Yeah, can't see any data but I do get abundance of caution given the MSM feeding frenzy. Interesting research on the pill here, basically unless I got my sums wrong, the risk of blood clot arising from the AZ vaccine is significantly lower than the risk of blood clot arising from the common contraceptive pill, which puts it into a relative perspective.

Systematic Review of Hormonal Contraception and Risk of Venous Thrombosis

Although I’m as keen as anyone else for a holiday, a significant frustration for me is how this is always framed as “holidaymakers won’t be able to afford...”.

As others have noted upthread, many people have close relatives abroad (or conversely are themselves working abroad), who they haven’t been able to see for a year or more.

The requirement for PCR testing, especially at the UK’s inflated private testing prices, will mean that these family separations will persist. For those of us with more elderly relatives, that is a cruel blow - and far harder to bear than not being able to go on holiday, as much as I adore travel.

Is the GP rejection because Mrs Wilsnunn is on maternity leave and therefore doesn't qualify as a health care worker? That seems odd as health care workers are listed in one of the high categories and I am surprised that the GPs are not more supportive. Are you speaking to a GP at the surgery, or being fobbed off before that point. Maybe an email would work?
I'm also surprised the online booking system won't allow her to book in, if necessary click the category nearest appropriate eg carer. When you get to the centre the registration system prompts to ask for evidence, a recent payslip or official ID would be accepted. Provided you have that, I can't see a problem at all. I would plan a day out to Stevenage, if the hospital can't guarantee a slot, there is a genuinely large mass vac centre at Robertson House, Stevenage. I would guess a doctor registered at the nearby hospital would be accommodated.

My understanding is that the comparison to the risks of the pill are misplaced. the particular patterns of blood clotting issues observed (Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis or CVST, and disseminated intravascular coagulation, DIC*) with thrombocytopenia, ie low platelet counts, are what is unusual.

Comparing the apparent risk of “clots” between the pill and the vaccine (even if the link is proven, which so far is uncertain) isn’t comparing apples with apples.

* When I mentioned DIC to a medic friend, they pulled a long face - it’s really nasty.

What a mess with travel.
I ordered my pack of 7 rapid flow tests in case i need to use them for travel from gov.uk, at least I can be as prepared as possible.

The thing I don't get about the rapid flow tests is, how can they prevent people from faking negative results on these?

I was not interested from a medical view, more from pure statistics and the risk averse nature that society seems to have developed to this particular vaccine. People are happy to take a far greater risk to prevent pregnancy, but not something like covid. I read somewhere this morning that it was 80 cases in 200 million doses, or something like that, for AZ. Just seems odd to me to go after it like this. Anyways...I am full of AZ and due a topup and not worried at all.

Got any spare? :D

I think there are several interesting things going on here. I totally agree about misperception of absolute risks (eg I’m far more likely to be hit by a bus on my way to the vaccination centre). But it also says a lot about how the risks of the pill are understated!

How a society reacts to particular issues like this is complex and mediated by a wide range of issues - media representation, peer influences, social media - and pre-existing biases and perceptions. I’m reminded in some ways of the UK horse-meat scandal in late 2012/early 2013 - I went to Iceland shortly thereafter and the UK’s squeamishness was laughed at. Vaccine hesitancy varies significantly across social groups and countries, and addressing that is very challenging.

And then add in the fact that humans are generally terrible at quantifying different risks - and even at visualising large numbers like “one million” or “ten million” - and it gets even trickier.

The long and short of it for me is that if I have the opportunity to be vaccinated with AZ, I’ll take it.

Though the choice is between (1) the AZ vaccine or (2) a possibility of getting Covid really badly whilst waiting for an alternative vaccine, so these are the only probabilities that are relevant. The elephant in the room is that the chance of getting Covid really badly is tiny -- and then take into account its only a few weeks to wait for something else, and that you might already have Covid immunity due to a previous infection.

Are there not two parallel discussions here? One is the basis for which the decisions are being made by scientists and medics and somewhat separate is the acceptability to the wider public receiving the vaccines.

On the latter, people are, as pointed out, terribly irrational when it comes to probability (exhibit A: the national lottery).

On the medical determination, I’m broadly happy to go with what is recommended by committees of experts in their field and were AZ offered to me I’d take it. But, given there are better performing alternatives available, which appear to have lower risks, I would imagine over time government purchasers will gravitate towards the alternatives, subject to supply. At least until the next new variant, or side effect, emerges!

I'm still doing Euromillions tonight though :)

Actually that is a good point - how do we know people aren't faking these?

If check-in were to hand out a sealed bag - or the passenger shows their own bag - and then gets back 30 minutes later a completed test kit, it would be difficult to fake, even less so when observed. There is always scope for malfeasance, apparently not everyone drives below the speed limit, or so I am told. Ultimately it's remarkable how most people, most of the time, do the right thing, for their own benefit and those around them.

I mean we don’t know if people are using Photoshop to generate PCR results or if they are taking the test genuinely. It’s probably better to supervise a lower quality test than to get people to do a high quality test unsupervised.