Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

expectationlost · 17-05-2021 11:08PM

Russman wrote: »

If the reports are true and the guidance will be that the 40s are only offered J&J or AZ if the mRNA vaccines are unavailable, and that the person can then refuse and wait for an mRNA jab, purely IMO it sounds to me like NIAC are/were very reluctant to approve them for under 50.
I don’t know how they explain that without throwing the HSE under the bus.

how long is the wait though, could you wait for pfizer and still get both before you get both az considering the 16 week gap for AZ

Goldengirl · 17-05-2021 11:13PM

Russman wrote: »

If the reports are true and the guidance will be that the 40s are only offered J&J or AZ if the mRNA vaccines are unavailable, and that the person can then refuse and wait for an mRNA jab, purely IMO it sounds to me like NIAC are/were very reluctant to approve them for under 50.
I don’t know how they explain that without throwing the HSE under the bus.

Very much opt in for under 50s , but no problem if you don't want viral vector . Risk versus benefit level slightly more so has to be a choice .

JRant · 17-05-2021 11:19PM

expectationlost wrote: »

how long is the wait though, could you wait for pfizer but still get both before you get both az considering the 16 week gap for AZ

Even if you had to wait a month you'd still be done long before the AZ one.

Van.Bosch · 17-05-2021 11:22PM

Russman wrote: »

If the reports are true and the guidance will be that the 40s are only offered J&J or AZ if the mRNA vaccines are unavailable, and that the person can then refuse and wait for an mRNA jab, purely IMO it sounds to me like NIAC are/were very reluctant to approve them for under 50.
I don’t know how they explain that without throwing the HSE under the bus.

But I wonder how it actually works. If you are say 48 and they are doing them on Monday. They have Pfizer/moderna so no issues. Then they run out of that, so they start offering appointments saying you can have JJ/AZ on Tuesday or wait until the others are available. Do you then go to the top of the queue ahead of 47/46 year olds for example? Seems overly complex. If they asked you at registration do you want AZ/JJ then it goes against the nIAC recommendation of only giving it if Pfizer etc aren’t available.

Rebelbrowser · 17-05-2021 11:52PM

Van.Bosch wrote: »

But I wonder how it actually works. If you are say 48 and they are doing them on Monday. They have Pfizer/moderna so no issues. Then they run out of that, so they start offering appointments saying you can have JJ/AZ on Tuesday or wait until the others are available. Do you then go to the top of the queue ahead of 47/46 year olds for example? Seems overly complex. If they asked you at registration do you want AZ/JJ then it goes against the nIAC recommendation of only giving it if Pfizer etc aren’t available.

Also, they can't have people opting in at registration. They will probably need to explain the risks in person before any decision with the requisite informed consent can be made to take AZ or JJ given NIACs stance

18-05-2021 06:14AM

Goldengirl wrote: »

Yes raind , Covid does cause myocarditis in some people , pac:

Similar to many other viruses in fact

Happydays2020 · 18-05-2021 06:23AM

Rebelbrowser wrote: »

Also, they can't have people opting in at registration. They will probably need to explain the risks in person before any decision with the requisite informed consent can be made to take AZ or JJ given NIACs stance

That could be messy. Let’s see how they decide to do it. It could be a case of an opt in electronically, a link to information on the vaccine, and then an explanation before administration.

JTMan · 18-05-2021 07:01AM

For anyone who doubts that the vaccination of children is important ...this interesting NY Times article citing multiple top epidemiologists say vaccinating children is key to ending the pandemic.

Hopefully the EMA approves Pfizer-BioNTech in June for 12-15 year olds.

mvl · 18-05-2021 07:44AM

unbelievable "88-year-old member of the airport cleaning crew who was fully vaccinated but who tested positive for the virus"
feeling sorry for ppl who need to work at that age

18-05-2021 07:46AM

EDit wrote: »

The Indian variant likely didn’t exist when the trials took place. TBH, the key quote to note is “None of the cases linked to the airport outbreak are believed to have resulted in critical illness or death, according to officials.”

