Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

paw patrol

Deleted User wrote: »

I think its clear you dont "get it"

of course I don't , that's why I'm here.

SusanC10

Rebelbrowser wrote: »

As a mid 40 something I'm not pleased with mood music this morning. Talk of approving AZ and J&J for us (I.e more vaccines available for us) but simultaneously saying it won't start for a while and will take all of June. Sounds to me like they are deliberately slowing us up to allow all the AZ and J&J get delivered so they can use all that supply on us. Yesterday I thought I'd be getting Pfizer in 3 weeks, now I reckon it could be AZ in 4 or 5 weeks. I know which I'd prefer....

Tbh, I am finding this lack of certainty a bit draining. NIAC took a while to issue their advice on the use of J&J and AZ which is fair enough as to my mind it meant that they properly considered it. But now that they have issued it, I don't understand why it is taking so long to make a decision and enlighten the public.

As I said earlier, I don't believe that the portal will open this week for 40-49 and I agree with you and feel that they are deliberately stalling now.

rn

As soon as the portal is open, I'll apply. I'd be happiest with phizer, but will not object to whatever they chose to give me.

To be fair to NIAC, the vaccine rollout is really in its infancy worldwide. There's new findings emerging regularly and they have to be supported by evidence. That takes time to gather and study.

Call me Al

podgeandrodge wrote: »

Indo: "Both vaccines can now be used in people over 40 but anyone who is offered one in this age group will be asked for their consent after the very small risk of unusual blood clots is explained.

The vaccines will also be used in those over 40 where alternatives are not available".

Am I reading this wrong?

But there is an alternative available. It mightn't be available on that particular day in the MVC I'll be allocated to though.

So what will happen if I say that I don't consent and I want a MRNA vaccine?

duffman13

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Green lighted expected for AZ & JJ to be used in over 40s.

Not sure why they mention the consent part, that's already in place and has been for a while

https://m.independent.ie/world-news/coronavirus/green-light-for-j-and-j-and-astrazeneca-vaccination-for-those-in-40-49-range-40432452.html

I used to subscribe to the indo for a while. Since Covid they've been full of sensationalist guessing tbh. Not very sensational this time but I find it difficult to take them seriously as a news source. Mind you, I dont know who I'd trust anymore Gavin Reilly and possibly Fergal Bowers seem to be decent from a reporting POV on it

SusanC10

Call me Al wrote: »

But there is an alternative available. It mightn't be available on that particular day in the MVC I'll be allocated to though.

So what will happen if I say that I don't consent and I want a MRNA vaccine?

I would like to know that too.

Lucas Hood

duffman13 wrote: »

I used to subscribe to the indo for a while. Since Covid they've been full of sensationalist guessing tbh. Not very sensational this time but I find it difficult to take them seriously as a news source. Mind you, I dont know who I'd trust anymore Gavin Reilly and possibly Fergal Bowers seem to be decent from a reporting POV on it

Nah.

ddarcy

SusanC10 wrote: »

Tbh, I am finding this lack of certainty a bit draining. NIAC took a while to issue their advice on the use of J&J and AZ which is fair enough as to my mind it meant that they properly considered it. But now that they have issued it, I don't understand why it is taking so long to make a decision and enlighten the public.

As I said earlier, I don't believe that the portal will open this week for 40-49 and I agree with you and feel that they are deliberately stalling now.

Really the 40-49 group should be opening on Wednesday/ Thursday at latest this week. Cabinet meets tomorrow, so unless they decide against using AZ or JJ in the 40-49 group, then it should open up this week. If they do decide against, then the HSE will probably have to replan on what to do, so may need more time.

Given the advice this is entirely possible. I’m guessing that the AG is probably having a look into the advice as well.

duffman13

Call me Al wrote: »

But there is an alternative available. It mightn't be available on that particular day in the MVC I'll be allocated to though.

So what will happen if I say that I don't consent and I want a MRNA vaccine?

