ujjjjjjjjj wrote: » Luke O'Neill is pretty unambiguous about NIAC's decision..........they ain't trusting the science................... An abundance of caution also can be described as scared of your own shadow................. We have a country next door to us with over 11 million doses issued and they are banging away. We have used 120,000 odd AZ vaccines and nothing untoward. One document from Norway and we panic.
is_that_so wrote: » It's not panic to await the outcome of data review, it's a choice a number of countries have made. Glynn and the rest will happily take the hit for possible overreaction so it's not much of a target.
mick087 wrote: » Delays and excuses. No issues in Ireland but again more delays more excuses.
is_that_so wrote: » Most delays are not of our making but we may even have more AZ to use at the end of this! It's up to 30K people, which the system has shown it can comfortably deal with inside a week.
Fitz* wrote: » Call me a cynic but I suspect that those in charge of the vaccine roll out in Ireland wanted a reason to suspend the rollout. They are under severe pressure because of the speed of their roll out, so any sort of a chance they can get to pause will be welcomed. This gives an opportunity to take a break, recheck their internal stock levels of needles etc, keep up to date on the admin side, maybe get more doses in and then continue the vaccine roll out again. Again, the reason of the slow roll-out can be blamed on external factors, which suit their narrative. Targets won't be met again this week or next week but the excuse given this time will be the suspension. I wonder what the next excuse will be?
Strawberry Milkshake wrote: » I think I’m going to ring the doctors and get my housebound 82 yr old father onto the next round of Pfizer. I’ll get a private disabled taxi/ambulance to bring him. My only concern is he has a tracheotomy so a face mask doesn’t cover that. I don’t know if it should be covered at all tbh.
stephenjmcd wrote: » If he's housebound then NAS will be visiting to administer the vaccine. It'll take time for them to get to everyone.
Hector Savage wrote: » So the EU are still saying it's on track to have the vast majority vaccinated and pandemic under control by end of 2021, what are they basing this on ? It's on a snails pace and at this rate will take 2+ years to vaccinate the majority ..
Strawberry Milkshake wrote: » Doctor was out last week to change catheter and said housebounds were getting the AZ vaccine.
Mitch Connor wrote: » Not proof, anecdotal, but my sister in law was quite ill after her AZ jab (dose 1) the other day. Vommiting, hot an cold flashes, migrane. She was much better the following day though.
astrofool wrote: » Sorry to go back to an old post, but this stuck with me, vaccines are approved for use based on their own safety data, the risk of catching the disease that the vaccine prevents are not part of the approval. There is no "balance of risks" to the approval. This is why we can trust the health authorities when medicines are approved, and it's also why when we see something severe that doesn't match previous data that it must be investigated. It's also why people with a much less chance of catching the disease and having complications can trust taking the vaccine.
The position of EMA’s safety committee PRAC is that the vaccine’s benefits continue to outweigh its risks and the vaccine can continue to be administered while investigation of cases of thromboembolic events is ongoing
CMAs allow for the authorisation of medicines that fulfil an unmet medical need on the basis of less complete data than normally required. This happens if the benefit of a medicine or vaccine’s immediate availability to patients outweighs the risk inherent in the fact that not all the data are yet available.
IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: » Because more vaccines will be available and the vaccines currently available will be scaling up production. This time next month the J&J deliveries will be starting and the yield from Pfizer's new factory in Germany will be coming through.
Hector Savage wrote: » So do people think by end of 2021 EU will be in a good position vaccine wise ? I'm genuinely curious, have not been back to the old sod since December 2019 and don't know if it will ever be possible - seriously.
stephenjmcd wrote: » Any proof of that ? Anecdotally I know people who've had AstraZeneca & others who've had Pfizer. Both sets reported pretty much the same experience 24hrs post vaccination, a bit of fatigue, aches and pains but not a bother on them the next day. All your advised possible side effects in both. It was compared to a hangover.
ACitizenErased wrote: » Yes there is.
This happens if the benefit of a medicine or vaccine’s immediate availability to patients outweighs the risk inherent in the fact that not all the data are yet available.
astrofool wrote: » I would bold the end part as well: This is saying that that the approval will be given based on the risk that the dataset might be incomplete, not that there is a risk with the medicine based on the data being submitted. It's a subtle difference, but it is a difference.This also means that when data comes in, that data can effect the approval, sometimes with updated guidelines and side effects. As of right now there is no known severe side effects to the vaccine, the data causing the latest pause is weak, and some authorities are pausing and some are not as it's highly probable that it's not an issue. This is not a case of "COVID causes 1% death, but the vaccine only causes 0.00001% death so take it", it's currently 0% death with the vaccine if administered according to the guidelines.
ACitizenErased wrote: » Yes there is. Look at the EMA update just the other day:https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-prac-investigating-cases-thromboembolic-events-vaccines-benefits And the actual definition of a CMA from the EMA approval press release..https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-recommends-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-authorisation-eu
Leinster90 wrote: » I hate this phrase “an abundance of caution”. We need to take some more risks at this stage regarding vaccines and re-opening. Keep distributing the AZ vaccine to those who want it. Nobody is being forced to take it. It has already been given to millions of people. Why do we always have to take the most conservative, low-risk approach as if there are no negative knock-on effects?
stefanovich wrote: » Is the risk collective or individual? In other words, could an individual be put at greater individual risk if the collective effect was positive?
ACitizenErased wrote: » Which is exactly what I posted above. The EMA recommended "that the vaccine’s benefits continue to outweigh its risks and the vaccine can continue to be administered while investigation of cases of thromboembolic events is ongoing" That is literally their AZ statement.
average_runner wrote: » Yeah, i know people who have gotten it. Severe headaches, temps and a hangover feeling for 2 days!!!