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

polesheep · 09-12-2020 03:38PM

seamus wrote: »

Of course it's pure speculation. Nobody knows what's going to happen.

But this quite unprecedented. We've had pandemics before, but not ones that have been quashed by a vaccine within a year. The 'flu vaccine is not the same thing, the risk to patients is lower.

We can speculate as to what will likely happen though.

Telling someone (in at-risk areas) that they can't come into work until they've been vaccinated is kind of a given. And is not unheard of - new training, new certs, etc can all result in someone being kept out of the workplace until they've upskilled.

What they can't (not really) do is fire them or withhold pay for not getting vaccinated. That's crossing the line into civil rights.

So what's an employer to do? Put the person on different duties perhaps; something lower risk where vaccination is not necessary. This is standard if the job requirements change and someone is no longer qualified to do it.

But what if the employer has nothing else for them? The next step there is redundancy. And it's perfectly legal.

Contriving to fire someone and redundancy are not the same thing.

The HSE is extremely short-staffed in specialist, often high-risk, areas. It is not going to tell staff in those areas not to come in.

seamus · 09-12-2020 03:41PM

I'm not worrying, I'm speculating

Do you genuinely think headlines like, "20% of hospital staff are refusing to be vaccinated" would go down well in February? polesheep is right that the HSE can't afford to just dump a load of workers, but at the same time it's an issue of critical importance when the majority of our deaths and cases were acquired in a healthcare setting.

If healthcare workers don't get vaccinated it can and will be spun as a waste of time for the rest of to do it. So the HSE/HPSC wil take a pretty hard line on it.

expectationlost · 09-12-2020 03:53PM

seamus wrote: »

I'm not worrying, I'm speculating

Do you genuinely think headlines like, "20% of hospital staff are refusing to be vaccinated" would go down well in February? polesheep is right that the HSE can't afford to just dump a load of workers, but at the same time it's an issue of critical importance when the majority of our deaths and cases were acquired in a healthcare setting.

If healthcare workers don't get vaccinated it can and will be spun as a waste of time for the rest of to do it. So the HSE/HPSC wil take a pretty hard line on it.

did they take a hard line on the seasonal flu vaccine no.

polesheep · 09-12-2020 03:57PM

seamus wrote: »

I'm not worrying, I'm speculating

Do you genuinely think headlines like, "20% of hospital staff are refusing to be vaccinated" would go down well in February? polesheep is right that the HSE can't afford to just dump a load of workers, but at the same time it's an issue of critical importance when the majority of our deaths and cases were acquired in a healthcare setting.

If healthcare workers don't get vaccinated it can and will be spun as a waste of time for the rest of to do it. So the HSE/HPSC wil take a pretty hard line on it.

If 20% don't take it, it will be spun as 80% taking it. A fantastic uptake that, if replicated across society, would be a resounding success.

is_that_so · 09-12-2020 03:57PM

expectationlost wrote: »

did they take a hard line on the seasonal flu vaccine no.

They may not need it here as staff have seen first hand what it can do. Flu' shots I can understand people shrugging off and ignoring but COVID is a different beast. I think we'll get to 70% coverage comfortably nationally.

expectationlost · 09-12-2020 03:58PM

is_that_so wrote: »

They may not need it here as staff have seen first hand what it can do. Flu' shots I can understand people shrugging off and ignoring but COVID is a different beast. I think we'll get to 70% coverage comfortably nationally.

Personally I can't understand healthcare staff shrugging off seasonal flu shots.

is_that_so · 09-12-2020 03:59PM

polesheep wrote: »

If 20% don't take it, it will be spun as 80% taking it. A fantastic uptake that, if replicated across society, would be a resounding success.

Anything above herd immunity levels and a virtual disappearance of COVID as a public health threat is the success.

Hmmzis · 09-12-2020 03:59PM

expectationlost wrote: »

did they take a hard line on the seasonal flu vaccine no.

Comparing SARS-cov-2 to seasonal influenza is disingenuous at best, the former being far more dangerous and a good bit more transmissible.

