Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

timsey tiger

princereingold wrote: »

is this a vaccine as per the legal and medical definitions?

or is it unapproved experimental gene therapy?

yes

majo

Gael23 wrote: »

No I’m younger than that. I realize I’ll be waiting a while longer

Hopefully you’ll get it before too much longer. Best of luck.

Strazdas

stephenjmcd wrote: »

EMA update expected 4pm Irish time
https://twitter.com/dannyctkemp/status/1384404291851595778?s=20

Given that it's very similar to the AstraZeneca vaccine, it will be interesting to see how this pans out and what Ireland does with it.

seamus

Trying to crunch numbers here in terms of the numbers in each cohort. Really difficult when you've got two doses and ever-increasing numbers being done every week.

So this is very much on the basis of ignoring some things and making assumptions about others;

Group 5 (60-69 years) will be done with dose 1 by the end of May, if not earlier. This is based on doing about 50k - 100k doses of AZ per week. Which means they'll be done with dose 2 by the end of August,. Thing is, once we're finished with dose 1, we will start building up a significant backlog of AZ. We could start on the dose 2 pretty much immediately at the start of June; that's a 7-8 week gap. Then the 60-69 group are done by the end of July.
However, that's capacity which we will need for the rest of the rollout.

The other priority groups are likewise looking at end of May to be finished with their first dose and end of July for their second.


The end of May timing is kind of serendipidous; it means we can go hell for leather from the start of June on the general population.

This might mean that registration for the 50-59 group will open on 24th May, 40-49 group from around 7th June, 30-39 group from 21st June, etc. That's pure guesswork though. I'm assuming they're not just opening registration for a new age group every day for the next 65 days.

Jinglejangle69

seamus wrote: »

Trying to crunch numbers here in terms of the numbers in each cohort. Really difficult when you've got two doses and ever-increasing numbers being done every week.

So this is very much on the basis of ignoring some things and making assumptions about others;

Group 5 (60-69 years) will be done with dose 1 by the end of May, if not earlier. This is based on doing about 50k - 100k doses of AZ per week. Which means they'll be done with dose 2 by the end of August,. Thing is, once we're finished with dose 1, we will start building up a significant backlog of AZ. We could start on the dose 2 pretty much immediately at the start of June; that's a 7-8 week gap. Then the 60-69 group are done by the end of July.
However, that's capacity which we will need for the rest of the rollout.

The other priority groups are likewise looking at end of May to be finished with their first dose and end of July for their second.


The end of May timing is kind of serendipidous; it means we can go hell for leather from the start of June on the other cohorts.

This might mean that registration for the 50-59 group will open on 24th May, 40-49 group from around 7th June, 30-39 group from 21st June, etc. That's pure guesswork though. I'm assuming they're not just opening registration for a new age group every day for the next 65 days.

The over 70s aren't even close to finishing dose 1.

seamus

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

The over 70s aren't even close to finishing dose 1.

82.2% of the over-70s have got their first dose as of Sunday just gone.

Champagne Sally

seamus wrote: »

Trying to crunch numbers here in terms of the numbers in each cohort. Really difficult when you've got two doses and ever-increasing numbers being done every week.

So this is very much on the basis of ignoring some things and making assumptions about others;

Group 5 (60-69 years) will be done with dose 1 by the end of May, if not earlier. This is based on doing about 50k - 100k doses of AZ per week. Which means they'll be done with dose 2 by the end of August,. Thing is, once we're finished with dose 1, we will start building up a significant backlog of AZ. We could start on the dose 2 pretty much immediately at the start of June; that's a 7-8 week gap. Then the 60-69 group are done by the end of July.
However, that's capacity which we will need for the rest of the rollout.

The other priority groups are likewise looking at end of May to be finished with their first dose and end of July for their second.


The end of May timing is kind of serendipidous; it means we can go hell for leather from the start of June on the general population.

