Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

1…138139141143144…331

Comments

  • #4202
    lucernarian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,236 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    Hurrache wrote: »
    If only she knew this thread was full of experts she could seek advice from.
    Try and sell that line to a Traveller family, it's fine to give you this J&J vaccine but we think it's too risky to give it to 35 year old settled folk down the road.

    If this age restriction is implemented, it will have severe ramifications for the rollout from both an epidemiological and political perspective.


  • #4203
    Deathofcool
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 48 ✭Deathofcool


    Irish times reporting that AZ will also be used for 50+ so that will help.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/niac-to-recommend-johnson-johnson-and-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccines-for-over-50s-1.4547891?mode=amp


  • #4204
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,077 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    Deathofcool wrote: »
    Irish times reporting that AZ will also be used for 50+ so that will help.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/niac-to-recommend-johnson-johnson-and-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccines-for-over-50s-1.4547891?mode=amp

    So J&J has less issues with clots than AZ but now they're going to be on a par?

    Not sure that makes sense


  • #4205
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 1,159 ✭ [Deleted User]


    The US is different, alternatives are being offered.

    From the head of the CDC committee who approved resumption of J&J:

    The Johnson & Johnson vaccine “can be reinstituted and should be reinstituted. I acknowledge, as does everyone else, that these events are rare, but serious,” Jose Romero, chair of the committee, said. “It is our responsibility as clinicians to make sure that women understand this risk and, when possible, that they have an alternative at the same site that you’re administering the vaccine.”

    Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/04/23/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-blood-clots/

    In practice, even if an alternative was not available at the same site, it would be easy to source one elsewhere.


  • #4206
    Myramar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 49 ✭Myramar


    Aidric wrote: »
    What is this NIAC recommendation based on? Given that the FDA and EMA have lifted their pause with the condition of an additional warning of rare clotting events in young women.


    It is based on the fact that they are paid to give advice to government so Government can distance themselves from the decision and claim it is based on science.


    They made a very restricitive decision on AZ which was based more on logistics.
    Inventory and supplies of AZ in coming weeks were about equal to the number of 60-69 year olds that needed to be vaccinated. To avoid problems with vaccine hesitancy where younger people (like teachers and guards for example ) who were told that the risks of dying from Covid were very low for under 60s and these
    might question whether the risk was worth it. NIAC decided to limit it to the 60-69 year olds who have no choice but to accept the risk.


    A few days later the same issues of clotting were identified with the J&J Vaccine and now the numbers don't add up. There are not enough 60-69 year olds to use up the supplies of both AZ and J&J.


    Problem was that they had to come up with a reason why they had to differentiate between the two vaccines and keep government happy so they get to continue to get paid!


    Last week Martin and Varadkar made it abundantly clear to NIAC theat they wanted "independant" advice that was not the same as that they had received for AZ.


    Today NIAC have complied by "Leaking" their advice.


    But please be assured - It's all based on Science - We are always following the Science.


  • Advertisement
  • #4207
    titan18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,052 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Deathofcool wrote: »
    Irish times reporting that AZ will also be used for 50+ so that will help.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/niac-to-recommend-johnson-johnson-and-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccines-for-over-50s-1.4547891?mode=amp

    What's that a week or so since they recommended over 60s. I'm sure they got a huge pile of more information to change that.


  • #4208
    Szero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 162 ✭✭Szero


    Serious question ... Should we now jump straight to those aged 49 and below with Pfizer and Moderna if we want to make best use?


  • #4209
    useless
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 792 ✭✭✭useless


    I wonder how far that sets us back in terms of having 80-90% of the country vaccinated? Feels like "80% by end June" is a pipe dream now.


  • #4210
    MerlinSouthDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭MerlinSouthDub


    Szero wrote: »
    Serious question ... Should we now jump straight to those aged 49 and below with Pfizer and Moderna if we want to make best use?

    If we don't do that, we will have loads of unused vaccines at the end of June. That seems mad to me, but it may well happen.


  • #4211
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,077 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    Szero wrote: »
    Serious question ... Should we now jump straight to those aged 49 and below with Pfizer and Moderna if we want to make best use?

    After the vulnerable cohorts 4 & & yes we should

    Apart from second doses no more Pfizer or Moderna should be given to 50-69 year olds otherwise vaccines will be wasted


  • Advertisement
  • #4212
    Happydays2020
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭Happydays2020


    If the clotting is with women, why not just use on men? Just wondering.


  • #4213
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    After the vulnerable cohorts 4 & & yes we should

    Apart from second doses no more Pfizer or Moderna should be given to 50-69 year olds otherwise vaccines will be wasted

    Would this not slow down the overall pace of the program?


  • #4214
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,690 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    Happydays2020 wrote: »
    If the clotting is with women, why not just use on men? Just wondering.

    That would be logical


  • #4215
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,077 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    Turtwig wrote: »
    Would this not slow down the overall pace of the program?

    Maybe it would

    Be interesting to see what the HSE come up with

    However if you give 50-69 year olds Pfizer, Moderna, AZ and J&J when AZ and J&J are not recommended for use in younger groups any leftover AZ and J&J will not be used

    That's a waste of precious vaccines

    NIAC have created a logistical nightmare for the HSE


  • #4216
    titan18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,052 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Turtwig wrote: »
    Would this not slow down the overall pace of the program?

    If you're doing AZ and J&J for all over 50 now, it shouldn't do that much I think. Logistically makes it more difficult as you need to have 2 separate streams going groups 4,7 and 49 and under and another with the 50-70s but if they can manage that, I don't see why it should slow down much on the supply to delivery side.

