Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

plodder

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Thread has moved on too far since I last logged in.

I was talking to my cousin a few minutes ago who works as a secretary in a GP's practice.

2 weeks ago: Calling people to arrange vaccine:
- "Are you offering me Pfizer or AZ? Because I don't want the AZ......oh its Pfizer? Great - book me in".

This morning at 7.45, phone starts hopping, several such calls before 9.30: Patients in their 50's:
- "Hi, is there any way you can get me a Pfizer vaccine?"
- "Can I be added to a waiting list, etc or will you be getting more Pfizer"?

My mother was saying there are 2 questions now in her circle:
1. Are you vaccinated
2. Which one did you get

This is what this is generating. AZ has served 30-40m people in the UK perfectly well, and the overall vibe is "they are all excellent vaccines, it doesn't matter which one you get". The US and EU have both said unrestricted access to J&J is fine.

Here, we are just faffing around, creating arbitrary rules, and generating vaccine hysteria because people think a blood clot which is 1000 times less likely to kill you than Covid is a danger.

You simply couldn't make it up. I have previously defended scientists, etc on this thread, and do favour a cautious approach for the most part, but how many other lives will be lost due to missed cancer screening, missed operations, etc because of this arseing around?

They need to be better prepared to deal with this nonsense, with the right information. Many of these people (like myself) probably had the flu vaccine in the past. Did (most of us) ever ask any questions about what they were putting in our arms? No, because we trusted the system. And this situation has arisen because they are being more cautious than usual, not less so.

I'm hearing a bit of equivocation now as well that could lead people to think they might have a choice. The advice about J&J being given if others are "not available" certainly leads to that thinking as well. They should be 100% clear that if you are being offered a vaccine today but refuse it, they shouldn't be saying anything about when you might get a different one. They'll be asked "surely you must have some idea" and the answer should be "no we don't".

Russman

is_that_so wrote: »

If the J&J advice had been suggested by Donnelly we'd laugh at him and it has the potential to cause a lot of grief with its very vague whatever you're having yourself. We also know the risk of depending on AZ for any numbers. You'd like it to work out but bumpy road may be an understatement and we really don't want to see half the over 50s unvaccinated in the middle of June when the under 30s are getting their call.

Totally agree with all that.

I'm hopeful, maybe in a naive way, that it will work out. Most people are pragmatic enough to realise we have to roll with the punches, especially after the 15 months we've had. I think the carrot of just getting one jab will mitigate much of the "they're getting it before me" for people. Communication and getting the message out there that all the vaccines work will be massive.

FlubberJones

Polar101 wrote: »

Also, if it's OK to give J&J to under 50s if a random condition is met, why is it being restricted in the first place?

In any case, at least many people in their 50s would be fully vaccinated pretty quickly, since there's only one dose.

51 here and wondering how long it will be before I can actually book an appointment online... anyone any ideas on this? Or is it dependent on too many factors to make an informed response.

PhilOssophy

PropJoe10 wrote: »

And another thing - why is AstraZeneca now acceptable for over 50s whereas previously it was only to be used on over 60s? What has changed in the medical advice there? All this is doing is creating doubt and confusion. We really aren't capable of doing anything right.

This!!!! Why are we restricting its use, when some of the top medical institutions in the world are saying it is safe? Do NIAC claim to know more than the FDA and the EMA?

If we are saying over 50s because it fits with the number of vaccines, then that is just the sort of twisted logic which creates hesitation.

Lumen

PhilOssophy wrote: »

I have previously defended scientists, etc on this thread, and do favour a cautious approach for the most part, but how many other lives will be lost due to missed cancer screening, missed operations, etc because of this arseing around?

None? Why would lives be lost?

A few thick whiners are deferring their vaccines because they're too lazy/stupid to understand that all the vaccines are good, but if they defer they're only hurting themselves because other people will take them instead.

As far as I can tell there isn't any hold up. We have a little over a weeks supply of vaccines in fridges, and have done for a while.

All that's happening is that queues are being shunted around. A bit like when you're in the supermarket queue and you feel aggrieved that another one is going faster, it makes no difference in aggregate.

Russman

PropJoe10 wrote: »

We're the only country to limit use of this J&J vaccine,

No, we're not.

Strazdas

is_that_so wrote: »

If the J&J advice had been suggested by Donnelly we'd laugh at him and it has the potential to cause a lot of grief with its very vague whatever you're having yourself. We also know the risk of depending on AZ for any numbers. You'd like it to work out but bumpy road may be an understatement and we really don't want to see half the over 50s unvaccinated in the middle of June when the under 30s are getting their call.

I think the logical thing to do would be to give the over 50s whatever is available rather than target them with one vaccine. Being fixated on there being 600k J & J doses and 600k people in that cohort is messy and potentially very problematic (what would happen if the J & J doses failed to arrive in June?). By giving them a first dose of every vaccine available, you would be able to mostly clear them and move straight down to the 40s and then 30s.

