Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

Amirani

robinph wrote: »

The risk of getting run over by a drunk driver whilst on a long haul flight is zero, and the risk of the windows falling out of the plane you are in causing catastrophic decompression whilst crossing the road is also zero. That doesn't mean you can't compare the relative risks of each incident happen in the situation where they are actually going to happen though.

One type of clot is commonly fatal or at least debilitating. The other one isn't.

In that context it doesn't make much sense to compare the relative risks of acquiring distinct illnesses. If you want to compare relative risk than compare fatalities from flight-acquired clots to fatalities from vaccine acquired clots.

Wolf359f

Wolf359f wrote: »

What's the risk of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis from a long haul flight? If you're going to compare.... Maybe compare the same type of clot?
The AZ rate in certainly increasing in occurrence as younger and younger people are vaccinated with it.
Ontario rate is higher than the UK rate now.

Exactly. They are different types of clots, the CVSTs being more difficult to treat and having a much higher fatality rate.

In Ontario it's now 1 in 60,000.

OwlsZat

Lumen wrote: »

The risk of veinous thrombosis after a long-haul flight is approximately 1 in 5000.

The risk of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis or splanchnic vein thrombosis from the AZ vaccine is approximately 1 in 150,000, and that's including all the people who would have got it anyway.

So crudely, the worst case is that a single long haul flight is about as risky as being vaccinated 30 times with AZ. There's also well known radiation risks from long haul flights.

Yet I have never met anyone who avoids long haul flights because of the health risks.

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/eu-regulator-reviews-reports-rare-nervous-disorder-after-astrazeneca-vaccine-2021-05-07/

Any amusing anecdotes around the risk of developing a rare degenerative nerve disorder by taking the AstraZeneca as well?

As a young non-obese person I certainly wont' be taking AZ when my risk profile is so low.

Russman

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Right here, "a few more weeks"


Like I said your under 50 you won't be offered it anyway. There's 3 vaccines available to your age group, you don't get a choice as to which one you get.

Not to be that guy, but 3 ??
Edit:Including the caveat with J&J I guess ?

Gile_na_gile

The overall incidence of VITT concurs with the much more extensive data from the UK of 1 in 100,000, so it is what it is. AZ benefits outweighs risk until such time that mRNA vaccines are widely available and Covid rates are very low. In the meantime, the current measure favours >40-60 years across Europe including the UK. If you are offered it and don't want it that is your right. It doesn't need to be broadcasted to the world to help you rationalise your decision. You will get an mRNA vaccine eventually, but it is not clear when. Perhaps only a matter of weeks rather than months, but there will be pressure to retain mRNA vaccines for minors in the summer.

Pandiculation

Any indication of when registration will begin for the next age group, which I assume is 40-49 ?

Pandiculation

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Interesting update here: https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0512/1221083-virus-vaccine-rollout/

Finally the media picking up that cohort 7 people are getting left behind and GPs not vaccinating them. Let's hope Reid et al start answering.

That’s really beyond sloppy that this is only being picked up now. There’s been lot of anecdotal evidence of very big differences between different GPs on this in terms of speed of rollout and plenty of posts on social media from people who are complaining that they haven’t been contacted.

It looks like ball was dropped badly for this group and they’re very high priority in terms of risk.

iamwhoiam

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Interesting update here: https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0512/1221083-virus-vaccine-rollout/

Finally the media picking up that cohort 7 people are getting left behind and GPs not vaccinating them. Let's hope Reid et al start answering.

Finally someone is copping on and the HSE better sort it out very soon .
A bit of relief for a lot of stressed people hopefully

revelman

Pandiculation wrote: »

That’s really beyond sloppy that this is only being picked up now. There’s been lot of anecdotal evidence of very big differences between different GPs on this in terms of speed of rollout and plenty of posts on social media from people who are complaining that they haven’t been contacted.

It looks like ball was dropped badly for this group and they’re very high priority in terms of risk.

What I don’t understand is that there have been lots of anecdotal reports of people without underlying conditions being vaccinated when GPs (especially in rural areas) have had excess vaccines. These reports are so numerous that there must be some truth to them. I don’t necessarily have a problem with this but I’m wondering how have these people been categorised? Have they also been categorised as Cohort 4?

iamwhoiam

revelman wrote: »

What I don’t understand is that there have been lots of anecdotal reports of people without underlying conditions being vaccinated when GPs (especially in rural areas) have had excess vaccines. These reports are so numerous that there must be some truth to them. I don’t necessarily have a problem with this but I’m wondering how have these people been categorised? Have they also been categorised as Cohort 4?

