Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

celt262

JTMan wrote: »

Irish Times reporting that those aged 18-30 age would get shots before those aged 30-50 under new plan. (I assume they mean 16-30).

There will be war over this.

The logic given seems to be that the younger party and socialise more. This does not sit well with me from a fairness perspective.

Those aged 30-50 are at significant more risk than the younger groups. All other countries, that I am aware of, are doing vaccinations by descending age group.

Wouldn't be happy with that was hopping to get is ASAP to protect the wife who can't get it due to her condition.

is_that_so

JTMan wrote: »

Irish Times reporting that those aged 18-30 age would get shots before those aged 30-50 under new plan. (I assume they mean 16-30).

There will be war over this.

The logic given seems to be that the younger party and socialise more. This does not sit well with me from a fairness perspective.

Those aged 30-50 are at significant more risk than the younger groups. All other countries, that I am aware of, are doing vaccinations by descending age group.

It's not the first time it's been mentioned. It came up as a proposal when NIAC first presented their plans. It also has very solid logic behind it as they are the most socially active group. More socialising - more contacts - potentially more cases - more cases in other groups. If we get what's promised it would be no more than a few weeks' adjustments.

is_that_so

Leftwaffe wrote: »

So, what about this Indian variant that George Lee and co. are frothing from the mouth about? Anything to actually be concerned about?

I’m gone past the variant scare mongering tbh.

It has two mutations but so have others. India's problem is complacency, like what we did at Christmas so "de variants" are having a ball!

celt262

is_that_so wrote: »

It's not the first time it's been mentioned. It came up as a proposal when NIAC first presented their plans. It also has very solid logic behind it as they are the most socially active group. More socialising - more contacts - potentially more cases - more cases in other groups. If we get what's promised it would be no more than a few weeks' adjustments.

They need to stop moving the goalposts this would be the third change to there plan. If they though they got it wrong the first time it should have been in the second plan as it was rumoured. All they are doing is making large groups of the population angry.

delly

Whether you agree with this 'new' plan or not, can we all just agree the incredibly frustrating behaviour of the plan getting changed on a continual basis. It just takes credibility away as a whole.

Personally I don't agree with it, I'm in the 30 - 50 bracket and haven't socialised since this thing kicked off due to my risk factors. However no matter how much I don't socialise, I still have 2nd level school goers that are a potential entry point into the home that I can't do anything about, as are any school going kids.

is_that_so

celt262 wrote: »

They need to stop moving the goalposts this would be the third change to there plan. If they though they got it wrong the first time it should have been in the second plan as it was rumoured. All they are doing is making large groups of the population angry.

It's always been there as a possibility, the problem is that NPHET made all the original decisions around the cohorts in the absence of a body like NIAC who do have the expertise. Regardless of which group goes first we'll still have to behave in the same way for some months yet. As for people getting angry well some people make a habit of getting angry, every day.

Happydays2020

ianobrien wrote: »

Garda were shouting and the prison officers went on a work to rule over the past few days.

I was being a bit pedantic. Civil servants v public servants. Did not realise that about the Guards and prison officers.

celt262

is_that_so wrote: »

It's always been there as a possibility, the problem is that NPHET made all the original decisions around the cohorts in the absence of a body like NIAC who do have the expertise. Regardless of which group goes first we'll still have to behave in the same way for some months yet. As for people getting angry well some people make a habit of getting angry, every day.

I wonder have NIAC more expertise than there counterparts around the world?

Van.Bosch

leahyl wrote: »

And also, believe it or not, there are still single people over 30 (myself included) but sure we wouldn’t be socialising or anything!....if this is true then I honestly don’t know what to say at this stage.

Based of the amount of exemptions for MHQ, people over 30 who are single might get their own cohort!

I joke obviously but all the messages when the other groups changed were “ apart from HCW age is the only factor”, changing that now would be strange.

is_that_so

celt262 wrote: »

I wonder have NIAC more expertise than there counterparts around the world?

Expertise also means making appropriate local choices based on local understanding. This may or may not happen but they will explain it if it does.

eoinbn

JTMan wrote: »

Irish Times reporting that those aged 18-30 age would get shots before those aged 30-50 under new plan. (I assume they mean 16-30).

There will be war over this.

The logic given seems to be that the younger party and socialise more. This does not sit well with me from a fairness perspective.

Those aged 30-50 are at significant more risk than the younger groups. All other countries, that I am aware of, are doing vaccinations by descending age group.

I don't see that happening. Politically it would be a disaster and I doubt there is much science behind it.

Here is a CDC report outlining cases, hospitalisation and deaths by age. This is the US so there data is probably a little different here, however...
Cases numbers are similar in all ages from 18-64.
40-49 are 13 times more likely to die. An 18 year old is hundreds of times less likely to die than a 49 year old.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html

CIARAN_BOYLE

Leftwaffe wrote: »

So, what about this Indian variant that George Lee and co. are frothing from the mouth about? Anything to actually be concerned about?

I’m gone past the variant scare mongering tbh.

Its got the mutations that people think caused the problems seen in about in the californian and South African Variants. If both those mutations are the main problems with those variants it could be the worst variant so far but it might not be.

But we don't know that those mutations are actually the problems with South African and Californian variants.

