coldfire1x wrote: I thought one shot J&J is more convenient.
Sowerberry wrote: » Age: 49 Location: Dublin North Date of Registration: 19th May (0530) Texts/Emails received: Text, 19th May (2113) Vaccination appointment for: 22nd of May Vaccine: J&J Croke Park Delighted but can't believe I only registered this morning (when 49 year olds cohort opened) and have my appointment for Saturday already!
ger vallely wrote: » 50 years old. Applied Friday 14th. Just received text, 1st dose, Pfizer, Sunday 23rd.
Flying Fox wrote: » That's an interesting one. The NIAC advice was only to offer J&J to people in their 40s if an mRNA is unavailable. Sounds like they're just offering it anyway and interpreting "unavailable" very loosely.It also seems like someone has to turn up to the appointment if they want to make the choice to wait for an mRNA, which is a waste of a slot.
ShineOn7 wrote: » Has this last part been confirmed anywhere? Cheers And yes, Jansson seems to be getting lashed out to under 50s regardless
sean72 wrote: » Do you mind me asking what site? Wondering how quickly the Waterford WIT is progressing
podgeandrodge wrote: » Other than that poster earlier (doing first post), who at 49 registered today and got a text today, have other 49yr olds got offered J&J? The huge amount of J&J confirmations on here seem to be 50,51,52,53 mainly?
ShineOn7 wrote: » I sped read this and the Vaccine thread today due to time restraints (plus we're all Covid'd out at this stage) Was it just the one under 50 Jansson you saw? I could've swore I saw a few Podge, but open to correction We'll know more in the next few days I'm sure
Diane Selwyn wrote: » Me too = registered approx 2am text approx 9.15pm on 19 May J&J on 22May at Croke Park 49 & Female quite surprised to get such a quick response - thinking twice about what to do as both my parents have family history of clotting events
Lumen wrote: » The risk of a clotting event with J+J is about a thousand times lower than with oral contraceptives, depending on the time period you choose to measure the risk, and from what I've read is not linked with a family history of clotting.
Happydays2020 wrote: » The experts NIAC have recognised the risk. It is not coming from anti-Vaxxers. People should discuss with a medical practitioner to understand the risks.
Diane Selwyn wrote: » Thanks yes I will do that = too much conflicting info on the internet!
Flying Fox wrote: » Just my reading of it. If there's no option to consent to it on the portal or after getting the text, then presumably you would have to turn up? Unless you can let them know through the helpline, but I don't know if that would be allowed. We probably won't really know until we hear of people going through the process.
Sleeper12 wrote: » They have worked their way through the 50/60 group in just over 2 weeks. At this rate you will be offered a safer vaccine in a matter of weeks. If the choice was take J&J now or safer one in 12 months then J&J would look more attractive to me. If a matter of weeks then I would wait. Doctor is a good place to start EDIT: Clots in my family too.
is_that_so wrote: » Heard that there are no-show issues in some places.
revelman wrote: » I’m in full agreement that people should be allowed to make the decision that works best for them. Nobody should be forced into anything. But I don’t like all of this talk about some vaccines being safer than others. The EMA has approved all of these vaccines. That means they are all safe. Yes, the viral vector vaccines have been associated with an incredibly rare risk of CVST (if I read the Winton Centre data correctly, I understand the risk of death for someone in their forties is 1 in 500,000. The older you are, the less risk). But the risk of rare side effects does not mean the vaccine is unsafe. The EMA is currently investigating a theoretical link between the MRNA vaccines and Myocarditis. The EMA says at the moment that there are no indications of a causative link. Indeed, at first glance, rates of myocarditis look no different to the background rates in the population but we need to take account that there are far fewer “normal viruses” circulating this year. Myocarditis is normally caused by viral infection. So this probably explains why the EMA is requesting more data from Pfizer. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/meeting-highlights-pharmacovigilance-risk-assessment-committee-prac-3-6-may-2021 Basic message: all medicines have the potential for side effects. But these medicines have been approved by the EMA after a thorough approval process. These vaccines are safe. We owe it to people who come on to these boards for reassurance to watch our language.
Sowerberry wrote: » I checked my appointment details on the portal and realised the consent form needed to be completed. Link to Janssen risks on HSE website and you had to confirm you were aware of risks etc.. Not sure if over 50s age group needed to do this or is this new for the 40-49 cohort. Also, I would note that I turn 50 in just over 4 months time so maybe I fell into the 50 age group for the HSE.
gipi wrote: » Report from local radio in Louth.https://www.lmfm.ie/news/lmfm-news/over-a-fifth-of-people-to-receive-covid-19-vaccines-yesterday-in-drogheda-no-shows/ I wonder if all of the no shows got texts for their appointment? A few folk in this thread mentioned that they hadn't, and only saw the appointment details on the portal. Should the HSE be advising people to check the portal, and not just assume a text will be sent? (I'm checking it several times a day!!) Edit - post crossed with sleeper12
Sleeper12 wrote: » I am sorry you feel that way BUT two vaccines have been deemed unsafe for under 50s. 45 to 50 can opt for them if they want BUT if safer vaccine is available on the day then they are NOT allowed to get J&J and AZ. They were unsafe for under 60s only a few weeks ago until we realized that these are the next vaccines coming into Ireland. If they didn't change the guidelines the vaccine would be dumped. They didn't become any safer in the last few weeks. They still carry the same risks as when it was deemed fro them to be unsafe for under 60s. The rules wern't changed because they became safer. Rules changed because these are our vaccine stock for the next few weeks
ThreeGreens wrote: » Were you given any option in the text to reject it or explained how to reject it?
revelman wrote: » I don’t “feel” anyway - I’m trying to deal with facts. The EMA, with some of the best scientists in the world, approved the viral vector vaccines for all adults. National regulators have now put age restrictions in place because of data suggesting that the benefit does not outweigh the incredibly rare risk in certain age groups. This is not the same thing as saying the vaccines are “unsafe”. If they were “unsafe” they would not have been approved by the EMA.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b6984b3dff155c34b5a9498bb42f9c13.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/cb3e473e130edbea92f4060567c2cc7f.svg)
