Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

Strazdas · 29-04-2021 10:22PM

Stheno wrote: »

My oh in his late 50s got his first jab as he was on the GPs reserve list yesterday

I'm late 40s if what you post is correct that would be great

It's good that Varadkar has a sense of urgency anyway. The plan now seems to be to rip through the cohorts and throw every vaccine available at people (perhaps in the hope that when it come to late June that J & J will be authorised for everyone).

Danzy · 29-04-2021 10:23PM

adam240610 wrote: »

7-day average of vaccines given now just over 30k per day!

Now we're sucking diesel.

Stheno · 29-04-2021 10:24PM

Strazdas wrote: »

It's good that Varadkar has a sense of urgency anyway. The plan now seems to be to rip through the cohorts and throw every vaccine available at people (perhaps in the hope that when it come to late June that J & J will be authorised for everyone).

It means that we would both potentially be fully vaccinated by the end of June which is way sooner than I expected

Godot. · 29-04-2021 10:25PM

Emergent’s facility in the Bayview neighborhood of Baltimore is crucial to J&J meeting its U.S. production target of delivering 100 million does by the end of June. It’s an essential part of the global supply chain, one of few facilities responsible for making the bulk drug substance, or the active ingredient, used in the vaccine.

Is the EU relying on Emergent to meet their targets? Only a trickle is coming out of the Dutch plant. Even the US have only received 8 million doses.

Wolf359f · 29-04-2021 10:28PM

hmmm wrote: »

Too complicated, absolute gibberish for most people. Would someone please get control of the chaotic communication.

If there's an actual risk in there (for example meeting within 2 weeks of first vaccine) then highlight it, otherwise simplify the message.

People only receive 1 vaccine brand, so it's not to hard to look at the list, ignore the vaccines you haven't had and focus on the one you got instead.

Or they could just say 6 weeks after your first dose, assuming you also got your second dose, unless you were told you didn't need a Second dose, but if you were told your second dose was in 12 weeks, that's ok.

Or to simplify it, 2 weeks after your last dose. That's covers it's all and it's simple. However there would be a massive difference measured in months between say J&J and AZ and people will be giving out.

iamwhoiam · 29-04-2021 10:30PM

hmmm wrote: »

Too complicated, absolute gibberish for most people.

If there's an actual risk in there (for example meeting within 2/4 weeks of first vaccine) then highlight it, otherwise simplify the message and we can live with the tiny risk as a consequence.

It makes complete sense to me . You just need to read it a few times

Stheno · 29-04-2021 10:32PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

It makes complete sense to me . You just need to read it a few times

Same here tbh

I think they've looked at the data out of the UK and Israel around transmission reducing after first doses and applied it

hmmm · 29-04-2021 10:32PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

It makes complete sense to me . You just need to read it a few times

You and I might read it but most people won't.

Instead people will develop their own rule of thumb based on the little bits of information they pick up in conversation. That may or may not be dangerous, but I'd expect a lot of people will assume they can be meeting inside 2 weeks after their first dose.

Stheno · 29-04-2021 10:41PM

hmmm wrote: »

You and I might read it but most people won't.

Instead people will develop their own rule of thumb based on the little bits of information they pick up in conversation. That may or may not be dangerous, but I'd expect a lot of people will assume they can be meeting inside 2 weeks after their first dose.

Ah thats true to be fair

I wfh and don't go out much apart from walking the dog

I was in 2 shops today and social distancing was non existence in both, I'd people standing right behind me and if I moved the just moved again

Strazdas · 29-04-2021 10:46PM

Stheno wrote: »

It means that we would both potentially be fully vaccinated by the end of June which is way sooner than I expected

There are definite signs they are forcibly accelerating the rollout. Perhaps it has dawned on them that this will speed up the opening of the country to a major degree and that they should go hell for leather with the vaccinations from here on in.

Stheno · 29-04-2021 10:57PM

Strazdas wrote: »

There are definite signs they are forcibly accelerating the rollout. Perhaps it has dawned on them that this will speed up the opening of the country to a major degree and that they should go hell for leather with the vaccinations from here on in.

I'm now dreaming of a week in Malta in September

Russman · 29-04-2021 11:04PM

Strazdas wrote: »

Tanaiste suggesting on Prime Time that the 45-49 portal could be opened very quickly after the 50-54 year olds.

He didn't go into too much detail but seems to be saying the plan is to throw every vaccine available at the 45-59 year olds.