The Indian variant has been designated as a variant of interest because while both mutations that might be concerning are spotted it hasn't been proven that there's actually an increased risk of transmission or antibody evasion.

Personally I feel there's enough that India should be on the mandatory hotel quarantine list but not enough that anyone should be frothing at the mouth.

Red Silurian

Van.Bosch wrote: »

Based of the amount of exemptions for MHQ, people over 30 who are single might get their own cohort!

I joke obviously but all the messages when the other groups changed were “ apart from HCW age is the only factor”, changing that now would be strange.

You joke yet 75% of our new cases every day are in the under-45 age group... So theoretically if we vaccinate that age group then our figures should drop 75%

is_that_so

eoinbn wrote: »

I don't see that happening. Politically it would be a disaster and I doubt there is much science behind it.

Here is a CDC report outlining cases, hospitalisation and deaths by age. This is the US so there data is probably a little different here however...
Cases numbers are similar in all ages from 18-64.
40-49 are 13 times more likely to die. An 18 year old is hundreds of times less likely to die than a 49 year old.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html

It's really not about hospitalisations at this stage, the under 45 cohort have been continually flagged throughout this as being a sizable proportion of daily cases and of social contacts. If they do go down this route it will be based on the perceived benefits of possibly eliminating that threat.

Gael23

Who would be left waiting if this were to happen?
https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0417/1210409-covid-19-ireland/

celt262

Gael23 wrote: »

Who would be left waiting if this were to happen?
https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0417/1210409-covid-19-ireland/

Have you not read the last 2 pages here ?

is_that_so

Gael23 wrote: »

Who would be left waiting if this were to happen?
https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0417/1210409-covid-19-ireland/

Likely to be the 30-50 age group. Let's not forget that pretty much everyone except the over 70s are still waiting.

harr

So teachers , guards or any frontline workers I include shop workers and carers in that aren’t allowed to jump the Q as it’s more streamlined and efficient to go by age and do everyone in turn and now doing a complete U-turn and saying one particular group might be more important than the other..
An awful lot of teachers , guards and carers would be suddenly put straight to the back of the Q
Talk about mixed messaging, only a couple of days into the new age based system and they are talking about changing already.

Red Silurian

Gael23 wrote: »

Who would be left waiting if this were to happen?
https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0417/1210409-covid-19-ireland/

It could work to drop our case numbers but vaccine hesitancy is highest amongst the younger people as well who tend to follow the bull**** on social media more so the real question is would you reach enough people to slow the virus down considerably

harr wrote: »

So teachers , guards or any frontline workers I include shop workers and carers in that aren’t allowed to jump the Q as it’s more streamlined and efficient to go by age and do everyone in turn and now doing a complete U-turn and saying one particular group might be more important than the other..
An awful lot of teachers , guards and carers would be suddenly put straight to the back of the Q
Talk about mixed messaging, only a couple of days into the new age based system and they are talking about changing already.

they're still going by age, just in reverse

Gael23

There will be an all out strike in the civil service if this happens

is_that_so

harr wrote: »

So teachers , guards or any frontline workers I include shop workers and carers in that aren’t allowed to jump the Q as it’s more streamlined and efficient to go by age and do everyone in turn and now doing a complete U-turn and saying one particular group might be more important than the other..
An awful lot of teachers , guards and carers would be suddenly put straight to the back of the Q
Talk about mixed messaging, only a couple of days into the new age based system and they are talking about changing already.

It's not about queues, it's the possible value to reducing the overall prevalence of the disease and nothing has been decided yet.

Red Silurian

Gael23 wrote: »

There will be an all out strike in the civil service if this happens

Why?

Gael23

Red Silurian wrote: »

Why?

The teaching unions won’t have it, GRA will kick up too

is_that_so

Gael23 wrote: »

The teaching unions won’t have it, GRA will kick up too

They've already done that, now it would look like a tantrum!

harr

is_that_so wrote: »

It's not about queues, it's the possible value to reducing the overall prevalence of the disease and nothing has been decided yet.

Still puts the 30-50 age group in last place to get a vaccine.

is_that_so

harr wrote: »

Still puts the 30-50 age group in last place to get a vaccine.

By a manner of weeks one would guess if they opt for this approach so June/July rather than June. They'll still get in before the refusniks!

Professor Moriarty

Gael23 wrote: »

The teaching unions won’t have it, GRA will kick up too

The civil service won't go on strike if teachers are upset about not receiving a vaccine.

SusanC10

Just 2 weeks ago the Government were saying that vaccination of older ages first was based on medical advice. Has that advice changed ?

Husband and I are mid-late 40s so would be end of the queue with this.

Ohmeha

This latest assessment request on 18-30s has to have an economic motivation as the hospitality sector the government desperately wants to re-open this summer is significantly dependent on employees in this age cohort

is_that_so

SusanC10 wrote: »

Just 2 weeks ago the Government were saying that vaccination of older ages first was based on medical advice. Has that advice changed ?

Husband and I are mid-late 40s so would be end of the queue with this.

It still holds but most people under 60 in reasonable health are at a far lower risk anyway. They are just considering how doing the younger group first might impact cases and potentially return us to return to normal faster.