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

funnydoggy · 03-12-2020 12:24PM

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

This whole process is being rushed, usually takes 10 years....Also, why are they taking so long ????

Got me in the first half, not gonna lie :pac:

is_that_so · 03-12-2020 12:25PM

leahyl wrote: »

yes, but we're only one of two in Europe that isn't ready? Every other country is? Wouldn't you think that we'd be well prepared by now? Anyway....I'm keeping positive!

We've been planning it since September apparently, well the HSE/DoH have, but the task force has only been up and running for about a month.

ixoy · 03-12-2020 12:31PM

is_that_so wrote: »

We've been planning it since September apparently, well the HSE/DoH have, but the task force has only been up an running for about a month.

Hopefully the task force didn't go in and have to say, "You've barely started your work". Them not responding, as above, is not encouraging as, whatever way you cut it, we're not as prepared as other EU countries.

I also saw this statement by on RTE Gloom's site:

Dr Favier said it will be important not to rush things and to get this right.

She said the involvement of GPs in vaccine provision has yet to be decided, but GPs are very good at rolling out vaccinations and know their patients, so they are nimble and can respond to challenges.

However, she said that GPs are overworked but will "potentially stand up to the plate" and respond if needed.

It's the "potentially stand up to the plate" that'd be concerning and the fact it appears GPs haven't been consulted yet.
The article mentions a target of 60% for herd immunity but it just seems to be an opinion, rather than anything definite.

odyssey06 · 03-12-2020 12:34PM

Not sure if it's the right thread to mention it, but what would certainly ease rollout is ensuring staff can take paid time off to get the vaccine. At the moment, my understanding is that paid leave for a scheduled medical appointment isn't statutory - as opposed to an unexpected illness or accident or emergency type situation.
So clarity, something unequivocal from the government on that would be good across the private and public sector.

03-12-2020 12:36PM

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

They really aren't ahead. There is still data been analysed by the EMA, but the Uk have gone ahead for purely political/Brexit reasons, possibly preparing for a no deal Brexit. It's a bit of a gamble by the UK, it'll most likely be fine, but a gamble none the less.

The UK could also be doing it for medical reasons, the earlier they get this out the fewer deaths they'll have.

BrianD3 · 03-12-2020 12:38PM

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

They really aren't ahead. There is still data been analysed by the EMA, but the Uk have gone ahead for purely political/Brexit reasons, possibly preparing for a no deal Brexit. It's a bit of a gamble by the UK, it'll most likely be fine, but a gamble none the less.

We don't know that they are or aren't ahead. We don't know what assessments of what data have been or remain to be carried out

As complete speculation, it could be that the British have analysed safety data but been less thorough on analysing efficacy data, deciding, following a risk assessment that it is preferable to get needles in arms next week rather than wait a month for the inevitable "x number of projected deaths caused by vaccine approval delay" headlines.

Yes the British action is a gamble, inaction is also a gamble. The EU could spend as long as it wants analysing the Pfizer submission and it still wouldn't guarantee that nothing bad would ever happen and it still wouldn't satisfy the militant anti vaxxers.

is_that_so · 03-12-2020 12:38PM

AdamD wrote: »

The UK could also be doing it for medical reasons, the earlier they get this out the fewer deaths they'll have.

It's more to make them look like they finally have a plan. They have screwed up all the way through the pandemic. This is for a political win and of course for medical reasons.

Ashbourne hoop · 03-12-2020 12:41PM

AdamD wrote: »

The UK could also be doing it for medical reasons, the earlier they get this out the fewer deaths they'll have.

Everything they've done thus far would suggest otherwise.

Marhay70 · 03-12-2020 12:45PM

Cordell wrote: »

UK had to approve it because they are not EU anymore and the EU approval is worth nothing to them, right? If this is the case, Boris had seized an opportunity to score some points and prove that they were right to leave and so on, while doing something good for a change.

