What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

fly_agaric · 09-04-2021 11:48AM

Deleted User wrote: »

UK has dabbled in this and are trialling currently mixing them up.

i think its a good idea.

I would like a AZ with a dash of moderna.

Maybe even higher efficacy possibly.

Would prefer not to be guinea pig, but we are all going to be guinea pigs in next few months to a degree. Ill be happy when offered one.

You'd prefer not to be a "guinea pig" but you'd like multiple different covid-19 vaccines together [which has not (as far as I know?) been tested in a trial + wasn't a scenario considered when getting these vaccines approved]!

JP100 · 09-04-2021 11:51AM

Flying Fox wrote: »

We're talking about a scenario where we apply an age cut off to AZ, not people refusing vaccines.

I believe that it makes sense for people in cohort 4 to take the vaccine, as for them the benefit clearly outweighs the risk. But I can understand the worry and the frustration when other countries have taken clear decisions on this. Especially for people who have a history of clots, blood disorders, strokes, etc, either in themselves or their families.

There's no need to take such a rude tone by the way. Both yourself and LLMMLL have repeatedly misrepresented what I've said on here and taken a very aggressive tone with me and other posters. Not to mention continuously belittling perfectly reasonable concerns, and claiming that action taken in other countries is somehow impossible to implement here.

Well said.

fin12 · 09-04-2021 11:52AM

astrofool wrote: »

I'm pretty sure this is sarcasm, there's a lot of tightly wound people on the thread who won't get it (and I'm sorry if this wasn't sarcasm).

It’s not sarcasm that’s how I feel , maybe if u have t got the shot and have had a headache ever since

09-04-2021 11:55AM

fly_agaric wrote: »

You'd prefer not to be a "guinea pig" but you'd like multiple different covid-19 vaccines together [which has not (as far as I know?) been tested in a trial + wasn't a scenario considered when getting these vaccines approved]!

I will take whats offered to me but things can and will change in the future. Who knows what things will be like in 6 months. 6 months ago we had no vaccines out of stage 3 trials. Now we have 4 vaccines approved in ireland. We have to trust the health professonals. We have no choice but to.

In an ideal world i wouldnt have to take a vaccine that has been produced in a year but there we are. We do and thats it.

Previous generations had tougher choices. 20 year olds going to front line with a reasonable prospect of not coming back. It has been tough year but most generations had it tougher. Imagine covid hit in 1980. Things would be alot tougher

astrofool · 09-04-2021 12:00PM

fin12 wrote: »

It’s not sarcasm that’s how I feel , maybe if u have t got the shot and have had a headache ever since

If you have a constant headache then do go to the doctor.

I would avoid reading the daily mail as it will only make the headache worse, they are a rag well known for amping up dangers around any and all medicines.

mick087 · 09-04-2021 12:17PM

dogbert27 wrote: »

I find this passive aggressive response to a genuine health concern uncalled for.

Nothing passive i would go far as to say push them out the queue if they are holding things up.

This is a emergency situation i don't want myself or my family held up by someone in front of me is nervous, this will slow us down. If you are scared of taking the vaccine that's fine but please don't hold up people who's families are willing wanting to take the vaccine.

Stand in a a line and jab jab jab.

09-04-2021 12:20PM

mick087 wrote: »

Nothing passive i would go far as to say push them out the queue if they are holding things up.

This is a emergency situation i don't want myself or my family held up by someone in front of me is nervous, this will slow us down. If you are scared of taking the vaccine fine but please don't people who families are willing wanting to take the vaccine.

Stand in a a line and jab jab jab.

Agree we dont have time to hold peoples hands and tell them everything will be ok. You assess your risk and decide. Its called being an adult.

Turtwig · 09-04-2021 12:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Agree we dont have time to hold peoples hands and tell them everything will be ok. You assess your risk and decide. Its called being an adult.

That's not the society I aspire to live in. We give people as much information as possible. Be transparent on what we think the associated level of risks are (like the EMA and MHRA have been), address people's concerns and try to help them make the most informed choice.

Not just push them through like its a conveyor belt.

fly_agaric · 09-04-2021 12:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I will take whats offered to me but things can and will change in the future. Who knows what things will be like in 6 months. 6 months ago we had no vaccines out of stage 3 trials. Now we have 4 vaccines approved in ireland. We have to trust the health professonals. We have no choice but to.

In an ideal world i wouldnt have to take a vaccine that has been produced in a year but there we are. We do and thats it.

Previous generations had tougher choices. 20 year olds going to front line with a reasonable prospect of not coming back.

