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; } } }

Child Item

COVID-19: Vaccine and testing procedures Megathread Part 3 - Read OP

Beasty

Thread 1
Thread 2

No anti-vax stuff in this thread - it's to discuss the various vaccines available and how they are getting rolled out, as well as testing procedures

Threadbans carry over

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

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

leahyl

My friends dad is getting the vaccine tomorrow - got a call this evening from his GP! He’s 76

ACitizenErased

leahyl wrote: »

My friends dad is getting the vaccine tomorrow - got a call this evening from his GP! He’s 76

That's the youngest (given the cohort) I've heard, thats fantastic. Whereabouts?

leahyl

ACitizenErased wrote: »

That's the youngest (given the cohort) I've heard, thats fantastic. Whereabouts?

Cork City

ACitizenErased

leahyl wrote: »

Cork City

have heard my local gp (also cork city) is flying through the group too

brickster69

Data, data data

https://twitter.com/TheGazmanRants/status/1367213609802215431

leahyl

ACitizenErased wrote: »

have heard my local gp (also cork city) is flying through the group too

They must be working overtime like - I mean her dad has had heart issues so maybe that’s the reason but like to ring at 8pm on a Wednesday night!

[Deleted User]

My wife’s parents and uncle have the same gp. Her dad and uncle are 75-80 and got their appointment today for the 20th, and her mother who is 70 to 75 got hers for April 3rd

SwordofLight

ACitizenErased wrote: »

The last update was 15 cases, all of which are people who have arrived from south africa. That sounds like not spreading to me.

Thanks for your reply, can you explain how it sounds like not spreading? Do you mean that these people are now 'contained'? Meaning you don't think it can come from elsewhere such as England over the coming weeks?

ACitizenErased

SwordofLight wrote: »

Thanks for your reply, can you explain how it sounds like not spreading? Do you mean that these people are now 'contained'? Meaning you don't think it can come from elsewhere such as England over the coming weeks?

They're all in quarantine, which is how they were detected. You said it's spreading across Ireland, which is completely false.

It doesn't matter if it comes in, the vaccines are effective against it.

SwordofLight

ACitizenErased wrote: »

They're all in quarantine, which is how they were detected. You said it's spreading across Ireland, which is completely false.

It doesn't matter if it comes in, the vaccines are effective against it.

You see, you've just made two unsubstantiated claims.

ACitizenErased

SwordofLight wrote: »

You see, you've just made two unsubstantiated claims.

The vaccines are 100% effective at preventing hospitalisation and death with the South African variant.

speckle

namloc1980 wrote: »

I did speak to my GP. That's what I said in my post. He can't get any clarity from the HSE and is just getting the run around.

If you for example have RA maybe get in contact with your advocacy group to see if they can get more information from the HSE?
Maybe somebody here might know is there a special vaccine rollout hotline/email... especially for people belonging to rare diseases or immunocompromised groups as they need more information than the average person.
Wishing you good luck in finding the information you and your doctor need asap at this time.

SwordofLight

ACitizenErased wrote: »

The vaccines are 100% effective at preventing hospitalisation and death with the South African variant.

I'm going to leave the discussion here, because that is not true. It might be part true, or it might be 100% true, but at this moment in time, we don't have the data to support the claim. All the best.

ACitizenErased

SwordofLight wrote: »

I'm going to leave the discussion here, because that is not true. It might be part true, or it might be 100% true, but at this moment in time, we don't have the data to support the claim. All the best.

You need to do some reading, because it is 100% facts. Come back and tell me I'm wrong

ACitizenErased

Vaccine news: (Preprint so take with a pinch of salt)

Novavax released their South African variant analysis today - "The NVX-CoV2373 vaccine was efficacious in preventing Covid-19, which was predominantly mild to moderate and due to the B.1.351 variant, while evidence of prior infection with the presumptive original SARS CoV-2 did not confer protection against probable B.1.351 disease."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.25.21252477v1

SwordofLight

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Vaccine news: (Preprint so take with a pinch of salt)

Novavax released their South African variant analysis today - "The NVX-CoV2373 vaccine was efficacious in preventing Covid-19, which was predominantly mild to moderate and due to the B.1.351 variant, while evidence of prior infection with the presumptive original SARS CoV-2 did not confer protection against probable B.1.351 disease."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.25.21252477v1

That's a shame, I thought you were going to be able to back up your claims there for a moment.

Unfortunately that paper doesn't refer to any vaccine being offered in the Irish state. You might also want to recheck the figures. Better than chance? That's the question your statistical interpretation needs to answer, ACitizenErased.

ACitizenErased

SwordofLight wrote: »

That's a shame, I thought you were going to be able to back up your claims there for a moment.

Unfortunately that paper doesn't refer to any vaccine being offered in the Irish state. You might also want to recheck the figures. Better than chance? That's the question your statistical interpretation needs to answer, ACitizenErased.

Your wish is my command

Pfizer, Moderna vaccines can protect against coronavirus variant

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/17/health/pfizer-vaccine-south-africa-variant/index.html

Oh and that Astrazeneca paper?

"All forty-two endpoint cases were graded either as mild (vaccinees=15;placebo-recipients=17) or moderate (vaccinees=4; placebo-recipients=6)with no cases of severe disease or hospitalisation in either arm."
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.10.21251247v1.full.pdf

Happy reading!

CIARAN_BOYLE

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Vaccine news: (Preprint so take with a pinch of salt)

Novavax released their South African variant analysis today - "The NVX-CoV2373 vaccine was efficacious in preventing Covid-19, which was predominantly mild to moderate and due to the B.1.351 variant, while evidence of prior infection with the presumptive original SARS CoV-2 did not confer protection against probable B.1.351 disease."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.25.21252477v1

95% confidence interval that the vaccine efficacy against the South African variant is between - 0.6% and 76.2%.

15 positive cases in the seronegative vaccine test group.

This is too small a sample size to conclude anything on hospitalisation.

Not saying anything on the point. Just that that's not backing anything up.

ACitizenErased

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

95% confidence interval that the vaccine efficacy against the South African variant is between - 0.6% and 76.2%.

15 positive cases in the seronegative vaccine test group.

This is too small a sample size to conclude anything on hospitalisation.

Not saying anything on the point. Just that that's not backing anything up.

Exactly why I said it's a preprint in brackets?

lbj666

SwordofLight wrote: »

That's a shame, I thought you were going to be able to back up your claims there for a moment.

Unfortunately that paper doesn't refer to any vaccine being offered in the Irish state. You might also want to recheck the figures. Better than chance? That's the question your statistical interpretation needs to answer, ACitizenErased.

https://twitter.com/TheGazmanRants/status/1358832491415678977

SwordofLight

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Your wish is my command

Pfizer, Moderna vaccines can protect against coronavirus variant

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/17/health/pfizer-vaccine-south-africa-variant/index.html

Oh and that Astrazeneca paper?

"All forty-two endpoint cases were graded either as mild (vaccinees=15;placebo-recipients=17) or moderate (vaccinees=4; placebo-recipients=6)with no cases of severe disease or hospitalisation in either arm."
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.10.21251247v1.full.pdf

Happy reading!

Thanks for taking the time to post that.

Neither refer to the vaccine I have questioned, the AZ.

The first is a news article which speculates about findings from a study that is not real-world related.

The second is a very worrying paper which you don't seem to have been able to interpret, no offence, but it does propagate misinformation (not the paper, your conclusion about it).

Here are the findings in plain English.

The vaccine in the trial was no better than no vaccine.

Or as it is summarised in the actual paper: "A two-dose regimen of ChAdOx1-nCoV19 did not show protection against mild-moderate Covid-19 due to B.1.351 variant, however, VE against severe Covid-19 is undetermined."

