Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

Necro · 18-05-2021 08:43AM

Thread cleaned up, troll removed and posts quoting them deleted

18-05-2021 08:44AM

Cal4567 wrote: »

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.

This is the exact same talk track as with relaxation of restriction,s and we actually accelerated rather than delayed

And 3 months ago UK had only delivered 50% of the vaccine doses we now have. At current rate its about 4 weeks

18-05-2021 08:52AM

stephenjmcd wrote: »

That's not new information.

You are dealing with someone who yesterday was reporting the raw surveillance reporting data as suggesting the the level of "injury and death" with this vaccine was unprecedented and should be stopped

Cal4567 · 18-05-2021 08:54AM

Deleted User wrote: »

This is the exact same talk track as with relaxation of restriction,s and we actually accelerated rather than delayed

And 3 months ago UK had only delivered 50% of the vaccine doses we now have. At current rate its about 4 weeks

I'm just basing my views on speaking to family and friends across the UK and the US. That's not just a handful of people either. I'm 68. I got the first vaccination last week. Yes, 3 months after just about everyone I know in both other countries got theirs and most of them, have had their second.

Your 'talk track'. My 'facts'.

Professor Moriarty · 18-05-2021 08:55AM

Cal4567 wrote: »

I'm just basing my views on speaking to family and friends across the UK and the US. That's not just a handful of people either. I'm 68. I got the first vaccination last week. Yes, 3 months after just about everyone I know in both other countries got theirs and most of them, have had their second.

Your 'talk track'. My 'facts'.

Given the mortality rates across all three countries, aren't you a happy bunny to be living in Ireland.

paw patrol · 18-05-2021 08:56AM

plodder wrote: »

Flu isn't a novel virus causing a pandemic

I caught it and I was fine like your granny, but I'm prepared to do my bit to protect myself and others for the future.

Not sure where those figures come from, but how many do you think would have died without the measures we took, like the lockdown?

That's it exactly. Approved vaccines. Not just any old crap as you seemed to imply.

We're in a pandemic. They figured the risks were worth taking. And it turns out they were right.

conversation moved on , no need to clog thread . so I'll finish with a final point.

Ok.

18-05-2021 09:13AM

Cal4567 wrote: »

I'm just basing my views on speaking to family and friends across the UK and the US. That's not just a handful of people either. I'm 68. I got the first vaccination last week. Yes, 3 months after just about everyone I know in both other countries got theirs and most of them, have had their second.

Your 'talk track'. My 'facts'.

The facts are that at current vaccination rates we will be at where the UK are today by the end of June. And as someone pointed out, with a lower death rate overall

Russman · 18-05-2021 09:15AM

Happydays2020 wrote: »

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.

You're right, it could get very messy.
Surely they'd have to give some sort of indication of the likely wait time for an mRNA shot though ? If the system for the 40-49 demographic allows a choice, they couldn't be seen to penalise someone for exercising that choice, so presumably they couldn't lash on into the 30s with mRNA shots (which is all that group can get) before someone who is 45 and said they didn't want AZ for instance ? I do have a lot of sympathy with the HSE planners in fairness.

I think a lot of it might all ultimately be a bit moot though. If most of the incoming AZ will be used for second doses, and with the J&J delays, I think we might end up with a lot of the 40s done before it really becomes a huge issue. The rollout will be a few weeks later than planned and we'll ship a boatload of J&J off to COVAX. Once the 40s are done they might even open the whole thing up for everyone.
Or they'll do the sensible thing and put J&J in the pharmacies and let people sign up to get them there if they want to.

18-05-2021 09:15AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You are dealing with someone who yesterday was reporting the raw surveillance reporting data as suggesting the the level of "injury and death" with this vaccine was unprecedented and should be stopped

The raw surveillance data on various official global sites do show presently that the level of injury and death is unprecedented for any medication or vaccine. These vaccines have accrued multiples more raw data adverse events reports from medical personnel than any other substance ever monitored by official websites. That is just a fact.

Zipppy · 18-05-2021 09:16AM

A question regarding efficacy of 1st dose of vaccines (Mods: I think this thread is the correct location for it? If not please move it, thanks)

I've 2 weeks to go for my 2nd Pfizer and then fully vaxed (WooHoo)

But a question, do we know has there been cases of people contracting covid, getting very ill, being hospitalised or dying after 1st dose but before second dose?

18-05-2021 09:17AM

isha wrote: »

The raw surveillance data on various official global sites do show presently that the level of injury and death is unprecedented for any medication or vaccine. These vaccines have accrued multiples more raw data adverse events reports from medical personnel than any other substance ever monitored by official websites. That is just a fact.

