It would make perfect sense in the pure “survival of the species” sense but would be political suicide. Imagine the media coverage of the “old” people dying.
Short of a nuclear WW3 or something like that, political suicide is a no-go, no matter what.
There is no definitive answer. There is no way there could be even a hint, not until we have a widespread roll out.
But based on what we know about viruses and vaccines in general, it would be rather unusual if vaccinated people were spreaders (or at least, as spready as the unvaccinated.)
DavidS wrote:
However, it would neatly account for there only being two new variants!
Yea it would, but we know there are over 4000 variants of the virus, most of which make no clinical difference. The B.1.1.7 variant is relevant precisely because, unlike thousands of others, it does seem to actually enhance the capability of the virus (to spread).
kwlf wrote:
I have no idea whether we are doing more or less of that than other comparably wealthy countries.
The UK is sequencing 7.4% of cases.
The USA is sequencing 0.3% of cases. Japan sequences 4.6% of its cases.
The UK and Denmark (11.7%) are the only two European countries in the top 10 countries sequencing COVID cases (the only table I can find is a top 10, showing where the US lies in relation to this. I’ve seen another table somewhere that shows France is in a similar place to the US, sequencing about 0.3% of cases, but I can’t find it now).
Graham wrote:
vaccinate those who spread, not those who are vulnerable.
How do you find out in advance?
You make a sensible estimate, on the grounds that the elderly in care homes don’t get around as much as the younger and more active.
I am not sure how you can get the “heathy young under 25years vaccinated first to protect those at risk”? they are already locked down, staying at home most with no jobs, studies, money or future for what is “barely 0.2% mortality risk” where all of them have a zero risk aversion, you can’t ask more than that 
In a nutshell you have to vaccinate those at risk first or daily contact and then problem solved? anyone who does not take the vaccine will get the real one soon or later it’s just question of time, at the current scale of the pandemic, the goal of most countries is not “suppression of transmission” or “protect those at risk”, current lockdowns are mainly driven by limiting daily hospital admissions and at this early stage the goal of the vaccine is not to stop transmissions or to ease lockdowns, we are really not there yet…
My home state of Lower Saxony has extensive data on the local spread of Covid-19 on its official homepage (in German).
One statistic I found notable was the cases by age group. People aged 20-29 are now leading by total number of infections, followed by the 50-59 year old.
Yet if you look at the incidence by age group (cases per 100.000 people of the age group in question), the elderly clearly dominate:
If you look at the number of Covid-19 deaths by age, it is clear that not only over 80s die:
But if you look at the “death incidence”, i.e. how many out of 100.000 people per age group died, it is obvious that the deaths among the younger people are statistical background noise in comparison:
Edit: Note, all graphs are also sorted by sex, with blue representing male and green female values (orange is “diverse”, meaning those who identify as neither…didn’t find a single orange pixel anywhere)
“vaccinate those who spread, not those who are vulnerable”
Those who are vulnerable are not those in care homes. They are the workers in contact with many people in confined spaces. They are likely to pass it on because of their work, not their choice of behaviour.
Small shops, railway carriage staff, taxi drivers, etc
On Tuesday I travelled in 2 taxis. Eshott to Newcastle I sat next to the driver with both of us wearing masks. Inverness station to airport, I sat in the back, with a polythene sheet separating us. A flap lifted to pay the driver. Again we both wore masks.
The Covid-19 incidence in Newcastle is higher than in Inverness.
(My journey was to deliver an aircraft, not for leasure.)
Very interesting data Medewok, though not surprising.
Clearly being sexually “non binary” confers 100% protection from the virus, but I would get a “reaction” from Justine if I went to test that
