Coronavirus: social, economic and other changes as a result of the pandemic

[Dave2002]

My booster appointment (this Saturday) is for 7 months after the 2nd jab.

Am I corrrect in thinking that officially there should be 9 months after the first vaccination date?
That is 3 months between jabs, then a further 6 month for the booster. In practice I think some of the gaps between jabs were shorter - depending on whatever advice, thoughts and vaccine availability were prevalent at the time.

[Serial_Apologist]

Am I corrrect in thinking that officially there should be 9 months after the first vaccination date?
That is 3 months between jabs, then a further 6 month for the booster. In practice I think some of the gaps between jabs were shorter - depending on whatever advice, thoughts and vaccine availability were prevalent at the time.

My booster is 9 months on from the second..........

[french frank]

Am I corrrect in thinking that officially there should be 9 months after the first vaccination date?

I read that the double dose begins to weaken after six months. I suppose you get offered the booster when the particular surgery/Trust/hub is best placed with vaccine and staff to administer it.

[Cockney Sparrow]

I had an appointment with the nurse yesterday and came out with my flu vaccine delivered (previously patients were messaged to wait to hear, delivery delayed) - I'm sure I would have been called when it was my turn in the priorities. But, if they've got you there, with the fridge 5 paces away........

A fortnight ago I came away with the Pneumonia vaccination. I told the nurse when I return in 2 weeks time, I'm hoping I'll get the Covid Booster (she said not got it yet, awaiting news).

A friend has had protracted recovery from Shingles and is still experiencing pain, 5 months on. I'm eligible for the vaccine via the NHS in 4 years time, but I mean to see if it is efficaceous before age 70 as I'm tempted to pay for an earlier one.......

[Dave2002]

I read that the double dose begins to weaken after six months. I suppose you get offered the booster when the particular surgery/Trust/hub is best placed with vaccine and staff to administer it.

I believe that the boosters are going to be the Pfizer ones - as they can't reasonably be sent off to remote tropical countries, so no complaints (in theory) that we're depriving poor people in other countries of a vaccination opportunity, and additionally there is some evidence that that there is better protection with some different vaccine types, rather than more of the same.

[Bryn]

I think this is the most suitable coronavirus thread to mention https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CqZqi1nQ_0 on. Currently well into its scheduled duration, hopefully, it will be available to watch/listen to later. Brian Cox hosting and chairing well. An interesting reminder that Smallpox was eliminated via compulsory vaccination.

[Frances_iom]

I believe that the boosters are going to be the Pfizer ones ....

Just had mine and yes it was Pfizer - local pharmacy but though I acted on the sent email I could only get an appointment just under 2 weeks later and that was at 4.55pm but efficient in & out within 10mins.

[Padraig]

I think this is the most suitable coronavirus thread to mention https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CqZqi1nQ_0 on. Currently well into its scheduled duration, hopefully, it will be available to watch/listen to later. Brian Cox hosting and chairing well. An interesting reminder that Smallpox was eliminated via compulsory vaccination.

Playing now. Thanks.

[Bryn]

Just had mine and yes it was Pfizer - local pharmacy but though I acted on the sent email I could only get an appointment just under 2 weeks later and that was at 4.55pm but efficient in & out within 10mins.

Had mine this afternoon, too, at Waitrose*. To my delight, I was also offered and accepted an age-relevant flu jab. SARS-Cov2 in the left arm, flu jab in the right. Even better, they also measured and recorded my BMI, blood pressure and pulse rate.

* As in the Waitrose Sports and Social Club hall.

[Dave2002]

Had flu and Covid booster earlier this week. Pfizer for Covid - and I've still got to read the details of this year's flu vaccine.
Slight soreness in each arm, fortunately now receding, and also thankfully so far no other or bad side effects.

in the meantime there's this - animals can get jabs too - https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...1bf_story.html

[Bryn]

Had flu and Covid booster earlier this week. Pfizer for Covid - and I've still got to read the details of this year's flu vaccine.
Slight soreness in each arm, fortunately now receding, and also thankfully so far no other or bad side effects.

in the meantime there's this - animals can get jabs too - https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...1bf_story.html

In my case, minor discomfort for around 48 hours from the Pfizer.BioNTech (left arm) but not even that from the aQIV flu jab in the right. Those with an egg allergy should make this clear before vaccination with the aQIV flu vaccine option. It is egg-based.

[Dave2002]

Anti-vaxxers

This is worrying - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/17/w...ny-europe.html German (and others?) anti-vaxxers.

I can understand the resistance to authority etc., but sometimes they aren't just trying to control people, but hopefully to help them.

The wretched virus however is not taking a political or social stance.

[Dave2002]

Journalism ... and big numbers!

I'm still not a fan of journalists, and their "misuse" of big numbers. The Daily Mirror recently reported - shock horror - "England’s Test and Trace service is sill spending £1million a day on consultants, according to a report in the Guardian newspaper."

OK - so Test and Trace is not great - perhaps - but there are over 50 million people in the UK. So the "horrific" sums of money being spent on Test and Trace consultants work out at under 2p per day for everyone in England.
Put that way, it doesn't seem too bad after all. The alternatives - for the country might cost a lot more - and for each person who contracts Covid - let alone falls ill or dies from it - they probably would have been glad to have had that 2p per day spent on them by the rest of us.