QED

http://www.adrreports.eu/en/search_subst.html#

Lets ban Paracetemol, Ibuprofen, Penacillin, Atorvasatin.....

18-05-2021 09:18AM

Lumen wrote: »

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

Which will cost 150 quid each way

is_that_so · 18-05-2021 09:22AM

Zipppy wrote: »

A question regarding efficacy of 1st dose of vaccines (Mods: I think this thread is the correct location for it? If not please move it, thanks)

I've 2 weeks to go for my 2nd Pfizer and then fully vaxed (WooHoo)

But a question, do we know has there been cases of people contracting covid, getting very ill, being hospitalised or dying after 1st dose but before second dose?

Catching COVID yes and there may be some cases of the rest but the level in the community is now static or falling so there's a smaller risk. Just keep doing what you're doing to stay safe until 7 days after the 2nd dose!

Hmmzis · 18-05-2021 09:22AM

Zipppy wrote: »

A question regarding efficacy of 1st dose of vaccines (Mods: I think this thread is the correct location for it? If not please move it, thanks)

I've 2 weeks to go for my 2nd Pfizer and then fully vaxed (WooHoo)

But a question, do we know has there been cases of people contracting covid, getting very ill, being hospitalised or dying after 1st dose but before second dose?

Yes, there have been, unfortunately the vaccine cannot make your immune system build the defenses instantly, it takes time. It's approximately in the 2-3 weeks range. From UK's data, efficacy of the first dose after that period is in the range of 80-90%. In the first two weeks after the 1st dose the efficacy is pretty much nil.

Russman · 18-05-2021 09:32AM

Hmmzis wrote: »

Yes, there have been, unfortunately the vaccine cannot make your immune system build the defenses instantly, it takes time. It's approximately in the 2-3 weeks range. From UK's data, efficacy of the first dose after that period is in the range of 80-90%. In the first two weeks after the 1st dose the efficacy is pretty much nil.

Thanks Hmmzis, I was going to ask more or less the same question !

So, leaving international travel aside, if you're someone in your 40s who isn't the least bit concerned about the clotting issues with J&J and AZ, is there any good reason to refuse them and wait for an mRNA vaccine, if that's what's offered ? Is there even a case for refusing J&J but accepting AZ, or vice versa ?

is_that_so · 18-05-2021 09:35AM

Russman wrote: »

Thanks Hmmzis, I was going to ask more or less the same question !

So, leaving international travel aside, if you're someone in your 40s who isn't the least bit concerned about the clotting issues with J&J and AZ, is there any good reason to refuse them and wait for an mRNA vaccine, if that's what's offered ? Is there even a case for refusing J&J but accepting AZ, or vice versa ?

Based on your own perceived level of risk it really depends how long you are prepared to wait. The back of the queue might not start until nearer September.

Lumen · 18-05-2021 09:41AM

AdamD wrote: »

Which will cost 150 quid each way

Unlikely. From what I dimly recall the prices in Ireland are already down to around 100, and there is talk of/arguments over making them free once the green cert comes in.

ddarcy · 18-05-2021 09:42AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

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

So what age group are you in? I have a suspicion you’re not over 40 and will be getting the mRNA one. It’s amazing that is galling when it doesn’t apply to you…

Trudee · 18-05-2021 09:42AM

You are incorrect when you say that my neighbours going on holidays a few weeks before me is the most galling fact; it is the fact that I was told categorically ‘take AZ or go to back of queue’ that is what is most galling and it was Leo who said it.

stephenjmcd · 18-05-2021 09:43AM

Russman wrote: »

Thanks Hmmzis, I was going to ask more or less the same question !

So, leaving international travel aside, if you're someone in your 40s who isn't the least bit concerned about the clotting issues with J&J and AZ, is there any good reason to refuse them and wait for an mRNA vaccine, if that's what's offered ? Is there even a case for refusing J&J but accepting AZ, or vice versa ?

If your not in the least bit concerned about the clotting issues then no there's nothing I can think of, they all offer protection and are proven in real world now.

is_that_so · 18-05-2021 09:48AM

Trudee wrote: »

You are incorrect when you say that my neighbours going on holidays a few weeks before me is the most galling fact; it is the fact that I was told categorically ‘take AZ or go to back of queue’ that is what is most galling and it was Leo who said it.

It's HSE policy and has been since they started the programme. You can't have a functioning system where people think they are in a sweetshop.

