nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

COVID-19: Vaccine/antidote and testing procedures Megathread [Mod Warning - Post #1]

Masala

Today being Paddy Day 2020... when do you think we will have a ‘flu jab’ / pill / syrup that we can take to make us immune/ les likely to catch this 19 virus?.

Mod: The purpose of this thread is baked into the title - COVID-19: Vaccine/antidote and testing procedures - it's not a platform to push an anti vaccination agenda. If posters wish to discuss the perceived cons of vaccinations, or push various theories regarding 'the agenda' (whatever that is supposed to mean), open a thread elsewhere on it.

Threadbanned Users:
3xh
Dr.Frost
kingbhome
nannerbenahs
skooterblue2
Fodla
Caraibh
drunkmonkey
lawrencesummers
Howard Beale

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Le Bruise

Irish Stones wrote: »

I told you, that's a fake newpapers. Who knows there is behind that website.

Then why use it as a source?

timsey tiger

Irish Stones wrote: »

In my opinion, it's weird that no more certainties can be given about this vaccine. Lots of probably, likely, and so on.

Wouldn't these terms instill too many doubts in people who are already unsure about taking this vaccine?
I think that nobody could blame them if they are hesitant.

You're reading the news as it unfurls, not a bedtime story for kids. How on earth could you expect certainty, when the investigations into the vaccines aren't complete yet?

stephenjmcd

Le Bruise wrote: »

Then why use it as a source?

They're trying to be smart after I called out a few of the Italian links they posted last week as being BS, very easy to disprove them but sure its like talking to a brick wall.

Such as that link this morning saying eu doesn't have anything with Moderna, takes 2 seconds to disprove

Gael23

Our share if the modern a vaccine is only 1.6m doses so we need the Pfizer one as well

Le Bruise

Gael23 wrote: »

Our share if the modern a vaccine is only 1.6m doses so we need the Pfizer one as well

We'll get our share of both....plus whatever else comes down the line. The joys of being part of the EU.

Gael23

Le Bruise wrote: »

We'll get our share of both....plus whatever else comes down the line. The joys of being part of the EU.

Hopefully, there’s not enough of others for the HSE to say they don’t want the Pfizer one because of the storage issue

iguana

I just saw on twitter that a portion of the funding for the Moderna vaccine came from a fund donated by Dolly Parton. I feel like there's a Nearly 95, percent protection from my vaccine parody song on it's way to us.

I'm also curious about how the anti-vaxxers forthcoming evil Dolly conspiracy will go.

enda1

Gael23 wrote: »

Our share if the modern a vaccine is only 1.6m doses so we need the Pfizer one as well

Out of interest, when they say 1.6M doses for example, does this mean 800,000 people can be vaccinated since it takes 2 doses spaced apart or is that already taken into account and so it means 1.6M people?

Cheers

stephenjmcd

Gael23 wrote: »

Our share if the modern a vaccine is only 1.6m doses so we need the Pfizer one as well

We get both.

EU will assign whatever they have on a pro rata basis

stephenjmcd

Gael23 wrote: »

Hopefully, there’s not enough of others for the HSE to say they don’t want the Pfizer one because of the storage issue

Its not a case of saying they don't want it.

Government has signed into pre purchase and put the money forward as part of the EU collective

AssetBacked2

iguana wrote: »

I just saw on twitter that a portion of the funding for the Moderna vaccine came from a fund donated by Dolly Parton. I feel like there's a Nearly 95, percent protection from my vaccine parody song on it's way to us.

I'm also curious about how the anti-vaxxers forthcoming evil Dolly conspiracy will go.

It depends whether her funding was a donation or an investment.

lbj666

enda1 wrote: »

Out of interest, when they say 1.6M doses for example, does this mean 800,000 people can be vaccinated since it takes 2 doses spaced apart or is that already taken into account and so it means 1.6M people?

Cheers

Generally the numbers you see floating around are expressed in doses, not recipients

enda1

lbj666 wrote: »

Generally the numbers you see floating around are expressed in doses, not recipients

Seems an unfortunate way to communicate. For those of us who've read about it, we know that it's 2 doses per recipient. But I'm sure many people have misunderstood and believed we're talking about double the number of recipients than actually.

ixoy

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Government has signed into pre purchase and put the money forward as part of the EU collective

Plus, on the Pfizer side, it seems the logistics aren't quite as challenging as initially made out if it can stay refrigerated for five days.

It looks like Moderna also can't scale up to the same level as Pfizer - I saw 1b doses in 2021 being spouted, or 500m people vaccinated globally. Now they might overcome that hurdle (although it'd be difficult), but with that in mind it makes sense to have as much as possible. As with any vaccine, it's important yes to vaccinate the most vulnerable but we do need it done more widely to protect not only people against any long-term effects but also for those who can't be vaccinated.

Water John

Likely that other vaccines may be one dose. Even if not IWT enough supplies of various vaccines for all the Irish pop will be secured by the Spring.

stephenjmcd

ixoy wrote: »

Plus, on the Pfizer side, it seems the logistics aren't quite as challenging as initially made out if it can stay refrigerated for five days.