And how did it happen when GPs had lists of Cohort 4 and 7 in front of them ?

Scuid Mhór

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Interesting update here: https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0512/1221083-virus-vaccine-rollout/

Finally the media picking up that cohort 7 people are getting left behind and GPs not vaccinating them. Let's hope Reid et al start answering.

What exactly is this article saying?

stephenjmcd

Russman wrote: »

Not to be that guy, but 3 ??
Edit:Including the caveat with J&J I guess ?

Yeah using the "If nothing else available" caveat which will be used a fair bit I'd suspect

Pandiculation

iamwhoiam wrote: »

And how did it happen when GPs had lists of Cohort 4 and 7 in front of them ?

I suspect we’ll have to have an inquiry later in the summer. They’ll just be ploughing on with it now.

What it points out to me is a lack of local public health coordination infrastructure. Our GP system isn’t really a system at all. It’s a bunch of totally free floating, self employed operators, just doing their own thing with very little HSE involvement.

It’s not surprising there are issues like this emerging.

keno-daytrader

FlubberJones wrote: »

Registered this morning, expecting it won't be long before I have the invite for the jab... shame it's not J&J as that would mean I would be in the clear soon... rather than the 12 week wait for the second dose. Hopefully restrictions will ease overall allowing us to travel anyway..

As far as I know over 50's who get AZ are still at 16 weeks for second dose. NIAC crazy solution to "collect more data".

Wolf359f

keno-daytrader wrote: »

As far as I know over 50's who get AZ are still at 16 weeks for second dose. NIAC crazy solution to "collect more data".

Considering the UK had only started second doses of AZ when all this kicked off, it was unknown if the same issue could appear in the second doses.
First update from the UK a few weeks ago had 4 cases in 4mil second doses, last week's update has 6 in 6mil. So no nasty surprises so far. That's data being collected.
Or would you prefer NIAC to just suggest they just jab away and have the person cross their fingers?

Edit: sorry just realised you mean the 50-59 group getting vaccinated this week have the 16 week gap? Yeah that's a bit silly if their first dose benefit outweighs the risk, the second would also. I under the reasoning for the under 50's second dose being delayed.

lastusername

OwlsZat wrote: »

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/eu-regulator-reviews-reports-rare-nervous-disorder-after-astrazeneca-vaccine-2021-05-07/

Any amusing anecdotes around the risk of developing a rare degenerative nerve disorder by taking the AstraZeneca as well?

As a young non-obese person I certainly wont' be taking AZ when my risk profile is so low.

You just wonder is this the start of the effects coming out now. That said, it mentions no causal link between the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines and the heart inflammation reports. Who knows if there will be a link this time next year though?


It seems like if you are in a low risk profile and cases are on a downward trajectory, you might be reluctant to rush to take one at the minute.

Cole

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

What exactly is this article saying?

Glad I'm not alone. I get the overall story, but I'm still left confused...not sure if it's my lack of detailed knowledge of the current system of vaccinations or just plain old bad writing.

i'm sure I'll hear/read a clearer explanation somewhere late.

ACitizenErased

That RTE article sounds like nothing will change to me, they’ll just re-assign some of the cohort 4 as cohort 7

Scuid Mhór

ACitizenErased wrote: »

That RTE article sounds like nothing will change to me, they’ll just re-assign some of the cohort 4 as cohort 7

That's exactly how I read it too, beefing up the numbers in cohort 7.

iamwhoiam

ACitizenErased wrote: »

That RTE article sounds like nothing will change to me, they’ll just re-assign some of the cohort 4 as cohort 7

At least we know that the HSE are aware that cohort 7 exist . That’s a help .

Wolf359f

ACitizenErased wrote: »

That RTE article sounds like nothing will change to me, they’ll just re-assign some of the cohort 4 as cohort 7

Sounds like that will only happen when they get their second dose, so it's going to make it hard to see any progress and then all of a sudden first and second doses get taken away from cohort 4 and added to cohort 7.

Maybe the figures we see atm for cohort 7 are the ones actually done by GP's? How this wasn't flagged ages ago, I don't know. Was there not a tick box for cohort 7 when they were inputting the data on to the system?

Tim Robbins

iamwhoiam wrote: »

At least we know that the HSE are aware that cohort 7 exist . That’s a help .

I'm surprised the media aren't making more of this. There's quite a lot of very serious conditions there in cohort 7 and hard to understand how come they are not being looked after, while people in their 50's with nothing are being looked after.

revelman

keno-daytrader wrote: »

As far as I know over 50's who get AZ are still at 16 weeks for second dose. NIAC crazy solution to "collect more data".

