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

Stark

Deleted User wrote: »

Even if we were 100% Pfizer - $144million (4.9m x 2 x $14.7) to get a vaccine for every man, woman and child is cheap for what it gives us.

Yeah I just don't get why the price of vaccines comes up at all. The most expensive vaccines are pocket money compared to what we're spending to keep our economy on life support.

NIMAN

Stark wrote: »

Yeah I just don't get why the price of vaccines comes up at all.

I was simply curious.

Wasn't giving off about the cost or anything. In fact, now that I know what it costs to vaccinate Ireland, I do consider it very good value.

muddypuppy

Deleted User wrote: »

Even if we were 100% Pfizer - $144million (4.9m x 2 x $14.7) to get a vaccine for every man, woman and child is cheap for what it gives us.

Yep, the price of the vaccines is basically nothing in the grand scheme of things. I sure hope no one is complaining about them. In fact it was pretty stupid to even try to haggle on the price, I would have just thrown cash in pfizer/moderna/AZ/etc direction if it was up to me.

odyssey06

Stark wrote: »

Yeah I just don't get why the price of vaccines comes up at all. The most expensive vaccines are pocket money compared to what we're spending to keep our economy on life support.

It did seem to be a factor for some EU countries in terms of what mix of vaccine allocations they signed up for with AZ being chosen over Pfizer & would be important for COVAX programme.

josip

Deleted User wrote: »

They say 50m from June.

Also - 2 factories to be constructed - see you in 18 months then. Best case 2 existing vaccine plants to be qualified is 6 months

The people who want to believe that the Russian 'offer' is genuine will either not read this or choose to ignore it unfortunately.

speckle

Hmmzis wrote: »

One more to the growing pile of these papers:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.22.436441v1.full.pdf+html

Would certainly be an option to do some dose sparing in the younger cohorts. Had a positive PCR test? Single dose and done.

thanks for that..on mobile so cant qoute from pdf page 4... do I take from that in lay person terms that potentially the second injection would possibly in one sceanario exhaust the cd4 tcells in people with previous covid infections? Would this also hava a potential effect of making them to a degree unresponsive to other respiratory infections until the cd4 tcells recouparate?

Read before a couple some research papers on a slight risk increase for other respiratory infections in a minority of people post influenza *vaccinations.. this research area might be on a hiatus at the moment because of sars cov2.

Good idea re dose sparing but I potentially would include a positive antibody test with no pcr as the guidlines for a positive case per WHO include clinical cases without a postive pcr and we know especially early on some people missed pcr tests aswell as later on when contact tracing collapsed.

On a different note cant wait for the WBC peptide pools covid t cell tests one of the main authors is working on.

Edit* vaccinations instead ...changed

GT89

Covid worshippers on covid deaths "even if they had an underlying condition or were very elderly they wouldn't have died if they didn't catch covid". The same people when it comes to vaccine deaths "they were very old and vulnerable they probably would have died anyway, the vaccine is 100% safe".

This is not me being anti vax btw I'm just calling out certain individuals for their hypocrisy a common trend throughout the last year. The vaccine probably is safe but is unessecary for a disease which in my opinion has been blown out of proportion with regards to severity.

astrofool

GT89 wrote: »

Covid worshippers on covid deaths "even if they had an underlying condition or were very elderly they wouldn't have died if they didn't catch covid". The same people when it comes to vaccine deaths "they were very old and vulnerable they probably would have died anyway, the vaccine is 100% safe".

This is not me being anti vax btw I'm just calling out certain individuals for their hypocrisy a common trend throughout the last year. The vaccine probably is safe but is unessecary for a disease which in my opinion has been blown out of proportion with regards to severity.

This covers a large amount of people:
"even if they had an underlying condition or were very elderly they wouldn't have died if they didn't catch covid"

This covers a vanishingly small number of people:
"they were very old and vulnerable they probably would have died anyway, the vaccine is 100% safe"

The big difference in numbers for both of these statements means that there is no hypocrisy.

The vaccines and herd immunity are the way out of lockdown. We have spent a year in lockdown costing trillions, and you think it has been "blown out of proportion with regards to severity".