Yeah, he kind of left it hanging out there didn’t he. Definitely opened the door to bumping the 40s up with the 50s (even if they end up not doing it). Hard to know how much was groundwork Vs an off the cuff remark.

OwlsZat · 29-04-2021 11:14PM

Strazdas wrote: »

There are definite signs they are forcibly accelerating the rollout. Perhaps it has dawned on them that this will speed up the opening of the country to a major degree and that they should go hell for leather with the vaccinations from here on in.

Surely they can only go as fast as the vaccines from the EU come? Clearly the supply is improving.

dominatinMC · 29-04-2021 11:20PM

Stheno wrote: »

Ah thats true to be fair

I wfh and don't go out much apart from walking the dog

I was in 2 shops today and social distancing was non existence in both, I'd people standing right behind me and if I moved the just moved again

The new normal looks a lot like the old normal

Strazdas · 29-04-2021 11:22PM

OwlsZat wrote: »

Surely they can only go as fast as the vaccines from the EU come? Clearly the supply is improving.

Indeed, but there was talk of keeping many of the over 50s waiting until mid to late June because of the J & J situation, but they seem to be saying 'to hell with it, let's vaccinate them now'.

Valhallapt · 29-04-2021 11:28PM

Strazdas wrote: »

Indeed, but there was talk of keeping many of the over 50s waiting until mid to late June because of the J & J situation, but they seem to be saying 'to hell with it, let's vaccinate them now'.

Which will mean we will need to pause the vaccination campaign in mid June as we have to bin 500k J&J and wait for 1m additional Pfizer to arrive in Q3

Lmkrnr · 29-04-2021 11:29PM

When are o40s expected to get a vaccination offer?

ceegee · 29-04-2021 11:33PM

Valhallapt wrote: »

Which will mean we will need to pause the vaccination campaign in mid June as we have to bin 500k J&J and wait for 1m additional Pfizer to arrive in Q3

Better leaving people in their 20s waiting a few weeks in June than having people in their 50s wait a month now.

ACitizenErased · 29-04-2021 11:34PM

Valhallapt wrote: »

Which will mean we will need to pause the vaccination campaign in mid June as we have to bin 500k J&J and wait for 1m additional Pfizer to arrive in Q3

No matter how many times this is repeated that poster won’t get it

Valhallapt · 29-04-2021 11:38PM

ceegee wrote: »

Better leaving people in their 20s waiting a few weeks in June than having people in their 50s wait a month now.

No. Completely wrong. Full return to normal only happens with herd immunity. Only vaccinating those over 50 won’t get us to herd immunity.

If you want a pint inside a pub this side of august, we need to slow down the 50+ cohort for about 2 to 3 weeks. Plus side is they will be fully vaccinated. Only alternative is NIAC authorise J&J for 40+

Chivito550 · 29-04-2021 11:38PM

SJFly wrote: »

Can't help with your main question, but anecdotally, the reaction from the second AZ jab is much less severe (apparently the other way around with Pfizer. Probably still not something you'd want to chance before a big event.

I've been trying to find anything online to verify this and yet I can't find a single thing

Do you know many who have had both jabs?

Look at how easy a vaccine appointment can be changed in NI.

https://covid-19.hscni.net/guidance/how-do-i-change-or-cancel-my-vaccine-appointment/

We really live in the dark ages with HSE.

Am I going to have to pretend I'm having a medical procedure the day of my second jab to get them to reschedule me?!

ceegee · 30-04-2021 12:10AM

Valhallapt wrote: »

Which will mean we will need to pause the vaccination campaign in mid June as we have to bin 500k J&J and wait for 1m additional Pfizer to arrive in Q3

And if J&J fail to deliver in June? You'll have a load of 50 somethings waiting to be done the same time as teenagers. The government would be crucified for it, not to mention the media coverage everytime a 50 year old gets hospitalised or dies while waiting for the vaccine.

Politically there's no way they can skip over a decade and not have major push back. The hospital & death figures will also inevitably be higher by prioritising younger age groups just to hit an arbitrary percentage by an arbitrary date

SJFly · 30-04-2021 12:16AM

Chivito550 wrote: »

I've been trying to find anything online to verify this and yet I can't find a single thing Do you know many who have had both jabs?

Look at how easy a vaccine appointment can be changed in NI.

https://covid-19.hscni.net/guidance/how-do-i-change-or-cancel-my-vaccine-appointment/

We really live in the dark ages with HSE.