[oddoneout]

I'm still not a fan of journalists, and their "misuse" of big numbers. The Daily Mirror recently reported - shock horror - "England’s Test and Trace service is sill spending £1million a day on consultants, according to a report in the Guardian newspaper."

OK - so Test and Trace is not great - perhaps - but there are over 50 million people in the UK. So the "horrific" sums of money being spent on Test and Trace consultants work out at under 2p per day for everyone in England.
Put that way, it doesn't seem too bad after all. The alternatives - for the country might cost a lot more - and for each person who contracts Covid - let alone falls ill or dies from it - they probably would have been glad to have had that 2p per day spent on them by the rest of us.

I take your point on the seemingly small cost per head Dave, but I think it's worth reading the original article and then considering value for money https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...on-consultants
Local authorities have been doing sterling work on track and trace with only the tiniest budgets compared to the government version - without looking up figures the local versions achieve something like 80% to 90% success rate against national version of at best 50%. You (or I would) also have to ask why so many consultants are still employed so long after the scheme was set up - are they really doing necessary work that can't be done by anyone else or is it another example of the jobs for chums scenario? A week's consultant pay given to a local authority T&T would I suggest represent much better value for money and, more importantly, better outcomes for the people in that area as a result of local knowledge of the population. Paying a consultant for the theory is of limited use if in practice the reality is that lack of income means that infected individuals have to carry on working - tracking and tracing is only the first step, the real work is then supporting individuals - financially, practically(self isolation in an HMO anyone?)and medically where necessary. The latter is now a significant limiting factor.

[Dave2002]

I take your point on the seemingly small cost per head Dave, but I think it's worth reading the original article and then considering value for money https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...on-consultants
Local authorities have been doing sterling work on track and trace with only the tiniest budgets compared to the government version - without looking up figures the local versions achieve something like 80% to 90% success rate against national version of at best 50%. You (or I would) also have to ask why so many consultants are still employed so long after the scheme was set up - are they really doing necessary work that can't be done by anyone else or is it another example of the jobs for chums scenario? A week's consultant pay given to a local authority T&T would I suggest represent much better value for money and, more importantly, better outcomes for the people in that area as a result of local knowledge of the population. Paying a consultant for the theory is of limited use if in practice the reality is that lack of income means that infected individuals have to carry on working - tracking and tracing is only the first step, the real work is then supporting individuals - financially, practically(self isolation in an HMO anyone?)and medically where necessary. The latter is now a significant limiting factor.

From the Guardian article

Dr Jenny Harries, the chief executive of the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), who is responsible for NHS test and trace, told MPs in July there was a “very detailed ramp-down plan” to cut the number of consultants.

Presumably that's the issue - that some people are now being paid high daily rates for services which may be unnecessary and the ramping down has not taken place fast enough.

It's a tricky business now anyway. Not everyone is going to participate in Track and Trace. According to the information provided by the government "About 1 in 3 people with coronavirus do not have symptoms but can still infect others." - this information comes in emails and other documents which will be sent to people who request test kits. According to the splendid Travelling Tabby website - https://www.travellingtabby.com/scot...-tracker/local - the infections in my area are around 250 per 100k, or 1 in 400 people. People may work out that the chances of being in contact (as a random event) with someone who is an asymptomatic carrier of Covid 19 are around 1 in 750 which seems low enough. Further, since it now seems that with most people vaccinated, the chances of really serious illness or death are low, the chances of one asymptomatic person "causing" a problem to someone else are really low. So if someone is likely to lose significantly financially, or be otherwise inconvenienced by having to self isolate if they take a test and it proves positive, they will either (a) not take a test or (b) take a test but ignore the results. People may also (c) wait until the impact of knowing the outcome of a test is going to have minimal impact on them personally. For example, if I have a ticket for a concert tomorrow and I feel well enough, and I really want to go - but there is not a requirement to take a test and report the result before attending, then I can wait - attend the event, then wait a few more days then take a test. If the test returns a negative result I wouldn't worry about it, but if it then returns a positive result I can assume that I picked up the virus at that event, and thus did not myself infect anyone, and also since I'm now not going to go anywhere for a while where I might spread the disease further, then "that's OK, isn't it?". That argument does have flaws, but avoids wasting a ticket. More problematic would be people who are working, and have dependents. Their reasoning would be that if they discover they are asymptomatic carriers they will probably lose financially, and additionally they may not be able to provide support to others in their family or social circle. Where people might take Track and Trace tests more seriously would be in cases where they may come into contact with people who are very vulnerable - for example a family member or friend with a severely compromised immune system.

When we went to Glyndebourne recently we did actually do tests which came out negative - but many people might not carry out the tests because of the obvious possibility of an "unhelpful" outcome. However having recently heard of vaccinated people in our social circles who nevertheless became infected, and did not enjoy the experience, a more rigorous enforcement of testing and quarantine procedures might become necessary again, and it would be more socially responsible to participate than otherwise.