That is not the key note, though it is advantageous of course at the individual level that they do not get as sick or sick at all.
At the demographic level however it is disadvantageous in a similiar manner to the way antibiotic resistance is built in wider populations by leaky antibiotic protocols at the individual level. It illustrates that non sterilising vaccines do not stop fully incubation and transmission, and thus among asymptomatic vaccinees largely invisible immune pressure is enabled to be put on the virus, in effect training it as per serial passaging practises for viruses in labs. Which may be a very big problem for the wider population.

Lumen · 18-05-2021 08:01AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Is that known? A number of people tested positive who were vaccinated, but the were also many who were not vaccinated. Is it known that any of those who tested positive actually passed on the virus? It is more likely that some of the staff picked it up from travellers, and unvaccinated staff subsequently spread virus to other unvaccinated staff as well as vaccinated staff as they would have had a significantly higher viral load. Those vaccinated did not get sick, and as has been demonstrated everywhere the vaccines have been studied had reduced transmission.

Vaccines do not stop transmission in unvaccinated people.

This is the TRUTH that BIG PHARMA don't want you to know.

18-05-2021 08:10AM

In April, Public Health England reported the results of a large study of COVID-19 transmission involving more than 365,000 households with a mix of vaccinated and unvaccinated members.

It found immunisation with either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the chance of onward virus transmission by 40-60%. This means that if someone became infected after being vaccinated, they were only around half as likely to pass their infection on to others compared to infected people who weren’t vaccinated.

Vaccines reduce but do not prevent all transmission.

18-05-2021 08:16AM

isha wrote: »

That is not the key note, though it is advantageous of course at the individual level that they do not get as sick or sick at all.
At the demographic level however it is disadvantageous in a similiar manner to the way antibiotic resistance is built in wider populations by leaky antibiotic protocols at the individual level. It illustrates that non sterilising vaccines do not stop fully incubation and transmission, and thus among asymptomatic vaccinees largely invisible immune pressure is enabled to be put on the virus, in effect training it as per serial passaging practises for viruses in labs. Which may be a very big problem for the wider population.

Would be so much better off with no vaccine!

Viruses do not get "trained" to vaccines. The mutate through though random selection to evade the bodies own antigens generated by the immune system rather than the vaccine itself. This is in fact more likely where a large number of unvaccinated hosts exist as there are more opportunities for mutations to occur and become fixed in the population. Should antigenic shift occur that results in a escape strain prior to sufficient immunity being reached, the solution is to add the strain to the vaccine programme, not abandon it per the anti-vaxx nonsense.

is_that_so · 18-05-2021 08:18AM

isha wrote: »

In April, Public Health England reported the results of a large study of COVID-19 transmission involving more than 365,000 households with a mix of vaccinated and unvaccinated members.

It found immunisation with either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the chance of onward virus transmission by 40-60%. This means that if someone became infected after being vaccinated, they were only around half as likely to pass their infection on to others compared to infected people who weren’t vaccinated.

Vaccines reduce but do not prevent all transmission.

It wasn't their primary purpose anyway, just an added bonus. Preventing serious illness and death was what they were meant to do so job well done.

Trudee · 18-05-2021 08:20AM

As a 60yr old who was told by Leo to take AstraZeneca or go to back of queue where I would still get Astra Zeneca it’s a bit galling now to see roll back, a lot of 60s group received first dose in last two weeks so 2nd dose mid August meanwhile 50s, 40s done and dusted by mid July so can travel abroad if Green Travel Cert up and running which no doubt it will.

Level 42 · 18-05-2021 08:23AM

a person in their mid 40s will be offered az or jnj if others arent available and then choose which one theyll take is that correct

18-05-2021 08:23AM

is_that_so wrote: »

It wasn't their primary purpose anyway, just an added bonus. Preventing serious illness and death was what they were meant to do so job well done.

A mass vaccination campaign is a demographic exercise - this is important to keep in mind.

18-05-2021 08:24AM

isha wrote: »

A mass vaccination campaign is a demographic exercise - this is important to keep in mind.