I think you may be calling the wrong group hypocritical.

[Deleted User]

GT89 wrote: »

Covid worshippers on covid deaths "even if they had an underlying condition or were very elderly they wouldn't have died if they didn't catch covid". The same people when it comes to vaccine deaths "they were very old and vulnerable they probably would have died anyway, the vaccine is 100% safe".

This is not me being anti vax btw I'm just calling out certain individuals for their hypocrisy a common trend throughout the last year. The vaccine probably is safe but is unessecary for a disease which in my opinion has been blown out of proportion with regards to severity.

Would you not consider it necessary to reduce the likelihood of you spreading it to someone more vulnerable?

GT89

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Would you not consider it necessary to reduce the likelihood of you spreading it to someone more vulnerable?

Not my problem. They can take precautions they feel are nessecary. Actually it's funny that many of the people who they call "covid deniers" or "anti maskers" fall into one of the groups that have been deemed vulnerable. I've heard lot's of older people in the UK think it's a scam whilst younger less vulnerable people are afraid of it.

KrustyUCC

Nana got her second Pfeizer vaccine this morning

She was so excited it's great

funnydoggy

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Nana got her second Pfeizer vaccine this morning

She was so excited it's great

Brilliant. Granda's getting his second one tomorrow week. Such a relief isn't it!

ACitizenErased

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Nana got her second Pfeizer vaccine this morning

She was so excited it's great

My granny got hers last Thursday, she said she's going to take her grandson's 6th year holiday apartment in Greece if he can't go!

KrustyUCC

100%

The most important thing would be keeping her out of hospital and getting very sick at this stage of out lives

We've all been so careful with her over the past year

Be great to get back down again when things go back to county wide travel

KrustyUCC

ACitizenErased wrote: »

My granny got hers last Thursday, she said she's going to take her grandson's 6th year holiday apartment in Greece if he can't go!

Ha love it

afatbollix

Was almost going to leave the thread.. As its mostly bickering about supply.

But comments like that above with some stranger's grandmother on the internet makes me keep coming back.

Hmmzis

speckle wrote: »

thanks for that..on mobile so cant qoute from pdf page 4... do I take from that in lay person terms that potentially the second injection would possibly in one sceanario exhaust the cd4 tcells in people with previous covid infections? Would this also hava a potential effect of making them to a degree unresponsive to other respiratory infections infections until the cd4 tcells recouparate?

Read before a couple some research papers on a slight risk increase for other respiratory infections in a minority of people post influenza infections.. this research area might be on a hiatus at the moment because of sars cov2.

Good idea re dose sparing but I potentially would include a positive antibody test with no pcr as the guidlines for a positive case per WHO include clinical cases without a postive pcr and we know especially early on some people missed pcr tests aswell as later on when contact tracing collapsed.

On a different note cant wait for the WBC peptide pools covid t cell tests one of the main authors is working on.

It could well bee that for convalescents the 2nd dose is a bit too much too soon, though to my untrained eye it looks more like the 2nd shot is doing nothing (it's sort of passively destroyed by the boosted response to the 1st shot). The immune system is on a wind-down, after the 1st shot made all the T and B cells expand like crazy.

If AB tests would be cheap and plenty to go round it could be a good addition. The existing PCR+ is something that's available already for 230k people here and they would know their result as would the HSE. Even if we assume half of them have already been vaccinated, there could still be dose sparing to gain.

Hmmzis

The father in law got his first dose today (AZ). He's in a high risk group, 3-4 weeks and we can start breathing easier.

funnydoggy

These comments stand out in the midst of all the Sputnik/We have German overlords/Our govt. is ****e comments.

Hooray for loved ones getting vaccinated!

Chris_5339762

73 and 74 year old parents waiting and getting more angry, I've told them likely early April, possibly the week of the 12th after some back of the envelope calculations. Roughly what ages are being done (in reality) right about now?

rameire

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

73 and 74 year old parents waiting and getting more angry, I've told them likely early April, possibly the week of the 12th after some back of the envelope calculations. Roughly what ages are being done (in reality) right about now?

Age Group 70-75 is to start week starting 29th March.
Should take around 3 weeks to complete first dose.

