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

Danzy

Strazdas wrote: »

I've seen some people argue that the AZ suspension will increase vaccine hesitancy, but if anything it should reassure people that the health authorities are proceeding sensibly.

Trying to cover everything up and going "Blood clots? What blood clots?" would be more likely to make people wary of the vaccine. Being very open about what you are doing seems a good idea.

If it did, it would be the first time that that ever happened, in any context.

Especially in continental Europe where vaccine hesitancy is very common.

Nothing wrong with being open, that's always good but making a mountain out of a mole hill is not being open.

stephenjmcd

Wolf359f wrote: »

I didn't think the EMA would be involved. They have been quite vocal that there's no issue. So if they say no issue again Thursday.... nothing really has changed?

The inital findings from EMA were no link, they've still continued with the rapid review and that is due to complete this week. Once published NIAC & HPRA will make any recommendations based on it. Overall probably looking at a weeks suspension so, roughly 30k vaccinations

Apoapsis Rex

NeuralNetwork wrote: »

The regulator is there to provide assurance of safety and that is all their role is. If they can’t act without being forced to consider social-psychology, political or any non technical issue, then they’re not doing their job.

If the aviation authorities ground an aircraft type because of a minor glitch and it is resolved and the plane takes to the skies again does that not provide confidence in aviation? Or would you rather that those regulatory agencies just carried on regardless, as to take a plane out of service might spook passengers?

I’d feel a lot more spooked if the regulator felt it was their job to be concerned about public perception.

You need absolute independence of a regulator and for them to only be focused on technical issues.

If they find a problem - you deal with the problem.

When you’ve systems like that in place, everyone can feel confidence.

So as far as I’m concerned, the politics and worries about anti-vaxxer paranoiacs needs to take a back seat. We need to ensure whatever is going on is gotten to the bottom of and then we can all move on with confidence that we’ve no issues.

The problem is they are following procedures for one 'airline' but not the next 'airline'

JTMan

The FT reports here (paywall) that AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson have warned that the world’s vaccine production is being threatened by America’s pandemic export controls.

This is causing big issues for Indian manufactures. This is important for Ireland because AZ might get their extra Q2 doses from India.

Both US President Joe Biden and his predecessor Donald Trump have invoked the Korean war era DPA during the pandemic to secure priority supplies of materials needed to control the disease.

Hopefully Biden drops the export restrictions soon.

Dressoutlet

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'll be sure to let him know.

I'm a fat prick, guess which one I have. :pac:
Couple of years ago my blood pressure was high, doctor if he puts me on the medication I'll never come off it. I lost a bunch of weight and had perfect blood pressure. Tested my blood sugar on my mam's yoke as well and it had all fixed itself as well. There's no need to overcomplicate simple things. Unfortunately I got injured, can't do anything with lower body beyond a very gentle stroll, can't go for a swim because of Covid, can't get any proper medical intervention for my actual problems because of Covid. But anyway, enough about me. :pac:

OK, this very much seems like a YOU problem and not a GP problem.
If loosing weight is the magical answer then you can do so without exercise. You just need a caloric deficit. Or go to Slimming World, they lose weight without exercise. 80% of weight loss is the food so there's no excuse.

Dressoutlet

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Like I said though, I'm not sure what my BMI was when I was last at the GP. He's also pointed out that I'm almost certainly diabetic but there's no point in him recording it as all it'll do is **** me down the line.
Gonna spend this week seeing about registering at an NI address and see how I get on. Better than waiting around for naval gazers to get the finger out.

You can go to your GP any day this week and get weighed and bloodwork done to check for diabetes. You seem to be making things harder for yourself.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why would he?
It's barely a disease when the treatment is to eat properly. Having it recorded is a black mark that I don't want and has no benefit (til now :pac:) and just downsides in the future for life insurance, certain health insurances etc. If I lose weight it'll go away and be like nothing ever happened.

Jesus Christ.

