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

lbj666

plodder wrote: »

Risk is also based on occupation. A teacher standing in front of 30 kids is at a lot more risk than a worker working from home.

Problem is that given the issues with cohort 4 and 7 , they havent a grasp of numbers of each and its prolonguing them starting other cohorts until they have certainty. It also happened with group 2, with non frontline (or at least debatable) getting done at the same time, the actual number at group 2 stage became far more than projected as a result caused delays to group 3. You might say it doesnt matter they all get done anyway, be it in an earlier group or not but as i said lack of certainty of numbers in each cohort holds up organising the next cohorts down, it leads to creep in the programme. There isnt mention of 65-70s yet as an example.

The point of the change in strategy is it eliminates as many hesitancys as possible, the numbers in the teacher category would have turned into everything from principle to the class pet gold fish if there wasnt some form of verification or policing , but this verification or policing needed leads to hesitancies in the programme. These hesitancies all add up.

Regarding teachers risk, Yes there is a larger risk of them involved in an outbreak of course. ,but in broad terms the data shows they are no more at risk than anyone else in the community, in which case it should come down to their age not setting like everyone else in good health in the community. They have busted their holes to implement safe measures in schools but they will still have to do that when they are back anyway.

Teachers arent going to get a lot of symthpathy if the logistical headache of them wanting to be done a few weeks sooner leads to hold ups in the programme overall.

PhilOssophy

This is the best thread on boards for me.
It is a tonic of reasoned debate, logic and a small amount of crap to be ignored.
I think the government must have a serious commitment on vaccine supply which they know won't fail. There is no way they would have gone for age categories otherwise.
The production is at such a stage for all vaccines that we are about to be met with a tsunami of supply I think. I think they know this and starting to go with cohorts, this group and that, is splitting hairs as there will be weeks between the various groups.
Bring.it.on.

My elderly parents get their 2nd shot today. I have seen them 3 times in the last year, outdoors, for 1 hour each time. One was over Christmas and it was baltic and pushed the limits of all of our desires for a visit. I can't wait to give my mother a hug, and sit and have a proper cup of tea with them. It has been such a tough year for them in particular. Sorry - somebody is peeling onions.

The light at the end of this tunnel is nigh.

ectoraige

plodder wrote: »

Risk is also based on occupation. A teacher standing in front of 30 kids is at a lot more risk than a worker working from home.

Is that teacher at higher or lower risk than the person serving 100s of customers in the local petrol station? Is the teacher more at risk from the 30 kids, or from filling the car at the petrol station?

Is there data to quantify these risks, and does it show a clear statistically significant difference?

We already have a clear statistically significant stratifier of the health risk that COVID-19 presents to individuals - age. Let's use that.

namloc1980

PhoenixParker wrote: »

That’s been roughly the plan for weeks now.

Has it? First I heard of 3 million does being given in June.

Stark

Sounds like a mistake tbh, the plan up to now has been 3 million doses spread across April, May, June. (This is the same crowd who estimate there are 500,000 "high risk" 65-69 year olds in a country of 230,000 65-69 year olds).

PhilOssophy

ectoraige wrote: »

Is that teacher at higher or lower risk than the person serving 100s of customers in the local petrol station? Is the teacher more at risk from the 30 kids, or from filling the car at the petrol station?

Is there data to quantify these risks, and does it show a clear statistically significant difference?

We already have a clear statistically significant stratifier of the health risk that COVID-19 presents to individuals - age. Let's use that.

They are at no higher risk than the person who has manned the checkout in Lidl or Aldi for the past year anyway, that's for sure.

plodder

ectoraige wrote: »

Is that teacher at higher or lower risk than the person serving 100s of customers in the local petrol station? Is the teacher more at risk from the 30 kids, or from filling the car at the petrol station?

Is there data to quantify these risks, and does it show a clear statistically significant difference?

We already have a clear statistically significant stratifier of the health risk that COVID-19 presents to individuals - age. Let's use that.

Pragmatic decisions have to be made to make the vaccination proceed efficiently. Teachers and gardai are easily identifiable as groups whereas supermarket workers and other essential retail workers, though just as deserving, are not easily identifiable. Hospitalisations are still dropping. So, hopefully the question is moot. But, if they take off as a result of cases originating in schools (or the re-opening is delayed to prevent that), then it might not have been the right course to take.

eoinbn

namloc1980 wrote: »

Just heard an updated HSE ad on Newstalk. Saying 3 million doses will be administered by the end of May with 6 million by the end of June! 3 million alone in June?

5m by the end of June.
6m by the end of July.
June will likely be a slight overestimate even if we get 100% of the expected deliveries.

namloc1980

Stark wrote: »

Sounds like a mistake tbh, the plan up to now has been 3 million doses spread across April, May, June. (This is the same crowd who estimate there are 500,000 "high risk" 65-69 year olds in a country of 230,000 65-69 year olds).

