3mom4 wrote: » I think you are correct for the most part; NIAC recommended that very/high risk cohorts under 70 be given mrna vaccines as a priority. We have done the opposite based on outdated evidence that AstraZeneca is less suited to the elderly than the at risk under 70s. Opposite is now true. Some people under 70 in high risk cohorts (including many females under 50 like myself) are at a higher risk of blood clotting. This is ignored. The choice is that there is none. Suck up the high risk or get covid. Why are those most at risk with the AZ vaccine being the ones only offered it? Those least at risk are being offered the others? This makes no sense. Why are we still continuing with this stupid strategy? It's convenient.
3mom4 wrote: » I think you are correct for the most part;
Deleted User wrote: » Its called tony holihans brain. His thinking seems to be protect all over 70s at all costs to the detriment of everyone else. He wanted to vaccinate 18 year olds before 54 year olds again his theory an 18 year old will reduce spread quicker and protect a 90 year old in a nursing home further by reducing spread in community. This is the same 90 year old that has had two.pfzier jabs a month apart. The man was trying to make up for deaths in nursing homes in first wave. With regards vaccination policy he has been inept.
astrofool wrote: » Where supply of vaccines isn't an issue, and where vaccines reduce transmission, vaccinating the spreaders leads to a lower disease and morbidity rate than vaccinating those most at risk to the disease, this is one of the reasons why colleges and those at work are targeted with flu vaccines. Where there is supply issues, it makes most sense to vaccinate those at risk of the disease as the number of vaccines required to prevent a death is quite a low number. This is vaccination 101 stuff.
astrofool wrote: » There was very little correct in that post, with a lot of other posters including myself laying out the reasons why it was incorrect in quite a factual manner.
3mom4 wrote: » I think they were correct in that people at risk from the blood clotting side effects of AZ should not be the group ONLY offered the vaccine that causes that! What is your problem with this statement?
stephenjmcd wrote: » Not sure what age group your folks are in but if they're 65-69 it won't be the GP doing it. They'll register on the portal when it's launched and then attend a vaccination centre.
Deeper Blue wrote: » I've seen Chile being used as an example of why the vaccines "aren't a silver bullet", however if I'm not mistaken Israel's cases skyrocketed in early January despite having given out millions of vaccines. And look at them now.
LLMMLL wrote: » What should they be offered? Pfizer? And then when a 70+ person is upset and anxious that they are getting AZ what do we do then?
[Deleted User] wrote: » Its called tony holihans brain. His thinking seems to be protect all over 70s at all costs to the detriment of everyone else. He wanted to vaccinate 18 year olds before 54 year olds again his theory an 18 year old will reduce spread quicker and protect a 90 year old in a nursing home further by reducing spread in community. This is the same 90 year old that has had two.pfzier jabs a month apart. The man was trying to make up for deaths in nursing homes in first wave. With regards vaccination policy he has been inept.Its not about disproportionately helping one cohort to the detriment of everyone else.
ectoraige wrote: » Tiny Holohan isn't NIAC, and white the deputy CMO is a member there are 23 other members of the committee too.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Correct. Its impossible to undo many of the vaccination policy mistakes that tony holihan has made. This is one of them. All over 70s will have to be vaccinated with pfzier now. Totally avoidable stuff were over 70s unvaccinated at present are now suffering for no good reason. Any over 70s should have been vaccinated with any vaccine from the start given their risk of death. This is now left further mistrust of AZ by the public.
VG31 wrote: » I've never seen anyone in goggles. I'd imagine everyone you meet would stare at you, I certainly would!
Deleted User wrote: » You mean Tony. Tony pushed beyond niacs advise to have mrna only for over 70s. He also had a big say in original priority list.
Turtwig wrote: » It's raining you have the option of an umbrella that works or one that in theory should work but it's not been robustly tested yet as you didn't collect the hard data. I would say using the first umbrella is the most reasonable option. There was insufficient efficacy data for AZ use in over 70s. Just adequate safety data. Had we given people a dud vaccine that while safe to administer would not have gone down well. This decision btw was not Tony Holohans. It was NIACs.
