Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

expectationlost

hmmm wrote: »

If a group of randomners on an Internet forum could see straight away that this would cause serious political controversy, a Minister should not have gone on a solo run with this without informing and getting the backing of their cabinet colleagues. No matter what a document from a few months ago said.

Now this kite has been well and truly shot out of the sky, and even if it was a good idea it will be far more difficult to get public support because the groundwork wasn't done to prepare.

its not just a document it was the National Strategy

expectationlost

expectationlost wrote: »

its not just a document it was the National Strategy

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/39038-provisional-vaccine-allocation-groups/&ved=2ahUKEwiFpdTct4XwAhVASBUIHflNAv0QFjABegQIGhAC&usg=AOvVaw2Y03Ei4OMyEy3LhpztSyfD

It was being the important word. Another important world when published in December was provisional. Provisional doesnt mean final. Its a rough draft at best.

Can I ask what age you are by the way.

I have a sneaking suspicion you are are not a 49 year old :rolleyes:.

expectationlost

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/39038-provisional-vaccine-allocation-groups/&ved=2ahUKEwiFpdTct4XwAhVASBUIHflNAv0QFjABegQIGhAC&usg=AOvVaw2Y03Ei4OMyEy3LhpztSyfD

It was being the important word. Another important world when published in December was provisional. Provisional doesnt mean final. Its a rough draft at best.

Can I ask what age you are by the way.

I have a sneaking suspicion you are are not a 49 year old :rolleyes:.

changing to under 30/35's doesn't benefit me, I just don't like lying politicians or people who buy their lies.

ACitizenErased

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1383421734712274944?s=21

ACitizenErased

ACitizenErased wrote: »

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1383421734712274944?s=21

Brilliant.

Its a good vaccine.

Just getting alot of bad press at present.

In time the efficacy and safety issues will clear.

ebbsy

Maxface wrote: »

I'm a firefighter in my thirties. We obviously have been working as normal throughout and attend medical calls in addition to normal calls. We haven't been vaccinated yet and are part of the normal cohorts. I'd be annoyed if younger people got the vaccine ahead just because of age.

That is a disgrace.

ACitizenErased

I thought Dublin fire brigade got vaccinated? Why wouldn’t other fire brigades?

stephenjmcd

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It does come across a little bit your not against what he's said in the last 24 hours.

Are you in your 20s/ 30s by any chance :pac:

Why do you keep asking people their ages ? People can have an opinion on it either way based on emerging evidence.

Yup I'm in my 20s no health issues so I'll wait until whenever I'm called, I've no issue with a department being asked to look into it based on the evidence of vaccines providing reduced transmission.

Ultimately whatever the department come back with can be rejected by NIAC, the vaccine task force and government but there's no harm.in the question being posed to them.

Am I not allowed to agree with it being looked into because I'm in my 20s ?

Ps he's a woeful minister

celt262

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Donnelly is some spanner.

This will come to nothing, but he really is a very akward politician. A tendency to say the wrong thing. Of all ministers I wish he was gone and never heard of again. He's a wrong one as they say in my part of the world.

Covid is a risk as is trampolines.

He makes my skin crawl tbh.

The night he was on prime time before Christmas and was asked who would be responsible for deaths and increases in cases after opening up against Nephet's advice and he said "the virus would be responsible" was the time for the government to kick him into touch.

The man isnt up to it.

hmmm

I saw the media pushing the story below as a scare story about AZ not being effective against the South African variant. If anything as the tweet says it's the reverse - a very vulnerable group got infected, and (fingers crossed) their symptoms appear to be relatively mild. Which is what you'd expect - if the vaccine also prevents them from getting infected in the first place that's a bonus, but not the key benefit.

ACitizenErased wrote: »

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1383421734712274944?s=21

stephenjmcd

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Why do you keep asking people their ages ? People can have an opinion on it either way based on emerging evidence.

Yup I'm in my 20s no health issues so I'll wait until whenever I'm called, I've no issue with a department being asked to look into it based on the evidence of vaccines providing reduced transmission.

Ultimately whatever the department come back with can be rejected by NIAC, the vaccine task force and government but there's no harm.in the question being posed to them.

Am I not allowed to agree with it being looked into because I'm in my 20s ?

It will come to nothing.

If it didn't suit your own interests you might not have been as supportive:rolleyes:.

There is harm.

It causes confusion.

In UK 40 year olds are being vaccinated and everyone unvaccinated knows roughly where they are in the queue.

Here it is an utter rollercoaster each day never mind each week.

There should be a quiet orderly vaccination process.

Here its people trash talking every other day. Going on solo runs etc.

You can have too much discourse on something like this.

We are definitely in that realm.

Not good.

He probably is one of the worst cabinet ministers of all time. His department works best when he is annoymous.

The best thing you can do with Donnelly is ignore all utterances.