Here is a document from the HSE outlining what vaccinations/immune statuses are needed for certain HCWs:

https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/immunisation/hcpinfo/guidelines/chapter4.pdf

The measles section is quite strict in its wording.

is_that_so · 09-12-2020 04:03PM

expectationlost wrote: »

Personally I can't understand healthcare staff shrugging off seasonal flu shots.

I agree but most of the more mature members in the family don't get them because they don't think they need them. A lot of health workers seem to have the same opinion, as would many in society.

expectationlost · 09-12-2020 04:08PM

Hmmzis wrote: »

Comparing SARS-cov-2 to seasonal influenza is disingenuous at best, the former being far more dangerous and a good bit more transmissible.

Here is a document from the HSE outlining what vaccinations/immune statuses are needed for certain HCWs:

https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/immunisation/hcpinfo/guidelines/chapter4.pdf

The measles section is quite strict in its wording.

im not comparing the virus' in total or its negative effects Im comparing them in hospital settings in respect of the people who would outside of a pandemic likely be there and likely be harmed, in contrast to the time and efforts that is needed to get a seasonal flu-vaccine which in a hospital setting would be very little.

Stheno · 09-12-2020 04:08PM

Hmmzis wrote: »

Comparing SARS-cov-2 to seasonal influenza is disingenuous at best, the former being far more dangerous and a good bit more transmissible.

Here is a document from the HSE outlining what vaccinations/immune statuses are needed for certain HCWs:

https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/immunisation/hcpinfo/guidelines/chapter4.pdf

The measles section is quite strict in its wording.

If they adopted the same approach for the Covid vaccine as for measles it would be mandatory from reading that document for certain HCWs

Golfman64 · 09-12-2020 04:11PM

is_that_so wrote: »

It's just a cut and paste from the UK MHRA so not wholly RTE's fault. The warning is not a surprising development and TBH flags should have been raised well before this as part of their plan.

I had the Flu vaccine a couple of weeks ago and was asked specifically about any history of allergic reactions. This is not unusual for many vaccines. It won't stop the media jumping all over this nonetheless....

Stheno · 09-12-2020 04:15PM

Golfman64 wrote: »

I had the Flu vaccine a couple of weeks ago and was asked specifically about any history of allergic reactions. This is not unusual for many vaccines. It won't stop the media jumping all over this nonetheless....

Same here, had to fill out a pre screening form and wait for 15 minutes after the injection in case of a reaction

bush · 09-12-2020 04:20PM

What kind of allergies are they talking about? Food allergies? Ive had 2 bad reactions in my life but never found what caused them.

iamwhoiam · 09-12-2020 04:40PM

bush wrote: »

What kind of allergies are they talking about? Food allergies? Ive had 2 bad reactions in my life but never found what caused them.

I have a severe allergy . Have taken the flu vaccine and will take the Covid one
I carry two epipens and am willing to chance it
It might be a good idea to look up allergy testing clinics for your own sake

seamus · 09-12-2020 04:43PM

bush wrote: »

What kind of allergies are they talking about? Food allergies? Ive had 2 bad reactions in my life but never found what caused them.

The kind of allergies that require you to have an epipen in close proximity 24/7.

Micky 32 · 09-12-2020 04:49PM

Golfman64 wrote: »

I had the Flu vaccine a couple of weeks ago and was asked specifically about any history of allergic reactions. This is not unusual for many vaccines. It won't stop the media jumping all over this nonetheless....

Wait until the reports from the media flood in about all the headaches and chills that people will be having ( regardless of it being caused by the jab or not). There will be a huge mountain made out of this. It’s only the begining of the media frenzy.

stephenjmcd · 09-12-2020 05:18PM

Canada has approved the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine for use.

It reaches all effiency, safety, manufacturing & quality requirements

https://globalnews.ca/news/7510755/pfizer-vaccine-approval-canada/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

is_that_so · 09-12-2020 05:20PM

Micky 32 wrote: »

Wait until the reports from the media flood in about all the headaches and chills that people will be having ( regardless of it being caused by the jab or not). There will be a huge mountain made out of this. It’s only the begining of the media frenzy.

