Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

revelman

revelman wrote: »

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-said-probing-link-between-pfizer-shot-and-heart-problem-in-men-under-30/

Expected rates of myocarditis are 10-20 per 100k per year. So if you take the lower end of that range Israel would expect about 250 cases in 3 months. Younger males also have a higher rate of myocarditis than the general population. So, 62 cases in Israel with a higher prevalence in younger males is not something to be overly concerned about

Charles Babbage

Sparko wrote: »

My understanding is if you are under 60 with no underlying conditions and have already gotten a dose, then it has been extended to 16 weeks. Over 60s and under 60s with high risk conditions are staying at 12 weeks.

My mother is in her 60s and got her first dose of AZ over the weekend, she was told it'd be 12 weeks.

So a 60 year old vaccinated towards the end of May, and some will be, will not get a second jab until the end of August and will be one of the last people to be fully vaccinated? What are they going to do with the AZ in the meantime?

FlubberJones

I have an appointment to get a vaccine this coming bank holiday weekend. I would have to travel over on the Ferry to Holyhead on Friday night, get out and get a PCR test on the Saturday, get the vaccine on the Sunday then travel back on the Monday.
This would be heavily reliant on the PCR negative test results being available to me by the bank holiday Monday morning.

I'm trying to balance up both the cost and the benefit here and obviously when I will get vaccinated in Ireland if I didn't do this.

Russman

Charles Babbage wrote: »

So a 60 year old vaccinatined towards the end of May, and some will be, will not get a second jab until the end of August and will be one of the last people to be fully vaccinated? What are they going to do with the AZ in the meantime?

I'd imagine hold what we need for second doses in storage, and come August/September when the 60s have their shots, that's us & the EU done with AZ for ever more.

cool

I'm not sure what the benefits of this are?

The clotting incidence rate for J&J is 7 per million in women under 50.

For women in their 30s, it's 11.8 per million.

These are similar rates to AZ (albeit for a more specific cohort), so I can't really understand the logic in restricting one and not the other.

In the US, people have some choice over which vaccine they get, it's not a case of "take J&J or get to the back of the queue."

Lumen

Flying Fox wrote: »

The clotting incidence rate for J&J is 7 per million in women under 50.

For women in their 30s, it's 11.8 per million.

These are similar rates to AZ, so I can't really understand the logic in restricting one and not the other.

J&J is single dose, so that adjusts the risk downwards.

1huge1

FrankN1 wrote: »

When are they due to start 20-30s?

Vicxas wrote: »

June(ish) all going well

I'd assume early to mid July for people in their 20s, they want 80% of Adults to have their first dose by the end of June, presumably then the 20% is the 18-30yr old cohort?

This is based on 80% of adults having their first dose by the end of June which is the target.

Russman

is_that_so wrote: »

They can but they also know that will delay the vaccination programme and Butler does seem keen to get people vaccinated as fast as we can. I won't be surprised either way but logic suggests they should approve it for all.

I guess it depends on what weight they'd put on the speed of the programme. As you say, could go either way.

stephenjmcd

25,832 for Saturday

21070 first dose
4762 second dose

FlubberJones

I am also wondering of the benefits, if the vaccine will be sooner rather than later for a over 50s then I would wait for my turn to come around in Ireland.

seamus

1huge1 wrote: »

I'd assume early to mid July for people in their 20s, they want 80% of Adults to have their first dose by the end of June, presumably then the 20% is the 18-30yr old cohort?

Yeah, I wouldn't expect under-35s to be jabbed until well into July. I'm (barely) under 40 and I'm hoping but not expecting a jab before the end of June.

Lumen

Lumen wrote: »

J&J is single dose, so that adjusts the risk downwards.

We don't have enough data yet on the second dose risks for AZ, so it's not really possible to compare at this stage.

Russman

Flying Fox wrote: »

The clotting incidence rate for J&J is 7 per million in women under 50.

For women in their 30s, it's 11.8 per million.

These are similar rates to AZ (albeit for a more specific cohort), so I can't really understand the logic in restricting one and not the other.

In the US, people have some choice over which vaccine they get, it's not a case of "take J&J or get to the back of the queue."

If those rates are correct & are similar to AZ (not doubting you), then its hard to imagine there not being some restriction. Would AZ have any legal recourse if the rates were the same and no restriction placed on J&J ?

Your last sentence could be quite important for context also, a degree of vaccine choice is a huge mitigating factor IMO.

seamus

stephenjmcd wrote: »

25,832 for Saturday

21070 first dose
4762 second dose

If we reached 1m first doses yesterday, then that's at least 13,000 first doses done yesterday.

Eyeballing it, they're the biggest weekend numbers by a very long way. I haven't verified that though.

Strazdas

Sanjuro wrote: »

Was talking to a mate of mine last night who lives in Belfast. Just a year older than me (40). He got his first shot last week. A mixture of emotions. Firstly, incredible frustration that we're not at the same pace. Even though the differences in how to approach vaccinating the population is understood and I do prefer our approach. Secondly, very encouraging hearing him be all upbeat about things. I'm looking forward to when we're at that stage.

