So you'll be giving a single dose which is ineffective to the people that need protection the most.

That point in vaid and needs addressing.

There are around 25 million in the highly vulnerable group, hence at 40 million Pfizer doses, there is sufficient vaccine cover them all with one dose, but not enough to give two doses. Whatever happens, and whatever the scientific merits of your observations, it is numerically impossible to give two jabs to them all, unless there is another tranche. I don't know the odds on that, but we have to plan for the worst. So, the basic simple options to operationalise these are:

1) to give at least one dose quickly to as many of the vulnerable as possible,consuming 25 million doses and then after min 21 days since first jab start to use the balance (15 million ) to follow up with a second dose for the most vulnerable of the highly vulnerable, consuming the last drop. Resume for all after new tranches obtained.

or

2) To give two doses to exactly 20 million of the highly vulnerable, leaving 5 million highly vulnerable, with no protection whatsoever.

I suggest that option 2 is very foolish. Option 1 is correct, being similar to what what Mr Blair and Dr Salisbury suggest, but (caveat) constraining remaining vaccine after first pass to vulnerable group. Everybody vulnerable gest some protection, most vulnerable get most protection. It's as good as it gets. I hear you Splatt, but those are the figures.

I hope to hell NHS. has a decent planner who knows these things.

I have taken my pick. I choose not to have it. If you believe jabbing the population will get you out of lockdown and all the other shite that goes with it then good for you. Me I dont. They have already said masks ect will continue. 99% of the population to protect the 1% ..when has this ever happened before with flu as an example? When has the populations well being ever been at the forefront of anything before ....wake up please and smell the coffee ...I am very happy with my social conscience thanks.i have one..
😀

That's my point. Perhaps we can change the dynamics of it via vaccination to make it occur sooner and get out of lockdown sooner,

Why are you still making that claim when:
(i) we have no data at all to suggest any of the vaccine candidates currently prevent infection OR transmission?!

(ii) Why vaccinating twice the number at half the efficacy is in any way sensible when the highest group it WONT work for are the very same group most vulnerable

It'll come naturally regardless - it already has in some parts of the world.

good for you.

That's nice of you, thanks!

It's not about what I believe. The govt. is locking down according to cases, cases in vulnerable group, deaths, admissions and icu occupancy. Those are what they watch. To get out of lockdowns, there must be fewer of all that. The vaccine provides fewer of all the above. hence it is a good thing, I expect Oxford vaccine to be approved on Mon or Tue, which will remove all the scheduling problems with Pfizer, moderna etc. as we have enough Oxford for all.

It is not clear what the "exit policy" of this mess will be.

At the beginning there was - understandably - a panic about numbers of deaths.

Then, the script changed and the panic became about numbers of "cases" (positive tests). The theory was that positive tests one day, translated into hospital beds and deaths the next. That correlation has failed to materialise but, still, cases and positive tests are driving the fear narrative.

Will vaccinations address this narrative, or will they give rise to a new one?

It is not clear - and anybody who knows please reply - if someone with a vaccination will still return a positive test? Will it matter if they do? Will people who are vaccinated still be asked to test and re-test and re-re-re-test?

Many governments have created - deliberately - a panic. A massive sense of hysteria, that they can no longer control. Witness schools. There was no reason, in my opinion, to ever shut them down but having done so, they are now facing stiff opposition from teaching unions and many parents who have, quite simply, just believed the original propaganda, and these same governments are now having some difficulty to re-open schools without admitting that closing them in the first place was wrong.

It would be nice to think that vaccinations will end the hysteria but, sadly, I fear not. Hysteria by nature is illogical. All we will need will be just ONE case of a vaccinated person dying from covid-related complications to maintain the public reign of terror.

Calm talk about building up immunity and "being reasonable" requires just that: calm.

In almost any and every other crisis I can think of - even war - the role of governments has been to try and maintain a sense of calm. This is a very rare case where the public message has been to encourage and exaggerate the fear and hysteria.

I am not sure vaccinations will end this.