18-05-2021 09:48AM

ddarcy wrote: »

So what age group are you in? I have a suspicion you’re not over 40 and will be getting the mRNA one. It’s amazing that is galling when it doesn’t apply to you…

Did you not see that AZ and J&J can and will be used for over 40's. And whichever one I am offered I will take without fuss or complaint. Because going to Lanzarote or wherever is not a priority this year.

And also, as pointed out multiple times, within Ireland the AZ is considered fully vaccinated after 4 weeks and if the euro green card comes in, and if you are desperate to head to Puerto del Carmen, all you will need at most is a test 2 days prior to departure.

ddarcy · 18-05-2021 09:49AM

Lumen wrote: »

Unlikely. From what I dimly recall the prices in Ireland are already down to around 100, and there is talk of/arguments over making them free once the green cert comes in.

That’s still 100 more than it should be. Nothing official on free tests. Unlikely you’ll get free if you go to France etc. So you’d need a reimbursement program.

18-05-2021 09:51AM

Trudee wrote: »

You are incorrect when you say that my neighbours going on holidays a few weeks before me is the most galling fact; it is the fact that I was told categorically ‘take AZ or go to back of queue’ that is what is most galling and it was Leo who said it.

And? Its the under 50's who are taking the greater risk with the AZ vaccine. Once you reach under 40's the risk benefit in the current epidemiological situation is marginal in that age group, wheras for 60+ its massively in favour of the vaccine as the risk is far lower and benefit far far higher

ddarcy · 18-05-2021 10:00AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Did you not see that AZ and J&J can and will be used for over 40's. And whichever one I am offered I will take without fuss or complaint. Because going to Lanzarote or wherever is not a priority this year.

And also, as pointed out multiple times, within Ireland the AZ is considered fully vaccinated after 4 weeks and if the euro green card comes in, and if you are desperate to head to Puerto del Carmen, all you will need at most is a test 2 days prior to departure.

And the tests aren’t free. Also only ireland says you’re fully vaxed at 4 weeks. If no use elsewhere. You get mRNA or JJ you don’t need that. Still avoiding your age group.

I see AZ/ JJ will be used, but I think the delay in starting it for this group is the fact that the government knows people will prefer mRNA. Throw in the 16 wait as well, if day the HSE knows AZ at the very least is dead

18-05-2021 10:00AM

is_that_so wrote: »

Based on your own perceived level of risk it really depends how long you are prepared to wait. The back of the queue might not start until nearer September.

What do you mean by back of the queue? That's not what's happening with people in their 40s.

18-05-2021 10:02AM

ddarcy wrote: »

And the tests aren’t free. Also only ireland says you’re fully vaxed at 4 weeks. If no use elsewhere. You get mRNA or JJ you don’t need that. Still avoiding your age group.

I see AZ/ JJ will be used, but I think the delay in starting it for this group is the fact that the government knows people will prefer mRNA. Throw in the 16 wait as well, if day the HSE knows AZ at the very least is dead

The holidays aren't free either.

is_that_so · 18-05-2021 10:03AM

Flying Fox wrote: »

What do you mean by back of the queue? That's not what's happening with people in their 40s.

It's the general HSE policy on this and if the over 40s reject two appointments or vaccines it's what you'd expect to happen. The system will just move on to the next on the list.

18-05-2021 10:11AM

is_that_so wrote: »

It's the general HSE policy on this and if the over 40s reject two appointments or vaccines it's what you'd expect to happen.

NIAC advice is that an mRNA vaccine should be used in people in their 40s. AZ and J&J can only be offered if an mRNA is unavailable, and the person has the right to choose to wait for an mRNA if they are not comfortable with the clotting risk. There is absolutely no indication that this would put someone to the back of the queue, that would defeat the whole purpose of offering a choice.

Are you honestly suggesting that the policy would be to vaccinate everyone in their 30s and 20s before coming back to people in their 40s? If so, you're misinterpreting the advice.

I also don't see why someone would have to reject AZ/J&J more than once.

Russman · 18-05-2021 10:13AM

is_that_so wrote: »

It's the general HSE policy on this and if the over 40s reject two appointments or vaccines it's what you'd expect to happen. The system will just move on to the next on the list.

But that's the current arrangement, no ? If there are new guidelines for people in their 40s to be allowed refuse one of the viral vector jabs until an mRNA one is available, it can't be the same arrangement as refusing a jab now, sure nothing would have changed. They couldn't be seen to be penalising people the same as now, if people exercise the choice that NIAC have mandated be available to the 40s group.

Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

Comments