Covid 19 Part XXXV-956,720 ROI (5,952 deaths) 452,946 NI (3,002 deaths) (08/01) Read OP

ednwireland

niamh247 wrote: »

Sorry, I don't understand why it is so wrong to prefer a vaccine brand. Also, I wont be causing wastage of anybody's effort if they can be transparent about the vaccine type.

because theres a limited supply (personally i would want mrna as seems to be less chance of a reaction but will probably end up with AZ or J&J which all my uk work colleagues have had and my sister )

stephenjmcd

niamh247 wrote: »

Sorry, I don't understand why it is so wrong to prefer a vaccine brand. Also, I wont be causing wastage of anybody's effort if they can be transparent about the vaccine type.

What is there to prefer, they all do the same thing? AZ for example is just as good at preventing severe illness and transmission compared to Pfizer.

This nonsense of preferring vaccines I blame on media coverage

celt262

ednwireland wrote: »

because theres a limited supply (personally i would want mrna as seems to be less chance of a reaction but will probably end up with AZ or J&J which all my uk work colleagues have had and my sister )

How much less a chance is there?

Ficheall

Knine wrote: »

I think I would still refuse, having had Covid & had some very strange skin issues with it, I'd rather have no vaccine than risk blood clots.

Knine wrote: »

Ok thanks, one of us though not immune compromised ended up very sick in hospital, age under 50. I'm wondering if they would only need one too?

Hang on... One of you ended up in hospital and you would still refuse the vaccine??

stephenjmcd

Ficheall wrote: »

Hang on... One of you ended up in hospital and you would still refuse the vaccine??

The logic is baffling...

Necro

stephenjmcd wrote: »

What is there to prefer, they all do the same thing? AZ for example is just as good at preventing severe illness and transmission compared to Pfizer.

This nonsense of preferring vaccines I blame on media coverage

Agreed, the only real preference I had was to get the mRNA one cos it's new technology and I'm super impressed with it (I'm weird like that)

The truth is I'd have taken any of them even if they were injected with a fifteen foot needle through my eyeball though, absolutely any of them.

ednwireland

celt262 wrote: »

How much less a chance is there?

about 50% on personal completely non scientific study anyone who i know had who has had pfizer (4 people ) no reaction about 10 AZ 5 have had shakes, vomiting sweats etc after it, clears after a few hours though.

stephenjmcd

Necro wrote: »

Agreed, the only real preference I had was to get the mRNA one cos it's new technology and I'm super impressed with it (I'm weird like that)

The truth is I'd have taken any of them even if they were injected with a fifteen foot needle through my eyeball though, absolutely any of them.

Oh absolutely the technology is astounding and this is only the start of it. Its mind blowing to think in the not too distant future mRNA could be used to prevent cancer.

Likewise when I get the call I'll gladly take any of them

Ficheall

stephenjmcd wrote: »

The logic is baffling...

It's like that "Last Week Tonight" clip someone posted a few days ago with your man being interviewed outside the hospital his mum was on a ventilator in, saying he didn't know what it would take to convince him to take the vaccine. Seems it's not just Americans..

BobbyMalone

KrustyUCC wrote: »

If having Covid within last 6 months and under 50 then yes just one dose of vaccine needed

iamwhoiam wrote: »

And not immuno compromised

Do they test for antigens (or whatever) to see how many doses you would need? In case you had Covid but weren't aware.


Immuno-compromised myself, so wouldn't matter judging from the above, but interested to find out the answer to this.

Knine

Ficheall wrote: »

Hang on... One of you ended up in hospital and you would still refuse the vaccine??

Yes I would refuse the one associated with blood clots & as we recently had covid, we already have some immunity. Nothing at all baffling about it. Having spoken to my GP about the reaction I had to actual Covid, they said I should avoid AZ!

Necro

BobbyMalone wrote: »

Do they test for antigens (or whatever) to see how many doses you would need? In case you had Covid but weren't aware.


Immuno-compromised myself, so wouldn't matter judging from the above, but interested to find out the answer to this.

Not presently, that I'm aware of. I actually had the antigen test when they did that study last summer and they didn't detect anything... then I went and caught it in October two weeks after getting the results :pac:

Necro

Knine wrote: »

Yes I would refuse the one associated with blood clots & as we recently had covid, we already have some immunity. Nothing at all baffling about it. Having spoken to my GP about the reaction I had to actual Covid, they said I should avoid AZ!

Well if you're under 50 you'll be getting jabbed with Pfizer or Moderna. No need to refuse at all.