Am I going to have to pretend I'm having a medical procedure the day of my second jab to get them to reschedule me?!

I don't know anyone with 2 jabs of AZ. Obviously there won't be many about. I've just heard it reported. Here's an article with a quote from MRHA saying the same.

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/18/covid-vaccine-side-effects-what-are-they-who-gets-them-and-why

Russman · 30-04-2021 12:16AM

Valhallapt wrote: »

Plus side is they will be fully vaccinated. Only alternative is NIAC authorise J&J for 40+

Exactly this.
Govt need to play up the “you’ll be fully vaccinated quicker” aspect of waiting for J&J if they want to take that course of action. At this stage in the game, who’s going to complain ? Whingers got short shrift a few weeks ago when the cohorts were changed, they’d get even more at this point in the programme. The 50s would be fully done as quick or quicker and you’d be putting a big dent in the 40s at the same time. It’s not like the big outcry when Donnelly had his brain fart a week or two ago, this change would be as a result of medical advice and govt could stand over it.

Obviously if NIAC change the advice, that’s well and good and would be a big benefit, but really I can’t imagine them changing it based on pure expediency for the rollout.

Valhallapt · 30-04-2021 12:56AM

ceegee wrote: »

And if J&J fail to deliver in June? You'll have a load of 50 somethings waiting to be done the same time as teenagers. The government would be crucified for it, not to mention the media coverage everytime a 50 year old gets hospitalised or dies while waiting for the vaccine.

Politically there's no way they can skip over a decade and not have major push back. The hospital & death figures will also inevitably be higher by prioritising younger age groups just to hit an arbitrary percentage by an arbitrary date

People are not stupid. They can deal with facts.

I think people like you are the exception, you believe what you want, but politically there is no way they can extend lockdown by 6+ weeks to appease a single cohort.

With 30+% of population having had one vaccine, still in level 4/3 restrictions in June, a two to three week delay to non vulnerable 50+ won’t result in additional deaths.

FG won’t support a 6 week extension to lockdown so FF would have to force it through, I doubt their voters would support that.

Polar101 · 30-04-2021 01:21AM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

It makes complete sense to me . You just need to read it a few times

Yes, but say you have three people meeting up, and they all got a different vaccine at different times, I don't think anyone is actually going to take notes and calculate if they're OK to meet according to the rules chart.

The only way it would work is to keep it simple, such as "4 weeks after vaccination" or something similar.

So I think it's going to be a fairly meaningless guideline.

Lumen · 30-04-2021 04:06AM

Polar101 wrote: »

Yes, but say you have three people meeting up, and they all got a different vaccine at different times, I don't think anyone is actually going to take notes and calculate if they're OK to meet according to the rules chart.

The only way it would work is to keep it simple, such as "4 weeks after vaccination" or something similar.

So I think it's going to be a fairly meaningless guideline.

Welcome to public health.

You can either produce simple, clumsy guidance which will get torn apart for insulting people's intelligence.

Or you can produce sophisticated guidance which will get torn apart by exactly the same type of people for being too hard for hypothetical lazy morons to follow.

This is why we can't have nice things.

Ll31 · 30-04-2021 06:50AM

The risk for over 50s, particularly those over 55 , is still substantially higher than the cohorts below, for ICU admission and mortality, which means leaving them till the j &j vaccines arrive is wrong. Cant link but NIAC advise on 31 march makes that clear

Supercell · 30-04-2021 07:35AM

The amount of virtue signalling going on here by people likely not in their 50's is unbelievable. "Sure feck the over 50's, they are higher risk but they can wait, they should be thankful they are getting anything at all, now please get on with vaccinating my group with an mRNA vaccine".
I'd wager if you offered 100 people the choice of vaccine, not one would go for the AZ, maybe 25% would go for the J&J for the speed of it and the rest for the mRNA ones, that's a bet i'd take all day long.

Sanjuro · 30-04-2021 07:41AM

Supercell wrote: »

I'd wager if you offered 100 people the choice of vaccine, not one would go for the AZ, maybe 25% would go for the J&J for the speed of it and the rest for the mRNA ones, that's a bet i'd take all day long.

And I'd wager this is rubbish. Just pulling numbers out of your arse to give out about virtue signalling and by that doing the same thing you're complaining about yourself.

Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

Comments