The Lemon Fool

What better way to help the virus spread than to have large numbers of people lingering in one area.

BT63 wrote:What better way to help the virus spread than to have large numbers of people lingering in one area.

To take your question at face value and answer it, a far better way to spread the virus would be to have them all singing together, or shouting "It's behind you!!!!"

As if that would ever happen this time of year, though.

BT63 wrote:What better way to help the virus spread than to have large numbers of people lingering in one area.

I passed a queue of well over 100 people at about 9:15 this morning. Given that this was outside, they were in a line, and not standing too close to each other, I would consider the risk to be very low.


Julian F. G. W.

eermmm
they're outdoors and unless you can breathe in through the back of your head there's not too much risk
But I did see the easy opportunity to have a laugh

BT63 wrote:What better way to help the virus spread than to have large numbers of people lingering in one area.

I think that is taking cynicism too far if they are queuing round the block and in the open air.

Dod

I was modenised yesterday in the old John Lewis store in Aberdeen. From previous experience for Oxford I and II (at TECA) I turned up about 20 minutes early for my appointment. The queue was out the door when I arrived all neatly spaced. I think they were keeping everyone outside whilst they cleared a backlog inside as they rapidly moved every one inside about 5 minutes after I arrived. Took about 15-20 minutes for the queue to make it to the check in desks (so i arrived almost spot on my appointment time) and then there was another (shorter) queue to get a vaccinator. All seemed well organised and there were a few soldiers helping out as vaccinators.

In all it took about 1hr 30 mins to get from work, boosted and back including cycling there and back, so not bad. I booked 8 days before yesterday's appointment.

Why were the first two rounds of jabs done on an age/risk priority basis - but now this booster has been turned into a free-for-all?

It seems a bit random to me.

Not random... logical
Omicron is reported as spreading much faster so more urgency in getting protected

MrFoolish wrote:Why were the first two rounds of jabs done on an age/risk priority basis - but now this booster has been turned into a free-for-all?

It seems a bit random to me.

The booster has been done in exactly the same way as the first two jabs; by age/risk priority first and then finally anyone 18+. The difference this time round is that fewer people took it up when they were invited by age/risk but later decided it was a good idea when omicron came along.

mc2fool wrote:

MrFoolish wrote:Why were the first two rounds of jabs done on an age/risk priority basis - but now this booster has been turned into a free-for-all?

It seems a bit random to me.

The booster has been done in exactly the same way as the first two jabs; by age/risk priority first and then finally anyone 18+. The difference this time round is that fewer people took it up when they were invited by age/risk but later decided it was a good idea when omicron came along.

So if they are now prepared to take up the booster, this fails to explain why they've dumped the priority system.

MrFoolish wrote:

mc2fool wrote: The booster has been done in exactly the same way as the first two jabs; by age/risk priority first and then finally anyone 18+. The difference this time round is that fewer people took it up when they were invited by age/risk but later decided it was a good idea when omicron came along.

So if they are now prepared to take up the booster, this fails to explain why they've dumped the priority system.

Uh? The priority system hasn't been "dumped", it's already been gone through. It started with 80+ in October and then gradually dropped to 70+, 60+, 50+, 40+, 30+ and is now at 18+. That's exactly as for the first two rounds.

If you're asking why did some, e.g. 50+ folks not take it up when they were first eligible and invited by age/risk, you'll have to ask them; I got mine within a few days of being invited by the priority system.

I got asked one day after my 6 months had elapsed (very efficient)
buit it was a whole month before I got it (not inefficient - very high demand, in my area anyway)

mc2fool wrote:

MrFoolish wrote: So if they are now prepared to take up the booster, this fails to explain why they've dumped the priority system.

Uh? The priority system hasn't been "dumped", it's already been gone through. It started with 80+ in October and then gradually dropped to 70+, 60+, 50+, 40+, 30+ and is now at 18+. That's exactly as for the first two rounds.

If you're asking why did some, e.g. 50+ folks not take it up when they were first eligible and invited by age/risk, you'll have to ask them; I got mine within a few days of being invited by the priority system.

I should think plenty of people in their 40s hadn't had their booster yet. Now they are fighting it out with 18 year olds.

I'm 50's. When I went for my second jab appointment, there was a notice on the vaccination centre door saying sorry, we are shut! I had to re-book. Unsurprisingly, I am now behind most of my age group. I'm not too worried about it - but don't assume everyone who didn't get a booster didn't want one.

MrFoolish wrote:I should think plenty of people in their 40s hadn't had their booster yet. Now they are fighting it out with 18 year olds.

The high-risk groups have already been offered it. Almost no 40-somethings will have had boosters by now on the original plan - I know a 40-something who got their first jab on the second day they could in mid-April, got a 2nd at a walk-in after 8 weeks in mid-June - so about as far ahead as it is possible for a non-vulnerable under-50 to do it. But that means they could not booster before mid-December and in fact the earliest appointment was in January, until the 6-month criterion was relaxed and they could walk in last week.