Turtwig

ACitizenErased wrote: »

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1383421734712274944?s=21

If we're going to be consistent we have to recognise that this sample is tiny. Ten random people with no indications of the age, gender or underlying health of the residents either. If this had gone the opposite way and 8 of them had died we'd be lambasting the media for scare mongering about the variants. You can't draw any conclusion either way.

We can't have the cake and eat it.
This inference is almost as bad as some of the hydroxychloroquine ones that were emerging last year.

Corholio

godzilla89 wrote: »

Vaccine efficacy aside

Bit of selection bias going on with reporting?

That's also a small size and missing many details as was SA study, yet we disregarded SA study for those reasons and don't disregard this one?

Disregard? Some have been endlessly quoting that study for weeks now as 'proof'.

I'm not saying this is any type of proof either but long as people know it's far from any kind of misery finality that some have claimed.

GazzaL

Beasty wrote: »

With your record in this forum I would suggest you cut out the trolling

On a serious note, I've been offered vaccines by two different people.

TomOnBoard

km79 wrote: »

We were told just a few weeks ago that the medical advice had changed and that the science said it must be age based and that the science must be followed

What has changed ?

Look at it this way.

The lastest information available is suggesting that ppl in the 18-30 age group are socializing more, now that their elderly relatives whom they've been trying to protect are steadily getting vaccinated. As more of the at-risk ppl are vaccinated, the younger folk have less of a drive to stay apart, and more and more need to get on with being young folks. So that greater mixing leaves them at greater risk of catching Covid. Once caught, they then are at high risk of spreading Covid. They are still at the same risk as last week of getting seriously ill and/or dying, which is low, but could become super-spreaders.

On the other hand, the more elderly you are, the greater is the risk of developing serious Illness and/or death, if you catch Covid, but less prone to spreading it, coz if you catch it, you'll most likely know it and wont be as likely to spread it.

trellheim

High points of daily shots first, second, all types


5 March 19449
24 Mar 23330
25 March 27490
1 April 30915

New high:
15 April 34596

Turtwig

godzilla89 wrote: »

Vaccine efficacy aside

Bit of selection bias going on with reporting?

That's also a small size and missing many details as was SA study, yet we disregarded SA study for those reasons and don't disregard this one?

The most damming bit is they've justified tweeting what they tweeted because people are quoting this much maligned South African study. It's like:
here's one piece of flawed reasoning so to counter that I'm going to use an equally, possibly worse piece, of flawed reasoning

You cannot say vaccines are effective because ten people didn't get sick. It's completely undermined that tweeters credibility in my eyes. This was a very poor judgement. I hope in a few hours or so they'll see the sense and retract it.

titan18

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Look at it this way.

The lastest information available is suggesting that ppl in the 18-30 age group are socializing more, now that their elderly relatives whom they've been trying to protect are steadily getting vaccinated. As more of the at-risk ppl are vaccinated, the younger folk have less of a drive to stay apart, and more and more need to get on with being young folks. So that greater mixing leaves them at greater risk of catching Covid. Once caught, they then are at high risk of spreading Covid. They are still at the same risk as last week of getting seriously ill and/or dying, which is low, but could become super-spreaders.

On the other hand, the more elderly you are, the greater is the risk of developing serious Illness and/or death, if you catch Covid, but less prone to spreading it, coz if you catch it, you'll most likely know it and wont be as likely to spread it.

So the same argument for why teachers and guards etc should be prioritized which the government threw out. They've a higher chance of catching it due to their work environments and if they do catch it, a very big chance of having a mass spread coming out of it.

The younger cohort only have a chance of spreading it cos they're ignoring the restrictions. People like teachers and guards can be obeying restrictions and still have a high chance of spreading it.

titan18

titan18 wrote: »

So the same argument for why teachers and guards etc should be prioritized which the government threw out. They've a higher chance of catching it due to their work environments and if they do catch it, a very big chance of having a mass spread coming out of it.

The younger cohort only have a chance of spreading it cos they're ignoring the restrictions. People like teachers and guards can be obeying restrictions and still have a high chance of spreading it.

Exactly.

This is a non story.

Would the public tolerate an 18 year old vaccinated before a 30 year old Gardai.

Donnelly doesn't have an idea of how to read a room.

I'm shocked how he was ever elected.

The story will be dead within a week.

Russman

stephenjmcd wrote: »

A minister doesn't need to get the backing of his cabinet colleagues to ask his own department to report on something to him. He'd then take that report to cabinet where it could be consider and could very well be dismissed.

As much as he's gone about it the wrong way by saying it in an interview with the Times he's not actually done anything wrong in terms or informing the cabinet.

Now I'm not defending him here because its gone public in a messy manner and an unneeded manner but the rational behind his request to the department to at least look into it has fairly sound basis.