Youll get an appointment which will state what vaccine and location. You can request a new appointment once, you may get a different vaccine on new appointment but hard to know. If you reject a 2nd appointment your out of luck from what the HSE are saying

Is it specifically an mRNA vaccine you want?

stephenjmcd

duffman13 wrote: »

I used to subscribe to the indo for a while. Since Covid they've been full of sensationalist guessing tbh. Not very sensational this time but I find it difficult to take them seriously as a news source. Mind you, I dont know who I'd trust anymore Gavin Reilly and possibly Fergal Bowers seem to be decent from a reporting POV on it

Some things are over the top and for clicks but when there's commonality between them and another paper (Irish times) both reporting the same thing I'd have it pretty much nailed on that its accurate

Russman

podgeandrodge wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if they, operationally, decided AZ was primarily for second doses and J&J was a choice for the 40-50. Plenty will take J&J for the convenience factor of 1 shot, and those that are reticent will be allowed refuse and get an alternative date (maybe at the end of 40-50 grouping) for Pfizer etc, rather than make it look like they are making it like a sanction.

They can't really up the "consent" angle and hit you if you don't - they want everyone vaccinated, so if you don't consent, you'll have to get another vaccine - when they can.

But there is probably more AZ ordered than just 2nd doses?

I think it'll be interesting to see what terms/conditions attach. As someone mentioned earlier, the consent has always been a thing so its hard to know what the "new" item might be. Following on, it will be even more interesting to see how they would deal with those who don't opt in (if its an opt in model), which no doubt there will be some.

I'll absolutely take whatever I'm offered, but its hard not to have the feeling that the slightly less safe vaccines are being farmed off onto the group slightly more vulnerable to the risks, purely in the interests of logistics and the political fear of telling the 50s to wait a couple of weeks. Like I say, I'll take whatever, but when you see countries like Australia and the Nordics etc deciding not to use or severely limit the use of J&J/AZ, its very odd to me that NIAC would loosen our restrictions at the same time.

paw patrol

Van.Bosch wrote: »

I will be applying for it as soon as I’m allowed.

and that's fine. . I'm actually not bothered what a person does - they should do what they feel is best. Once vaccines aren't mandatory which is a different issue.

May I ask if it's not too personal - why?
Do you think you need it? Or is it just the right thing to do?

I'm intrigued as to people's motivations. I understood the older folk were afraid of getting covid and of course people with medical conditions too.
But as we move down the categories to where people would in general be more robust in health I'm curious to people's motivations, either way.
Also if the rates of take-up will drop significantly?

The people under 50 would also be the category of those with kids in school. It would be a good indicator of any black lash against the vaccine being issues to kids.

My own view is I don't need it , I'm in rude health (i hope) but I'm fit and strong and happy to rely on my immune system.
I also previously had covid and it was unpleasant but fine overall - few days of a temp and a cough with the odd headache. paracetamol was all i took

stephenjmcd

SusanC10 wrote: »

I would like to know that too.

Reject the first appointment, you'll get another appointment, could be same vaccine, might be a different one, luck of the draw.

Refuse the 2nd time and you won't be getting another offer from the HSE for a while. They'll keep going.

Call me Al

duffman13 wrote: »

Youll get an appointment which will state what vaccine and location. You can request a new appointment once, you may get a different vaccine on new appointment but hard to know. If you reject a 2nd appointment your out of luck from what the HSE are saying

Is it specifically an mRNA vaccine you want?

Yes, or J&J.

It'll be interesting to see, if they go ahead with consent, if they so so via the.portal.

But I don't believe they'll follow through with a "2 strike you're out" approach.
They need people vaccinated so they can't start to strong arm people like that.

JRant

Russman wrote: »

I think it'll be interesting to see what terms/conditions attach. As someone mentioned earlier, the consent has always been a thing so its hard to know what the "new" item might be. Following on, it will be even more interesting to see how they would deal with those who don't opt in (if its an opt in model), which no doubt there will be some.

I'll absolutely take whatever I'm offered, but its hard not to have the feeling that the slightly less safe vaccines are being farmed off onto the group slightly more vulnerable to the risks, purely in the interests of logistics and the political fear of telling the 50s to wait a couple of weeks. Like I say, I'll take whatever, but when you see countries like Australia and the Nordics etc deciding not to use or severely limit the use of J&J/AZ, its very odd to me that NIAC would loosen our restrictions at the same time.

If, and that's a big If, it's allowed for the 40-50 cohort with consent then there's a very real possibility most in that age group will just decline the AZ for no other reason than the length of time it takes to be fully vaccinated. Even if someone has to wait till their cohort is finished to get a different vaccines they will still be fully vaccinated long before someone getting AZ. It's a no win situation for the HSE here in my opinion.

SusanC10

paw patrol wrote: »

and that's fine. . I'm actually not bothered what a person does - they should do what they feel is best. Once vaccines aren't mandatory which is a different issue.