Your comment contained a contradiction (not wanting to be a guinea pig, but would like to be part of an experiment).

Yes, I'll take whatever I'm offered as regards vaccines when they get to me but would much prefer the regulators here/HSE etc. stuck to context in which vaccines were approved and of course additional evidence that comes out of their use in accordance with that, or from controlled experiments with volunteers.

Thankfully that seems to be what they are doing.

09-04-2021 12:23PM

mick087 wrote: »

Nothing passive i would go far as to say push them out the queue if they are holding things up.

This is a emergency situation i don't want myself or my family held up by someone in front of me is nervous, this will slow us down. If you are scared of taking the vaccine that's fine but please don't hold up people who's families are willing wanting to take the vaccine.

Who was holding anyone up, I rang up a day in advance and they said thats fine it will not go to waste there are plenty on standby.

patnor1011 · 09-04-2021 12:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I will take whats offered to me but things can and will change in the future. Who knows what things will be like in 6 months. 6 months ago we had no vaccines out of stage 3 trials. Now we have 4 vaccines approved in ireland. We have to trust the health professonals. We have no choice but to.

In an ideal world i wouldnt have to take a vaccine that has been produced in a year but there we are. We do and thats it.

Previous generations had tougher choices. 20 year olds going to front line with a reasonable prospect of not coming back. It has been tough year but most generations had it tougher. Imagine covid hit in 1980. Things would be alot tougher

We this, we that...
Your Majesty?

mick087 · 09-04-2021 12:48PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Who was holding anyone up, I rang up a day in advance and they said thats fine it will not go to waste there are plenty on standby.

Fantastic news once you are not holding anyone up behind you or delaying anyone else then i don't see an issue.

09-04-2021 01:18PM

patnor1011 wrote: »

We this, we that...
Your Majesty?

:pac::pac:

09-04-2021 02:09PM

Looks like the UK will consider raising the age cut off for AZ to 40 as they get closer to vaccinating people in their 30s.

https://metro.co.uk/2021/04/09/under-40s-could-be-asked-to-take-alternative-jab-to-oxford-vaccine-14381985/

manus35 · 09-04-2021 02:15PM

Do you think it is fair that somebody in the vulnerable group who has previously suffered an acquired brain injury and stroke is offered the AZ vaccine when they are terrified of even the slightest possibility of suffering another one,

Been offered a vaccine that is said to be safe in Ireland as it's benefits outweigh it's risks which is a correct statement when applied to the general population but not really when you apply it to an individual who probably doesn't have much risk of infection at this point in time.

When in Countries like France they are halting it for the u55 age group as their health minister says "it is completely consistent to say that we do not recommend the AstraZeneca vaccine to people under 55 years of age while we learn more"

Shouldn't people with legitimate fears from past experience be allowed an alternative vaccine,

I understand it is down to supply at this point but the current data suggests that AZ is safe for the over 55s so why can't they move other vaccines down to other groups

09-04-2021 02:18PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

Looks like the UK will consider raising the age cut off for AZ to 40 as they get closer to vaccinating people in their 30s.

https://metro.co.uk/2021/04/09/under-40s-could-be-asked-to-take-alternative-jab-to-oxford-vaccine-14381985/

We got it so wrong ringfencing mrna vaccines to over 70s.

The great Sir Tony Holohan.

He should have said just jab over 70s as supply comes in with whatever available as NIAC advised.

Not one over 70 has received a really suitable vaccine that is very low risk for this cohort.

Risk benefit ratio that uk are doing all the time he didnt consider it all.

He has given hse etc. huge headache now. Especially after all the logistics of getting mrnas to gps offices for elderly.

Please please dont come back Tony.

fin12 · 09-04-2021 02:29PM

astrofool wrote: »

If you have a constant headache then do go to the doctor.

I would avoid reading the daily mail as it will only make the headache worse, they are a rag well known for amping up dangers around any and all medicines.

It says a headache for 4 days then seek medical advice , I’m only two days in.

LLMMLL · 09-04-2021 02:35PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

On the first point, appreciate that, thanks. It's just frustrating as my words have been twisted a few times on here, but it probably has been LLMMLL moreso than yourself.

In general I would agree that if someone refuses a vaccine they should go to the back of the queue. I'm not (as some are claiming) trying to pick and choose which vaccine I want. But there is a safety issue associated with one specific vaccine, serious enough to cause most of our peer countries to restrict it's use. So that does change the picture in my view.

Flying Fox wrote:

I'm not asking to jump the queue, just to keep my place in the queue.