A song just came into my head!

speckle · 09-12-2020 05:23PM

There are many reasons more than nut allerygs to potentially have an epipen etc. Please consult beforehand with your medical professionals/specialists first... and have information, whether you are allowed to get it or not or even one of the other types later on.. so as not to waste time/resources and so that those giving it to you know your history.

foods – including nuts, milk, fish, shellfish, eggs and some fruits
medicines – including some antibiotics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) like aspirin
insect stings – particularly wasp and bee stings
general anaesthetic
contrast agents – dyes used in some medical tests to help certain areas of your body show up better on scans
latex – a type of rubber found in some rubber gloves and condoms
(Not a full comprehensive list)

In some cases, there's no obvious trigger. This is known as idiopathic anaphylaxis.

Not all of the above may end up being contraindicated. ie not exclude you from making your choice.

Good luck and good health to all no matter were you fall on the spectrum.

funnydoggy · 09-12-2020 05:24PM

I just fear for the day that woman who got the first jab (outside of trials) dies. They'll blame it on the vaccine, despite her being at a very advanced age.

(not trivialising it)

joseywhales · 09-12-2020 07:15PM

Is nobody else concerned about the testing that was done during the trials?
I recently heard Fauci compare pfizer v astra zenca, where he opined , who would we give 70% efficacy vaccine v a 90% efficacy.

I was surprised by this, since he is an eminently intelligent man, he would know that in the astra zeneca trial they regularly swabbed participants for the virus, in the other trials they discouraged testing for mild symptoms because they said that the side effects may cause some mild symptoms and they left testing to the discretion of the participants' physician, who is by definition biased.

Now given that the majority of cases are asymptomatic, to compare 70%v 90% is nonsensical, they are completely different numbers.

We don't know which vaccine is more effective?

Am I missing something?

nommm · 09-12-2020 07:21PM

joseywhales wrote: »

Is nobody else concerned about the testing that was done during the trials?
I recently heard Fauci compare pfizer v astra zenca, where he opined , who would we give 70% efficacy vaccine v a 90% efficacy.

I was surprised by this, since he is an eminently intelligent man, he would know that in the astra zeneca trial they regularly swabbed participants for the virus, in the other trials they discouraged testing for mild symptoms because they said that the side effects may cause some mild symptoms and they left testing to the discretion of the participants' physician, who is by definition biased.

Now given that the majority of cases are asymptomatic, to compare 70%v 90% is nonsensical, they are completely different numbers.

We don't know which vaccine is more effective?

Am I missing something?

That narrative has gained a lot of popularity online but it is incorrect. Asymptomatic cases were not included in Oxfords 70% efficacy so he is right in what he is saying.
Details are in recent Lancet paper.

hmmm · 09-12-2020 07:22PM

joseywhales wrote: »

Now given that the majority of cases are asymptomatic, to compare 70%v 90% is nonsensical, they are completely different numbers.

Both of those numbers are percentages who caught the disease, Covid-19. It's an Apples for Apples comparison.

Astra Zeneca were doing a separate study for evidence of the virus (2019-nCoV). You're correct Pfizer weren't doing this. These Astra Zeneca numbers haven't been released (I think).

Hmmzis · 09-12-2020 07:27PM

hmmm wrote: »

Both of those are for numbers who caught the disease, Covid. It's an Apples for Apples comparison.

Astra Zeneca were doing a separate study for evidence of the virus. You're correct Pfizer weren't doing this. These Astra Zeneca numbers haven't been released (I think).

The asymptomatic infection results are in table 2 of the published paper. The point estimate is 58.9% for the LD/SD group but the CI is very wide. For the SD/SD group there is no difference in the positive swabs.

tom1ie · 09-12-2020 07:30PM

seamus wrote: »

Obviously we cannot know if anything will appear within 12/24/48 months for this particular vaccine, but that's not to say we've never done anything like this before. Long-term effects can also be extrapolated from the short-term data and outcomes from similar vaccines.

