Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

seamus

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

If there’s evidence that AZ are deliberately not delivering to EU out of spite as that poster insists then imho that’s criminal.

I don't think there's necessarily any "spite" against, but there are definitely reasons of bias and commercial hay-making that are resulting in the EU being deliberately underserved.

It's not bad luck or "manufacturing delays" that has seen the EU's supply has been continuously cut without explanation, while the UK has seen no similar disruption.

Valhallapt

hmmm wrote: »

Interestingly, it looks like the regulator there may also allow citizens to receive the AZ vaccine "at their own risk".

I think there is merit to this, people here are concerned about clotting and they have every right to be and to opt not to take the vaccine. However that are probably more people who are either unconcerned and still happy to proceed the AZ and J&J, but they are being prevented from doing so.

Enlarge the age cohorts for AZ and let people opt out without severe penalty, probably will have to wait longer but that’s down to supply.

Russman

hmmm wrote: »

Germany has given the approval for J&J to be used without restrictions.
https://www.ft.com/content/b254833a-27c9-482c-8492-4b63571e57ee

Excellent news and hopefully a sign of what others including ourselves will do.

Turtwig

hmmm wrote: »

Germany has given the approval for J&J to be used without restrictions.
https://www.ft.com/content/b254833a-27c9-482c-8492-4b63571e57ee

Interestingly, it looks like the regulator there may also allow citizens to receive the AZ vaccine "at their own risk".

I think this is something that given the current circumstances you have to consider allowing for. The problem is ensuring people understand the risk. Going by a lot of the sh1t I've seen on twitter and social media the risk is actually very poorly explained to people.

It's also something you have to be really careful how you present to people. Simply allowing the option may cause people to perceive the vaccine as more dangerous than it actually is! If you are going to use it it needs to be very carefully presented with assurances for thorough follow up if something does awry for the individual on the receiving end of the jab.

Wolf359f

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Definitely they seem to be firing ahead
I have friends all done and dusted in City west and other friends who registered the same day awaiting a text . They would be Croke Park or Aviva
Whoever is in charge of logistics in City West is doing a tremendous job

City West was a little quieter this morning, still a steady stream in and out. It looks like they are using Moderna this morning, based on the purple pamphlet and a mix of young and old going in. So logistically, it has to be a challenge juggling different vaccines on different days.
Be curious how they handle 5k a day from next week, hopefully any teething problems have been ironed out.

crossman47

Turtwig wrote: »

I think this is something that given the current circumstances you have to consider allowing for. The problem is ensuring people understand the risk. Going by a lot of the sh1t I've seen on twitter and social media the risk is actually very poorly explained to people.

It's also something you have to be really careful how you present to people. Simply allowing the option may cause people to perceive the vaccine as more dangerous than it actually is! If you are going to use it it needs to be very carefully presented with assurances for thorough follow up if something does awry for the individual on the receiving end of the jab.

I agree with that. Just presenting a choice will automatically mean many will opt to avoid AZ (wrongly IMO but many people have no concept of risk).

thebaz

Russman wrote: »

Excellent news and hopefully a sign of what others including ourselves will do.

our NIAC seams more over-cautious than even NPHET, taking the weekend off to think about it - meanwhile citizens of the country are in lockdown for a year and most are urgently awaiting vaccinations, and a return to some form of nomality. Sighhh.

hmmm

Turtwig wrote: »

It's also something you have to be really careful how you present to people. Simply allowing the option may cause people to perceive the vaccine as more dangerous than it actually is! If you are going to use it it needs to be very carefully presented with assurances for thorough follow up if something does awry for the individual on the receiving end of the jab.

True, and for the next few decades we're going to have anti-vaxxers saying "Do you remember the AZ vaccine killed young Timmy O'Reilly back in 2021."

If you're going to make it available, it needs to be very clear that you are spinning a wheel, and while the odds are incredibly low that you will have a bad outcome a small number of people will be affected. Many people will be turned off by this, I think most are quite realistic about risk and won't be.

It's not something you would consider outside a pandemic with very significant and continuing economic and social impacts from restrictions. It might not even be needed if we see a big acceleration of supply from other vaccines, but if we do have surplus AZ over the coming weeks we should be deciding now whether we would be willing to release it to under-60s.

Gael23

What’s the process of getting the vaccine via your GP

Russman

Turtwig wrote: »

I think this is something that given the current circumstances you have to consider allowing for. The problem is ensuring people understand the risk. Going by a lot of the sh1t I've seen on twitter and social media the risk is actually very poorly explained to people.

It's also something you have to be really careful how you present to people. Simply allowing the option may cause people to perceive the vaccine as more dangerous than it actually is! If you are going to use it it needs to be very carefully presented with assurances for thorough follow up if something does awry for the individual on the receiving end of the jab.

