Covid 19 Part XXXIV-249,437 ROI(4,906 deaths) 120,195 NI (2,145 deaths)(01/05)Read OP

Wolf359f

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Although those 1 million doses should almost all have been first doses.

This early second-dose strategy is an error in my view.

Better to have 1 million people with 80+% protection, than the system they've opted for with the second doses adding a marginal booster effect.

Then, we'd be at 20% of the population vaccinated and pretty much over the top of the hill.

To what end? Fly in the face of all the trials and manufacturer guidelines. Why stop there, we could have had 2 million dosed with a half dose. Any protection is better than none!

Wolf359f

Wolf359f wrote: »

To what end? Fly in the face of all the trials and manufacturer guidelines. Why stop there, we could have had 2 million dosed with a half dose. Any protection is better than none!

Don't be facetious.

The one dose format has been practiced in the UK and Israel to a larger extent to Ireland.

If it's good enough for the UK and Israel, who appear to be doing quite well I've noticed, then it's good enough for Ireland.

Logic dictates that spreading out a highly efficacious first dose is better than administering a second dose too early. You vaccinate a greater number of the most vulnerable, faster.

podgeandrodge

As more vaccines come on-stream, what would the likely approach be with the likes of Astrazeneca with a potential link to side effects? Could we reach a situation where vaccine availability allowed us to move away completely from reliance on Astra (if still not proved to be a cause of the clot issues, but potentially being)?

JDD

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't be facetious.

The one dose format has been practiced in the UK and Israel to a larger extent to Ireland.

If it's good enough for the UK and Israel, who appear to be doing quite well I've noticed, then it's good enough for Ireland.

Logic dictates that spreading out a highly efficacious first dose is better than administering a second dose too early. You vaccinate a greater number of the most vulnerable, faster.

The UK hasn't really been tested yet though.

There's no issue with spreading the doses out with the AZ vaccine. In fact, they're trials showed that efficacy might actually be increased if you stretch out the time between doses to 12 weeks. The vast majority of the UK's vaccines have been AZ. Ireland is going to follow this process, and also wait 12 weeks to give the second dose.

The issue comes with Pfizer. Pfizer themselves have said that while a good level of efficacy can been achieved with one dose, they believe that efficacy decreases in the 65-85 age group if longer than three weeks is left between doses.

If this is true, some of those 65-85 year olds in the UK who have had only one Pfizer dose - say over a month ago - will catch covid once the UK opens up on 12 April. What impact this will have on numbers remains to be seen. AFAIK, most over 65s in the UK have had the AZ vaccine. So in fact any effect might be negligible for them, but would have a huge impact on us because ALL of our over 65s have got the Pfizer vaccine.

Ultimately the reason why the UK are doing so well is the availability and supply of the AZ vaccine, and not the decision to move out the second Pfizer dose to 12 weeks.

Bubbaclaus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Don't be facetious.

The one dose format has been practiced in the UK and Israel to a larger extent to Ireland.

If it's good enough for the UK and Israel, who appear to be doing quite well I've noticed, then it's good enough for Ireland.

Logic dictates that spreading out a highly efficacious first dose is better than administering a second dose too early. You vaccinate a greater number of the most vulnerable, faster.

I'm pretty sure Israel stuck to the recommended dosing procedure like ourselves.

muddypuppy

podgeandrodge wrote: »

As more vaccines come on-stream, what would the likely approach be with the likes of Astrazeneca with a potential link to side effects? Could we reach a situation where vaccine availability allowed us to move away completely from reliance on Astra (if still not proved to be a cause of the clot issues, but potentially being)?

Unless it get blocked I don't think it's likely. From here to June AZ is supposed to be ~1/4 of the vaccines we are going to get (https://i.redd.it/10z7x6xbhmp61.png) so not using it would set us back by 1-2 months.