Most drugs do not have a long-term "testing" element. The long-term portion is the bit where it's approved for general use and the outcomes are monitored.

This is not known. It requires a specific kind of test where people are vaccinated and then deliberately infected to determine what happens next. It's ethically fraught.

Strictly speaking vaccination doesn't prevent an pathogen from getting into your body, it just trains your body kill it when it does.

The question is about how far the virus gets before being eliminated by the immune system. We know that it reduces the severity of any infection, which by implication suggests that it limits the propagation of the virus within the body.
One can then deduce that if someone's viral load is lower, their infectiousness is also lower.

But that's supposition and cannot be known.

If they're classed as immunocompromised, then vaccination is not advised. Other family members should still get vaccinated as this will still limit the compromised person's risk of exposure.

Anyone who had never taken a vaccine before is not going to take this one, that's kind of a given.

It is so unlikely that it's basically impossible that someone could get to adulthood and be unaware of a severe allergy to the ingredients. They will have received multiple vaccinations as a child, but will also have been exposed to them through food or the environment.

If someone *can't* get the vaccine, then their employer can't do anything about it. If vaccination is important to their work, then they will be prioritised.

Thanks very informative.
However I see a major problem here.
If myself and my wife get vaccinated we could still become infected with the virus (but not know it) and spread that to our kids who won’t be getting the virus (one of which has a low white blood cell count).

So if we get the vaccine pressure mounts on the government to get rid of restrictions.

At least 25% of the population won’t be getting the vaccine (that’s the population of kids in Ireland under 16).

So adding this 25% to the people who are immune compromised and the people who won’t get it, that could mean 40% of the population not vaccinated.

When restrictions lift that means the virus can spread via people that are vaccinated (approx 60%) to people who aren’t.
The people who aren’t vaccinated being kids and immune compromised, and to a lesser extent the people who don’t wanna get it.

So do we have to keep restrictions eve n with this vaccine or am I way off the mark here?

tom1ie · 09-12-2020 07:39PM

polesheep wrote: »

If 20% don't take it, it will be spun as 80% taking it. A fantastic uptake that, if replicated across society, would be a resounding success.

It can’t be though.
25% of the population are under 16 which can’t take the vaccine. That doesn’t include immuno compromised people and people that just won’t take it.

Leftwaffe · 09-12-2020 07:39PM

Wait until mass vaccinations occur. If you observe a group of say 1 million people for a set period of time, naturally enough you’re bound to get some freak deaths, like people dropping dead, dying in their sleep, etc.

Now vaccinate a million people and observe the results, you’re bound to get these same types of deaths yet they’ll be attributed to the vaccine somehow. If someone dies say within 24 hours of getting the shot it will make headlines.

Fear sells.

tom1ie · 09-12-2020 07:41PM

Stheno wrote: »

Same here, had to fill out a pre screening form and wait for 15 minutes after the injection in case of a reaction

Yep me too.
Media not really helping by not explaining the allergy thing being fairly normal.

dublinman1990 · 09-12-2020 08:27PM

I heard the news about the allergic reactions from the Pfizer vaccine a short time ago.

This is bad news for me because I have had an allergy to nuts as I have had eczema since birth. I also get hayfever in the summer time as well. I get allergies from wearing non-powdered latex gloves. I'm also allergic to minocycline oral tablets which are used to treat acne. This could mean that my GP could say to me that I'm not allowed to receive this vaccine at all because that instruction could apply to people who have allergies of any kind including food & other allergies from medicine. I don't like the idea of fearing through an ordeal of getting a potential anaphylactic shock in my own body from the Pfizer vaccine whatsoever. I rather just wait it out a little bit longer until I get word of either a safe Oxford, Moderna or Johnson & Johnson Covid vaccine becomes available from the GP instead.

I do take the seasonal flu vaccine once a year & the pneumonia vaccine every few years. The only problem that I get from them is a sore arm.

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

Comments