May I ask if it's not too personal - why?
Do you think you need it? Or is it just the right thing to do?

I'm intrigued as to people's motivations. I understood the older folk were afraid of getting covid and of course people with medical conditions too.
But as we move down the categories to where people would in general be more robust in health I'm curious to people's motivations, either way.
Also if the rates of take-up will drop significantly?

The people under 50 would also be the category of those with kids in school. It would be a good indicator of any black lash against the vaccine being issues to kids.

My own view is I don't need it , I'm in rude health (i hope) but I'm fit and strong and happy to rely on my immune system.
I also previously had covid and it was unpleasant but fine overall - few days of a temp and a cough with the odd headache. paracetamol was all i took

I am mid-40s. With kids of school-going age. I will be vaccinated for 2 main reasons - I don't want to get Covid and I believe that getting vaccinated will help us all to get out of this.
While I probably could be fitter, I don't have any health conditions. But a friend who I would have considered much fitter than I am, contracted the virus in January. She still struggles with fatigue and breathlessness - finds it hard to get to the top of the stairs in her own house.

SusanC10

Call me Al wrote: »

Yes, or J&J.

It'll be interesting to see, if they go ahead with consent, if they so so via the.portal.

But I don't believe they'll follow through with a "2 strike you're out" approach.
They need people vaccinated so they can't start to strong arm people like that.

Where have you seen that you can reject the 1st appointment but not the 2nd without bring put to the back of the line ?

Thebeast078

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Reject the first appointment, you'll get another appointment, could be same vaccine, might be a different one, luck of the draw.

Refuse the 2nd time and you won't be getting another offer from the HSE for a while. They'll keep going.

Does this not seem a bit unfair. You may be offered a vaccine that 2 weeks ago was not considered safe for your age group. If you are offered AZ or J&J and do not consent based on you believe it is not safe, surely then you should be offered an alternative which in this case would be one of the other 2.

Don't get me wrong, I will take what is offered but just seems that the advice is one thing but in reality has anything really changed when it comes to what you are offered?

Russman

Purely hypothesising and speculating, but if, as Stephen mentioned earlier, the likelihood is that most of the AZ will go on second doses (seems reasonable), and there was some form of Opt In for J&J, I wonder what people in their 40s would do if the choice was J&J now or Pfizer in a week, month, two months etc ? Where would the line be ?
Not sure for me, would I wait a week for an mRNA ? Absolutely. Would I wait a month ? Probably not.

MrStuffins

paw patrol wrote: »

My own view is I don't need it , I'm in rude health (i hope) but I'm fit and strong and happy to rely on my immune system.

Do you think that if most of the country is vaccinated, that Covid will be reduced and the economy & society can open up once again?

Do you have any loved-ones or friends who could be in mortal danger by passing Covid to them?

SusanC10

Russman wrote: »

Purely hypothesising and speculating, but if, as Stephen mentioned earlier, the likelihood is that most of the AZ will go on second doses (seems reasonable), and there was some form of Opt In for J&J, I wonder what people in their 40s would do if the choice was J&J now or Pfizer in a week, month, two months etc ? Where would the line be ?
Not sure for me, would I wait a week for an mRNA ? Absolutely. Would I wait a month ? Probably not.

That sums it up for me too.

Call me Al

SusanC10 wrote: »

Where have you seen that you can reject the 1st appointment but not the 2nd without bring put to the back of the line ?

I haven't.
But some here are saying the HSE are saying this is the case.
I'd be interested to know how they can have people not give consent for AZ but then offer it to them a 2nd time anyway.
If that's the approach they take.

Russman

Thebeast078 wrote: »

Does this not seem a bit unfair. You may be offered a vaccine that 2 weeks ago was not considered safe for your age group. If you are offered AZ or J&J and do not consent based on you believe it is not safe, surely then you should be offered an alternative which in this case would be one of the other 2.

Don't get me wrong, I will take what is offered but just seems that the advice is one thing but in reality has anything really changed when it comes to what you are offered?

Yeah, it seems like they want the part of the US advice that allows unrestricted use, but don't want the part about choice.

podgeandrodge

Call me Al wrote: »

But there is an alternative available. It mightn't be available on that particular day in the MVC I'll be allocated to though.

So what will happen if I say that I don't consent and I want a MRNA vaccine?