KrustyUCC

Yet then you will have left over J&J and AZ that can't be used on those 40s and 30s if you the Pfizer and Moderna that they can use on 50-69 year olds

Diarmuid

Russman wrote: »

Yeah, but you've others with restrictions too, its not just us in fairness. If 50 is true for us, we'd have one of the lowest restrictions from what I can see:
Spain 70-79
France 55+
Italy 60+
Iceland 60+

Its so subjective that there's likely no definitive "right" or "wrong" answer, but every country's version of NIAC will come to its own decision.

I don't know about other countries but France isn't restricting it to over 55. They are currently vaccinating the over 55s so maybe that's where the confusion has come in.

is_that_so

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Yet then you will have left over J&J and AZ that can't be used on those 40s and 30s if you the Pfizer and Moderna that they can use on 50-69 year olds

This is where the J&J "nothing else available" clause will be invoked!

ixoy

PropJoe10 wrote: »

We're the only country to limit use of this J&J vaccine,

Not true at all. Other countries have limited it, e.g. Italy to over 60s.

Russman

Strazdas wrote: »

I think the logical thing to do would be to give the over 50s whatever is available rather than target them with one vaccine. Being fixated on there being 600k J & J doses and 600k people in that cohort is messy and potentially very problematic (what would happen if the J & J doses failed to arrive in June?). By giving them a first dose of every vaccine available, you would be able to mostly clear them and move straight down to the 40s and then 30s.

Exactly this, the simple thing is to fire away as planned, if some of the 50s are still not done by the time J&J arrives, then fine, horse it into them. If it means that come end of June, the 50s are done and we've half a million shots of J&J arriving, donate it to COVAX. In the meantime, keep jabbing people.

PhilOssophy

Lumen wrote: »

None? Why would lives be lost?

The longer hospital beds and HSE resources are taken up with Covid patients, the more others who are waiting for treatments lose out.

We need to end this thing ASAP and creating a vaccine hesitancy or the "I'm getting the worst vaccine so I am not taking it" mantra is the worst way to do it.

Strazdas

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Yet then you will have left over J&J and AZ that can't be used on those 40s and 30s if you the Pfizer and Moderna that they can use on 50-69 year olds

They would have to cross that bridge when they come to it. Leaving perhaps hundreds of thousands of people in their fifties waiting until mid to late June (two months away) for a first dose of a vaccine seems no sort of a solution.

And as I said, what would happen if there was a sudden problem with delivery of the J & J doses in June and they don't arrive?

SusanC10

Completely confused as to how this latest news on the use of J&J and AZ will affect the rollout here.

Husband and I both aged in 45-49 bracket. No medical conditions. Roughly when can we expect to get our 1st doses ? And how does this news affect us - will we get them earlier or later ?

MerlinSouthDub

I see Belgium got 396,630 Pfizer vaccines yesterday (this was expected)

That would be about 170,000 here. Should be a busy, busy week for vaccinating!

https://covid-vaccinatie.be/en/doses-delivered

is_that_so

SusanC10 wrote: »

Completely confused as to how this latest news on the use of J&J and AZ will affect the rollout here.

Husband and I both aged in 45-49 bracket. No medical conditions. Roughly when can we expect to get our 1st doses ? And how does this news affect us - will we get them earlier or later ?

Probably June but could register earlier. I guess it depends when they start the over 50s and add 3-4 weeks to that.

MerlinSouthDub

LarryBird wrote: »

They'd one job and it was not to make an arse of this, one job.

When this is all said and done serious questions have to be asked about the asshats running the show.

What specifically have they made an arse of in relation to vaccinations? Going along at a great pace now, and looking good to have 80% done by end of June

Strazdas

SusanC10 wrote: »

Completely confused as to how this latest news on the use of J&J and AZ will affect the rollout here.

Husband and I both aged in 45-49 bracket. No medical conditions. Roughly when can we expect to get our 1st doses ? And how does this news affect us - will we get them earlier or later ?

A hard one to estimate Susan, but if the plan is to have the bulk of the adult population done by the end of June, I could see you registering on the portal in May, so not 'too' far away.

The big unknown is what they intend to do with people in their 50s and just what vaccines they will give them apart from J & J.

titan18

Strazdas wrote: »

They would have to cross that bridge when they come to it. Leaving perhaps hundreds of thousands of people in their fifties waiting until mid to late June (two months away) for a first dose of a vaccine seems no sort of a solution.

And as I said, what would happen if there was a sudden problem with delivery of the J & J doses in June and they don't arrive?

It would seem very unfair if you were telling 60-69 just AZ for you and nothing else but allow 50-59 get Pfizer when they have the same vaccines available to them as 60-69.

Should split the groups imo and once groups 4 and 7 are done (probably another 3-4 weeks anyway), move on to 40-49 then with them and have 50-69 as a separate group. It likely means a 59 year is getting a vaccine sooner than original plan and a 50 year old is waiting a bit longer but so be it.

