I think that there are a multitude of reasons but comparisons with India are flawed for the reason you identify. The data is simply not reliable.
The factors I’ve seen identified are partly cultural and partly as a result of historic and systemic discrimination causing a disproportionate impact on the socio-economic situation of the wider BAME community.
Things such as the greater prevalence of diabetes, and weight issues, three or more generations living under the same roof, the more vulnerable economic circumstances meaning that people are less likely to be able to afford to self-isolate, more pressure on them to continue to go to work, where they are more likely to be in circumstances where contact with others is more likely. A higher proportion live in congested urban environments, they may also not be able to afford or get access to adequate PPE, perhaps less likely to seek urgent medical attention before it’s too late.
These are all sweeping generalisations, of course, but are applicable due to the socio-economic disparity that disproportionately impacts the BAME community. There may be other factors at a biological level that may make certain ethnicities more vulnerable - as you see with sickle cell anaemia. Not sure if a biological vulnerability has been shown?
I think it’s simply smaller populations. Roughly equivalent doses have been administered across various regions in terms of geographical area but the population of the NE or NW is smaller than London or the SE (for example) so by proportion those areas (NE and NW) have vaccinated more.
I dont know about the comparison with India. I suspect there is a question about data reliability there. In the UK there will be a socioeconomic factor (shared living/accommodation, jobs in public transport or health sector where there is a high risk of spreading, or low wage businesses where people have no choice but to work and often in unpleasant or small spaced businesses. Then there is also the underlying health issues on top of that.
Spain has had to halt vaccinations for at least two weeks in several parts of the country due to the problems with supply. It’s rate of daily vaccinations had already been falling every day from 70k per day 10 days ago to 47,000 on Monday. That comes at a time when Spain have reported their highest 7-day number of new cases since the pandemic began.
This situation is dire but its even worse in developing countries. Someone on BBC 5live this morning reported that those developing nations had administered 25 doses of vaccine so far. Not 25,000. 25. This needs to be addressed urgently.
London is getting its fair share of vaccine supply for the priority groups we have to vaccinate by mid-February.
I read this to mean that London is getting the same quantities of vaccine in proportion to its population of over 80s / at risk group, as say the Northwest or the Northeast.
If so, the difference in vaccination rates is not that London is being relatively starved of vaccine, but that London’s vaccination system is not large enough or is less efficient/effective than these other regions.
Until this deficiency is addressed, diverting vaccine away from the Northwest / Northeast will only serve to slow down these regions’ vaccination rates whilst increasing stockpiles of vaccine in London.
It will not increase the vaccination rate in London.
I think the EU really screwed up dragging its feet with Moderna, even more so now with this concern. Our Moderna flows have been prioritized to the elderly because it appears to have much gentler side effects for over 65s.
In the sense that not approving its use will affect confidence in the UK vaccination program. We definitely do not need an increase in scepticism within vulnerable groups in the UK to a vaccine that has been shown to provoke a strong immune response in the over 65s.