Derek Zoolander

muddypuppy wrote: »

Unless it get blocked I don't think it's likely. From here to June AZ is supposed to be ~1/4 of the vaccines we are going to get (https://i.redd.it/10z7x6xbhmp61.png) so not using it would set us back by 1-2 months.

ultimately the AZ vaccines will become the emerging market / 3rd world vaccine of choice - its cheap to manufacture and first world economies will pivot towards the one shot J&J option or the RNA option which can be changed much quicker if required to cope with variants.

Doubtful at this stage if AZ will even launch in US as their manufacturing location just got allocated to J&J and they need to find a new one.

irishguy1983

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you're in hospital past 6 on a Friday evening you're rarely gonna get out before Monday morning, Tuesday morning when it's a bank holiday. A lot of people working in hospitals are on fairly normal hours, including those who make the decision to discharge.


Fun little study here. If you're admitted to hospital on a Sunday you're more likely to die. But at the same time fewer deaths happen at the weekend, likely due to a combination of a higher rate of people who could be at home (but haven't been signed out) and fewer risky procedures done and fewer new interventions with drugs.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3284293/

Sound - appreciate the explanation!

Wolf359f

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't be facetious.

The one dose format has been practiced in the UK and Israel to a larger extent to Ireland.

If it's good enough for the UK and Israel, who appear to be doing quite well I've noticed, then it's good enough for Ireland.

Logic dictates that spreading out a highly efficacious first dose is better than administering a second dose too early. You vaccinate a greater number of the most vulnerable, faster.

As others above have pointed out, Israel have been sticking to a 3-4 week gap.
The UK, of the ~36 mil jabs, 20mil are AZ and like most/if not all countries worldwide are following AZ guidelines and going with a 12 week gap.

There seems to be some confusion that the UK invented this 12 week gap for AZ, it's simply the manufacturer's guidelines.

On Pfizer doses being spaced apart further than 4 weeks, the UK's own analysis showed the efficacy dropped after 4 weeks. No further data points were collected, so it's hard to imagine the efficacy increases week 1-4, drops on week 5 and then (without a booster) it magically increases from week 6 on wards.

seamus

podgeandrodge wrote: »

As more vaccines come on-stream, what would the likely approach be with the likes of Astrazeneca with a potential link to side effects? Could we reach a situation where vaccine availability allowed us to move away completely from reliance on Astra (if still not proved to be a cause of the clot issues, but potentially being)?

Yes. When J&J come online, we will start seeing AZ being used as the vaccine of last resort. That is, we will burn through Pfizer, Modern and J&J as quickly as we can and will use AZ just to fill in the gaps. It's the easiest stored, but outside of that it's the inferior one.

I still assert that this is why AZ were so keen to stiff the EU on supplies; because they know by the end of 2021 they won't be getting many orders from wealthy countries. So they prioritised delivery to those who were willing to overpay.

Away With The Fairies

RoseStick wrote: »

Many of the over 70s haven't been touched in my village and local community. I had to make an appointment at the GP the week before last and they were only just touching on the late 70 group like 75 to 79 but not even all of them. My mother in law is 76 and we are hoping she will be in the next round of vaccines.

It's not surprising to me. Healthcare workers and residential homes were so important to work on first. It's a new vaccine and there's going to be a wait for vaccine.
Many people think the Taoiseach can click his fingers and all over 70s are vaccinated like magic. People just need to be patient.

I'm hearing of people now phoning the GPS surgery on a weekly basis to see where they are on the vaccine list. I would consider that to be harassment instead of allowing the surgery to get on with the work they have to do. They have to do work outside of covid too. Anybody who is harassing a GP surgery for vaccine should be moved to the back of the queue and waiting line.

Are you even aware of the HSE website on vaccines where alot of work is on GPs. And specific groups will be contacted by their GPs.

Good system that is. I put on weight during lockdown and my GP doesn't even know my BMI. But yeah, they'll contact me for a vaccine.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

Yes. When J&J come online, we will start seeing AZ being used as the vaccine of last resort. That is, we will burn through Pfizer, Modern and J&J as quickly as we can and will use AZ just to fill in the gaps. It's the easiest stored, but outside of that it's the inferior one.

