You mean 'low risk' then?
When should you have had it?
I'm fine with having it after the more vulnerable people. I was just answering the question asked.
I do think it stinks that the current plan is to lift all restrictions before all workers have been vaccinated or even had the first part.
Except (in the under the bus metaphor) you will have have a he1met on, young person, which will save you from serious injury
Good metaphor in one way: how much does a helmet stop your chest being crushed?
- the bus will be travelling at less than 8mph. So its BSEN1078 standard should be relevant.
BSEN1078 is only relevant if it hit the top of my head square on!
At which point, the weight of the bus becomes rather more important than the impact from the speed it was dropped on me!
By then (21 June), unless you are under 45 (which the style of your posts doesn't suggest), you will have been 'offered' a vaccination, or already received one.
Only the first part, if that. And then there's the rest of my household to protect, all under 45. Or am I meant to not care about them, the same way that all these 50+ politicians don't seem to care about us?
If the take up is less than 90% in the next JCVI groups your jab date will be earlier still. And 37 million (2/3rds of the adult population) will have been vaccinated and another 4 million (under 45, unvaccinated, estimated) will have antibodies from having had C19 in the last 6 months.
As usual, those numbers seem optimistically high to me, both in assumed rate and assumed take-up. Are you taking the top of the confidence intervals again?
And then there's the implication that that level of vaccination might suffice to avoid negative consequences.
You will still have the option not to go anywhere.
Probably not easily if the restrictions on workplaces are also lifted, unless I fancy having no work. The "lock yourself up" approach doesn't work if the virus runs riot and it would still be a crap tactic in June.