It looks like Moderna also can't scale up to the same level as Pfizer - I saw 1b doses in 2021 being spouted, or 500m people vaccinated globally. Now they might overcome that hurdle (although it'd be difficult), but with that in mind it makes sense to have as much as possible. As with any vaccine, it's important yes to vaccinate the most vulnerable but we do need it done more widely to protect not only people against any long-term effects but also for those who can't be vaccinated.

Yeah the Pfizer storage issues are being amplified needlessly I feel.

Given the size of Ireland you might need maybe 1 or 2 central storage locations at the required deep freeze.

They can then be transported to vaccination sites as required to be stored in a normal medical freezer at I think its -5 or thereabouts. After that once out of the freezer then you've 24hrs at room temperature.

Thats the thing of course you should look to vaccinate vulnerable first and front line but I'd personally mix in younger age groups as well, simply because as you say it would be more widely done and then again reduces the risk of overspill back into vulnerable age groups from younger age groups.

Loafing Oaf

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Yeah the Pfizer storage issues are being amplified needlessly I feel.

Yep should be fine as long as people are not messing round looking to reschedule appointments for their injections. Which you'd imagine they wouldn't...

stephenjmcd

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Yep should be fine as long as people are not messing round looking to reschedule appointments for their injections. Which you'd imagine they wouldn't...

Thats it, when you get your appointment no taking the p1ss, set the time aside for the two doses and don't be messing around with rescheduling dates

Water John

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Yep should be fine as long as people are not messing round looking to reschedule appointments for their injections. Which you'd imagine they wouldn't...

Miss your appointment, go to the back of the queue. See you in 3 months.

funnydoggy

Water John wrote: »

Miss your appointment, go to the back of the queue. See you in 3 months.

Bit harsh

a few weeks maybe?

ShineOn7

What positive news have we today?

ShineOn7

iguana wrote: »

I just saw on twitter that a portion of the funding for the Moderna vaccine came from a fund donated by Dolly Parton. I feel like there's a Nearly 95, percent protection from my vaccine parody song on it's way to us.

I feel like there's a joke in there somewhere about large, glorious breasts

I just haven't had enough coffee yet

Knex*

ACitizenErased wrote: »

RTE can **** off. People should remember this going into the future.

They're a poorly run, bloated, loss generating businesses who are utilising sensationalist and negative articles and headlines to generate traffic and clicks.

It's pretty despicable behaviour when you consider the impact they can have on the collective psyche during an already difficult time for everyone.

Marhay70

Knex* wrote: »

They're a poorly run, bloated, loss generating businesses who are utilising sensationalist and negative articles and headlines to generate traffic and clicks.

It's pretty despicable behaviour when you consider the impact they can have on the collective psyche during an already difficult time for everyone.

You forgot "publicly funded", which is the most despicable aspect of all.
Happy to say I stopped watching RTE years ago because of their blatant support for government propaganda in everything so I don't have to pull my hair out reading this shi*e every day.

Sconsey

I see J&J are kicking off a new two-dose phase 3 trial.

I have seen some speculation that Pfizer and Moderna have now set the bar at around 90% effectiveness. There is now a lot of talk that any of the other vaccine candidates will need to report at least 85% to be considered. So it could be that J&J are worried that a single dose would not reach the 85 - 90% effective, and they want to have the two dose option as a backup.

All speculation at this stage, and actually a really good situation if we are approaching the point where the bar is set so high.

It makes the pending Az/Oxford announcement even more interesting. I don't know what percentage effictivness they are expecting but the pressure on them has been ramped up by the first two announcements.

ShineOn7

Sconsey wrote: »

I see J&J are kicking off a new two-dose phase 3 trial.

I have seen some speculation that Pfizer and Moderna have now set the bar at around 90% effectiveness.

There was speculation on Reddit Ireland yesterday about all companies trying to one-up each other from now on with efficiency % claims

That's grand with me, as long as those claims are true

Sky King

Sconsey wrote: »

All speculation at this stage, and actually a really good situation if we are approaching the point where the bar is set so high.

Yea it's great, and basically the opposite of what some feared would happen: A mediocre vaccine might get approved first, putting off many other potentially better candidates.

ACitizenErased

My thoughts on the second J&J trial:

The one dose effectiveness isn't high enough based on early readouts and a two dose regimen will be needed.

[Deleted User]

ACitizenErased wrote: »

My thoughts on the second J&J trial:

The one dose effectiveness isn't high enough based on early readouts and a two dose regimen will be needed.

Doubtful. They wouldn't have access to any unblinded data yet. Most likely they're just trying to cover all bases in the event efficacy isn't as high as they hoped.

iguana

Sconsey wrote: »

It makes the pending Az/Oxford announcement even more interesting. I don't know what percentage effictivness they are expecting but the pressure on them has been ramped up by the first two announcements.

What are the transport and storage requirements for Chadox1? Afaik, they are much more standard. So a slightly lower efficacy could be counterbalanced by the ease of which they could be distributed and given to lower risk sections of the population.