I hope I'm not sounding naive but I'm curious as to why the UK regulator would bow to political pressure. I would presume there is more to be lost than gained from this in the long term.
I did hear some blatant jingoism from a Tory politician this morning claiming a first for Britain along with the usual bluster but the interviewer took the wind out of his sails by pointing out it was developed by Turkish doctors, using German money in a US facility in Belgium. What a put down, I had to laugh

Ashbourne hoop · 03-12-2020 12:46PM

BrianD3 wrote: »

We don't know that they are or aren't ahead. We don't know what assessments of what data have been or remain to be carried out

As complete speculation, it could be that the British have analysed safety data but been less thorough on analysing efficacy data, deciding, following a risk assessment that it is preferable to get needles in arms next week rather than wait a month for the inevitable "x number of projected deaths caused by vaccine approval delay" headlines.

Nothing they've done so far would suggest they've made such a calculated decision, it's possible I guess, but unlikely imo.

Yes the British action is a gamble, inaction is also a gamble. The EU could spend as long as it wants analysing the Pfizer submission and it still wouldn't guarantee that nothing bad would ever happen and it still wouldn't satisfy the militant anti vaxxers.

There is still 100% data been analysed by the EMA. It's very likely that the EMA will follow the UK in approving the vaccine but it's still a gamble by the UK.

03-12-2020 01:04PM

A presentation by BioNTech on their vaccine. They go into a lot of detail regarding the science and distribution. It's over an hour but well worth a watch.
https://player.admiralcloud.com/?v=5c1fecc2-f902-4886-b87b-5bcac76b7c2d

Also a link to the slides seen in the video.
https://investors.biontech.de/static-files/53f0968a-279b-4f82-a2fc-d67dcb6e4e91

Sky King · 03-12-2020 01:26PM

is_that_so wrote: »

It's more to make them look like they finally have a plan. They have screwed up all the way through the pandemic. This is for a political win and of course for medical reasons.

Yes and also 'get one over on the EU'.

afatbollix · 03-12-2020 01:28PM

EMA used to be based in London, London has all the experts already.

How many people of the EMA wanted to stay in London instead of Amsterdam when it moved last year?

The UK has also been doing a rolling review of the data. They didn't get the data all on day 1 like the EMA.

But they will be seen as wrong in the EU or Irish eyes no matter what they do.

I expect the Vaccine to be approved by the EMA it will just take longer, We should be asking the experts why it is taking longer?

brisan · 03-12-2020 01:29PM

ixoy wrote: »

A little bit of more concrete detail here on RTE, including:

* nine ultra-low temperature containers have been obtained for storage
(not sure how many doses each container can old) and that " this equipment will be commissioned by the middle of next week."

MM claims it's their top priority but, even so, gives us a moment of humour when he says:

"He said he was sure the Department of Health and HSE had a lot of experience and expertise."

.. Assuming they're allowed exert that expertise and not stifled by red tape.

MM is one of the few who are sure of that so

brisan · 03-12-2020 01:31PM

Talk of them using hospitals to give the vaccinations
Well my mother and a few of her neighbours will not be going near a hospital
3 people in the estate went into hospital Covid free with other ailments , caught Covid in the hospital and died with / from Covid
They are petrified of going near a hospital

Ashbourne hoop · 03-12-2020 01:31PM

afatbollix wrote: »

EMA used to be based in London, London has all the experts already.

How many people of the EMA wanted to stay in London instead of Amsterdam when it moved last year?

The UK has also been doing a rolling review of the data. They didn't get the data all on day 1 like the EMA.

But they will be seen as wrong in the EU or Irish eyes no matter what they do.

I expect the Vaccine to be approved by the EMA it will just take longer, We should be asking the experts why it is taking longer?

I fully expect them to do so too, but they are still reviewing data so it'll take a little longer.

stephenjmcd · 03-12-2020 01:37PM

brisan wrote: »

Talk of them using hospitals to give the vaccinations
Well my mother and a few of her neighbours will not be going near a hospital
3 people in the estate went into hospital Covid free with other ailments , caught Covid in the hospital and died with / from Covid
They are petrified of going near a hospital

Except they won't actually be going into a hospital. Vaccination centres would be outside on hospital grounds.

Bit of a difference between going into hospital and turning up to a tent outside

03-12-2020 01:37PM

Caraibh wrote: »

Is that the same Lancet that was forced to retract a bogus study on hydroxychloroquine?