Nobody has twisted your words. You are now saying you are ok with going to the back of the queue (which I’m fine with) but the above quote shows you originally wanted to be able to refuse a vaccine and NOT go to the back of the queue i.e. get your preferred vaccine.

It’s only since you were questioned on where this preferred vaccine was going to come from given limited supply that you seem to have changed your mind.

It’s a little rich to claim your words have been twisted by me.

09-04-2021 02:39PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

Nobody has twisted your words. You are now saying you are ok with going to the back of the queue (which I’m fine with) but the above quote shows you originally wanted to be able to refuse a vaccine and NOT go to the back of the queue i.e. get your preferred vaccine.

It’s only since you were questioned on where this preferred vaccine was going to come from given limited supply that you seem to have changed your mind.

It’s a little rich to claim your words have been twisted by me.

Do you want to actually read my posts properly before having a go? I've set out perfectly reasonable points, but instead of reading what I say you're just desperate to attack.

I'm done engaging with you now.

LLMMLL · 09-04-2021 02:59PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

Do you want to actually read my posts properly before having a go? I've set out perfectly reasonable points, but instead of reading what I say you're just desperate to attack.

I'm done engaging with you now.

I’m not desperate to attack. You said I misrepresented you. I quoted your posts which showed that that was false, that you had just changed what you are saying since.

It seems you are the one in attack-mode.

astrofool · 09-04-2021 03:19PM

Deleted User wrote: »

We got it so wrong ringfencing mrna vaccines to over 70s.

The great Sir Tony Holohan.

That was nothing to do with Tony and all to do with missing data in the trials that led to a very very low confidence of the AZ vaccine protecting the over 70's from severe illness and death, if the trials had been ran correctly, as Moderna and Pfizer and J&J have done, then the confidence level would have been high and over 70's would have received it.

09-04-2021 03:28PM

astrofool wrote: »

That was nothing to do with Tony and all to do with missing data in the trials that led to a very very low confidence of the AZ vaccine protecting the over 70's from severe illness and death, if the trials had been ran correctly, as Moderna and Pfizer and J&J have done, then the confidence level would have been high and over 70's would have received it.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...-70s-1.4475153

The committee found that all approved vaccines were suitable for adults, and that “the best vaccine anyone can receive at this time is the vaccine that can be soonest administered”

In early February NIAC advised the above.

Over two months later how many unvaccinated over 70's?

Annecdotely I know plenty.

I think you could have selective memory.

We have over 70's that cant get vaccines and under 70's that don't want certain vaccines.

Well managed.

I think Tony deserves a pay rise.

astrofool · 09-04-2021 03:42PM

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...-70s-1.4475153

The committee found that all approved vaccines were suitable for adults, and that “the best vaccine anyone can receive at this time is the vaccine that can be soonest administered”

In early February NIAC advised the above.

Over two months later how many unvaccinated over 70's?

Annecdotely I know plenty.

I think you could have selective memory.

We have over 70's that cant get vaccines and under 70's that don't want certain vaccines.

Well managed.

I think Tony deserves a pay rise.

We're still using up all vaccines we get, the delay to over 70's just meant cohort 4 could begin sooner and HCW got the AZ vaccine rather than mRNA. There was never an issue with safety in the over 70's, the issue was solely around the effectiveness of the vaccine. The blame is purely with the trial data and management of the trials.

09-04-2021 03:49PM

astrofool wrote: »

We're still using up all vaccines we get, the delay to over 70's just meant cohort 4 could begin sooner and HCW got the AZ vaccine rather than mRNA. There was never an issue with safety in the over 70's, the issue was solely around the effectiveness of the vaccine. The blame is purely with the trial data and management of the trials.

Over 70's have been unduly delayed without even one dose with the above.

Some in cohort 4 and HCW are rightly saying why are we getting a vaccine that risks our health more than an over 70 person?

Vaccines should have been given to the most appropriate cohort based on risk/benefit etc.

Maybe UK got lucky, but they made much better decisions.

Do we have the luxury to not give AZ to under 40s like UK are suggesting?

We have alot of this is Q2 and it all has to go to under 70's due to decision two months ago.

astrofool · 09-04-2021 04:00PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Over 70's have been unduly delayed without even one dose with the above.

Some in cohort 4 and HCW are rightly saying why are we getting a vaccine that risks our health more than an over 70 person?

Vaccines should have been given to the most appropriate cohort based on risk/benefit etc.

Maybe UK got lucky, but they made much better decisions.

Do we have the luxury to not give AZ to under 40s like UK are suggesting?

We have alot of this is Q2 and it all has to go to under 70's due to decision two months ago.