Turtwig wrote: » It's raining you have the option of an umbrella that works or one that in theory should work but it's not been robustly tested yet as you didn't collect the hard data. I would say using the first umbrella is the most reasonable option. There was insufficient efficacy data for AZ use in over 70s. Just adequate safety data. Had we given people a dud vaccine that while safe to administer would not have gone down well. This decision btw was not Tony Holohans. It was NIACs. They approved the AZ vaccine for all ages over 18. They also recommended that where possible the over 70s should be given MRNA if a timely administration was possible.
astrofool wrote: » People also forget that AZ was being used in homebound over 70's due to the difficulty of transporting Pfizer.We also haven't seen any of the reported issues with AZ and young people in Ireland, for whatever reason.
3mom4 wrote: » It should be literally a few weeks before over 70s are given a first dose. Why can't those at risk from side effects in cohort 4 and AZ be given the opportunity to wait those few weeks and take an mrna vaccine. What I am saying is that the opportunity to wait doesn't exist. You don't take AZ and you're gone in this cohort. That's not right.
Deleted User wrote: » I remember andrew lloyd weber who.is over 70 saying he got az in abtrial and remebering him saying.it has good record with elderly. That was last summer. Unforgiveable mistakes.
lbj666 wrote: » Which you have only come to critises here tonight retrospectively because of the potential quandry left due to safety concerns in AZ that only transpired in the past few weeks. The level of Johnny Hindsighting here to get a bit of Tony bashing in is a bit pathetic.
astrofool wrote: » We should of course listen to the scientific opinion of the man who wrote Cats...
Deleted User wrote: » When you are paid what tony is paid you are judged on your judgements/decisions Simple as that. He did have a country beside him 13 times bigger thann ireland, vaccine hq in europe before brexit, at least one month ahead in vaccine implementation. He could have cut and.paste theirs. Not a huge amount.of insight.needed there. UK have not made these bad decisions. He followed germany instead. Merckle in her 60s still waiting.on vaccine. Boris in his fifties vaccinated a few weeks.
LLMMLL wrote: » The over 70s will be done soon and all have the highest level of protection. To me that is a success. There are plenty of variations on rollout strategies. Some might have turned out a bit better. Some might have turned out a bit worse. But the one we did is turning out well. I question why you feel the need to badmouth it for your preferred strategy that you have no way of knowing whether it would perform better or not.
Deleted User wrote: » But you dont have enough umbrellas for everyone until middle/end of april. So you give 20 per cent of cohort super protection.in february march, while the other 80 per cent are having to fend for themselves for months on end until third wave is completely over. Tonys ideas were correct in his head with endless amounts of vaccine of all discriptions simply waiting to be used. The on the ground reality for hse to.implement was completely different. Hence in April many unvaccinated 70s are waiting unnecessarily. In this pandemic you have to.make judgements. Always being so conservative does not always get best results. The over 70s he thought was helping many are waiting around with AZ reputation in further tatters. we need people to take this vaccine in large part in next 3 months and he has planted another seed of doubti in.peoples mind. not good enough for over 70s but good enough for you. I will take astra if offered but this distinction made for.over 70s was without evidence. I remember andrew lloyd weber who.is over 70 saying he got az in abtrial and remebering him saying.it has good record with elderly. That was last summer. Unforgiveable mistakes.
astrofool wrote: » You do seem to be obsessing about Tony Holohan, you do of course know that he's just one of a number of experts working on the country's pandemic response? UK has the 10th highest amount of deaths per million in the world? Ireland is 42nd, UK made bad decision after bad decision, the vaccine rollout is all that has went well for them and was driven by taking risks and subterfuge, but also following roughly the same rollout strategy as we have.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/cc5c49cbcd8338fb80f9b4941d6b358e.svg)