Otherwise you need to allow for Pfizer being given to all from 50-69 and we end up with unused vaccines in June and it takes us longer to get everyone vaccinated.

Russman

Diarmuid wrote: »

I don't know about other countries but France isn't restricting it to over 55. They are currently vaccinating the over 55s so maybe that's where the confusion has come in.

Fair enough. I had just done a quick google to see if there were any others.


Took it from here
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/apr/22/coronavirus-johnson-eu-states-begin-using-single-dose-covid-vaccine

"France, which has received 200,000 doses of the J&J shot, will begin using them from Saturday, a government spokesman said, adding that there was “no question” of the country abandoning either J&J or AstraZeneca.

The country’s health authority, HAS, earlier this month approved the J&J vaccine for use in people aged 55 and over, the same age limit it had imposed on the AstraZeneca shot, and is expected to reaffirm that restriction by Friday."

Zipppy

I'm very high risk, in my 50s.
two weeks ago had vaccination cancelled as apparently I couldn't get AZ cos it wasn't safe for my age group.
Now it appears that today we'll be told it is in fact safe..with no further data utilised except 'ah sure it'll be grand'

So 2 weeks on, no vaccine, no word, no sign of one....pathetic shambles...

FlubberJones

Strazdas wrote: »

A hard one to estimate Susan, but if the plan is to have the bulk of the adult population done by the end of June, I could see you registering on the portal in May, so not 'too' far away.

The big unknown is what they intend to do with people in their 50s and just what vaccines they will give them apart from J & J.

This is my concern, I'm 51 and wondering when I will get the chance to book one... Happy to take whatever is offered.

KrustyUCC

Strazdas wrote: »

They would have to cross that bridge when they come to it. Leaving perhaps hundreds of thousands of people in their fifties waiting until mid to late June (two months away) for a first dose of a vaccine seems no sort of a solution.

And as I said, what would happen if there was a sudden problem with delivery of the J & J doses in June and they don't arrive?

To use your own phrase you cross that bridge when it comes to it

Using up all four vaccines on 50-69 year olds and having half of vaccines not recommended for 49 and under is no solution either

After vulnerable and second doses no further Pfizer and Moderna should be used in 50+

NIAC have made life very difficult for the HSE in fairness

I only hope it won't cause us to miss the June targets and also cause an even more drawn-out easing of restrictions

Christy42

Zipppy wrote: »

I'm very high risk, in my 50s.
two weeks ago had vaccination cancelled as apparently I couldn't get AZ cos it wasn't safe for my age group.
Now it appears that today we'll be told it is in fact safe..with no further data utilised except 'ah sure it'll be grand'

So 2 weeks on, no vaccine, no word, no sign of one....pathetic shambles...

They have had an extra 2 weeks of observation of those who got the AZ vaccine. For those that did suffer side effects how quick was it? I k ow J&J was about a week or two so they likely wanted to collect the data from those that had the vaccine without making it worse.

is_that_so

Zipppy wrote: »

I'm very high risk, in my 50s.
two weeks ago had vaccination cancelled as apparently I couldn't get AZ cos it wasn't safe for my age group.
Now it appears that today we'll be told it is in fact safe..with no further data utilised except 'ah sure it'll be grand'

So 2 weeks on, no vaccine, no word, no sign of one....pathetic shambles...

If you're in group 4 or 7 that shouldn't apply to you. Group 4 seem to be getting Pfizer.

Theboinkmaster

bodhrandude wrote: »

Yeah, thanks funnydoggy I'm just glad to be getting a vaccination, I don't care what it is.

Then why did you say which vaccine you received or add smiley face...

bodhrandude wrote: »

I'm getting Pfizer.

Lumen

PhilOssophy wrote: »

The longer hospital beds and HSE resources are taken up with Covid patients, the more others who are waiting for treatments lose out.

We need to end this thing ASAP and creating a vaccine hesitancy or the "I'm getting the worst vaccine so I am not taking it" mantra is the worst way to do it.

Even if there was significant vaccine hesitancy (which AFAIK there isn't any evidence of) vaccine hesitancy is only an issue when we are not supply constrained, which won't be until the end of the summer.

I'm not saying it's good, but it makes little difference for now, since the doses will just move from one person to another. Claiming otherwise is hyperbolic.

Theboinkmaster

VonLuck wrote: »

Surely they must have been saying it tongue in cheek, right? I can't even picture a scenario where someone would belittle another based on the kind of vaccine they received!

Welcome to Ireland....my mom got AZ last week and her brother told her he got his the week before.

He said "i got the better one - the Pfizer"

Hardly surprising TBH, there's a lot of that going around. You'd be very naïve to think otherwise.

crossman47

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Welcome to Ireland....my mom got AZ last week and her brother told her he got his the week before.

He said "i got the better one - the Pfizer"

Hardly surprising TBH, there's a lot of that going around. You'd be very naïve to think otherwise.

The brother is just displaying his ignorance so let him at it.