I still assert that this is why AZ were so keen to stiff the EU on supplies; because they know by the end of 2021 they won't be getting many orders from wealthy countries. So they prioritised delivery to those who were willing to overpay.

To be fair to AZ, this is not what they do. They are not a J&J or a Pfizer. They specialise in cost based deliver to emerging markets.....they’re a research specialist, not a massive commercial manufacturing operation. Their lack of experience was evident even in the way they sought their approvals. Given what they are, I think they have made an exceptional contribution

podgeandrodge

So, if only 0.1% of cases of Covid-19 are linked to outdoor transmission, is there a reason why construction, pubs/restaurants etc. serving outside etc. etc. etc. can't be relaxed now? Though presumably they had an idea of these stats a long time ago?

covidrelease

podgeandrodge wrote: »

So, if only 0.1% of cases of Covid-19 are linked to outdoor transmission, is there a reason why construction, pubs/restaurants etc. serving outside etc. etc. etc. can't be relaxed now? Though presumably they had an idea of these stats a long time ago?

No valid reason at this stage really, other than people will travel in a car or taxi together to meet others, more people on the dart, buses, chipper etc.

But opening for say 15 or 20 outdoors would mitigate this risk.

h2005

Is there an official resource for hospital numbers?

CoronaBlocker

podgeandrodge wrote: »

So, if only 0.1% of cases of Covid-19 are linked to outdoor transmission, is there a reason why construction, pubs/restaurants etc. serving outside etc. etc. etc. can't be relaxed now? Though presumably they had an idea of these stats a long time ago?

This has been niggling away at me since that stat was published the other day - but haven't we always, sort of, known (suspected) that this was the case? They said a while ago now that all of those crazy scenes at the packed beaches in the UK last summer produced zero cases; and there has never been any noticeable spike from the BLM/Anti-Restriction protests either.

Surely we must begin opening up the outdoor work/social options for people now. I can't think a of a reason as to why we can't start doing it immediately - unless of course the government is only capable of addressing matters in 6-week intervals..?

At what point does caution simply turn into fear?

Vicxas

podgeandrodge wrote: »

So, if only 0.1% of cases of Covid-19 are linked to outdoor transmission, is there a reason why construction, pubs/restaurants etc. serving outside etc. etc. etc. can't be relaxed now? Though presumably they had an idea of these stats a long time ago?

Surely we kind of have them over a barrel now with this.

ninebeanrows

podgeandrodge wrote: »

So, if only 0.1% of cases of Covid-19 are linked to outdoor transmission, is there a reason why construction, pubs/restaurants etc. serving outside etc. etc. etc. can't be relaxed now? Though presumably they had an idea of these stats a long time ago?

It's because of the variants don't ye know. Don't want to be giving them any air to breath.

prunudo

podgeandrodge wrote: »

So, if only 0.1% of cases of Covid-19 are linked to outdoor transmission, is there a reason why construction, pubs/restaurants etc. serving outside etc. etc. etc. can't be relaxed now? Though presumably they had an idea of these stats a long time ago?

At a minimum they should be allowing outdoor dining at cafes during daylight hours. We all know its really alcohol consumption they have the issue with but they just use a blanket approach like many other things throughout the last year.

Klonker

podgeandrodge wrote: »

So, if only 0.1% of cases of Covid-19 are linked to outdoor transmission, is there a reason why construction, pubs/restaurants etc. serving outside etc. etc. etc. can't be relaxed now? Though presumably they had an idea of these stats a long time ago?

Because they think we are children who can't be trusted to behave.

It'll be interesting how NPHET will be spin the answers to this at the next press conference they do.

iamwhoiam

prunudo wrote: »

At a minimum they should be allowing outdoor dining at cafes during daylight hours. We all know its really alcohol consumption they have the issue with but they just use a blanket approach like many other things throughout the last year.

And allow to meet others in your garden .The parks are all jam packed now and its a lot safer in your own garden

ninebeanrows

Klonker wrote: »

Because they think we are children who can't be trusted to behave.

It'll be interesting how NPHET will be spin the answers to this at the next press conference they do.

Quite simple really.

