Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

stephenjmcd

Flying Fox wrote: »

AZ has been approved for over 50s for the last two weeks.

Deleted already, as I got my 40's and 50's mixed up.

Christ you were quick, the post was only there for about a minute before I copped my mistake haha

Valhallapt

Valhallapt wrote: »

Problem is the government want to tie vaccine into green travel certs. I doubt they’ll be allowed but it would be unfair to deny people the ability to leave the country to see their family as they’re unvaccinated, but not allow those same people to be vaccinated when the vaccine is sitting in a fridge.

If they're determined to use all AZ and J&J stock then it really needs to be opt in.

Allocating them to people in their 40s who have valid concerns, while leaving younger people who want them without access to them, makes no sense.

Cole

Russman wrote: »

I agree. Like you I'd happily take any of them, its just the whole process seems to me to be too skewed towards "lets not waste any J&J". I get that there's a balance to be found between logistics, safety, etc etc., I just think they've become too fixated on the end of June date they promised. Lifting of restrictions is almost irreversible at this point, a huge chunk of vulnerable are protected and I don't think we'll go backwards.

I couldn't agree more. I'm 49 and healthy, so I'm happy enough to take whatever I'm offered. But when the decisions seem to be increasingly based on logistics rather than the previous narrative of 'what's best for certain cohorts/abundance of caution'...well it just makes it all seem a bit hollow. The HSE can't even get the stats on J&J right on their website to at least reassure everyone as best they can.

I'll still take whatever I get...J&J I'm assuming now.

Gile_na_gile

Yeah, it would seem anecdotally they are dishing it out as it comes in with a pref for mRNA <60 and then AZ >60. The posts show more AZ going to >60, which was what my mother and aunt got (late 60s). A retrospective change to >40 for AZ will probably incur a bit of justified moaning, but at least with J&J the clot risk is considerably lower than AZ and there won't be an impact on holiday plans! Also, the early efficacy data on Jannsen/J&J regards variants such as the B.1.351 one was better than AZ but we are lacking better data really.

Cole

Gile_na_gile wrote: »

Yeah, it would seem anecdotally they are dishing it out as it comes in with a pref for mRNA <60 and then AZ >60. The posts show more AZ going to >60, which was what my mother and aunt got (late 60s). A retrospective change to >40 for AZ will probably incur a bit of justified moaning, but at least with J&J the clot risk is considerably lower than AZ and there won't be an impact on holiday plans! Also, the early efficacy data on Jannsen/J&J regards variants such as the B.1.351 one was better than AZ but we are lacking better data really.

But a real lack of data on B.1.1.7...I think. I can't find anything on that.

sekond

SusanC10 wrote: »

I agree with you.

I am female 45 and have niggling doubts about taking AZ. They have increased since I read about the 47 year old woman who died in Slovakia after the AZ Vaccine.

I'm a similar age, with similar niggling doubts (and more specifically about the J&J where my age group seems to be one of the highest risk), and I've already had covid so my personal risk from not getting a vaccine is probably extremely low. That said, I'll take what I'm offered. (And admittedly spend 2 or 3 weeks slightly anxious - I always seem to be the 1% in cases where it's "99% sure that won't happen")

SusanC10

I am female 45 and would have no hesitancy taking Pfizer, Moderna or J&J with a slight and it is slight hesitancy on AZ.
Is anyone else (particularly female aged 40+) feeling that ?
Also, how likely is it that I am offered AZ ?
Based on assumption that NIAC recommends AZ for age 45+.

km79

Be a nice boost ahead of the weekend if us 40 somethings were told we can start registering next week.....

Charles Babbage

Alun wrote: »

Some serious delays at the Aviva MVC late yesterday. My wife had an appointment for 6pm and didn't get her vaccination until 8pm. I had mine there at 9am and was in and out in 30 mins.

There is a fundamental attitude in the HSE that taxpayers should wait for the convenience of its own operations.

revelman

Cole wrote: »

I couldn't agree more. I'm 49 and healthy, so I'm happy enough to take whatever I'm offered. But when the decisions seem to be increasingly based on logistics rather than the previous narrative of 'what's best for certain cohorts/abundance of caution'...well it just makes it all seem a bit hollow. The HSE can't even get the stats on J&J right on their website to at least reassure everyone as best they can.

I'll still take whatever I get...J&J I'm assuming now.

It is easier to sell a tightening of restrictions, as they have done in the U.K. (first to 30+ and then to 40+) than it is to sell a loosening of restrictions as we have done in Ireland (first it was 60+, then 50+ and now possible 40+). Even if we end up with the same restrictions as the U.K., our approach will cause more hesitancy, theoretically at least.

km79

SusanC10 wrote: »

I am female 45 and would have no hesitancy taking Pfizer, Moderna or J&J with a slight and it is slight hesitancy on AZ.
Is anyone else (particularly female aged 40+) feeling that ?
Also, how likely is it that I am offered AZ ?
Based on assumption that NIAC recommends AZ for age 45+.

I am male but that would be my order of preference too
I’ll take what I’m given though !