Every person over 50/60 I know who has recently been vaccinated with AZ has been told to return in 12 weeks.

I think the initial 16 week interval was for younger people (mostly in healthcare) who received AZ some time ago. There was a report somewhere on boards from one of these that they had since been told to get their second dose at 12 weeks.

iamwhoiam

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I'm surprised the media aren't making more of this. There's quite a lot of very serious conditions there in cohort 7 and hard to understand how come they are not being looked after, while people in their 50's with nothing are being looked after.

I personally think cohort 4 and 7 should have been via a portal and done and dusted in MVC’c before the next group was started
GPs and clinic could have mailed their lists to the HSE and had this sorted long before now .

iamwhoiam

revelman wrote: »

Every person over 50/60 I know who has recently been vaccinated with AZ has been told to return in 12 weeks.

I think the initial 16 week interval was for younger people (mostly in healthcare) who received AZ some time ago. There was a report somewhere on boards from one of these that they had since been told to get their second dose at 12 weeks.

Every one i know over 60 who had Az was told the HSE would be in touch after 12 weeks

Cole

Cole wrote: »

Can anyone point me in the direction of the stats for J and J's efficacy against the UK variant?

Thanks

Anyone got anything on this? Seems quite hard to find any data on this.

josip

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I'm surprised the media aren't making more of this. There's quite a lot of very serious conditions there in cohort 7 and hard to understand how come they are not being looked after, while people in their 50's with nothing are being looked after.

Probably nothing more being made of it because it's a diminishing issue. Considering that:

• most Cohort 7 in 60-69 have already received a first dose
• many in 50-59 are now receiving appointments
• some of the 18-49 in Cohort 7 have already received doses as part of Cohort 4

It wouldn't be unreasonable to calculate that half of (and increasing) Cohort 7 are already being looked after.

snotboogie

Numbers were pretty slow coming out of a lot of European countries this week. Today is the first day I can put this together. We have firmly caught up in terms of pace with the rest of the EU but will still almost certainly be the last in Western Europe to hit 40 shots per 100 people. Malta seem to be heading in the same direction as Israel with case numbers. They are down to a 7 day average of 25 daily cases per million. On one hand its good news but on the other hand it emphasises how far we have to go to get there. Even the second best performer in Lithuania are really only halfway towards real suppression of case numbers via vaccination (as can be seen by their current case numbers). Headlines like the number one focus of government shifting from covid to housing seem very premature with this in mind and given we are still last in Western Europe for vaccines administered.

Country per capita Date Reported Ireland Days Behind
Malta 87.5 May 10th
Lithuania 44.5 May 11th 12
Cyprus 44 May 11th 11
Spain 43 May 10th 10
Germany 42.5 May 10th 8
Denmark 42 May 10th 9
Austria 41.5 May 11th 6
Italy 41 May 11th 5
Estonia 41 May 11th 5
Belgium 40.5 May 10th 4
Portugal 40.5 May 11th 4
Luxembourg 40 May 10th 4
Finland 39 May 10th 1
Sweden 39 May 11th 1
France 38.5 May 10th 1
Netherlands 38 May 9th 1
Ireland 38 May 10th 0
Poland 37 May 10th -3
Greece 37 May 11th -3
Slovenia 36 May 11th -5
Czech Rep 35.5 May 11th -6
Slovakia 35 May 11th -7
Romania 31.5 May 10th -13
Croatia 28 May 10th -20
Latvia 22.5 May 11th -32
Bulgaria 14.5 May 11th -48

revelman

Richard Wall on Twitter is now reporting that Ireland has overtaken the U.K. on the daily vaccination rate per 100,000 people. We are at 726 per 100K. The U.K. is at 722.

Edit: Actually, he has updated this. We are at 748 per 100k.

expectationlost

SusanC10 wrote: »

I seem to have missed this idea of delaying the 45-49 Age Group. And only using J&J on this Group.
Husband and I fall into this Category.

I thought that *if* NIAC approved J&J (and AZ) for under 50s, then all 4 approved Vaccines would be used - same as 50+.

The HSE has proposed reducing the age limit for the Johnson & Johnson (J&J) vaccine from 50 to 45 years of age, which would further speed up the vaccination rollout next month, according to government sources.https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hse-pushes-lower-age-limits-single-shot-johnson-johnson-covid-vaccine-b67dqbn5s?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1620543479