Well they are advertising it on national radio that they plan on doing 3 million does alone in June. Must be pretty confident otherwise that's a massive hostage to fortune.

seamus

ectoraige wrote: »

Is that teacher at higher or lower risk than the person serving 100s of customers in the local petrol station? Is the teacher more at risk from the 30 kids, or from filling the car at the petrol station?

Is there data to quantify these risks, and does it show a clear statistically significant difference?

We already have a clear statistically significant stratifier of the health risk that COVID-19 presents to individuals - age. Let's use that.

I agree with all of this, though I am disappointed that Gardai appear to be left out of the loop on the planning and will have to wait for the main cohorts.

The same argument can apply - are they more at risk? But given that paramedics and fire stations are being covered, it seems logical that Gardai should be on the list. The former attend medical emergencies which is why they're on the list, but do Gardai not also attend medical emergencies on occasion?

There aren't that many Gardai and their movements are well controlled, they could all be done inside a week. It seems bizarre that they've basically been ignored.

namloc1980

eoinbn wrote: »

5m by the end of June.
6m by the end of July.
June will likely be a slight overestimate even if we get 100% of the expected deliveries.

The HSE ad says:
- 3 million by end of May,
- 6 million by end of June.

plodder

lbj666 wrote: »

Problem is that given the issues with cohort 4 and 7 , they havent a grasp of numbers of each and its prolonguing them starting other cohorts until they have certainty. It also happened with group 2, with non frontline (or at least debatable) getting done at the same time, the actual number at group 2 stage became far more than projected as a result caused delays to group 3. You might say it doesnt matter they all get done anyway, be it in an earlier group or not but as i said lack of certainty of numbers in each cohort holds up organising the next cohorts down, it leads to creep in the programme. There isnt mention of 65-70s yet as an example.

Definitely the priority has to be to get vaccines into arms, and I understand the worry that dithering over who is in which cohort could delay it, but that's really what I'm getting at. Someone said that a clinically obese 40 year old would get the vaccine ahead of a 20 year old teacher. They are certainly entitled to it, but from what you and others are saying, they are having trouble finding these people. I'm really saying that we need better IT systems, better information about people and their medical risks in case something like this happens again.

CrabRevolution

plodder wrote: »

Pragmatic decisions have to be made to make the vaccination proceed efficiently. Teachers and gardai are easily identifiable as groups whereas supermarket workers and other essential retail workers, though just as deserving, are not easily identifiable. Hospitalisations are still dropping. So, hopefully the question is moot. But, if they take off as a result of cases originating in schools (or the re-opening is delayed to prevent that), then it might not have been the right course to take.

Age cohorts are even easier to to identify as groups though, so following your logic it's best to go by age. It also removes the unfairness you point out that some professions aren't as easily quantified as others.

namloc1980

TDs are on the bandwagon in the Dáil at the moment advocating for different cohorts to be prioritised. Carers, teachers, Gardaí etc.

hmmm

seamus wrote: »

There aren't that many Gardai and their movements are well controlled, they could all be done inside a week. It seems bizarre that they've basically been ignored.

They're not being ignored though, the government scientific advisory committee has told the government that apparently they're no more likely to get the virus than anyone else.

Whether you believe that yourself or not, the government at least is acting on the advice it is getting.

I'm relieved at the decision because I think the next two months would have been filled with special interest groups all flexing their muscles to be first in line for vaccinations, and it would have been pretty unpleasant. People who are poorly represented yet at least at as high a risk (e.g. shop workers) would no doubt have been last in line in comparison to powerful unions.

Kivaro

namloc1980 wrote: »

TDs are on the bandwagon in the Dáil at the moment advocating for different cohorts to be prioritised. Carers, teachers, Gardaí etc.

I vote that TDs are the last cohort to be prioritised.

plodder

CrabRevolution wrote: »

Age cohorts are even easier to to identify as groups though, so following your logic it's best to got with those.

No, that's not my logic. It's really funny how it was all about front-line workers being at more risk .... until yesterday. And now today, it's all about age.

Anyway, if it's really true that we are that close to mass vaccination starting, then it's probably not worth arguing over. Plans have to be made and stuck to, to some extent. I'm not really saying they should change it, but they'd better be right that the vaccines are coming ..

Klonker

I can understand why teachers etc. are annoyed at the change to the roll out but this will be the fastest way to get the most at risk of severe disease vaccinated which will lead to lower deaths, ICU admissions and hospital admissions in the shortest time. Which should lead us getting back to normal quicker, isn't that what we all want?

josip

namloc1980 wrote: »

TDs are on the bandwagon in the Dáil at the moment advocating for different cohorts to be prioritised. Carers, teachers, Gardaí etc.

All the TDs will be getting lobbied by anybody who has a representative body and why their members are higher risk and should be moved up.
Probably the only groups who won't be able to make a case will be Kite Surfing Ireland and the Irish Hill Walking Association.
That's just part of the 'job' of being a TD.