What does a waiver or "at their own risk" actually mean in practical terms though ? I'm not against it, but does it mean you won't sue anyone ? or you won't take up a hospital bed if you need treatment ? I'm just not sure its workable.

Even in an Irish context, most people who are saying they'd take AZ tomorrow (I would too btw) are likely to be younger than the cohorts currently being jabbed so I'm not sure it would make any difference as we'll likely have plenty of supply by the time their turn comes round anyway.

If NIAC approve J&J without restriction then great, lash it into whoever is next on the list and plough on. I'm just not sure someone in their 40s saying they'd happily sign a waiver and take AZ will matter a damn as their turn is weeks away anyway. I think you'd end up having to mix and match cohorts all over the place if we went the waiver route.

ACitizenErased

Worth noting about Germany that the uptake of AZ is absolutely brutal. They’re handing it out without restriction because nobody will take it.

Valhallapt

thebaz wrote: »

our NIAC seams more over-cautious than even NPHET, taking the weekend off to think about it - meanwhile citizens of the country are in lockdown for a year and most are urgently awaiting vaccinations, and a return to some form of nomality. Sighhh.

Perhaps I’m biased working in tech, but on several occasions over my career we’ve had a major issue, we keep working until it’s fixed, we literally camped in the office 72 hours straight once to fix an issue. That wasn’t life or death or anything close.

crossman47

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Worth noting about Germany that the uptake of AZ is absolutely brutal. They’re handing it out without restriction because nobody will take it.

Thats the problem with giving people a choice when they have not even a basic understanding of relative risks.

ddarcy

Gael23 wrote: »

What’s the process of getting the vaccine via your GP

Honestly just ring them.

If you are in an eligible group they may offer it. But it is very open ended question as not all GPs are doing it and the ones that are may be restricted to who they have to give it to (eg over 70’s), so you could be lower priority on the list assuming your group is going now.

hmmm

Russman wrote: »

Even in an Irish context, most people who are saying they'd take AZ tomorrow (I would too btw) are likely to be younger than the cohorts currently being jabbed so I'm not sure it would make any difference as we'll likely have plenty of supply by the time their turn comes round anyway.

If I was the government, the waiver would say the odds of a bad outcome at certain ages (clot & possible death) and I'd set an amount aside for compensation, along with promise of excellent healthcare.

No idea if that would stand up legally

If we have lots of supply well and good, but otherwise the vaccine portal could easily advertise that 'x amounts of AZ' are available on a first come first served basis to who-ever books.

Charles Babbage

Russman wrote: »

What does a waiver or "at their own risk" actually mean in practical terms though ? I'm not against it, but does it mean you won't sue anyone ? or you won't take up a hospital bed if you need treatment ? I'm just not sure its workable.

Even in an Irish context, most people who are saying they'd take AZ tomorrow (I would too btw) are likely to be younger than the cohorts currently being jabbed so I'm not sure it would make any difference as we'll likely have plenty of supply by the time their turn comes round anyway.

If NIAC approve J&J without restriction then great, lash it into whoever is next on the list and plough on. I'm just not sure someone in their 40s saying they'd happily sign a waiver and take AZ will matter a damn as their turn is weeks away anyway. I think you'd end up having to mix and match cohorts all over the place if we went the waiver route.

Unfortunately, there are only modest quantities of J&J at present and lashing into it does not seem feasible. Most of the J&J will go in June to younger cohorts.

titan18

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Unfortunately, there are only modest quantities of J&J at present and lashing into it does not seem feasible. Most of the J&J will go in June to younger cohorts.

Tbf, every vaccine into someones arm is a help at this stage, even if we only have small amount of them. As is, they now to be giving Pfizer vaccines to the homeless etc next week over J&J as a decision hasn't been made, so we're taking Pfizer vaccines away from the vulnerable of group 4 to do that and have the logistical challenge of giving them their 2nd dose.

Gael23

ddarcy wrote: »

Honestly just ring them.

If you are in an eligible group they may offer it. But it is very open ended question as not all GPs are doing it and the ones that are may be restricted to who they have to give it to (eg over 70’s), so you could be lower priority on the list assuming your group is going now.

My doctors secretary says I should receive a text with a link to register.

Does that make sense?

crossman47

Gael23 wrote: »

My doctors secretary says I should receive a text with a link to register.

Does that make sense?

Yes if you are over 70 or in a vulnerable group.

celt262

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Unfortunately, there are only modest quantities of J&J at present and lashing into it does not seem feasible. Most of the J&J will go in June to younger cohorts.

I though they were going to uses it for the bosses and homeless etc?

iamwhoiam

crossman47 wrote: »

Yes if you are over 70 or in a vulnerable group.