But under 50 the age-related risks are much lower, and other factors come into play - a 20-something bartender is at far more risk than a 40-something accountant working from home. Particularly since if you look at Denmark, omicron is primarily hitting 20-somethings and to a lesser extent 30-somethings. And you've got the complications of Christmas and this urge to just get all of 18-50 boosted ASAP in the face of omicron. Doing it this way at least means centres won't be twiddling their thumbs because potential vaxees are prevented by paperwork.

It's not perfect, but it's not unreasonable.

I had my booster the day after I was eligible. A week before this rush, I was told by my consultant rheumatologist that my booster was equivalent to most people's second jab, so I should be eligible for a fourth you become my true booster. I won't hold my breath, but hopefully I will get one sometime.

Presumably, I'll have to wait for some longwinded exchange between consultant/GP/NHS before the system agrees I am eligible.

Arb.

Hallucigenia wrote:

MrFoolish wrote:I should think plenty of people in their 40s hadn't had their booster yet. Now they are fighting it out with 18 year olds.

The high-risk groups have already been offered it. Almost no 40-somethings will have had boosters by now on the original plan - I know a 40-something who got their first jab on the second day they could in mid-April, got a 2nd at a walk-in after 8 weeks in mid-June - so about as far ahead as it is possible for a non-vulnerable under-50 to do it. But that means they could not booster before mid-December and in fact the earliest appointment was in January, until the 6-month criterion was relaxed and they could walk in last week.

But under 50 the age-related risks are much lower, and other factors come into play - a 20-something bartender is at far more risk than a 40-something accountant working from home. Particularly since if you look at Denmark, omicron is primarily hitting 20-somethings and to a lesser extent 30-somethings. And you've got the complications of Christmas and this urge to just get all of 18-50 boosted ASAP in the face of omicron. Doing it this way at least means centres won't be twiddling their thumbs because potential vaxees are prevented by paperwork.

It's not perfect, but it's not unreasonable.

Well I entirely agree with this answer. The change is largely to avoid the admin nightmare of having to re-schedule people. So it's probably not unreasonable in the circumstances. But it can't be denied that the age related schedule has gone out of the window.

Arborbridge wrote:I had my booster the day after I was eligible. A week before this rush, I was told by my consultant rheumatologist that my booster was equivalent to most people's second jab, so I should be eligible for a fourth you become my true booster. I won't hold my breath, but hopefully I will get one sometime.

Presumably, I'll have to wait for some longwinded exchange between consultant/GP/NHS before the system agrees I am eligible.

Arb.

Not all third jabs are boosters - if you have a weakened immune system for one of various reasons then you go in the system for a "3rd dose" per here :
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavir ... -3rd-dose/

As you see, one of the criteria is "a condition or treatment your specialist advises makes you eligible for a 3rd dose". The system is geared up for that, so it should be a fairly straightforward case of either the consultant talking to the GP directly, or giving you a letter saying they recommend it.

Hallucigenia wrote:

MrFoolish wrote:I should think plenty of people in their 40s hadn't had their booster yet. Now they are fighting it out with 18 year olds.

The high-risk groups have already been offered it. Almost no 40-somethings will have had boosters by now on the original plan - I know a 40-something who got their first jab on the second day they could in mid-April, got a 2nd at a walk-in after 8 weeks in mid-June - so about as far ahead as it is possible for a non-vulnerable under-50 to do it. But that means they could not booster before mid-December and in fact the earliest appointment was in January, until the 6-month criterion was relaxed and they could walk in last week.

I'm 42 and had my booster on the 2nd December, eligible from the 26th November. Most of my friends of a similar age here have already had theirs too having hit the 6 month mark. Not sure if we're unusually efficient or if its a regional thing but I think it's a bit inaccurate to say almost none would have had it.

Hallucigenia wrote:

Arborbridge wrote:I had my booster the day after I was eligible. A week before this rush, I was told by my consultant rheumatologist that my booster was equivalent to most people's second jab, so I should be eligible for a fourth you become my true booster. I won't hold my breath, but hopefully I will get one sometime.

Presumably, I'll have to wait for some longwinded exchange between consultant/GP/NHS before the system agrees I am eligible.

Arb.

Not all third jabs are boosters - if you have a weakened immune system for one of various reasons then you go in the system for a "3rd dose" per here :
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavir ... -3rd-dose/

As you see, one of the criteria is "a condition or treatment your specialist advises makes you eligible for a 3rd dose". The system is geared up for that, so it should be a fairly straightforward case of either the consultant talking to the GP directly, or giving you a letter saying they recommend it.

Thanks for that - it will help getting me started. Interestingly, I've had a booster dose (AFAIK) rather than a "3rd dose", so that rather muddles up the sequence.

I'm sure it will happen in due course, but it's the length of time which slightly worries me - knowing how many weeks consultant's letters usually take. I'm going to call the GP today, if I can. I have already emailed but no reply as yet - no doubt they are all up against it this week.

Arb.