COVID-19: Vaccine and testing procedures Megathread Part 2 [Mod Warning - Post #1]

crossman47

lbj666 wrote: »

In fairness they were given clear guidance on the 12th January, the coombe happened on the 8th. They are supposed to keep a reserve list of 100 ish people of priority who can come in short notice. So binnings will be kept to a minimum.

And the Coombe did find 104 priority cases for the extra vaccines.

Gael23

crossman47 wrote: »

And the Coombe did find 104 priority cases for the extra vaccines.

Yes I’m sure there were women in receiving cancer treatment that needed it more than the bosses children

crossman47

Gael23 wrote: »

Yes I’m sure there were women in receiving cancer treatment that needed it more than the bosses children

You don't seem to know much about the Coombe.

Gael23

crossman47 wrote: »

You don't seem to know much about the Coombe.

Would they not treat women for gynaecology related cancers?

JimmyVik

This reminds me of a few other threads where begrudgery is the order of the day.

There were vaccines left over. They got it into people rather than the bin.

Well done i say.

It wont effect everyone elses place in the queue. Chill out people.

Mitch Connor

JimmyVik wrote: »

This reminds me of a few other threads where begrudgery is the order of the day.

There were vaccines left over. They got it into people rather than the bin.

Well done i say.

It wont effect everyone elses place in the queue. Chill out people.

those 16 people will also need to be given a second dose. So they now have to be in the list for that .

The impact, of 16 people, on the list is near meaningless though, in reality.

thomasdylan

Zechariah Worried Pug wrote: »

My mother has been seriously ill this year, and the service we have received from her pharmacist has been second to none. Far better than we have received from her doctor who hasn't contacted her at all and has been more or less unavailable throughout.

Not saying GPS are all like this,, and of course it's in all our interests for them to receive the vaccination. But in the absence of easy face to face contact with GPS, pharmacists have been a reassuring service throughout.

There are certainly a few GPs about who are seeing very few patients. They're causing extra pressure on hospitals too. Friends working in ED getting referral letters from GPs wgo haven't seen a patient when they should have and there aren't any Covid concerns.

VonLuck

Cork2021 wrote: »

Probably after going over the 100k mark!!

https://twitter.com/donnellystephen/status/1351461941097754625?s=21

I'm sure I'm making an error in my maths, but if 94,000 doses were administered, doesn't that mean that 1.9% of our population of 4,904,000 have received the vaccine? OurWorldInData reports it as 0.19 doses per 100 people which would be 0.19%.

What am I missing here?

timsey tiger

VonLuck wrote: »

I'm sure I'm making an error in my maths, but if 94,000 doses were administered, doesn't that mean that 1.9% of our population of 4,904,000 have received the vaccine? OurWorldInData reports it as 0.19 doses per 100 people which would be 0.19%.

What am I missing here?

maybe the data is out of date, things are moving fast

JimmyVik

Mitch Connor wrote: »

those 16 people will also need to be given a second dose. So they now have to be in the list for that .

The impact, of 16 people, on the list is near meaningless though, in reality.

16 people you dont even know who they are. So what difference does it make.
Thats just a thinly veiled, they are skipping ME in the queue if you ask me.

Bubbaclaus

VonLuck wrote: »

I'm sure I'm making an error in my maths, but if 94,000 doses were administered, doesn't that mean that 1.9% of our population of 4,904,000 have received the vaccine? OurWorldInData reports it as 0.19 doses per 100 people which would be 0.19%.

What am I missing here?

That's the daily rate which they calculated based on the last figures released.

muddypuppy

VonLuck wrote: »

I'm sure I'm making an error in my maths, but if 94,000 doses were administered, doesn't that mean that 1.9% of our population of 4,904,000 have received the vaccine? OurWorldInData reports it as 0.19 doses per 100 people which would be 0.19%.

What am I missing here?

Where have you seen that 0.19? On twitter (https://twitter.com/OurWorldInData/status/1350368905102061568)? That's new vaccinations per day, not total amount of vaccinations.
On the website the cumulative per 100 is 1.6, since they haven't updated it yet.

CrabRevolution

Gael23 wrote: »

Would they not treat women for gynaecology related cancers?

No, that gets treated in St. Lukes/ St. James'.

bennyineire

Yevon wrote: »

When he says next Sunday there will be 140k vaccinated does he mean Sunday 24th?

I read on RTE that there will be no delivery from Pfizer this week. Will dipping into the reserve prevent a slowdown next week?

J&J results on Thursday. If the 1 jab dose shows high efficacy it will be fantastic news.

Well yeah seeing as that is the next Sunday

celt262

JimmyVik wrote: »

16 people you dont even know who they are. So what difference does it make.
Thats just a thinly veiled, they are skipping ME in the queue if you ask me.

People been outraged for the sake of it, every Covid thread was polluted with it yesterday. You would thing someone was after robbing vaccines and administrating them down a alleyway the way some are going on especially on social media.

is_that_so

Yevon wrote: »

When he says next Sunday there will be 140k vaccinated does he mean Sunday 24th?

I read on RTE that there will be no delivery from Pfizer this week. Will dipping into the reserve prevent a slowdown next week?

J&J results on Thursday. If the 1 jab dose shows high efficacy it will be fantastic news.