And as such, you will benefit from the demographic exercise while still spouting anti-vaxx talking points

is_that_so · 18-05-2021 08:25AM

Trudee wrote: »

As a 60yr old who was told by Leo to take AstraZeneca or go to back of queue where I would still get Astra Zeneca it’s a bit galling now to see roll back, a lot of 60s group received first dose in last two weeks so 2nd dose mid August meanwhile 50s, 40s done and dusted by mid July so can travel abroad if Green Travel Cert up and running which no doubt it will.

That's the HSE, not Leo and it's not a new policy to punish the over 60s. It's been there since January. Green Cert unlikely to be of use to us until August. The unvaccinated and partly vaccinated can use a negative PCR to travel anyway.

18-05-2021 08:26AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And as such, you will benefit from the demographic exercise while still spouting anti-vaxx talking points

I get it. You do not like my points. That does not change the fact that they are valid.

iggy · 18-05-2021 08:26AM

When u reckon registrations open for 48 year olds.?
I'll take whatever vaccine available to me and be glad of it.

Vicxas · 18-05-2021 08:27AM

iggy wrote: »

When u reckon registrations open for 48 year olds.?
I'll take whatever vaccine available to me and be glad of it.

Sometime maybe end of this week/start of next week

18-05-2021 08:28AM

Trudee wrote: »

As a 60yr old who was told by Leo to take AstraZeneca or go to back of queue where I would still get Astra Zeneca it’s a bit galling now to see roll back, a lot of 60s group received first dose in last two weeks so 2nd dose mid August meanwhile 50s, 40s done and dusted by mid July so can travel abroad if Green Travel Cert up and running which no doubt it will.

To be honest, whats a bit galling is this attitude - once in a lifetime pandemic being dealt with by the rollout of multiple vaccines in record time, and all you are worried about is that your neighbour might get to go on holidays a couple of weeks before you, even though you are protected from the actual virus well before they are

is_that_so · 18-05-2021 08:28AM

isha wrote: »

A mass vaccination campaign is a demographic exercise - this is important to keep in mind.

Well, as it will shortly be available to all bar the very small, that's a somewhat pointless comment.

Sofa King Great · 18-05-2021 08:30AM

Trudee wrote: »

As a 60yr old who was told by Leo to take AstraZeneca or go to back of queue where I would still get Astra Zeneca it’s a bit galling now to see roll back, a lot of 60s group received first dose in last two weeks so 2nd dose mid August meanwhile 50s, 40s done and dusted by mid July so can travel abroad if Green Travel Cert up and running which no doubt it will.

Is it not the case that the risk associated with AZ is far greater among those in their 40s than 60s though?

is_that_so · 18-05-2021 08:30AM

iggy wrote: »

When u reckon registrations open for 48 year olds.?
I'll take whatever vaccine available to me and be glad of it.

I'd say it'll be confirmed at the HSE briefing later in the week.

Lumen · 18-05-2021 08:31AM

Trudee wrote: »

As a 60yr old who was told by Leo to take AstraZeneca or go to back of queue where I would still get Astra Zeneca it’s a bit galling now to see roll back, a lot of 60s group received first dose in last two weeks so 2nd dose mid August meanwhile 50s, 40s done and dusted by mid July so can travel abroad if Green Travel Cert up and running which no doubt it will.

Even if the first dose is insufficient for the green cert you should still be able to travel with a clear PCR test.

Cal4567 · 18-05-2021 08:32AM

Can't help but think our glorious leaders letting us down slowly re being able to travel abroad. Here in mid May, it's 'August'. In a month, it will be September but hey, we've opened a lot up.

The PR spin has been pretty solid. It's all vaccine positive stuff, completely disregarding the EU procurement mess which means we are 3-4 months behind the UK and the US.

pjohnson · 18-05-2021 08:40AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I get it. You do not like my points. That does not change the fact that they are valid.

Anti-vax "points" are never valid.

stephenjmcd · 18-05-2021 08:41AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Vaccines reduce but do not prevent all transmission.

That's not new information.

Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

Comments