You’re spot on, but a politician with even an ounce of savvy would know this wasn’t a kite to fly at this moment in the rollout. A bit of joined up thinking from him wouldn’t go amiss. By all means have the dept look at it behind the scenes, but broadcasting it to the world was next level stupid given the changes in the plan a couple of weeks earlier and the frenzy for a few days after.

iamwhoiam

Russman wrote: »

You’re spot on, but a politician with even an ounce of savvy would know this wasn’t a kite to fly at this moment in the rollout. A bit of joined up thinking from him wouldn’t go amiss. By all means have the dept look at it behind the scenes, but broadcasting it to the world was next level stupid given the changes in the plan a couple of weeks earlier and the frenzy for a few days after.

Absolutely . He read the public so wrong . We have just come to terms with a change in plan and understanding the reasons behind going by age
And Donnelly completely threw a spanner in the works and rattled people all over again
We need strong leadership and a feeling that all departments working together and getting this job done

Maxface

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I thought Dublin fire brigade got vaccinated? Why wouldn’t other fire brigades?

Dublin have been, I remember they had to cause a fuss to get them. They operate the ambulance service there so only right.

iamwhoiam

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Absolutely . He read the public so wrong . We have just come to terms with a change in plan and understanding the reasons behind going by age
And Donnelly completely threw a spanner in the works and rattled people all over again
We need strong leadership and a feeling that all departments working together and getting this job done

Hes just a bad politician that people should ignore.

He can't actually do much in fairness.

Sticks and stones.

Compared to Swann in NI or Hancock in England he really is awful.

It was a very bad decision of the coalition to change health minister last summer.

Probably their worst decision.

crossman47

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Absolutely . He read the public so wrong . We have just come to terms with a change in plan and understanding the reasons behind going by age
And Donnelly completely threw a spanner in the works and rattled people all over again
We need strong leadership and a feeling that all departments working together and getting this job done

Dead right. I know a primary teacher who has never been militant and went along with the age cohort idea. This morning, for the first time, she was angry. She and colleagues have been keeping the show on the road despite staff shortages arising from others vulnerable or pregnant not being in school. Now she feels, despite all the platitudes from Foley, they are getting no regard at all.

TomOnBoard

titan18 wrote: »

So the same argument for why teachers and guards etc should be prioritized which the government threw out. They've a higher chance of catching it due to their work environments and if they do catch it, a very big chance of having a mass spread coming out of it.

The younger cohort only have a chance of spreading it cos they're ignoring the restrictions. People like teachers and guards can be obeying restrictions and still have a high chance of spreading it.

Yeah, that's it.

Other than it being Donnelly's solo run, it does have some logic to it as a twin-track approach- Attack the issue from both ends simultaneously, rather than using a single strategy-

Assuming the drivers are that

a) older age correlates with higher morbidity and mortality
b) younger age correlates with greater transmissability, as they begin to 'rebel' against being locked down.

As those in a) get jabbed through the descending age strategy, those in b) start moving about more leading to greater spreading, making everything riskier for the bulk of the un-vaccinated population. If evidence exists that supports b) then I'd go along with it.

expectationlost

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Yeah, that's it.

Other than it being Donnelly's solo run

its not https://twitter.com/lostexpectation/status/1383390606605504517

TomOnBoard

crossman47 wrote: »

Dead right. I know a primary teacher who has never been militant and went along with the age cohort idea. This morning, for the first time, she was angry. She and colleagues have been keeping the show on the road despite staff shortages arising from others vulnerable or pregnant not being in school. Now she feels, despite all the platitudes from Foley, they are getting no regard at all.

And she has a point, along with so many others who are/have been working through the past year in the faces of the public, many with limited protection. SNAs and teachers in special ed have a particularly strong case for being vaccinated, but that plan was scuppered weeks ago.

TomOnBoard

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Yeah, that's it.

Other than it being Donnelly's solo run, it does have some logic to it as a twin-track approach- Attack the issue from both ends simultaneously, rather than using a single strategy-

Assuming the drivers are that

a) older age correlates with higher morbidity and mortality
b) younger age correlates with greater transmissability, as they begin to 'rebel' against being locked down.

As those in a) get jabbed through the descending age strategy, those in b) start moving about more leading to greater spreading, making everything riskier for the bulk of the un-vaccinated population. If evidence exists that supports b) then I'd go along with it.

Too late in the day...

What about a 40 year old Gardai or teacher?

Dec 20 - prioritised by their profession

Mar 21 - downgraded by people older than them

Apr 21 - also downgraded by young people having house parties.

I dont think this is a runner?

Is this 1 April?

TomOnBoard

expectationlost wrote: »

its not https://twitter.com/lostexpectation/status/1383390606605504517

It is Donnelly's solo run if his Ministerial colleagues were blindsided by his comments, regardless of the inherent logic

Lumen

TomOnBoard wrote: »

It is Donnelly's solo run if his Ministerial colleagues were blindsided by his comments, regardless of the inherent logic

Except this is a coalition with two parties who hate each other. It wouldn't be difficult to find someone from FG to put the boot in.