[dingbat2]

I wouldnt be surprised if they are prioritising 45-49s first, to give as many in that age group as possible the opportunity to book earlier slots, then a few days later they will open up to 40-44s as well to fill the remaining available slots, to as many 40s booked up as possible

[zahidf]

Poor Aussies

 

[zahidf]

Ha!

 

[Vulpes vulpes]

Sick of being told couple more weeks, especially from the already vaccinated. If it is just a couple of weeks, why can we not book now? 

[Ozanne]

2 minutes ago, Vulpes vulpes said:

Sick of being told couple more weeks, especially from the already vaccinated. If it is just a couple of weeks, why can we not book now? 

What do you mean? Booking a vaccine?

[stuie]

15 minutes ago, jimmillen said:

 

Sorry for self quoting, but obviously this is now answered and the 45-49 age group is getting prioritised.

Am I being unreasonable to be a bit miffed about how this has been communicated? 😒 I don't recall anything previously suggesting that the age groups would be broken down by 5-year bands, and I've been following vaccine news closely.

When it was announced that over-40s would be eligible this week I got excited about being able to get vaccinated and now it's going to be weeks longer, at least. Honestly a bit surprised myself at how gloomy this has made me feel...

Have I missed something, or is this yet another government pandemic communications SNAFU?

Same thing happened with the 50’s and 60’s age groups. 

[tigger123]

2 minutes ago, Vulpes vulpes said:

Sick of being told couple more weeks, especially from the already vaccinated. If it is just a couple of weeks, why can we not book now? 

Imagine it’s down to lack of clarity over supplies, they don’t want people booking appointments for it to turn out they don’t have the vaccine supplies to honour said bookings. April is primarily supposed to be focussed on second doses so any first doses on top of that is a bonus. Don’t worry you’ll be called up soon

[jimmillen]

1 minute ago, stuie said:

Same thing happened with the 50’s and 60’s age groups. 

Fair enough - I managed to completely miss that then! 😐

[Vulpes vulpes]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

What do you mean? Booking a vaccine?

Yes, my age group has been pushed back time and again. Now the lockdown is beginning to be lifted. Feel like we have been left behind.

[Ozanne]

Just now, Vulpes vulpes said:

Yes, my age group has been pushed back time and again. Now the lockdown is beginning to be lifted. Feel like we have been left behind.

What’s your age group? I’m 35 so we might be in the same boat!

[phimill]

9 minutes ago, Vulpes vulpes said:

4.4 million 45-49 or there abouts 

Just over 4 million 40-45’s

Thanks for this!

So based on the last 10day average we are doing 87,231 first does/day.

We are looking at 50days to get through 45-49, and 45 to get through 40-44.

Current rate means under 40's only starting Mid-July.

I presume the government a re confident in a big shipment coming on board over the next week or so to spped this up and get the 1st doses moving quickly again.

Or do we think we will be looking at a pivot of 1month 1st doses, 1 month 2nd doses? 

If so, that means 283k/day over May - which would cover all 40-50 in May, and then begin to drip feed under 40's at 80/90k per day during June and one final blast over July?

 

 

[steviewevie]

35 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Lol what?

 

this was always uncertain, the bigger concern that it was more infectious.

[zahidf]

7 minutes ago, Vulpes vulpes said:

Yes, my age group has been pushed back time and again. Now the lockdown is beginning to be lifted. Feel like we have been left behind.

They havemt really deviated from their general deadlines though tbf. July is still the all population vaccination

[Zoo Music Girl]

52 minutes ago, philipsteak said:

I agree, it probably is over. It very much looks like it is over for us. Things will probably be fine very soon. But it might not. (It probably will) And so the discussions and planning around that probably need to happen. One of the big criticisms from the start of this was how unprepared we were. Johnson sticking his fingers in his ears and going la la la everything's fine. (or if his handshaking comments were anything to go by, sticking his fingers in other people's ears). So even if they are doom mongers, people saying this stuff isn't a bad thing. it'll be added to the mix. A broad range of views is a good thing. Now you could argue whether they need to be popping up on the news or posting on twitter, and that's fair enough. But I don't know how much impact they have. The posts and articles that are regularly (so so regularly) posted in here, I rarely see them out in the wild. Just in here. The posters must be searching them out, looking for something to get angry about. Very Daily Mail.

I was thinking this the other day. The only place I come across these kind of "doom-mongering" articles is on here with all the accompanying outrage. I wouldn't even see them if they didn't get posted here, so ironically these scientists are being amplified by those who say they shouldn't be! 

[dingbat2]

9 minutes ago, Vulpes vulpes said:

Yes, my age group has been pushed back time and again. Now the lockdown is beginning to be lifted. Feel like we have been left behind.

Its all about risk, Older 40s have more chance of being hospitalised/dying than younger 40s - see the table below. Someone over 85 has 67 times more chance of dying of Covid than me in my forties. And I have just under 3 times more chance of dying than someone in their 30s. Broadly speaking for every 10 years in age your risk of dying trebles and your risk of hospitalisation increases by 50%

[st dan]

4 minutes ago, dingbat2 said:

Its all about risk, Older 40s have more chance of being hospitalised/dying than younger 40s - see the table below. Someone over 85 has 67 times more chance of dying of Covid than me in my forties. And I have just under 3 times more chance of dying than someone in their 30s. Broadly speaking for every 10 years in age your risk of dying trebles and your risk of hospitalisation increases by 50%

I understand what this table is trying to show, and agree with the ageing priorities they are using.
However I would be interested to know if this data accounts for those with underlying medical conditions too - as the older you get the more likely you are to suffer from these conditions. And those who have these have now all been offered jabs (number 6 of the priority list). So is there really much more risk for a healthy 48 year old than an 39 year old for example? Although saying that, not sure there is actually any better way to arrange the rollout. 