Sure, but each decision was correct at the time, and backed by the data available at the time, it's easy now in hindsight with much more data available. It would have been much easier in foresight if the AZ trials had been ran properly (and they didn't mess around on production, and they didn't secretly send vaccines to different countries, and they applied for Halix approval sooner and they applied for EMA approval sooner, and they applied for FDA approval sooner, or if Merck had been chosen as the manufacturer instead of a company with no vaccine expertise, and if the veil of secrecy around UK supply and their anaemic local supply had been lifted sooner).

Enzokk · 09-04-2021 04:21PM

Deleted User wrote: »

We got it so wrong ringfencing mrna vaccines to over 70s.

The great Sir Tony Holohan.

He should have said just jab over 70s as supply comes in with whatever available as NIAC advised.

Not one over 70 has received a really suitable vaccine that is very low risk for this cohort.

Risk benefit ratio that uk are doing all the time he didnt consider it all.

He has given hse etc. huge headache now. Especially after all the logistics of getting mrnas to gps offices for elderly.

Please please dont come back Tony.

You are doing it again, playing Monday morning quarterback. If we had gone ahead with the over 70's and AZ and a link was found with regards to adverse reactions or it was not as effective in treating the virus, would you have been going after Tony Holohan as well? Try to be honest...because the data wasn't there at the time to safely say either way what was going to happen.

Also, be careful to reference the UK on risk benefit choices, they are a bunch of chancers who got lucky by taking the same chances with the vaccines that they did with their initial response to the pandemic, including the handling of PPE and discharging people from hospital to care homes to spread the virus and kill thousands.

09-04-2021 04:32PM

astrofool wrote: »

Sure, but each decision was correct at the time, and backed by the data available at the time, it's easy now in hindsight with much more data available. It would have been much easier in foresight if the AZ trials had been ran properly (and they didn't mess around on production, and they didn't secretly send vaccines to different countries, and they applied for Halix approval sooner and they applied for EMA approval sooner, and they applied for FDA approval sooner, or if Merck had been chosen as the manufacturer instead of a company with no vaccine expertise, and if the veil of secrecy around UK supply and their anaemic local supply had been lifted sooner).

How come UK vaccinated their older population with AZ then if "decision was correct at the time, and backed by the data available at the time"?

They don't have our problems now as there no data to say it was ever dangerous to older citizens and there still is none.

These vaccines are gifts essentially, given the small price of them to restore our lives. Blaming the producer of these gifts because its not perfect extensive data to your liking 9 months into a pandemic does not obsolve countries of poor decisions.

UK knew to vaccinate its older with AZ. Ireland simply backed Germanys decision on a UK vaccine, rather than look at what the UK were doing. Ireland are watching what the UK regulators are doing now given their decent decision making to date on this vaccine, but its a bit late now in the day. There are some decisions you cannot undo and you have to pay the price of that error. This is one of those decisions. This should be highlighted more. Tony Holihan should be removed/sidelined/retire.

09-04-2021 04:43PM

Enzokk wrote: »

You are doing it again, playing Monday morning quarterback. If we had gone ahead with the over 70's and AZ and a link was found with regards to adverse reactions or it was not as effective in treating the virus, would you have been going after Tony Holohan as well? Try to be honest...because the data wasn't there at the time to safely say either way what was going to happen.

Also, be careful to reference the UK on risk benefit choices, they are a bunch of chancers who got lucky by taking the same chances with the vaccines that they did with their initial response to the pandemic, including the handling of PPE and discharging people from hospital to care homes to spread the virus and kill thousands.

Totally honest.

I thought it was a mistake from day 1, not a realization in last month.

We had a country next door to us a month a head of us to copy and paste.

How many vaccines have we developed for covid 19?

When your a small country you have to biggy back off someone in this situation.

We opted for Germany, were Merckle in her sixties is unvaccinated yet Boris in his fifties has been vaccinated for weeks.

We had a choice to follow Germany or UK?

We decided with Germany.

Thats the gist of what happened, whether you dont like hearing it or not.

Germany is just entering into new lockdown and UK are opening pubs within days.

Ireland are now noting what UK regulators are doing now in relation to AZ, 2 months too late.

Turtwig · 09-04-2021 04:47PM

I don't even know what I'm reading at this stage.

Merkel, Holohan. Dafuq have these people to do with anything?

09-04-2021 04:50PM

We're clearly not following Germany now when we're restricting AZ in the over 70s rather than the under 60s. I think the original decision was fair enough based on the lack of data, but we should be adapting as the picture changes.

What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Comments