But it's going to be pretty difficult for the govt to go against NIAC's advice.
They tried it once with NPHET and won't try it again.
Meanwhile, every week that passes, more people from each of these lobby groups gets vaccinated and the clamour subsides.

dominatinMC

Klonker wrote: »

I can understand why teachers etc. are annoyed at the change to the roll out but this will be the fastest way to get the most at risk of severe disease vaccinated which will lead to lower deaths, ICU admissions and hospital admissions in the shortest time. Which should lead us getting back to normal quicker, isn't that what we all want?

Teachers are perpetually annoyed. They need to just accept it and get on with the job they are paid to do like everyone else.

lbj666

plodder wrote: »

No, that's not my logic. It's really funny how it was all about front-line workers being at more risk .... until yesterday. And now today, it's all about age.

Anyway, if it's really true that we are that close to mass vaccination starting, then it's probably not worth arguing over. Plans have to be made and stuck to, to some extent. I'm not really saying they should change it, but they'd better be right that the vaccines are coming ..

In fairness HCWs were at a significantly greater risk of exposure than other "frontline" occupations and in times of scarcity or even plentiful supply there was no question about their priority.

is_that_so

NIAC's comments on the new system.

THE NATIONAL IMMUNISATION Advisory Council (NIAC) has described the new age-based approach as the “most equitable and efficient way” of continuing the rollout.

https://www.thejournal.ie/niac-vaccine-recommendations-5397171-Mar2021/

History Queen

dominatinMC wrote: »

Teachers are perpetually annoyed. They need to just accept it and get on with the job they are paid to do like everyone else.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. The public will not row in behind teachers, so special school staff, SNAs etc get tarred with this brush also. I can't understand the lack of outcry to have other sectors such as carers and childminders vaccinated though. They are more at risk, with less mitigating factors open to them than the general populace.

KrustyUCC

namloc1980 wrote: »

TDs are on the bandwagon in the Dáil at the moment advocating for different cohorts to be prioritised. Carers, teachers, Gardaí etc.

The same TDs who always want the government to follow health advice

is_that_so

KrustyUCC wrote: »

The same TDs who always want the government to follow health advice

It's that catch-all of "holding the government responsible".

eoinbn

namloc1980 wrote: »

The HSE ad says:
- 3 million by end of May,
- 6 million by end of June.

1.1m doses by the end of Q1 - likely to be less than that.
3.8m delivered in Q2.

Need to round up to get 5m. Need to find 1m doses to get to 6m. It is possible that the UK could give us doses in June but it is highly unlikely that we could admin 3m doses in June.

Gile_na_gile

plodder wrote: »

Pragmatic decisions have to be made to make the vaccination proceed efficiently. Teachers and gardai are easily identifiable as groups whereas supermarket workers and other essential retail workers, though just as deserving, are not easily identifiable. Hospitalisations are still dropping. So, hopefully the question is moot. But, if they take off as a result of cases originating in schools (or the re-opening is delayed to prevent that), then it might not have been the right course to take.

In Spain, they are well into the teaching cohort already with first doses (lots of AZ), which means at least they will have some sort of protection while actually teaching before the summer recess.

I guess we can now play the vaccine lottery in Ireland. A teacher in the 35-44 age group will probably now wait until June or July for full vaccination as our population pyramid bulges in the 35-39 age group, whereas before would have been (probably) fully vaccinated by late May early June.

According to NIAC, teachers are not at significantly larger risk of hospitalisation or death, but I guess that reflects their general younger ages. However, I wonder with increasing socialisation taking place families and teenagers a year into this whether that will hold into the future and whether they might become a further source of early transmission.

lbj666

hmmm wrote: »

They're not being ignored though, the government scientific advisory committee has told the government that apparently they're no more likely to get the virus than anyone else.

Whether you believe that yourself or not, the government at least is acting on the advice it is getting.

I'm relieved at the decision because I think the next two months would have been filled with special interest groups all flexing their muscles to be first in line for vaccinations, and it would have been pretty unpleasant. People who are poorly represented yet at least at as high a risk (e.g. shop workers) would no doubt have been last in line in comparison to powerful unions.

If any industry still has a case its the Meat Industry no matter how honest their efforts were, since its been such a problem. The decision could bite them if there is an outbreak resulting in additional restrictions introduced in certain counties.

Ask most people in school/retail environments etc. in good health they not necessarily worried about infection themselves, its the passing of it onto someone older possibly more at risk. So if we do cascade simply by age that eases the burden and mutes the issue even more.

Russman

KrustyUCC wrote: »

The same TDs who always want the government to follow health advice

All it is is a chance for them to rant and be seen to rant about something that they know won't change and they can tell their buddies "......I tried my best for ya, sure you saw me giving him hell in the chamber for ye......"

seansouth36

Given that we are constantly told by posters on here that case numbers don't matter, only hospitalisations/ICU, surely it makes total sense to prioritise those who COVID effects the most, rather than those most likely to get it? That's the whole point of the rollout it seems. It will also be quicker and save loads of lobbying and ****wittery from the HSE, who could barely organise a BBQ never mind a complex roll out.