Is that for cohort 7 as well ?

Gael23

crossman47 wrote: »

Yes if you are over 70 or in a vulnerable group.

I’m 30 but medically vulnerable l

What is the link to?

astrofool

Valhallapt wrote: »

Perhaps I’m biased working in tech, but on several occasions over my career we’ve had a major issue, we keep working until it’s fixed, we literally camped in the office 72 hours straight once to fix an issue. That wasn’t life or death or anything close.

While we're getting jabs into arms reliably, the biggest issue is to keep confidence in the vaccine rollout to get to herd immunity. People aren't rational about risk which means you have to be very clear on why a medicine is being used if your expectation is that you want everyone to take it.

Right now the problem is getting enough vaccine supplied to get into arms, people are lying and cheating to get to the top of the queue, later on it becomes about getting people who are hesitant to take the shots and for that you need to be absolutely clear that safety is the main concern, bad decisions now will effect success later on.

After you worked 72 hours straight to fix the problem, that was likely the start of it, with further work scheduled to ensure you didn't have to face working 72 hours straight again (at least in a well run IT company).

crossman47

Gael23 wrote: »

I’m 30 but medically vulnerable l

What is the link to?

You should be in Group 7 which GPs are handling.

TomOnBoard

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Yep they were chosen by Jenner (of Oxford fame) Institute for crony reasons too, one of the guys worked high up in AZ

Refusing offers from companies that actually have the experience.

That brand name is now tainted forever, they probably will rebrand later in year I bet

They already tried a rebrand. Its called Vaxzevria since end March. The re-brand didn't do anything to improve their image!

revelman

seamus wrote: »

There's a pretty considerable difference in the incidence rate - but that is bearing in mind that J&J hasn't been in widespread use like AZ has.

So on the face of it, this is apples & oranges. Not only is J&J "safer" than AZ, but it's also one-dose. So that tips the balance of risk -v- reward in a very different way.

I don't think it would fair to say that if J & J gets the go-ahead for under-60s that it must be a political decision.

We can’t say for sure that J&J is safer.

The fact that J&J was not in as widespread use is one issue. But the other issue is we can’t assume that the quality and quantity of reporting of clots is the same in the USA as it is in Europe. Countries like Norway and Germany are very good at reporting. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was underreporting of side effects in the States for various reasons (e.g. socio-economic).

I just don’t understand how some posters here can be saying with such certainty that the risks of clots are considerably less with J&J. We just don’t know yet. Btw, I’d take either vaccine in a heartbeat.

Valhallapt

hmmm wrote: »

True, and for the next few decades we're going to have anti-vaxxers saying "Do you remember the AZ vaccine killed young Timmy O'Reilly back in 2021."

Anti vaxxers going to antivaxx. Regardless of poor Timmy the crackpots will still be against all forms of vaccination.

TomOnBoard

hmmm wrote: »

True, and for the next few decades we're going to have anti-vaxxers saying "Do you remember the AZ vaccine killed young Timmy O'Reilly back in 2021."

If you're going to make it available, it needs to be very clear that you are spinning a wheel, and while the odds are incredibly low that you will have a bad outcome a small number of people will be affected. Many people will be turned off by this, I think most are quite realistic about risk and won't be.

It's not something you would consider outside a pandemic with very significant and continuing economic and social impacts from restrictions. It might not even be needed if we see a big acceleration of supply from other vaccines, but if we do have surplus AZ over the coming weeks we should be deciding now whether we would be willing to release it to under-60s.

Ah, Jazes, did young Timmy die?

A lovely lad!

Played football for the under-16s!

And he had a great brain... He could do sums in his head...

And all them O'Reillys were lovely people! Lovely!

And didn't the sister join the Nuns after?

A lovely lookin' girl!

She never got over it!

Married to the Lord now, she is!

Praying all the time for young Timmy!

SEAMUS!!! TWO MORE PINTS HERE WHEN YER READY!!!

Valhallapt

TomOnBoard wrote: »

SEAMUS!!! TWO MORE PINTS HERE WHEN YER READY!!!

Ordering pints in a bar, that’s the most optimistic thing I’ve read in a while

Galwayhurl

Germany has just approved the use of J&J vaccine with NO limits.

Good news.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/1-germany-sets-no-limits-103441717.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFkpa-HuuLqIBNjxYSjZTOHblev__nAUookgZT0Kus8oqiWlP_UfzwEEtH0IRrVA5Gc72EfauGmRM8uemlDMWltLHHnKOvMzm6Mn9kXtVzgZF_KsPsvUY3F8TnS-EuYpDXEsY2Yh_PI8x6VUjKZJg83qtpwz5-GSM3j0oBlFHBPQ