I can't see them offering you an alternative immediately - a significant amount of people, if that was known, would automatically refuse AZ/J&J, if they thought they'd get MRNA within a day or 2 - what's to lose. There'd have to be a quantifiable delay to avoid that surely?

Would seem more likely to allow you say you don't consent, and inform you that you will be offered another "in due course"..

SusanC10

Call me Al wrote: »

I haven't.
But some here are saying the HSE are saying this is the case.
I'd be interested to know how they can have people not give consent for AZ but then offer it to them a 2nd time anyway.
If that's the approach they take.

I think I replied to you instead of Stephen by accident!

stephenjmcd

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Reject the first appointment, you'll get another appointment, could be same vaccine, might be a different one, luck of the draw.

Refuse the 2nd time and you won't be getting another offer from the HSE for a while. They'll keep going.

If this was the approach, I don't think they would be taking so long to announce the advice. It looks like there are some kind of conditions being attached.

Telling people in their 40s that it's potentially AZ or nothing (depending on the luck of the draw), even though that age group has one of the highest risks for clots, is just plain wrong. If they don't offer an alternative, they'll have a significant number of people going unvaccinated. That's not in anyone's interest.

JRant

Russman wrote: »

Purely hypothesising and speculating, but if, as Stephen mentioned earlier, the likelihood is that most of the AZ will go on second doses (seems reasonable), and there was some form of Opt In for J&J, I wonder what people in their 40s would do if the choice was J&J now or Pfizer in a week, month, two months etc ? Where would the line be ?
Not sure for me, would I wait a week for an mRNA ? Absolutely. Would I wait a month ? Probably not.

There's a very positive tradeoff to taking the J&J now versus AZ. One and done for that cohort makes a huge dent in the numbers left to be vaccinated and takes the pressure somewhat off the mRNA vaccines for the under 40's allowing them to be done quicker.

Giving AZ to the under 50's now is going to be a tough sell. NIAC were very clear of the risks of giving that vaccine to under 50's and nothing has changed since then. I will say, the risks are very small but when they have other vaccines available but decided for to not delay the over 50's for a few weeks to allow stocks arrive to do them then they have made their own bed really.

stephenjmcd

Flying Fox wrote: »

If this was the approach, I don't think they would be taking so long to announce the advice. It looks like there are some kind of conditions being attached.

Telling people in their 40s that it's potentially AZ or nothing (depending on the luck of the draw), even though that age group has one of the highest risks for clots, is just plain wrong. If they don't offer an alternative, they'll have a significant number of people going unvaccinated. That's not in anyone's interest.

Its already the approach, 2 chances to change.

What's taking its time is the operational aspect and that's not surprising, sure they haven't got any computers to plan the whole thing out on. Sure HSE cold chain can't access their emails, everything is being done by pen and paper.

Until some basic IT function is restored in the HSE they won't be able to firm anything up

Not getting into AZ again tbh we've been around in circles discussing it numerous times. As I posted earlier a quick look at the numbers vaccinated with AZ v the delvieries would show that they'll be kicking off dose 2 in numbers shortly and AZ haven't ramped delvieries up to anything near that would give an excess outside of dose 2.
Chances of someone in their 40s getting AZ, slim to none in my opinion

Russman

Flying Fox wrote: »

If they don't offer an alternative, they'll have a significant number of people going unvaccinated. That's not in anyone's interest.

Its a very fine line they need to walk tbh. They can't run the risk of enough people saying "f-ck it" and refusing, because they'll never get to herd immunity. While, with our current supply levels, they can't really offer an open menu to people either.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the thing to do is put J&J into the pharmacies, let people in their 40s who want it, sign up and get it, and continue with the other vaccines in the MVCs. If you're called for an MVC appointment and you've had J&J in your pharmacy, just cancel the appointment.

JRant

Russman wrote: »

Its a very fine line they need to walk tbh. They can't run the risk of enough people saying "f-ck it" and refusing, because they'll never get to herd immunity. While, with our current supply levels, they can't really offer an open menu to people either.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the thing to do is put J&J into the pharmacies, let people in their 40s who want it, sign up and get it, and continue with the other vaccines in the MVCs. If you're called for an MVC appointment and you've had J&J in your pharmacy, just cancel the appointment.

That would be a very sensible approach and quite a popular one with the public I'd imagine. The threats of only 2 appointments and no more will not really wash with the 40's and under as they are not in the at risk category for COVID. They can just bide their time until they get a vaccine they want or feel safe taking.