    I'd say it's more slowed down if they give Pfizer to 50-59 as you're wasting vaccines (and as they went with a AZ only selection for 60-69, it'd be pretty unfair to allow 50-59 get Pfizer imo)


  • #4217
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Happydays2020 wrote: »
    If the clotting is with women, why not just use on men? Just wondering.

    No data to show there's a higher risk to a specific gender, age, medical condition etc. If there's a strong correlation established they may consider limiting to a given gender. For now, just not enough info for either J&J or AZ.


  • #4218
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 18,045 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    Maybe they'll say "50+ currently but under review" and will drop it down another age group, as they did with AZ, when they get more evidence to help with their "abundance of caution".


  • #4219
    Elessar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,268 ✭✭✭Elessar


    We won't have enough J&J and AZ vaccines until June to do the 50+ age group, and it will be politically and culturally unpalatable to let them wait while mRNA vaccines are given to younger groups.

    So in typical Irish fashion, we will have gigantic stockpiles of perfectly good, useable vaccines for use in age groups that will have already been vaccinated. So for all intents and purposes, they will be useless and sold to other countries. While we rely on Pfizer and Moderna for everyone else.

    An absolute unholy joke. F*ck this country.


  • #4220
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    Maybe it would

    Be interesting to see what the HSE come up with

    However if you give 50-69 year olds Pfizer, Moderna, AZ and J&J when AZ and J&J are not recommended for use in younger groups any leftover AZ and J&J will not be used

    That's a waste of precious vaccines

    NIAC have created a logistical nightmare for the HSE

    Have no issue with vaccines being unused here. There'll be any number of countries we can donate them to that they'll be used in. The impact of these decisions on the speed of delivery of the vaccination program and people's uptake of vaccination is all that matters imo.


  • #4221
    Fr_Dougal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,166 ✭✭✭Fr_Dougal


    Everyone was supposed to be vaccinated by September, are we on schedule or running behind at the moment does anyone know? And I mean actually on track, not behind but could catch up etc.


  • Advertisement
  • #4222
    hmmm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Turtwig wrote: »
    No data to show there's a higher risk to a specific gender, age, medical condition etc. If there's a strong correlation established they may consider limiting to a given gender. For now, just not enough info for either J&J or AZ.
    I can't find a more recent chart, but:

    https://twitter.com/megtirrell/status/1385630794685681667


  • #4223
    PhoenixParker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭PhoenixParker


    Fr_Dougal wrote: »
    Everyone was supposed to be vaccinated by September, are we on schedule or running behind at the moment does anyone know? And I mean actually on track, not behind but could catch up etc.

    On track for at least 1st doses. Most people will be fully done.


  • #4224
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Swamped in bureacracy. What could NIAC knew that allows them to against FDA & EMA recommendations? It's a farce at this stage. Do they not look at the risk of not vaccinating people quick enough so the virus won't be curtailed and people will die? Talking about 15 cases for 8M doses and no men were impacted. Nearly 5,000 have died from this virus in Ireland.

    This decison will ultimately keep the virus active at a higher rate longer in the population.


  • #4225
    bikeman1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,464 ✭✭✭bikeman1


    From my reading the of it tonight:

    Continue with medically vulnerable
    AZ and J&J 69 down year by year to 50
    PZ Moderna 49 down year by to 18
    Small out reach J&J vaccine to hard to reach groups which can start immediately but won’t take up much.

    All happening at the same time.

    A challenge but if you split it out the smaller groups and focused into specific vaccines should work and NIAC would have run the numbers. The HSE must be going mad with yet another change to the plan!!


  • #4226
    iamwhoiam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,249 ✭✭✭✭iamwhoiam


    Abundance of caution is all very fine when we have time and plenty of it . It’s inappropriate in an emergency and in the middle of a pandemic .
    Can NIAC not see this ?


  • #4227
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,077 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    Turtwig wrote: »
    Have no issue with vaccines being unused here. There'll be any number of countries we can donate them to that they'll be used in. The impact of these decisions on the speed of delivery of the vaccination program and people's uptake of vaccination is all that matters imo.

    It definitely matters if that wastage results in missed targets for the vaccine program and an even longer easing of restrictions for all society as a result

    You might vaccinate 50-70 year olds quicker but then that has knock on effects on the age groups under that which can't use AZ and J&J


  • #4228
    Fr_Dougal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,166 ✭✭✭Fr_Dougal


    PhoenixParker wrote: »
    On track for at least 1st doses. Most people will be fully done.

    So behind? The goal was to have everyone fully vaccinated. I know there have been several issues like supply etc., just want to know where we are.


  • #4229
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 18,045 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    Do NIAC have to do any modelling? Do they have to account for the fact that, if they limit the vaccine by X amount, then it means Y number of people have to wait longer and are put at risk? Or do they just focus on age groups and completely ignore the knock on effects because that's someone else's problem?


  • #4230
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    hmmm wrote: »
    I can't find a more recent chart, but:

    https://twitter.com/megtirrell/status/1385630794685681667

    Yeah saw that. I know it was not possible for them provide it but I'd have loved a breakdown by profession and income. If as reported the US is deploying this vaccine in homeless communities how likely is that any cases of this incredibly specific condition were going to be detected? They may not be detected even now but at least with the pause to spread greater awareness, in a few weeks we should have better idea of the actual incident rate of the adverse event. For now, the stats are in flux and it's a safe bet imo to say there's an undercount at the moment.


  • Advertisement
  • #4231
    PhoenixParker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭PhoenixParker


    Fr_Dougal wrote: »
    So behind? The goal was to have everyone fully vaccinated. I know there have been several issues like supply etc., just want to know where we are.

    Not really behind. AZ has a dose interval of 12 weeks to work best. That means any AZ doses past June 1st will need a second dose in September. That's the only reason everyone wouldn't be fully done in September.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement