Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

is_that_so · 28-04-2021 07:39AM

Supercell wrote: »

There is another option, research is showing that the mRNA vaccines dont have to be 4 weeks apart, why not make them 6 or maybe 8 weeks, offer them them to all alongside the J&J (for the over 50's) and donate the remaining AZ and J&J doses to other countries, overall rollout time would not be majorly affected or maybe be faster overall and fairer (nobody has to wait 12 weeks to be fully vaccinated or forced to take the J&J) to the over 50's.

They've already decided not to widen it.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/government-decides-not-to-widen-four-week-gap-between-vaccine-doses-1.4549267

SusanC10 · 28-04-2021 07:42AM

is_that_so wrote: »

It's more likely to be school time when they start on it, even if approved, as the rest of the summer will be taken up with second doses for adults.

That probably makes sense actually - logistically easier too - to do it at the Schools.

Supercell · 28-04-2021 07:43AM

is_that_so wrote: »

They've already decided not to widen it.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/government-decides-not-to-widen-four-week-gap-between-vaccine-doses-1.4549267

Yes I saw that, that was really a reply to the rte article which concluded there was no other option but to vaccinate the under 50's with the mRNA vaccines and force the over 50's to wait for the J&J or AZ.
We do have the luxury of choice , we don't have to be small minded and take the attitude that we should take whatever we are given and be thankful, we are a first world country , part of the the biggest economic group of countries in the world (the EU) we need to stop thinking like small potato farmers behoved to a better class, the Danish don't think like that, why should we?

is_that_so · 28-04-2021 07:51AM

Supercell wrote: »

Yes I saw that, that was really a reply to the rte article which concluded there was no other option but to vaccine the under 50's with the mRNA vaccines and force the over 50's to wait for the J&J.
We do have the luxury of choice , we don't have to be small minded and take the attitude that we should take whatever we are given and be thankful, we are a first world country , part of the the biggest economic group of countries in the world (the EU) we need to stop thinking we have to take whatever we are given, the danish don't think like that, why should we?

If we want the vaccination programme to stay on track it may be the only way. Yes we do have plenty of options but have all those choices been wise? NIAC's stance on some vaccines is clearly flexible as the abundance of caution is now for the over 50s! There's also the issue of how the need for an accelerated programme may go against the overall stated HSE aim of age first and this random rule making and changing is perplexing.

Elessar · 28-04-2021 08:14AM

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Good analysis

The "In other words, it seems, you can ask the 50–59-year-olds to wait, or you can risk wasting Johnson & Johnson doses." is very hard for the HSE

Impossible to get right

We all know what's going to happen. 50-59 year olds won't be asked to wait (imagine the outrage!) and so will get Pfizer and whatever AZ/J&J come in in the meantime. Come June 400k+ doses of J&J will be delivered that no one can use and they will be sold to other countries with no ridiculous restrictions.

Rebelbrowser · 28-04-2021 08:26AM

Elessar wrote: »

We all know what's going to happen. 50-59 year olds won't be asked to wait (imagine the outrage!) and so will get Pfizer and whatever AZ/J&J come in in the meantime. Come June 400k+ doses of J&J will be delivered that no one can use and they will be sold to other countries with no ridiculous restrictions.

More likely will do what it did with AZ and decide after 4 weeks that they can lower the threshold for J&J by 10 years....

sd1999 · 28-04-2021 08:31AM

Honestly, I think the provision that J&J can be used “if no other vaccine is available” will prevent it going to waste. That stipulation is very loose and open to interpretation and I imagine a lot of people would jump at the option to only need one dose.

Happydays2020 · 28-04-2021 08:33AM

US has had a very nationalistic policy yet Fauci is saying this:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/28/were-all-in-this-together-dr-fauci-says-world-has-failed-india-as-covid-cases-surge?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Omega28 · 28-04-2021 08:35AM

I'm waiting for a third open heart surgery and will recieve my first vaccine dose today. I'm a 34 year old male. I know of a young woman who needs a heart transplant and has yet to have here first vaccine also. I think that's pretty shocking.

Zipppy · 28-04-2021 09:07AM

Omega28 wrote: »

I'm waiting for a third open heart surgery and will recieve my first vaccine dose today. I'm a 34 year old male. I know of a young woman who needs a heart transplant and has yet to have here first vaccine also. I think that's pretty shocking.

why are they vaccinating healthy 60 somethings ahead of extremely vulnerable younger people???

Champagne Sally · 28-04-2021 09:09AM

Omega28 wrote: »

I'm waiting for a third open heart surgery and will recieve my first vaccine dose today. I'm a 34 year old male. I know of a young woman who needs a heart transplant and has yet to have here first vaccine also. I think that's pretty shocking.

That is shocking Omega. I wish you the very best with your surgery and hope all goes well. Also with your vaccine today.

is_that_so · 28-04-2021 09:14AM

Zipppy wrote: »

why are they vaccinating healthy 60 somethings ahead of extremely vulnerable younger people???

The 60 somethings are in the online system. Groups 4 & 7 are a separate process via hospitals and GPs.

hmmm · 28-04-2021 09:17AM

Elessar wrote: »

We all know what's going to happen. 50-59 year olds won't be asked to wait (imagine the outrage!) and so will get Pfizer and whatever AZ/J&J come in in the meantime. Come June 400k+ doses of J&J will be delivered that no one can use and they will be sold to other countries with no ridiculous restrictions.

Yep that's what I'm worried about.

Leaving aside the "outrage", we'd have an entire group at elevated risk who would be waiting until one manufacturer delivers enough vaccines for them, possibly by late June. If there was any hiccups with manufacturing, that date could be pushed into July. Meanwhile the 40 year olds would be finished, and they'd be starting on the 20 and 30 years olds.

That's just not going to happen. It'll be vaccinate the 50 year olds with everything we've got (maybe prioritising any extra AZ we have) and we end up with a pile of unused J&J vaccines in late June and the 20/30 year olds will be told "sorry, but it's a couple of extra weeks in lockdown for you."

PhoenixParker · 28-04-2021 09:20AM

Rebelbrowser wrote: »

More likely will do what it did with AZ and decide after 4 weeks that they can lower the threshold for J&J by 10 years....

From what I've read the blood clotting issue is very treatable now that they know what's going on. Or at least they're nearly certain it is but it needs a little more real world testing.

We could definitely see the restrictions being relaxed if the treatment protocol is more certain.

PhoenixParker · 28-04-2021 09:23AM

hmmm wrote: »

Yep that's what I'm worried about.

Leaving aside the "outrage", we'd have an entire group at elevated risk who would be waiting until one manufacturer delivers enough vaccines for them, possibly by late June. If there was any hiccups with manufacturing, that date could be pushed into July. Meanwhile the 40 year olds would be finished, and they'd be starting on the 20 and 30 years olds.

That's just not going to happen. It'll be vaccinate the 50 year olds with everything we've got (maybe prioritising any extra AZ we have) and we end up with a pile of unused J&J vaccines in late June and the 20/30 year olds will be told "sorry, but it's a couple of extra weeks in lockdown for you."

It's effectively already happening. They're doing 60-69 year olds with AZ while some 70+ year olds are still waiting for dose 1 Pfizer.

We'll most likely barely notice it as the "delay" will be a week or two for the last chunk of the over 50s and both groups will be run concurrently.

is_that_so · 28-04-2021 09:37AM

PhoenixParker wrote: »

It's effectively already happening. They're doing 60-69 year olds with AZ while some 70+ year olds are still waiting for dose 1 Pfizer.

We'll most likely barely notice it as the "delay" will be a week or two for the last chunk of the over 50s and both groups will be run concurrently.

They are different processes. Over 70s are GPs, with some MVC involvement but 60-69 are HSE administered MVCs plus the over 50s are a much bigger group. It could take a lot longer than a week or two delay. Even with supplies available the over 50s could take 3-4 weeks to do.

plodder · 28-04-2021 09:41AM

sd1999 wrote: »

Honestly, I think the provision that J&J can be used “if no other vaccine is available” will prevent it going to waste. That stipulation is very loose and open to interpretation and I imagine a lot of people would jump at the option to only need one dose.

Well it makes a lot more sense now if that is what was meant by it.

Russman · 28-04-2021 09:54AM

Strazdas wrote: »

Isn't there a get out clause of "if no other vaccine available" for J & J? People barely even noticed this today but it might be significant. Let's say they tear through the over 50s in May with the four vaccines and then open the portal to the 49-45 year olds. At that point, if there are not sufficient vaccines available but they have surplus stock of J & J, it seems they have the green light to administer it.

sd1999 wrote: »

Honestly, I think the provision that J&J can be used “if no other vaccine is available” will prevent it going to waste. That stipulation is very loose and open to interpretation and I imagine a lot of people would jump at the option to only need one dose.

I'd like to see the exact wording, but I thought I read something yesterday (looking but can't find it just now) where the wording wasn't as simple as no other vaccine available, it was more pointed towards hard to reach groups and locations. Open to correction, but it did strike me as being a bit more specific, whilst at the same time treading carefully by not mentioning specific groups, which I assume would be travellers, Roma, homeless etc.
I doubt the wording could be used to stock up the Aviva with J&J and simply tell everyone who arrives that there's nothing else available. Whether you agree with NIAC's advice or not, that's clearly not the intent of it to be fair. The HSE would or could never be seen to be twisting or manipulating expert advice and taking the p1ss with it a little.

Unless of course it was NIAC's intention to give them an "out", but I don't think that's the way they'd operate.

Cooled1 · 28-04-2021 09:59AM

Shouldn't healthy under 50s just be given 1 vaccine but give them the option to take the 2nd vaccine if they wish when it becomes available? The risk of hositalisation and serious illness for this group is so low that 2 doses of the vaccine just seems like overkill. Would help us to get back to normal months earlier.

Micky 32 · 28-04-2021 10:00AM

https://twitter.com/coronavirusgoo1/status/1387326097512087554?s=21

Turtwig · 28-04-2021 10:05AM

The priority in the general population has to be the age groups in reverse order first with whatever is available. If that leaves us stuck with supplies of AZ and J&J when all the over 50s are done so be it. We'll deal with the problems that occur then. There's a decent chance the risks associated with the viral vectors may be even better understood by then facilitating their use in younger age groups. Or we may be stalled in our progress of the younger cohorts. Who knows? Regardless, that's a few weeks away. We need to minimise risk of severe disease as much as possible in the first instance.

The risk of severe covid decreases by factors of ten as you descend the decades. People over 40 have to be vaccinated as quickly as possible imo.

odyssey06 · 28-04-2021 10:06AM

Cooled1 wrote: »

Shouldn't healthy under 50s just be given 1 vaccine but give them the option to take the 2nd vaccine if they wish when it becomes available? The risk of hositalisation and serious illness for this group is so low that 2 doses of the vaccine just seems like overkill. Would help us to get back to normal months earlier.

No you need second dose to lock in long term protection for Pfizer \ Moderna \ AZ.

Some countries are spacing out the doses beyond the 4 weeks.
That approach has been discussed a lot on this thread.
I personally think spacing should be looked at especially for healthy under 60s.
But NIAC confirmed recently no change to the spacing at present.

An 'informed consent' option for say 40 somethings to sign up for single dose J&J in a pharmacy, rather than waiting for Pfizer in an MVC, would be popular... especially if it meant people could travel.
But again, doesn't seem to be on the table here.

Valhallapt · 28-04-2021 10:07AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

An 'informed consent' option for say 40 somethings to sign up for single dose J&J in a pharmacy, rather than waiting for Pfizer in an MVC, would be popular... especially if it meant people could travel.
But again, doesn't seem to be on the table here.

Yea I'd be in the pharmacy as quick as possible to get my travel cert

Lucas Hood · 28-04-2021 10:07AM

1,417,942 vaccines now administered.
A difference of +19,881 compared to yesterday.

Turtwig · 28-04-2021 10:10AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

No you need second dose to lock in long term protection for Pfizer \ Moderna \ AZ.

Some countries are spacing out the doses beyond the 4 weeks.
That approach has been discussed a lot on this thread.
I personally think spacing should be looked at especially for healthy under 60s.
But NIAC confirmed recently no change to the spacing at present.

An 'informed consent' option for say 40 somethings to sign up for single dose J&J in a pharmacy, rather than waiting for Pfizer in an MVC, would be popular... especially if it meant people could travel.
But again, doesn't seem to be on the table here.

The problem with informed consent waiver is you need to have luxury of choice. Right now we don't have that. In a few months we may. As things stand we need people to take their designated vaccine with extremely limited exceptions. A waiver would mean everyone would potentially need to be able to access more than one vaccine in a timely manner.

sd1999 · 28-04-2021 10:11AM

Cooled1 wrote: »

Shouldn't healthy under 50s just be given 1 vaccine but give them the option to take the 2nd vaccine if they wish when it becomes available? The risk of hositalisation and serious illness for this group is so low that 2 doses of the vaccine just seems like overkill. Would help us to get back to normal months earlier.

That's... not how the vaccines work. You need two doses of Pfizer, Moderna and AZ. It's not overkill to give two doses, it's what's needed to be fully protected and prevent transmission as much as possible. By all means, if someone doesn't go for their second dose that's their decision but they won't be as protected long term and are more likely to transmit the virus.

seamus · 28-04-2021 10:12AM

I don't think this is really going to make a massive difference. Initial J&J supplies we know are prioritised for other groups anyway.

If you think logistically about this, it's going to be next week (or even the week after) before people aged 59 will be invited to register for a vaccine. Ten days again before they start even vaccinating them. Which means it'll be the start of June at the very earliest before a jab goes near someone aged 50-55. At which point there'll be enough AZ & J&J to mostly cover them all.

I expect the 40-49 group will be started in parallel towards the end of May.

By the end of June then Everyone over 50 is covered, you've exhausted your AZ & J&J supplies and you can begin in earnest on the under-40s.

seamus · 28-04-2021 10:15AM

Lucas Hood wrote: »

1,417,942 vaccines now administered.
A difference of +19,881 compared to yesterday.

Where are you seeing that?

Low in comparison to midweek last week, but massive for a Monday. A clear indication that the programme is getting into its stride.

odyssey06 · 28-04-2021 10:17AM

Turtwig wrote: »

The problem with informed consent waiver is you need to have luxury of choice. Right now we don't have that. In a few months we may. As things stand we need people to take their designated vaccine with extremely limited exceptions. A waiver would mean everyone would potentially need to be able to access more than one vaccine in a timely manner.

I guess I was envisaging a scenario where we had J&J spare in a month but say 40 somethings still to be vaccinated and jumping the queue for J&J would mean they'd be done much earlier.
If we don't have J&J spare it's a moot point.

Van.Bosch · 28-04-2021 10:18AM

seamus wrote: »

Where are you seeing that?

Low in comparison to midweek last week, but massive for a Monday. A clear indication that the programme is getting into its stride.

It on the HSE daily dashboard. Yeah low compared to the peaks but shows the impact of the MVCs on the “low” days

Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

Comments