I had a diabetes scare a few years ago and there is nothing proper about a low glycemic index diet. It's a nightmare disease that causes lots of complications for other organs, and by the time it's spotted, damage has usually already been done.

Your flippancy towards it is remarkable. Fair play in a way to not let it stress you, but I hope you know about the actual diet required and don't just think "healthy" home cooked meals are the answer.

Wolf359f

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah good, another week of missed targets.

They may revise their targets though. So rest assured they will meet their new target and please you!

Wolf359f

stephenjmcd wrote: »

EMA assessment due Thursday according to Donnelly as per Irish times. After that NIAC and HPRA will make their recommendation to Government

I didn't think the EMA would be involved. They have been quite vocal that there's no issue. So if they say no issue again Thursday.... nothing really has changed?

[Deleted User]

stephenjmcd wrote: »

EMA assessment due Thursday according to Donnelly as per Irish times. After that NIAC and HPRA will make their recommendation to Government

Ah good, another week of missed targets.

stephenjmcd

EMA assessment due Thursday according to Donnelly as per Irish times. After that NIAC and HPRA will make their recommendation to Government

[Deleted User]

Goldengirl wrote: »

Ah here this is just such an ignorant response .....

I'll be sure to let him know.

gozunda wrote: »

Because that shows an incredible level of ignorance on what can be a life threatening condition depending on whether its Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes. The forrmer which most certainly will not "go away and be like nothing ever happened". And the second where unmanaged can lead to significant impacts on your health and quality of life.

I'm a fat prick, guess which one I have. :pac:
Couple of years ago my blood pressure was high, doctor if he puts me on the medication I'll never come off it. I lost a bunch of weight and had perfect blood pressure. Tested my blood sugar on my mam's yoke as well and it had all fixed itself as well. There's no need to overcomplicate simple things. Unfortunately I got injured, can't do anything with lower body beyond a very gentle stroll, can't go for a swim because of Covid, can't get any proper medical intervention for my actual problems because of Covid. But anyway, enough about me. :pac:

NeuralNetwork

The regulator is there to provide assurance of safety and that is all their role is. If they can’t act without being forced to consider social-psychology, political or any non technical issue, then they’re not doing their job.

If the aviation authorities ground an aircraft type because of a minor glitch and it is resolved and the plane takes to the skies again does that not provide confidence in aviation? Or would you rather that those regulatory agencies just carried on regardless, as to take a plane out of service might spook passengers?

I’d feel a lot more spooked if the regulator felt it was their job to be concerned about public perception.

You need absolute independence of a regulator and for them to only be focused on technical issues.

If they find a problem - you deal with the problem.

When you’ve systems like that in place, everyone can feel confidence.

So as far as I’m concerned, the politics and worries about anti-vaxxer paranoiacs needs to take a back seat. We need to ensure whatever is going on is gotten to the bottom of and then we can all move on with confidence that we’ve no issues.

Strazdas

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I agree with this guy tbh

https://twitter.com/rupert_pearse/status/1371225541395763200?s=21

I don't agree with him. I don't think vaccine hesitancy is an issue for the vaccine regulators to take into consideration, that's well outside their remit. That would be more one for the general health authorities to address via their public information strategies.

lukas8888

Sweet.Science wrote: »

I know that . I'm in the last cohort . I'll be one of the last to be offered a vaccination . Anyone who was in anyway vulnerable will have already had one .

My vaccine will be to offer me protection if I want one . Which as things stand I won't take if it's AZ

Don't see what the huge issue is . It's my own decision .

Ive taken numerous vaccinations for travelling etc . I'm not some anti vax sort that you are insinuating

It always makes me wonder when i read similar statements from people stating how they have taken numerous vaccines for travelling etc,but will not take the AZ vaccine.I presume they investigated their travel vaccines as to their safety,ingredients,developer,and any reported issues.My guess is that in the overwhelming majority they have no idea whats going into their arms.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why would he?
It's barely a disease when the treatment is to eat properly. Having it recorded is a black mark that I don't want and has no benefit (til now :pac:) and just downsides in the future for life insurance, certain health insurances etc. If I lose weight it'll go away and be like nothing ever happened.

Because that shows an incredible level of ignorance on what can be a life threatening condition depending on whether its Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes. The forrmer which most certainly will not "go away and be like nothing ever happened". And the second where unmanaged can lead to significant impacts on your health and quality of life.

astrofool

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I disagree completely to be honest. Suspending the vaccine will not improve public confidence in the slightest and everyone knows that. The benefits of the vaccine completely outweigh any potential risk, no matter how “abnormal” these events are, they’re a statistically small amount. Same can be said for things like birth control which are well known to cause clots and are regularly prescribed.

The reason people have confidence is because they know that the health authorities will be overly cautious with medicines and investigate issues thoroughly, as the reaction was severe, the pause was seen as the safest thing to do. If they continued with a known severe issue being investigated and that was their reaction to every severe issue of medicine, then public confidence in the medicine would drop very quickly (which is what happened in France in the 00's causing an anti-vax movement to grow there).

On the other side, as we are supply constrained rather than constrained by number of vaccinators, the pause isn't going to have a material affect on the timelines, the vaccines not administered will be administered very quickly once it resumes.

Wolf359f

ACitizenErased wrote: »

The whole concept of vaccine approval is the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks. What we have seen is a very small number of clotting incidents that are not abnormal with regards to statistical prevalence. All of these types of events are taken into account when issuing approval.

Yes, but at the very least people need to be told of known side effects, this could potentially be a new one. It could be countered with aspirin for people who have known clotting issues etc....
It could be nothing at all, as Norway did flag deaths after the Pfizer vaccine etc...

ACitizenErased

astrofool wrote: »

The reason for the suspension is because there was an abnormal occurrence of clotting events (or the data looked abnormal), so there is a pause while it's investigated to make sure that it is actually normal.

Given the severity in the cases involved (1 person died, 1 person in hospital with severe difficulties), the pause is the safest thing to do and it can resume when the abnormalities are explained.

If the abnormality is indeed due to the vaccine, then guidance on who can take the vaccine will be updated, along with additional monitoring steps. I do not believe this is likely, but again, given the severity of the symptoms, it has to be investigated thoroughly.

I disagree completely to be honest. Suspending the vaccine will not improve public confidence in the slightest and everyone knows that. The benefits of the vaccine completely outweigh any potential risk, no matter how “abnormal” these events are, they’re a statistically small amount. Same can be said for things like birth control which are well known to cause clots and are regularly prescribed.

astrofool

ACitizenErased wrote: »

The whole concept of vaccine approval is the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks. What we have seen is a very small number of clotting incidents that are not abnormal with regards to statistical prevalence. All of these types of events are taken into account when issuing approval.

The reason for the suspension is because there was an abnormal occurrence of clotting events (or the data looked abnormal), so there is a pause while it's investigated to make sure that it is actually normal.

Given the severity in the cases involved (1 person died, 1 person in hospital with severe difficulties), the pause is the safest thing to do and it can resume when the abnormalities are explained.

If the abnormality is linked to the vaccine, then guidance on who can take the vaccine will be updated, along with additional monitoring steps. I do not believe this is likely, but again, given the severity of the symptoms, it has to be investigated thoroughly.

Wolf359f

astrofool wrote: »

What course should be taken? Keep it a secret and say nothing? What he says could be correct, but I'm not quite sure what the alternative to following the science is.

Is it not the fact blood clots are happening in young people and in the brain that is the issue? Very hard to convince young people to take a vaccine if you have a higher risk of getting a blood clot and dying than actually dying from Covid.
I don't have the actual figures to back that up though. Just seems like that what the nutters on twitter will be saying. Unless you investigate it and find the cause.

I think people want a safe vaccine above all else. If we only had AZ, yes it would be a very hard call to make as pausing your entire vaccine program would be serious.

