Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

NIAC based their assessment off the EMAs profile for likelihood from hospitalisations from covid vs the AZ and J&J vaccines for the various incidence rates of covid.

Presumably that means unless our disease levels increase the age restrictions will increase rather than decrease in the short term. Simply put we need more covid, a shortage of vaccines supply or international evidence to pin down the underlying causes of the vaccines adverse events.

zebastein wrote: »

How do you guys know for sure that a better planning is possible?


Imagine John Smith receives an appointment 3 days before the D day. Jane Doe is on the waiting list so that her vaccine is only due at D+7.


John Smith calls the HSE to cancel the appointment 2hours before the due time. Now there is an unused dose, an empty booth, and a staff doing nothing.
Option A: they send a text to Jane Doe for an appointment in 1h or 2h, hoping that she is available. Jane Doe is available, she gets lucky to get a vaccine 7days before she should have initially, but she does know it and complains that the HSE is really bad at planning.



Option B: they do nothing, because everyone needs to be asked at least 3days in advance. The slot is not used, the vaccination program is slow and Jane Doe is only vaccinated 7days later.


I think it is easy to complain when nobody knows the circumstances. People cancel, people don't show up to the appointments, extra doses become available at the very short notice, that is the normal life of vaccinating 230k people a week.



Better planning = less flexibility = running a much slower campaign

And that's a Slam Dunk

0 covid deaths reported in England today.

First time since July.

d15ude wrote: »

lukas8888 wrote: »

Your received your invitation text only 1 hour before the date?
I understand it's a crisis situation, but a little better planning should be possible.
What kinda SW are the running?

Yes one hour before,the texts were sent out the night before to a few hundred people but were not delivered.The Sligo centre only realised what happened when
nobody turned up for their 9AM appointment.

zebastein wrote: »

How do you guys know for sure that a better planning is possible?


Imagine John Smith receives a text 3 days before the D day of his appointment. Jane Doe is on the waiting list so that her vaccine is only due at D+7.


John Smith calls the HSE to cancel the appointment 2hours before the due time. Now there is an unused dose, an empty booth, and a staff doing nothing.
Option A: they send a text to Jane Doe for an appointment in 1h or 2h, hoping that she is available. Jane Doe is available, she gets lucky to get a vaccine 7days before she should have initially, but she does not know it and complains that the HSE is really bad at planning.



Option B: they do nothing, because everyone needs to be asked at least 3days in advance. The slot is not used, the vaccination program is slow and Jane Doe is only vaccinated 7days later.


I think it is easy to complain when nobody knows the circumstances. People cancel, people don't show up to the appointments, extra doses become available at the very short notice, that is the normal life of vaccinating 230k people a week.



Better planning = less flexibility = running a much slower campaign

A lot of whataboutery there, some of these points basically assume that the HSE's method has to be the best by default and it's up to everyone else to prove otherwise.

The ongoing debacle with cohorts 4 and 7, the 1200 odd doses sent to a GP in Longford... These are not signs of success, nor is the speed of the rollout some kind of excuse for clear mistakes.

Derkaiser93 wrote: »

Hey guys, my dad is 62 and registered for his vaccine over the phone when it was the 62's turn to register. He hadn't heard anything since and rang up the HSE today to see and they told him for whatever reason he wasnt registered (probably a processing or typo error). Hes registered today but just wondering would he be expecting to wait weeks now again or should it be quick enough considering hes in the 60s group?

Depends where you are. But if you are in Dublin or Cork, my guess is that he will get called very quickly (matter of days).

lucernarian wrote: »

A lot of whataboutery there, some of these points basically assume that the HSE's method has to be the best by default and it's up to everyone else to prove otherwise.

The ongoing debacle with cohorts 4 and 7, the 1200 odd doses sent to a GP in Longford... These are not signs of success, nor is the speed of the rollout some kind of excuse for clear mistakes.

I had to deal with the HSE in my work for a few years and there is so much I could complain about that I was expecting really worse from them.



But in fairness the last few weeks the vaccination campaign has ramped up better than the EU average. The vaccines are massively going into the arms of people who are on the priority list. These are the signs and proof of success so far. It could get worse in the future depending on how the HSE manage to transition to the general public.



On 2millions doses and thousands of people involved you'll always find a nurse wasting a dose, a mistake in the shipping of one batch of doses, someone trying to put their friends on the priority list, a forgotten appointment or a technical glitch. It has to be taken care of and fixed if possible, but if it is <1% of the vaccination program I don't think you can link the general success of the program to them. You can observe the same happening in all the countries.



Mistakes do not prove that the process is wrong. It only shows that human being might sometimes fail to apply it. I just think it is easy to be in the comfort of our couch reading the news and pointing at every single mistake done by people who have been on the deck for months. But more important my point is that most people here have no idea how the program is run internally so "it should be possible to do better" is an easy statement to make. The whataboutery is assuming that there are probably resources that could send the appointments early, probably a way to have 0% of errors on the IT system sending the texts and probably a way of having 0% human mistake.

ixoy wrote: »

Interesting that I was telling a GP that the HSE were doing a very good with the MVCs and they pointed out that the good work was primarily the GPs themselves who did a lot of the actual organisation with the HSE providing the vaccines and security.

He is talking about the over 70s where GPs referred patients but the people being vaccinated now register themselves so nothing to do with GPs.

ixoy wrote: »

Specifically, the smooth operation of the MVCs such as the Helix.

Which is a giant GP surgery at present but good for them. Others run equally well without GPs.

The last few Thursday and Friday evenings the local Dr's have being vaccinating very random people from the area.
Everyone is delighted to get the call.

is_that_so wrote: »

You mean in the MVCs that were set up as a giant GP surgery and only with Groups 3-7? I'd be wary of anyone claiming they had a bigger part to play in this especially with only piece of the jigsaw in their hand.

But they did enable the programme to get up and running quickly. They had the data and the alternative would have taken more time.