Yeah, that's been the plan for a week or so. If the care homes are about 75,000 that means they are not going to do much more of Group 2 this week.

lucernarian

is_that_so wrote: »

Once we get past hospital Group 2 vaccinations that ceases to be much of a problem.

This is so frustrating, I was practically mocked for demanding this last week when it would have had more of a meaningful impact. People forget that this vaccine rollout is happening in tandem with the worst epidemic in Europe. The first 1% of who gets it will have a critical impact on hospitalisations in February. This wasn't the non-issue that some portrayed it as, as subsequent events have revealed.

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

We are now up to 94,000 vaccinations by Sunday last.

https://twitter.com/DonnellyStephen/status/1351461942595104768

Were they bullsh*tting about us being the best in the EU so? Denmark were at 2.2 % 5 days ago, Donnelly seems far more concerned about the narrative rather than the job in hand.

Van.Bosch

bennyineire wrote: »

Well yeah seeing as that is the next Sunday

I often have this argument - I would refer to it as this Sunday if we’re in the week! I’m sure I’m wrong though as next Sunday is 24th!

Sky King

Yevon wrote: »

J&J results on Thursday. If the 1 jab dose shows high efficacy it will be fantastic news.

Any idea what the timeframe is for getting that approved? I've previously read end of Feb - is that still valid?

I see the WHO are warning about the uneven distribution of vaccines

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0118/1190411-coronavirus-vaccine/

It is preferable that those most in need are prioritised. Given Africa has had 79,000 deaths from 1.2BN people, while Europe has 630,000 deaths from 700 million, priority for Europe would seem to be appropriate (and South Africa). There are more pressing issues that we can help Africa with at the moment than vaccine access. Food security and clean water top of the list.

Leinster90

I appreciate that there may not be a straightforward answer to this, but if someone were to be infected one day, how likely would a PCR test the next day indicate them to be COVID-19 positive?

I really need an answer to this or at least to be pointed towards some research, thanks!!

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

Were they bullsh*tting about us being the best in the EU so? Denmark were at 2.2 % 5 days ago, Donnelly seems far more concerned about the narrative rather than the job in hand.

He says we are now at about 1.9% and we were 2nd in that table. TBH it's more about the problem for larger countries in getting largescale vaccines out.

seamus

Leinster90 wrote: »

I appreciate that there may not be a straightforward answer to this, but if someone were to be infected one day, how likely would a PCR test the next day indicate them to be COVID-19 positive?

I really need an answer to this or at least to be pointed towards some research, thanks!!

No, there's not really a straightforward answer to this.

If you were infected today, the chances of a positive PCR test tomorrow are close to zero. These increase progressively over time to about 60% by day five up to 99% by day ten.

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

He says we are now at about 1.9% and we were 2nd in that table. TBH it's more about the problem for larger countries in getting largescale vaccines out.

On Twitter last week he posted table that showed us top at 1.9%

https://mobile.twitter.com/DonnellyStephen/status/1350054793188929536.

Now he's saying we actually hit that point on Sunday. We are obviously doing comparatively well but I intensely like this dishonesty being used to deflect any criticism.

Bubbaclaus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

On Twitter last week he posted table that showed us top at 1.9%

https://mobile.twitter.com/DonnellyStephen/status/1350054793188929536.

Now he's saying we actually hit that point on Sunday. We are obviously doing comparatively well but I intensely like this dishonesty being used to deflect any criticism.

That was the daily rate mate. 0.19% per day at the time.

Bubbaclaus

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

That was the daily rate mate.

Ah, okay, my mistake.

titan18

Deleted User wrote: »

I see the WHO are warning about the uneven distribution of vaccines

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0118/1190411-coronavirus-vaccine/

It is preferable that those most in need are prioritised. Given Africa has had 79,000 deaths from 1.2BN people, while Europe has 630,000 deaths from 700 million, priority for Europe would seem to be appropriate (and South Africa). There are more pressing issues that we can help Africa with at the moment than vaccine access. Food security and clean water top of the list.

Also, we'd be paying for those poorer countries to get their vaccines as we sit in lockdowns and hemorrhaging money all over the place cos of it.

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

On Twitter last week he posted table that showed us top at 1.9%

https://mobile.twitter.com/DonnellyStephen/status/1350054793188929536.

Now he's saying we actually hit that point on Sunday. We are obviously doing comparatively well but I intensely like this dishonesty being used to deflect any criticism.

It's still groups 1 & 2 with the odd "other group". Next Sunday is a real milestone they have committed to, a far more important one IMO than this league table pandemic management some people seem to love. The next one after that is when we are supposed to get to the end of over 70s, maybe even the over 65s, in late March. After that we should be hitting well north of 100K a week.

Deeper Blue

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I see the WHO are warning about the uneven distribution of vaccines

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0118/1190411-coronavirus-vaccine/

It is preferable that those most in need are prioritised. Given Africa has had 79,000 deaths from 1.2BN people, while Europe has 630,000 deaths from 700 million, priority for Europe would seem to be appropriate (and South Africa). There are more pressing issues that we can help Africa with at the moment than vaccine access. Food security and clean water top of the list.

Maybe this seems harsh but I couldn't give a ****e about Africa or anywhere else at the moment. We need to look after our own house and protect our own people. Once that's done we can start being charitable.