My main gripe with AZ is length of time between doses. I’m a teacher so I’d like to be fully vaccinated before September . That’s my only issue with possibly receiving AZ

AdamD

Russman wrote: »

I’d guess it’ll be the UK approach. If Leo is talking about everyone being offered a jab by end of June, there won’t be time for pharmacies to be hugely involved I think.

Others will disagree, but the one line in the story I find troubling is:

“Senior sources say that it has been made clear to Niac that such a move would be important for the vaccination programme, which has been hampered by supply shortages and restrictions.”

Personally I think that comes waaay to close to political interfering in what should be a medical decision. I think it should be medical advice first and adjust your plan around that, rather than fulfilling political promises and adjust the medical advice to suit.

Right, but the medical advice seemed to be purely based on an individuals risk of covid vs the vaccine based on their age. It did not bring into account the societal impact of prolonging lockdowns and restrictions due to not using the vacccines we have available to us. Which was completely ridiculous

Valhallapt

Flying Fox wrote: »

If they're determined to use all AZ and J&J stock then it really needs to be opt in.

Allocating them to people in their 40s who have valid concerns, while leaving younger people who want them without access to them, makes no sense.

I'm late 30s and my preference is for J&J, happy to sign whatever waiver is needed. I'll take the first vaccine I am offered, J&J just gets the job done quicker.

revelman

SusanC10 wrote: »

I am female 45 and would have no hesitancy taking Pfizer, Moderna or J&J with a slight and it is slight hesitancy on AZ.
Is anyone else (particularly female aged 40+) feeling that ?
Also, how likely is it that I am offered AZ ?
Based on assumption that NIAC recommends AZ for age 45+.

I understand your hesitancy, Susan but I don’t understand how you can distinguish J&J from AZ. Both are associated with the rare blood clot. This makes sense since they are similar vaccines. Fewer cases have been reported with J&J but that doesn’t necessarily mean J&J has less risk than AZ. For one thing, far fewer J&J vaccines have been administered. Secondly, I have a sneaking suspicion that for various reasons, including socio-economic, reporting of side effects might not be as good in the USA as it is in Germany, Norway or even the U.K. In the fullness of time, I wouldn’t be surprised if we find similar clotting rates in AZ and J&J, albeit both will be incredibly rare. Disclaimer: this is just the opinion of an armchair layperson!

hmmm

whiz wrote: »

U.S. health officials said the number of confirmed cases of a rare but serious blood clot syndrome among people who received Johnson & Johnson's Covid-19 vaccine has risen to 28, but that the shot's benefits still outweigh the risk.

The additional cases of the clot condition, for the first time, included men. Six of the 28 cases were in men, a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention official said Wednesday in a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a panel of doctors and public-health officials advising the CDC on vaccine policy. Three of the people with the clot condition have died.

Further down it says that this was from 8.7 million shots so far.

That's one death in 2.9 million.

And the thing I keep coming back to on J&J is that it is single shot and done. I think the convenience is a big deal, and will be hugely important when trying to convince younger groups to get vaccinated. This is an important vaccine.

Even if you restricted it just to males over 18 that'd be enough. Restricting it to over 50s across the board looks excessively risk averse in my opinion, and is unhelpful as we are trying to close out a pandemic in this country.

Cole

revelman wrote: »

I understand your hesitancy, Susan but I don’t understand how you can distinguish J&J from AZ. Both are associated with the rare blood clot. This makes sense since they are similar vaccines. Fewer cases have been reported with J&J but that doesn’t necessarily mean J&J has less risk than AZ. For one thing, far fewer J&J vaccines have been administered. Secondly, I have a sneaking suspicion that for various reasons, including socio-economic, reporting of side effects might not be as good in the USA as it is in Germany, Norway or even the U.K. In the fullness of time, I wouldn’t be surprised if we find similar clotting rates in AZ and J&J, albeit both will be incredibly rare. Disclaimer: this is just the opinion of an armchair layperson!

Armchair layperson here too...as a healthy 49 year old male, I'd go for AZ over J&J, as I can't find any data on J&J's efficacy on the B.1.1.7 variant. But before someone jumps on me, I realise I won't have a choice and will take what I'm offered.

Bubbaclaus

Anyone know why almost all the J&J shots seem to be getting allocated against Cohort 1 on the dashboard currently?

Gile_na_gile

Cole wrote: »

But a real lack of data on B.1.1.7...I think. I can't find anything on that.

There should be more data from the US soon given that the B.1.1.7 variant has now taken over there too.
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#variant-proportions

To date, the usual wording is that no data to the contrary has been found, and the presumption remains in favour of J&J being efficacious against this variant but it would be good to see data on this! We used to have a few medics or immunologists commenting but not any longer it seems.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/janssen.html#anchor_1620329438166

Apogee

Clear vaccine effect for 75s (source: Prof Nolan/twitter).