The B117 variant is much more transmissible and we are in a precarious situation. We cannot give the virus any room to breath, people let down their guard when alcohol or socialization is involved.

The usual go tos. There is no nuance from NPHET.

Widdensushi

h2005 wrote: »

Is there an official resource for hospital numbers?

It's on the covid tracker app, not sure how often it is updated,maybe morning and evening.

ninebeanrows

We have to remember a large proportion of NPHET members would outright ban alcohol at a whim and probably chocolate bars too.

Many of them are extreme conservatives who will not move until there isn't a case recorded in this country.

CoronaBlocker

This old chestnut again.

"A senior official from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has told an Italian daily it is “clear” that there is a link between the AstraZeneca vaccine and a rare form of blood clot but that the cause is still not known"

Link

covidrelease

ninebeanrows wrote: »

We have to remember a large proportion of NPHET members would outright ban alcohol at a whim and probably chocolate bars too.

Many of them are extreme conservatives who will not move until there isn't a case recorded in this country.

Yet at Christmas they allowed a ridiculous situation where 48 cans cost €35, fuelling consumption at house parties and all the rest.

Turtwig

The number of outdoor cases linked is far too low imo and points more to our failure in detecting them than a reflection of their actual rate of occurrence.

Outdoors is lowest risk. Both government and businesses had a year to try it out and then we'd better know the risk. As it stands we're kind of blind. Given our current disease profile it's a bit of gamble until more people are vaccinated. One for which our safety net is marginal. You have to factor in too by allowing more people to meet up for dining etc you risk opportunities for spread by accident. Even if these are marginal. We're on a very fine margin as it is.

I think the presentation by Leo was reasonable. Accelerating that even further is tough one imo.

wadacrack

Turtwig wrote: »

The number of outdoor cases linked is far too low imo and points more to our failure in detecting them than a reflection of their actual rate of occurrence.

Outdoors is lowest risk. Both government and businesses had a year to try it out and then we'd better know the risk. As it stands we're kind of blind. Given our current disease profile it's a bit of gamble until more people are vaccinated. One for which our safety net is marginal. You have to factor in too by allowing more people to meet up for dining etc you risk opportunities for spread by accident. Even if these are marginal. We're on a very fine margin as it is.

I think the presentation by Leo was reasonable. Accelerating that even further is tough one imo.

The evidence worldwide is that 80% of transmission occurs at Superspreading events which are all indoor. We are not of blind at all.

It's obvious that schools are a huge problem that's the reason we have no room to breath.

covidrelease

Turtwig wrote: »

The number of outdoor cases linked is far too low imo and points more to our failure in detecting them than a reflection of their actual rate of occurrence.

Outdoors is lowest risk. Both government and businesses had a year to try it out and then we'd better know the risk. As it stands we're kind of blind. Given our current disease profile it's a bit of gamble until more people are vaccinated. One for which our safety net is marginal. You have to factor in too by allowing more people to meet up for dining etc you risk opportunities for spread by accident. Even if these are marginal. We're on a very fine margin as it is.

I think the presentation by Leo was reasonable. Accelerating that even further is tough one imo.

1 in 6 adults is vaccinated (edit: first dose), would another 1 in 6 have some sort of herd immunity?

So possibly 1/3 of adults won't be spreading it. That in itself makes out safety net far from marginal.

Opening hospitality for say 15 people outdoors will not cause a massive spike.

Case numbers are going nowhere as it is, and with vaccinations ramping up nicely every day the risk is lowered.

CoronaBlocker

CoronaBlocker wrote: »

This old chestnut again.

"A senior official from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has told an Italian daily it is “clear” that there is a link between the AstraZeneca vaccine and a rare form of blood clot but that the cause is still not known"

Link

The AZ-Oxford vaccine has the same risk of blood clots as Pfizer; but one is widely advertised as dangerous and the other not.

The AZ-Oxford vaccine is produced and sold at cost, whereas Pfizer is charging a very hefty fee in comparison.

There are both economic and political benefits to smash asunder the AZ-Oxford vaccine.