This might mean that registration for the 50-59 group will open on 24th May, 40-49 group from around 7th June, 30-39 group from 21st June, etc. That's pure guesswork though. I'm assuming they're not just opening registration for a new age group every day for the next 65 days.

I'm probably overly optimistic but I think that the 50 to 59 group will start registering around 10th May which puts my estimates 2 weeks ahead of yours, but I'm always optimistic, we shall see.

Knex*

seamus wrote: »

Trying to crunch numbers here in terms of the numbers in each cohort. Really difficult when you've got two doses and ever-increasing numbers being done every week.

So this is very much on the basis of ignoring some things and making assumptions about others;

Group 5 (60-69 years) will be done with dose 1 by the end of May, if not earlier. This is based on doing about 50k - 100k doses of AZ per week. Which means they'll be done with dose 2 by the end of August,. Thing is, once we're finished with dose 1, we will start building up a significant backlog of AZ. We could start on the dose 2 pretty much immediately at the start of June; that's a 7-8 week gap. Then the 60-69 group are done by the end of July.
However, that's capacity which we will need for the rest of the rollout.

The other priority groups are likewise looking at end of May to be finished with their first dose and end of July for their second.


The end of May timing is kind of serendipidous; it means we can go hell for leather from the start of June on the general population.

This might mean that registration for the 50-59 group will open on 24th May, 40-49 group from around 7th June, 30-39 group from 21st June, etc. That's pure guesswork though. I'm assuming they're not just opening registration for a new age group every day for the next 65 days.

Another 5-6 weeks to give everyone over 60 one dose?

I naively thought we'd ramp up to get it done a little quicker than that. Have you average daily totals that you're using to estimate that?

Just looking at it myself now. There's 417k in this cohort, 6 weeks is 42 days. That's an average of around 9k a day, not even accounting for those already jabbed.

I'd be hoping to half that time, even accounting for 2nd doses of previous cohorts. Am I way off?

Jinglejangle69

seamus wrote: »

82.2% of the over-70s have got their first dose as of Sunday just gone.

Yeah not close to been finished.

Someone said here yesterday their parents were told could be 4 weeks.

funnydoggy

Sanjuro wrote: »

That's my birthday. If they could go ahead and approve it for use for all, I'd forego any other present, thank you very much.

Happy birthday Sanjuro!

SheepsClothing

Surely we start registering 50 - 59 year olds as soon as over 70's are done dose 1. Unless we are giving Pfizer to the 60 - 69 age group, in which case my question would be why would we do that?

Beasty

princereingold wrote: »

is this a vaccine as per the legal and medical definitions?

or is it unapproved experimental gene therapy?

threadbanned

SheepsClothing

SheepsClothing wrote: »

Surely we start registering 50 - 59 year olds as soon as over 70's are done dose 1. Unless we are giving Pfizer to the 60 - 69 age group, in which case my question would be why would we do that?

Lot of people in cohort 4 and 7 to be done before then.

Strazdas

SheepsClothing wrote: »

Surely we start registering 50 - 59 year olds as soon as over 70's are done dose 1. Unless we are giving Pfizer to the 60 - 69 age group, in which case my question would be why would we do that?

It's unpredictable when the 50-59 year old portal will open, as we don't even know what vaccine they will receive (except that it's not AstraZeneca anyway).

seamus

SheepsClothing wrote: »

Surely we start registering 50 - 59 year olds as soon as over 70's are done dose 1. Unless we are giving Pfizer to the 60 - 69 age group, in which case my question would be why would we do that?

There are about 360,000 high-risk 15-59 year olds that are ahead in the queue. So they'll take 2-3 weeks to clear.

hynesie08

stephenjmcd wrote: »

EMA update expected 4pm Irish time
https://twitter.com/dannyctkemp/status/1384404291851595778?s=20

Do we know if they had decided who was getting these first J&J? Could we pretty much go straight into jabbing if they OK it or do we have to compile a list?

titan18

SheepsClothing wrote: »

Surely we start registering 50 - 59 year olds as soon as over 70's are done dose 1. Unless we are giving Pfizer to the 60 - 69 age group, in which case my question would be why would we do that?