Russman

AdamD wrote: »

Right, but the medical advice seemed to be purely based on an individuals risk of covid vs the vaccine based on their age. It did not bring into account the societal impact of prolonging lockdowns and restrictions due to not using the vacccines we have available to us. Which was completely ridiculous

I don’t think it was ridiculous at all tbh. Obviously purely imo, but lockdowns and restrictions don’t come into the equation at this point in the game. We’re done with them, even if there was delay in the program, I can’t see hospitalisations in the younger unvaccinated cohorts increasing at a rate that would require reintroduced restrictions. I could of course be wrong.
We’re now getting into the cohorts that seem to be most at risk (granted small) from the viral vector vaccines, and specifically targeting these groups for those vaccines simply because we have them seems to me a bit unnecessary.

cmred

Hi
i had the first jab on a Monday- only a sore arm afterwards for a few days.
5days later on the Saturday morning - woke with the dreadful metal taste in the mouth that they talk about. Still there now.
Is this normal? or should i have to refer to GP.
thankyou

iguana

SusanC10 wrote: »

I am female 45 and would have no hesitancy taking Pfizer, Moderna or J&J with a slight and it is slight hesitancy on AZ.
Is anyone else (particularly female aged 40+) feeling that ?
Also, how likely is it that I am offered AZ ?
Based on assumption that NIAC recommends AZ for age 45+.

I'm a 42 year old woman who almost certainly had (long) Covid a year ago and I have very mixed feeling about my current risks. While I know natural immunity isn't necessarily lasting and my immune system is still not at 100% as I have lasting symptoms, my fear of the virus causing severe illness isn't really there anymore. I'd strongly prefer an MRNA vaccine, which is the opposite to how I felt a year ago. In fact even a month or so ago I'd have preferred J&J for the one and done of it. Having NIAC advice change due to what we have on hand, rather than new safety information is the opposite of reassuring.

I'm well aware that the risk of the ad-virus vaccines is low to me but I feel the risks of Covid are low too and that the abundance of caution is thrown to the wind because, "this is what we have now and it's your turn, so actually it's grand after all." Obviously I'll still take what I'm offered but I will feel a bit p!ssed off and worried if it's an ad-virus vector. Especially as I have had issues with low blood pressure for decades which may be a factor in the clotting problem.

Delta2113

Anybody a link to actually log in to check if I registered correctly with the HSE?

Yes I got e-mail and a text message but after checking the text message again my e-mail address is not exactly the same as I registered.

Turtwig

Yeah I'm kind of the same page here as Russ. Given the plentiful supply of other vaccines and that Ireland is reopening I'm not sure the social harm caused from further restrictions outweighs the risks of the viral vector vaccines.

We know that the adverse outcomes from the vaccines is somewhere between 1 in 50,000 to 1 in 100,000. To justify the social harm we have to be confident that there would be more impact to society from the delay in the relaxation of restrictions than the vaccines causing adverse events. While it's not fully quantified we have a very good idea what the likelihood and impact from the vaccination will be. To justify the social harm argument you need to show that the expected quality of life and anticipated years of life lost would be greater from the delay in the relaxation of restrictions than they would from the vaccine.

freshpopcorn

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Does anybody know can the send people from the same area to different Vaccine clinics originally people from my area were being called to Mallow but now some are after getting an appointment for one of the one's in Cork City.

I found out the answer to my question.
The Mallow Center opened later in April and they have a back log. They hope to send people in the low 60’s to various centers in Cork, Waterford and even Kerry. So, they can move into the 50’s next week.

PCeeeee

hmmm wrote: »

Further down it says that this was from 8.7 million shots so far.

That's one death in 2.9 million.

And the thing I keep coming back to on J&J is that it is single shot and done. I think the convenience is a big deal, and will be hugely important when trying to convince younger groups to get vaccinated. This is an important vaccine.

Even if you restricted it just to males over 18 that'd be enough. Restricting it to over 50s across the board looks excessively risk averse in my opinion, and is unhelpful as we are trying to close out a pandemic in this country.

Does the single shot of J&J mean half the risk? Are both AZ shots as likely to trigger the clotting issue?

secman

Delta2113 wrote: »

Anybody a link to actually log in to check if I registered correctly with the HSE?

Yes I got e-mail and a text message but after checking the text message again my e-mail address is not exactly the same as I registered.

Go to the portal as if you were registering and at some point you will see an option to log in as already registeted. That part of logging in is very poorly designed, you will receive a text with a code to enter your portal page.

Turtwig

PCeeeee wrote: »

Does the single shot of J&J mean half the risk? Are both AZ shots as likely to trigger the clotting issue?

It's too early to tell yet as dosing interval for AZ is 3 months minimum. Data from the UK would suggest the more doses you get the greater your risk.

However, it's too early to draw any firm conclusion there.

PCeeeee

Turtwig wrote: »

It's too early to tell yet as dosing interval for AZ is 3 months minimum. Data from the UK would suggest the more doses you get the greater your risk.

However, it's too early to draw any firm conclusion there.

Thanks Turtwig. Interesting.

Turtwig

Turtwig wrote: »

It's too early to tell yet as dosing interval for AZ is 3 months minimum. Data from the UK would suggest the more doses you get the greater your risk.

However, it's too early to draw any firm conclusion there.

Yeah, the latest UK yellow card data shows six cases following a second dose. So it's happening, but as you say it's far too early to know if it's a similar risk level to the first shot.

There should be updated UK data coming this afternoon.