The data wasn't clear in June. It is now

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/hydroxychloroquine-does-not-benefit-adults-hospitalized-covid-19

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2772921

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2022926

https://pink.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/PS143379/Labeling-Changes-In-Store-For-Hydroxychloroquine-In-EU-After-COVID-19-Experience

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/11/studies-find-no-covid-benefit-preventive-hydroxychloroquine-or-convalescent

brisan · 03-12-2020 01:39PM

speckle wrote: »

What about the motorbikers in the gardai medical corp army and those who deliever bloods first responders etc. Have staff in place and they do the transport. Or refrigerated truckers.. just throwing ideas out for you all.

If you think the HSE is going to hand over any form of control or god forbid praise to an outside agency , think again
I have said this before and I’ll say it again
If the HSE can find an unique way to fcuk up the roll out of the vaccinations
rest assured they will find it and use it
People saying they have experience in vaccinations
When have they been asked to vaccinate 3 million people in 6 months
They do not have the mindset to think outside the box and they will not hand over power to an outside committee

Gael23 · 03-12-2020 01:41PM

Wouldn’t go near a hospital either but I expect these will be simply on hospital grounds in clinics mobile or otherwise

brisan · 03-12-2020 01:43PM

Pasteur. wrote: »

How is the cartoon relevant?

Seems to be the goto for smartypants

Exactly
The poster asks a simple question and they get a condescending sneering reply
If you’ve nothing g better to do , don’t answer
From what I have read injection is the only way to deliver the vaccine

Away With The Fairies · 03-12-2020 01:43PM

leahyl wrote: »

Just reading an article on RTE this morning and Dr Margaret Harris from WHO says this "She said the vaccine will be an immune barrier, but it will not stop the transmission for a long time unless we continue with the public health guidelines."

Eh what? How long do we have to continue with masks and social distancing even after we get the vaccine and are protected?? It sounds like it's indefinite from that statement?

Heard a bloke on an English channel yesterday say they don't know if it will stop transmission. So I'm guessing, they are starting slowly in telling us that things won't be normal anytime soon.

brisan · 03-12-2020 01:45PM

ShineOn7 wrote: »

It's a bit of craic on a great day

To be fair, you asked if a vaccine should be injected in us on a vaccine thread

It's the most direct way to get anything into the human body

But it’s not the only way as you well know
The poster asked a simple question and should have got a decent answer
The poster could have a severe phobia of needles

Irish Stones · 03-12-2020 01:46PM

chrisbonnie wrote: »

Do you mind me asking, have you had any other vaccines in your life, and if so, genuinely, how much of a background check did you do on them, ie, checking their efficiency, checking how many people where in the trials, numbers of people with side effects etc..... And please be honest.

I'm not the poster you asked the question to, but I would like to give my point of view, if you don't bother.
I only had the vaccines that were absolutely mandatory when I was a young child, say between 4 and 8 yo?
Since then, I haven't taken any vaccine anymore, and I'm in my 50's.

To be honest, when I was 25 I asked my GP to prescribe a shot for the mumps vaccine, and I still remember his reply.
He said "Please, explain it to me. You want to get the mumps or want to avoid it", I replied "I would like to avoid it". Then he said "Well, so you'd better skip the vaccine, because the vaccine is the best way to get the disease".

I'm not saying that all vaccines are giving us the diseases, just wanted to share with you this episode of my life.

brisan · 03-12-2020 01:46PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I heard they were considering fusing it with the sugar coating of Fruit Pastilles

Another condescending smart ass

timsey tiger · 03-12-2020 01:48PM

Pasteur. wrote: »

Why does everyone have to be injected?

Is there no simpler method?

I'd imagine, that it is the simplest and surest method of delivering a consistent dose.

brisan · 03-12-2020 01:50PM

Goldengirl wrote: »

Cannot be done like that .
What if someone faints or has a reaction to the jab ?
True reactions are rare but they do occur, most reactions are fainting.

The testing centres could be used but not drive thru .