You'd assume everyone in groups 4 and 7 (or at least a good 80-90% of them) would have 1 dose before you're opening it up to 50-59.

ixoy

Strazdas wrote: »

Given that it's very similar to the AstraZeneca vaccine, it will be interesting to see how this pans out and what Ireland does with it.

Reading an article here about it from the US (where it's been used I believe) makes it seem the incidence rate is quite low, lower than AZ and it seems again to effect women 18-49.
What I wonder is would the EMA, or even our local HIAC, go so far as to recommend it for men only (if it came to it) or would that be too tricky.

corkonion

If j+j vaccines are deemed to only be given to the older cohort (same as az), surely it’s time to start the under 60’s with Pfizer now. In a few weeks we won’t have anyone unvaccinated in the over 60’s if they are receiving all the approved vaccines. It’d be a real waste to have no use for az/j+j in a few weeks time

titan18

ixoy wrote: »

Reading an article here about it from the US (where it's been used I believe) makes it seem the incidence rate is quite low, lower than AZ and it seems again to effect women 18-49.
What I wonder is would the EMA, or even our local HIAC, go so far as to recommend it for men only (if it came to it) or would that be too tricky.

I think it'd be a PR mess to only give it to men. Whatever about ages, in the current climate, prioritizing men getting vaccinated in effect will generate some serious headlines.

BigMo1

titan18 wrote: »

I think it'd be a PR mess to only give it to men. Whatever about ages, in the current climate, prioritizing men getting vaccinated in effect will generate some serious headlines.

Let them write headlines! Surely we've not come so far that we are willing to sacrifice public health in order to avoid upsetting some irrational people.

If the science says it is safe for men, it should 100% be distributed as soon as it arrives.

Turtwig

There has been nothing yet to suggest any group or gender is at greater risk to either J and J or AZ.

Stark

princereingold wrote: »

is this a vaccine as per the legal and medical definitions?

or is it unapproved experimental gene therapy?

Or maybe it's Maybelline.

Chris_5339762

Jesus I can imagine it

"WOMEN TO STAY AT HOME WHILE THE WORKING MAN GETS VACCINATED".

It would be both delicious to see an an absolute tragedy at the same time.

ACitizenErased

If the EMA didn't do anything about the AZ vaccine I doubt they'll do anything about J&J tbh

Strazdas

ixoy wrote: »

Reading an article here about it from the US (where it's been used I believe) makes it seem the incidence rate is quite low, lower than AZ and it seems again to effect women 18-49.
What I wonder is would the EMA, or even our local HIAC, go so far as to recommend it for men only (if it came to it) or would that be too tricky.

I'm certainly curious to see just what they do with it and where it fits into the rollout in the next two months. Would they give a single shot vaccine with somewhat lower efficacy to people in their fifties for example? A logical step might be to reserve it for much younger and healthier people with low risk of catching Covid, but there might still be the blood clot concerns.

Elessar

ACitizenErased wrote: »

If the EMA didn't do anything about the AZ vaccine I doubt they'll do anything about J&J tbh

Do NIAC here also need to rule on it, like AZ?

corkonion

titan18 wrote: »

I think it'd be a PR mess to only give it to men. Whatever about ages, in the current climate, prioritizing men getting vaccinated in effect will generate some serious headlines.

There wouldn’t be any prioritisation, just giving a different brand to one group.

pc7

I'm hoping they ok it for over 40's to hurry my chance of just getting a vaccine, I'll happily sign a waiver.

Strazdas

Elessar wrote: »

Do NIAC here also need to rule on it, like AZ?

Yes, they are the ones who decide which age cohort actually gets it : the EMA only issues general recommendations.