FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Virus

Thoughts??

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

So, the vaccinations will of course go to the most vulnerable first, frontline staff, elderly etc...

People are saying that this is too ease the pressure off the NHS.

But, is it actually being done in the right order? More to the point, should it be in an order? Or should some groups be vaccinated side by side?

The reason i pose this question is that this virus is spread fastest by the most mobile people, workers, students, commuters etc. So to be able to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed biblically, the most mobile people have to be vaccinated sooner rather than later, OR have a complete national shutdown on ALL movement until everybody is vaccinated. If they vaccinate a smaller group to protect the NHS but then the virus rifles through the unvaccinated, a much larger number, then the risk is that both the vaccinated, (dependent on how good the vaccine is) , and the unvaccinated could end up overflowing the services.

So I think a good idea would be to vaccinate 2 groups side by side first, the most mobile, students, and the most vulnerable, the elderly and frontline, and then everyone else.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ockosaurusMan
over a year ago

Warwick

I think it's about right.

Giving it first to the people that after most likely to die from Covid rather than just those that are likely to catch and survive it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ockosaurusMan
over a year ago

Warwick

I don't think they have enough vaccines and resources to administer it to two groups at once tbh.

That would just mean less of the very vulnerable would get covered.

I'm just glad it's not me making the decision tbh.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

What has typically besieged hospital resources are those people who get severely ill and, prior to improved treatment programmes, were losing their lives in greater numbers. With a greater proportion of those people in hospital not losing their lives, they are still suffering and needing extensive care. Much of this may be in ICU, requiring hugh staffing levels. These people are not getting to die but may continue to need hospital care until well enough to be discharged.

Anyone of any age may be amongst those patients but the greater proportion of them should be the types of people targeted for earlier vaccination. They will be predominantly the most senior amongst us, including those with underlying conditions. There will then be others with underlying conditions and people who aren't quite as old.

You'll typically find the target groups prioritised for vaccines are those who, once having immunity should start to relieve pressure on hospitals, as they may not become infected or - if they do - will not become as severly ill, as they would have done, without any vaccination.

Whilst other more socially active people may acquire infection, they won't generally be the people who are imposing high demand levels on the NHS.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

I agree wholeheartedly with that last bit!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Thank you for the patient reply! I had the thought in my head and just needed to get it out, I thought if it was feasibly possible to vaccinate those two groups of people alongside each other it could severely diminish the transmission, particularly where students are concerned.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arakiss12TV/TS
over a year ago

Bedford

Based on the most vulnerable yes I agree, but in terms of spreading, it's the locally mobile, globally mobile and illegal immigrants.

I think something more virulent is just around the corner beware.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *riar BelisseWoman
over a year ago

Delightful Bliss

Both vaccines are designed to help our bodies fight covid-19 and try to prevent people developing complications and making that trip to hospital, they are not going to stop people from catching it.

This is why hands face and space is so important.

So the elderly and and vulnerable who can have it (many cannot unfortunately) need it to be protected first as these are the people in hospital dying right now

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alandNitaCouple
over a year ago

Scunthorpe


"So, the vaccinations will of course go to the most vulnerable first, frontline staff, elderly etc...

People are saying that this is too ease the pressure off the NHS.

But, is it actually being done in the right order? More to the point, should it be in an order? Or should some groups be vaccinated side by side?

"

Personally I believe that it would be more effective to vaccinate groups according to how socially mobility they are, it seems that this would reduce the spread more quickly and consequently reduce the load on the NHS. It certainly seems like a concept worth modelling.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

That's what I was thinking

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"So, the vaccinations will of course go to the most vulnerable first, frontline staff, elderly etc...

People are saying that this is too ease the pressure off the NHS.

But, is it actually being done in the right order? More to the point, should it be in an order? Or should some groups be vaccinated side by side?

Personally I believe that it would be more effective to vaccinate groups according to how socially mobility they are, it seems that this would reduce the spread more quickly and consequently reduce the load on the NHS. It certainly seems like a concept worth modelling. "

that would only work if the vaccine was designed to block you catching and transmitting which it is not

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

No but it is designed to vastly reduce the chances of hospitalisation, so vaccinating the most mobile alongside the most vulnerable would protect the NHS more than simply doing it in a specific order because if the virus mutated again in a future relaxation of lockdown and became even more easily transmitted, the numbers could decimate the services. So to my logic, either the two groups need to be vaccinated side by side or the country has to be entirely locked down again until at least 2 3rds of the population are vaccinated.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ee And MikeCouple
over a year ago

Cannock

We shouldn’t even be having this discussion we should have enough vaccine available to dose everyone in a month to wipe this thing out.

India has already made 50 million doses of the vaccine we are only just starting to distribute now and yet they are supposedly a third world country.

How come they produced 50 million doses ready and Whitty claims we are going to have to virtually ration our supply ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

India aren't a third world country, people think they are because of the poverty but they are actually one of the leading scientific research countries in the world, they are also very experienced in dealing with widespread illness quickly, and due to population would have had far more prep for a pandemic situation.

Maybe we should swap some of their leaders for ours

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top