[philipsteak]

13 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

I was thinking this the other day. The only place I come across these kind of "doom-mongering" articles is on here with all the accompanying outrage. I wouldn't even see them if they didn't get posted here, so ironically these scientists are being amplified by those who say they shouldn't be! 

Indeed

[Vulpes vulpes]

18 minutes ago, phimill said:

Thanks for this!

So based on the last 10day average we are doing 87,231 first does/day.

We are looking at 50days to get through 45-49, and 45 to get through 40-44.

Current rate means under 40's only starting Mid-July.

I presume the government a re confident in a big shipment coming on board over the next week or so to spped this up and get the 1st doses moving quickly again.

Or do we think we will be looking at a pivot of 1month 1st doses, 1 month 2nd doses? 

If so, that means 283k/day over May - which would cover all 40-50 in May, and then begin to drip feed under 40's at 80/90k per day during June and one final blast over July?

 

 

I think we may be way sooner. As a large percentage has already been vaccinated. Those with underlining health conditions and carers. It’s as high as 40% of under 50’s in some areas. 

[Vulpes vulpes]

The moderna vaccine is all 1st doses. If you’ve a large vaccine centre near you. 

[DeanoL]

16 hours ago, zahidf said:

Also, I think we need keep people incintivised to get a vaccine. Once someone has their vaccine, telling them that's ITS NOT OVER KEEP LIVING IN FEAR AND KEEP AWAY FROM PEOPLE is counter productive IMO

Do you really think people are too stupid to understand that we need to get everyone vaccinated, not just them, as they'll inevitably have contact with none vaccinated people? Genuine question, because I think they might be too but it's depressing.

And as I mentioned earlier, the logic for two vaccinated people being able to meet each other could equally have been applied to me and some of my friends across the entire pandemic. We were not seeing *anyone* except our partners who lived with us: working from home, getting food delivered, only having the occasional walk and staying clear of people. We should have been able to meet friends who were doing the same thing too - as frankly our lifestyles were giving us a level of protection equal to that of the vaccine (not 100%, but neither is vaccine) but we didn't as they were the rules. 

12 hours ago, tigger123 said:

My main anger at Indie Sage comes from the point around if we can't unlock safely over the next few months, then when can we?

When everyone is vaccinated. Like you say, that'll be in the next few months, but we're looking at August most likely now (for 3 weeks after the last person has a first dose). There's also the argument we should wait for second doses, which I don't think is necessary either, but it will continue to get even safer as the vaccine programme progresses. The problem is you're talking about opening in the next few months when everything is done, but we're starting to open up now and planning to have "no restrictions" in June, before everyone is vaccinated. That's what Indie Sage are arguing against.

11 hours ago, Matt42 said:

I think the problem people have is that the goal posts keep getting shifted.

To me, if deaths are low, we’ve won the battle. Cases rising doesn’t mean much to me when testing is easily accessible and people are mixing again. 

A roadmap was announced on 22 February with a bunch of dates in in the form "this will happen no earlier than these dates, if the data supports it". So far all of those dates have been hit on the earlier possible date. I get that you think they could be earlier, but that's literally you arguing to move the goalposts. 

 

[phimill]

2 minutes ago, Vulpes vulpes said:

I think we may be way sooner. As a large percentage has already been vaccinated. Those with underlining health conditions and carers. It’s as high as 40% of under 50’s in some areas. 

Yes I hadn't thought about that. I'm sure there is a gov.uk breakdown of % per year group so may give us an insight of how much is remaining.

[efcfanwirral]

2 minutes ago, Vulpes vulpes said:

I think we may be way sooner. As a large percentage has already been vaccinated. Those with underlining health conditions and carers. It’s as high as 40% of under 50’s in some areas. 

I think people need the media and government to change the narrative  a bit to take that into account, maybe once the over 40s are done. It could get people a bit more comfortable with going back out if shown their chances of hospitalisation are even lower than it initially looks when you split out conditions

[km9]

1 hour ago, philipsteak said:

... Very Daily Mail.

Funny you should say this. I often wonder if some people on here realise how much they sound like the very thing that they despise.... A daily mail ranter.

[zahidf]

4 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Do you really think people are too stupid to understand that we need to get everyone vaccinated, not just them, as they'll inevitably have contact with none vaccinated people? Genuine question, because I think they might be too but it's depressing.

And as I mentioned earlier, the logic for two vaccinated people being able to meet each other could equally have been applied to me and some of my friends across the entire pandemic. We were not seeing *anyone* except our partners who lived with us: working from home, getting food delivered, only having the occasional walk and staying clear of people. We should have been able to meet friends who were doing the same thing too - as frankly our lifestyles were giving us a level of protection equal to that of the vaccine (not 100%, but neither is vaccine) but we didn't as they were the rules. 

When everyone is vaccinated. Like you say, that'll be in the next few months, but we're looking at August most likely now (for 3 weeks after the last person has a first dose). There's also the argument we should wait for second doses, which I don't think is necessary either, but it will continue to get even safer as the vaccine programme progresses. The problem is you're talking about opening in the next few months when everything is done, but we're starting to open up now and planning to have "no restrictions" in June, before everyone is vaccinated. That's what Indie Sage are arguing against.

A roadmap was announced on 22 February with a bunch of dates in in the form "this will happen no earlier than these dates, if the data supports it". So far all of those dates have been hit on the earlier possible date. I get that you think they could be earlier, but that's literally you arguing to move the goalposts. 

 

so, what you could have done is bubbled with someone else? 

 

Bubbling is low risk. Its even lower risk if you bubble with someone who is vaccinated!