But we're gaining pace on them rapidly. In mid March, we were nearly three months behind them. At the moment it's eight weeks.....soon it will be four weeks etc.

Well, I don't see that it is any individual benefit to you to have the vaccine even a.couple of months before you would here?
Life won't change until the majority of the country is vaccinated.
There's nothing wrong with getting it early, if it suited you to do it.

Pete_Cavan

seamus wrote: »

If we reached 1m first doses yesterday, then that's at least 13,000 first doses done yesterday.

Eyeballing it, they're the biggest weekend numbers by a very long way. I haven't verified that though.

Yes I was expecting the 1,000,000th person dose to happen today, getting it done at the weekend is impressive. Should sail past 1.5m doses before next weekend. How would 1.5m doses administered at end of April compare with earlier targets?

JPup

What vaccine would you get in the UK? How would you get the second dose? Same trip again?

It's a lot of expense and effort. If you are over 50 chances are you will be vaccinated here in the next 4-6 weeks. Unlikely to be AZ also, so your second dose would be another 4-6 weeks after that.

Lucas Hood

https://twitter.com/IrelandVaccine/status/1386621657272496128?s=19

Good week.

Atlantic Dawn

I'd wait, the risk of exposure to the virus while travelling nullifies the benefits of getting it early, far better to wait. The expense is another reason not to.

odyssey06

A family member is in Group 7 of high risk, under 60.
Their GP surgery is not participating in the rollout because "AZ is not available".

Family member now seems to be in limbo as there doesn't seem to be any Plan B?
GP hasn't said anything along the lines of "We will register you for an MVC" and self registration on HSE is age based only.

Anyone else in same boat?

MerlinSouthDub

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, I wouldn't expect under-35s to be jabbed until well into July. I'm (barely) under 40 and I'm hoping but not expecting a jab before the end of June.

If the 82% of adult population target by end of June still applies (and I think it does), then everyone 30+ would get a dose by end of June. Good chart here:

https://twitter.com/RachelLavin/status/1383741192085467141/photo/1

Russman

Russman wrote: »

If those rates are correct & are similar to AZ (not doubting you), then its hard to imagine there not being some restriction. Would AZ have any legal recourse if the rates were the same and no restriction placed on J&J ?

Your last sentence could be quite important for context also, a degree of vaccine choice is a huge mitigating factor IMO.

Good point, I'm not sure if there could be legal implications.

The head of the CDC committee in the US, when announcing that J&J could be resumed, said this:

The Johnson & Johnson vaccine “can be reinstituted and should be reinstituted. I acknowledge, as does everyone else, that these events are rare, but serious,” Jose Romero, chair of the committee, said. “It is our responsibility as clinicians to make sure that women understand this risk and, when possible, that they have an alternative at the same site that you’re administering the vaccine.”

The point about alternatives is really important and I hope it's not just glossed over.

Personally I think both AZ and J&J should be offered and if people are prepared to take them, knowing the small risks, that's fine. But get rid of this "back of the queue" nonsense. The waiver approach being taken in parts of Germany seems a sensible one.

CIARAN_BOYLE

1huge1 wrote: »

I'd assume early to mid July for people in their 20s, they want 80% of Adults to have their first dose by the end of June, presumably then the 20% is the 18-30yr old cohort?

This is based on 80% of adults having their first dose by the end of June which is the target.

I was guessing that everyone who wants a Vaccine will be offered one by June because at least 20% of adults will probably refuse vaccination.

SheepsClothing

There will likely be an ever growing cohort of people who decline the vaccine as we get into the lower ages, which you would have to think will accelerate the pace in which we go through the groups.

ACitizenErased

SheepsClothing wrote: »

There will likely be an ever growing cohort of people who decline the vaccine as we get into the lower ages, which you would have to think will accelerate the pace in which we go through the groups.

I’m in my 20s and don’t know a single person either in my college course or friend group who would reject it tbh

charlie14

SheepsClothing wrote: »

There will likely be an ever growing cohort of people who decline the vaccine as we get into the lower ages, which you would have to think will accelerate the pace in which we go through the groups.

It would, but it would also lower the percentage vaccinated.
If Europe can get it`s act together on a Green Passport for travel based on meaningful level of vaccination, rather than the the mess we had last Summer on travel within Europe, that would be a major boost in encouraging the lower ages groups.
Unfortunately seeing the decisions by some countries on those UEFA matches I`m less confident now than I was that they will.

Christy42

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I’m in my 20s and don’t know a single person either in my college course or friend group who would reject it tbh

I am the same but these things tend to be very self selecting and very biased. We pick friend groups who are similar to us. College courses are full of people who picked the same thing.

20% seems to be overegging the amount who will refuse but there will be decent few.