Monitored waiting areas post vaccine
As I said the HSE will have to think outside the box for this and that is something they have shown themselves to be incapable of time and time again
Britain is using racecourses
Italy has major centres already identified as has Germany

VillageIdiot71 · 03-12-2020 01:50PM

afatbollix wrote: »

I expect the Vaccine to be approved by the EMA it will just take longer, We should be asking the experts why it is taking longer?

I don't expect it will lead to a significantly different position.

Both the EU and UK are indemnifying companies again claims for any unexpected problems, as the EU and UK processes are both rushed to the extent that they create significantly more risk than would normally be tolerated.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-pfizer-vaccine-legal-indemnity-safety-ministers-b1765124.html

The UK government has granted pharmaceutical giant Pfizer a legal indemnity protecting it from being sued, enabling its coronavirus vaccine to be rolled out across the country as early as next week.

The Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed the company has been given an indemnity protecting it from legal action as a result of any problems with the vaccine.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-eu-vaccine/covid-19-vaccine-makers-see-eu-shield-against-side-effect-claims-idUKKCN26D0UG

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Vaccine makers will be indemnified in Europe if their COVID-19 shots cause unexpected side-effects, an industry official said on Tuesday, urging European regulators to set up more predictable schemes to compensate possible victims.

It's like that line about haggling over the price.

It's like they're saying the UK is irresponsible by rushing in approval in less than a year, and we'll show how responsible we are by doing it after a couple more months.

Irish Stones · 03-12-2020 01:55PM

leahyl wrote: »

Just reading an article on RTE this morning and Dr Margaret Harris from WHO says this "She said the vaccine will be an immune barrier, but it will not stop the transmission for a long time unless we continue with the public health guidelines."

Eh what? How long do we have to continue with masks and social distancing even after we get the vaccine and are protected?? It sounds like it's indefinite from that statement?

This is what I was saying a few days ago, and I was criticized for.

brisan · 03-12-2020 01:56PM

JDD wrote: »

I do understand lawrencesummers feelings on this.

Put aside the fact that we need herd immunity to protect individuals who cannot take the vaccine for whatever health reason.

Say we get to June, and there has been an 80% uptake from over 70's, HCW and under-70's with serious underlying conditions.

The letter comes to you in the post offering you an appointment time to get your vaccine. You are in your twenties, or thirties, healthy, no underlying conditions. Your parents and those close to you in the vulnerable categories have already been immunized.

You know that the vaccine being offered to you is safe in the short term, because lots and lots of people worldwide took the vaccine in January or February. You do not know how safe the vaccine is in the medium term or the long term. You understand that for the vast majority of vaccines if issues come up they tend to come up immediately, but it is still at the back of your mind that the vaccine is only 12 months old, at best. So there is a sense of the unknown.

In addition, you don't know whether you will need to get a top up vaccination every year. What are the health implications of having to get a top up every year? Nobody knows, at least not yet.

Whereas you do have some certainty is over what effects Covid would have on you should you become infected. If you are young, healthy, and do not work in a health care or factory environment, the chances of being hospitalised are miniscule. You may consider the possibility that you will be effected by long covid, as a result of a mild infection. However, again, it appears that long covid is rare, and even rarer in those not hospitalised as a result of their infection. Still, you consider the possibility.

And then you weigh it against the unknown medium or long term effects of the vaccine, or indeed the unknown short, medium or long term effects of having to take the vaccine on an annual basis.

If you are at the middle point, perhaps taking the vaccine because it is the "right thing to do for society" might tip you into the "alright then, I'll take it" category. But if you are some percentage points away from the middle point, the "good for society" aspect isn't going to get you there.

Just to say, I will take the vaccine when it is offered to me. I am young and healthy. But I would be more concerned about catching a bad dose of covid or indeed suffering from lingering symptoms, then I would be about the miniscule chance that these frontrunner vaccines have some unknown long term side effects. The way I see it, I took a few illegal substances in my time without genuinely thinking what the long term effects might be. And they were just to have a good time at a party. This will actually prevent me from getting sick.

But I can see why someone might tip the other way.

Just on your first few lines
I would hope that by June we would have the vast majority of over 18s vaccinated and not just the vulnerable
We are simply giving out mass vaccinations, not sending men to mars
Most other countries are planning on having the bulk of the vaccinations done by mid summer

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

Comments