Apogee

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

73 and 74 year old parents waiting and getting more angry, I've told them likely early April, possibly the week of the 12th after some back of the envelope calculations. Roughly what ages are being done (in reality) right about now?

Dose 1 for 75-79 - ads on radio confirming this. In terms of supply, priority given to older in terms of dose 2.

70-74 haven't started yet.

Red Silurian

josip wrote: »

The people who want to believe that the Russian 'offer' is genuine will either not read this or choose to ignore it unfortunately.

The Russian offer may not be genuine but neither was the AZ offer as it turns out... Do we completely disregard every vaccine manufacturer on the basis it may or may not be genuine

Let's not forget that Russia has a lot of money to make internationally on this vaccine if they do it well so I think the motivation is there for them to be genuine on this occasion

El Weirdo

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

73 and 74 year old parents waiting and getting more angry, I've told them likely early April, possibly the week of the 12th after some back of the envelope calculations. Roughly what ages are being done (in reality) right about now?

My parents (74 & 75) are both getting theirs this week. Friday I think.

eoinbn

Apogee wrote: »

Dose 1 for 75-79 - ads on radio confirming this. In terms of supply, priority given to older in terms of dose 2.

70-74 haven't started yet.

Some 70-74 received it weeks ago, many 75+ are still waiting for a date. The 'system' is a bit of a mess.

Sconsey

GT89 wrote: »

Covid worshippers on covid deaths "even if they had an underlying condition or were very elderly they wouldn't have died if they didn't catch covid". The same people when it comes to vaccine deaths "they were very old and vulnerable they probably would have died anyway, the vaccine is 100% safe".

This is not me being anti vax btw I'm just calling out certain individuals for their hypocrisy a common trend throughout the last year. The vaccine probably is safe but is unessecary for a disease which in my opinion has been blown out of proportion with regards to severity.

I am assuming you have no qualification in medicine, immunology, or any other relevant discipline? So really your laymans opinion on the disease is worthless, and completely the opposite of what the vast majority of actual experts, all over the world, have to say on the topic. Keep angrily shaking your fist at passing clouds.

Tiredandcranky

Probably asking the million dollar question here, but is there any realistic date for when the 65-69 bracket will be jabbed?

Icantthinkof1

Tiredandcranky wrote: »

Probably asking the million dollar question here, but is there any realistic date for when the 65-69 bracket will be jabbed?

I would think the earliest would be the end of April/ beginning of May? I wonder will they be given the AZ or the mRNA vaccines?

silverharp

mick087 wrote: »

Ireland gave its powers of acquiring the vaccine for its citizens to EU Commission.

The EU commission are reasonable for acquiring the vaccines for the EU citizens.

Do you believe the EU commission have done a good job in acquiring vaccines?
Do you believe our elected government was correct in giving these powers away?

Would Ireland have done better if we had gone it alone?
Would we have been left behind in the vaccine race?

ireland is a small country , it should be possible to beat the EU

lbj666

GT89 wrote: »

Covid worshippers on covid deaths "even if they had an underlying condition or were very elderly they wouldn't have died if they didn't catch covid". The same people when it comes to vaccine deaths "they were very old and vulnerable they probably would have died anyway, the vaccine is 100% safe".

This is not me being anti vax btw I'm just calling out certain individuals for their hypocrisy a common trend throughout the last year. The vaccine probably is safe but is unessecary for a disease which in my opinion has been blown out of proportion with regards to severity.

Its not hypocrisy,

Vacinating a vulnerable person is part of best efforts to protect that individual, in the rare case that an individual befell to side effect of the vacine it was clearly still in their best interest to protect them from the far greatly risk of contracting the disease now but also looking ahead with the intent and need for society to open up.

Downplaying the severity of the virus and suggesting they would have died anyway is not attempting to protect that individual at all.

Sceptics love to point out that mortality is not astronomically higher than a bad flu year or winter but conveniently ignore that we have been under extreme restrictions in order to keep it that way. Its stunning to think that a year in people are still downplaying this, despite the stark mortality rates in vulnerable people that normally would still have many more years to live, add that the exponential nature of spread when unmitigated and the correlation that has to mortality.