ACitizenErased

astrofool wrote: »

What course should be taken? Keep it a secret and say nothing? What he says could be correct, but I'm not quite sure what the alternative to following the science is.

The whole concept of vaccine approval is the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks. What we have seen is a very small number of clotting incidents that are not abnormal with regards to statistical prevalence. All of these types of events are taken into account when issuing approval.

astrofool

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I agree with this guy tbh

https://twitter.com/rupert_pearse/status/1371225541395763200?s=21

What course should be taken? Keep it a secret and say nothing? What he says could be correct, but I'm not quite sure what the alternative to following the science is.

ACitizenErased

I agree with this guy tbh

https://twitter.com/rupert_pearse/status/1371225541395763200?s=21

Kerry25x

Deleted User wrote: »

Why would he?
It's barely a disease when the treatment is to eat properly. Having it recorded is a black mark that I don't want and has no benefit (til now :pac:) and just downsides in the future for life insurance, certain health insurances etc. If I lose weight it'll go away and be like nothing ever happened.

Wow. Its a very serious and terrible disease which has no cure. It'll take more than just loosing some weight to keep it under control, you're talking a very dedicated and strict diet for the rest of your life. You should go back to your GP, get a definite diagnosis of diabetes as opposed to prediabetes and take immediate steps to reverse it if you still have time.

astrofool

Deleted User wrote: »

Why would he?
It's barely a disease when the treatment is to eat properly. Having it recorded is a black mark that I don't want and has no benefit (til now :pac:) and just downsides in the future for life insurance, certain health insurances etc. If I lose weight it'll go away and be like nothing ever happened.

Not sure where you got your information about diabetes, but it's possible you should be at least on metformin given what you described (not medical advice, talk to your GP before doing anything). It also sounds like you would be in one of the severe groups if you registered your ailments properly, which means it's understandable why no one has contacted you.

NeuralNetwork

The problem in the UK is that due to extremely toxic Brexit politics and total paranoia about Europe, they will turn what is precautionary practice in regulation into some kind of weird anti-EU bonkers story that it's some kind of conspiracy theory against them by the EU.

The last thing they should be doing is turning a technical issue into a political one. It's absolutely right and prudent that if there's a problem with a product that's being rolled out population-wide, that if a yellow flag is raised by regulators like this that it's responded to appropriately.

It's extremely good from a transparency and reassurance point of view to know the vaccines are being monitored this closely and not being treated in a cavalier fashion by regulators.

It's in everyone's interest, including AstraZeneca's that any issue is identified and resolved.

That's good, pragmatic and transparent regulation.

I got a load of weird flack on Twitter earlier on for just RTing an update from a major Irish TV journalist on the breaking news, and it was entirely from people with little union jacks beside their name. There's an element out there who see absolutely everything through a Brexit lens and are utterly paranoid about the EU. It's really toxic but it's also extremely problematic when it comes to something that should be entirely beyond politics, as that's what will cause a slide in confidence in the UK, not the story itself. If people think there's a whiff of some issue being buried, you'll have a big problem.

lucernarian

Cork2021 wrote: »

Good thread here again. Like a few have said, AZ offered to me in the morning I’d be there in a flash!

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1371158484113371143?s=21

And some Twitter randomer is a good source about this? We have to pause the rollout to ensure there is no increased risk, so we have public confidence that each and every possible side effect is at least known and presented to the public, who have the right to know before agreeing to a dose in their arm. One which I personally am happy to take btw.

Goldengirl

Deleted User wrote: »

Why would he?
It's barely a disease when the treatment is to eat properly. Having it recorded is a black mark that I don't want and has no benefit (til now :pac:) and just downsides in the future for life insurance, certain health insurances etc. If I lose weight it'll go away and be like nothing ever happened.

Ah here this is just such an ignorant response .....

Happydays2020

Goldengirl wrote: »

And since when are NIAC answerable to MRHA ?

Exactly. NIAC are being cautious as they should be. Hopefully it is temporary but if there was a serious issue failure to investigate could have massive circumstances.