💉 Petition

Commons Chamber

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

Bambos Charalambous presented a petition urging the government to extend free Respiratory Syncytial Virus and shingles vaccines to those over 80, highlighting the severe health risks these illnesses pose. The current age limit of 80 for vaccine eligibility is seen as arbitrary and detrimental to those who need the vaccines most. The petition calls for immediate action to reallocate funds to ensure older individuals can access these crucial vaccines, noting that such measures are already in place in the US and EU.

Summary

  • Petition for Extended Vaccine Eligibility: Bambos Charalambous, representing Southgate and Wood Green, presented a petition on behalf of his constituent, Jane Wessman, and others. They are requesting the government to extend the eligibility for free Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) and shingles vaccines beyond the current cutoff age of 80.

  • Health Benefits Highlighted: The petition emphasizes the significant health benefits of extending vaccine eligibility, noting that RSV can lead to serious conditions like acute respiratory infections and pneumonia, while shingles can result in vision loss or blindness.

  • International Comparison: It was pointed out that in the United States and the European Union, these vaccines are recommended for all individuals over 80, suggesting a precedent for the UK to follow.

  • Request for Government Action: The petitioners are urging the UK Government to reallocate funds to ensure that those over 80 can continue to receive these vital vaccines free of charge, addressing an arbitrary age barrier that currently limits access to these health resources.

Divisiveness

The given transcript is a presentation of a petition by Bambos Charalambous, where he discusses the need to extend the eligibility criteria for the Respiratory Syncytial Virus and Shingles vaccines to individuals over 80 years of age. There is no apparent disagreement presented in the session. The entire text focuses on the content of the petition and the concerns of the constituents without any counterarguments or opposing views being expressed. Hence, the level of disagreement is minimal, warranting a rating of 1 on a scale of 1 to 5.