I know its unpopular but i really think if there is any 60+ people who are waiting for a choice then they should just be given it, I dont think its a massive number and people who are in an 'at risk' age group should be placed ahead of people who are statistically far LESS at risk
View attachment 258426
I tend to agree with you. I'm in that age group, and have had AZ, with second shot next week. So to be totally clear, I am not one of those people hanging out for Pfizer.
But the real point we should consider in making this decisions is the outcome that we are trying to achieve by vaccinating.
1. Is it to get people in a risky age group vaccinated to reduce the impact on hospitals by stopping them from getting seriously ill with COVID? 2. Is it to get as many people as possible vaccinated so we reach the 70/80% target as soon as possible?
3. Is it to punish people for having concerns about a vaccine, or feeling resentful about lack of choice, with the result that many of them hold out?
If it is 1 - then let the over 60s choose Pfizer if that's what they want.
If it is 2 - then it doesn't really matter what age the person is, a vaccinated person is a vaccinated person and adds to the target. In fact, it's better for target purposes to have the vaccine recipient be over 16, given that is the age group that is counted in the target. So let the over 60s choose Pfizer if they want, certainly before 12-15s.
If it is 3 - well keep doing what we are currently doing, it is being very effective in keeping a bunch of over 60s unvaccinated. s/It's totally worth showing them who is the boss here, because after all, medical treatment of unvaccinated people who are more likely to get sicker from COVID doesn't really cost anything (not money, not health care staff stress, not unintended consequences for other illnesses when the ICU beds are taken up) does it now? s/