I sincerely hope they can produce better research soon. Take care.

Update re 'pre-print': FYI the results are not going to change between now and when it gets published.

lbj666

SwordofLight wrote: »

Thanks for taking the time to post that.

Neither refer to the vaccine I have questioned, the AZ.

The first is a news article which speculates about findings from a study that is not real-world related.

The second is a very worrying paper which you don't seem to have been able to interpret, no offence, but it does propagate misinformation.

Here are the findings in plain English.

The vaccine in the trial was no better than no vaccine.

Or as it is summarised in the actual paper: "A two-dose regimen of ChAdOx1-nCoV19 did not show protection against mild-moderate Covid-19 due to B.1.351 variant, however, VE against severe Covid-19 is undetermined."

I sincerely hope they can produce better research soon. Take care.

Pot kettle black

Goldengirl

namloc1980 wrote: »

Is there any more information on who is in or out of Group 4? I am on immunosuppressing treatment not mentioned in Group 4 but I can't get any clarity on whether that incudes my treatment:

- treatment included but not limited to Cyclophosphamide, Rituximab, Alemtuzumab, Cladribine or Ocrelizumab in the last 6 months

Rang my GP and he said they had got no clarification from the HSE despite asking. Can't get any clarification on what the "but not limited to" actually means in terms of specifics.

Do you attend a hospital for check bloods or have you ever been referred to nurse led blood monitoring ?
If you have or if your GP has had a connection with one if these clinics he or you would get all the information you need from the nurse specialists/ doctors through that system .

ACitizenErased

SwordofLight wrote: »

Thanks for taking the time to post that.

Neither refer to the vaccine I have questioned, the AZ.

The first is a news article which speculates about findings from a study that is not real-world related.

The second is a very worrying paper which you don't seem to have been able to interpret, no offence, but it does propagate misinformation (not the paper, your conclusion about it).

Here are the findings in plain English.

The vaccine in the trial was no better than no vaccine.

Or as it is summarised in the actual paper: "A two-dose regimen of ChAdOx1-nCoV19 did not show protection against mild-moderate Covid-19 due to B.1.351 variant, however, VE against severe Covid-19 is undetermined."

I sincerely hope they can produce better research soon. Take care.

Update re 'pre-print': FYI the results are not going to change between now and when it gets published.

Alright cool you keep telling yourself that and it’ll all be okay

[Deleted User]

Some hard data from J&J....

https://twitter.com/JuliaLMarcus/status/1367159066531880961?s=19

Happydays2020

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Alright cool you keep telling yourself that and it’ll all be okay

Except it won’t be alright. We will be doomed.

Although I am with you. Things are positive and we will be out of this in no time. The vaccines have cracked it and if they need to be tweaked to adjust to new variants then it will be done.

ACitizenErased

Happydays2020 wrote: »

Except it won’t be alright. We will be doomed.

Although I am with you. Things are positive and we will be out of this in no time. The vaccines have cracked it and if they need to be tweaked to adjust to new variants then it will be done.

Ya had me in the first half not gonna lie

ACitizenErased

Hardyn wrote: »

Some hard data from J&J....

https://twitter.com/JuliaLMarcus/status/1367159066531880961?s=19

The J&J vaccine is ridiculously impressive

Edit: oh i see it now

lbj666

Hardyn wrote: »

Some hard data from J&J....

https://twitter.com/JuliaLMarcus/status/1367159066531880961?s=19

Stop laughing down the back.

On serious note, that certainly vindicates the 1 dose strategy and may not have been apparent in the trial data, due to the haste to get approval. Why does that graph start at 65% on day zero though.

nocoverart

Just caught a bit of that Gerry Kileen with the smug head on Virgin, he’s actually more poisonous than Mcdonkey. I’m all for the truth but the zero Covid posse are nothing short of manipulative, devious rodents at this stage. Hopefully they’ll be eradicated from the limelight soon enough.