If you're over 50 you will likely have to wait until everyone else is done if you refuse AZ/J&J

Frank Bullitt

niamh247 wrote: »

Sorry, I don't understand why it is so wrong to prefer a vaccine brand. Also, I wont be causing wastage of anybody's effort if they can be transparent about the vaccine type.

Have you cared about what vaccine brands you have been given before though? Or did you even know?

is_that_so

BobbyMalone wrote: »

Do they test for antigens (or whatever) to see how many doses you would need? In case you had Covid but weren't aware.


Immuno-compromised myself, so wouldn't matter judging from the above, but interested to find out the answer to this.

From what has been said, only those with a lab-confirmed infection in the last six months, under 50 and not immuno-compromised will qualify for that one shot.

Knine

Necro wrote: »

Well if you're under 50 you'll be getting jabbed with Pfizer or Moderna. No need to refuse at all.

If you're over 50 you will likely have to wait until everyone else is done if you refuse AZ/J&J

All under 50. People suggesting that it is baffling that I don't want that vaccine, what is actually baffling is their comments when they don't know the full story!

Necro

Knine wrote: »

All under 50. People suggesting that it is baffling that I don't want that vaccine, what is actually baffling is their comments when they don't know the full story!

No issues at all then

You won't be offered AZ or J&J unless NIAC advise changes.

podgeandrodge

niamh247 wrote: »

Sorry, I don't understand why it is so wrong to prefer a vaccine brand. Also, I wont be causing wastage of anybody's effort if they can be transparent about the vaccine type.

stephenjmcd wrote: »

What is there to prefer, they all do the same thing? AZ for example is just as good at preventing severe illness and transmission compared to Pfizer.

This nonsense of preferring vaccines I blame on media coverage

Frank Bullitt wrote: »

Have you cared about what vaccine brands you have been given before though? Or did you even know?

Firstly, I will take whatever vaccine I get. That doesn't mean I don't have a preference. Niamh has a preference.

There seems to be an adverse reaction (clever pun) on here whenever anyone suggests they have a preference for certain vaccines.

People are entitled to look at the reporting of various effectivness of different vaccines and have a preference.

That said, I fully agree with another poster that if you don't take the vaccine offered you are back of the line.

But it's not unreasonable for anyone to say, for example: "I'd prefer not to get the J&J, because the medical professionals of one EU country have stated “the benefits of using the Covid-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson do not outweigh the risk of causing the possible adverse effect in those who receive the vaccine”.

Each to their own. Have a preference, that's reasonable. But know that you don't really have a choice right now. That's the key.

Knine

Necro wrote: »

No issues at all then

You won't be offered AZ or J&J unless NIAC advise changes.

I wonder if our vaccine passport/booklet thing will show something to prove we are fully vaccinated with just the one vaccine against it?

I presume the HSE text is enough to prove we recently had it!

Necro

Knine wrote: »

I wonder if our vaccine passport/booklet thing will show something to prove we are fully vaccinated with just the one vaccine against it?

I presume the HSE text is enough to prove we recently had it!

Mine is just a card showing the batch number and type of vaccine I received, and the date of my second appointment. Dunno if you get anything more final afterwards, I'll let you know on 28th May if nobody else knows by then

Jammyd

393 cases 8 deaths

The number of people with coronavirus in ICU is 36, a reduction of one compared to yesterday.

Of the cases notified today 175 are men, 211 are women and 79% are under 45 years of age. The median age is 28-years-old.

There were 173 cases in Dublin, 42 in Cork, 34 in Kildare, 26 in Donegal, 15 in Meath and the remaining 103 cases are spread across 20 other counties.

Lumen

podgeandrodge wrote: »

But it's not unreasonable for anyone to say, for example: "I'd prefer not to get the J&J, because the medical professionals of one EU country have stated “the benefits of using the Covid-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson do not outweigh the risk of causing the possible adverse effect in those who receive the vaccine”.

The important context that you've missed is the implied in Denmark.

This is the relevant guidance from the Danish Health Authority:

https://www.sst.dk/en/English/Corona-eng/Vaccination-against-COVID-19/The-COVID-19-vaccine-from-Johnson-_-Johnson

Extracts:

As the COVID-19 epidemic in Denmark is currently under control, and the vaccination rollout is progressing satisfactorily with other available vaccines, the Danish Health Authority has concluded that the benefits of using the COVID-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson do not outweigh the risk of causing the possible adverse effect, VITT, in those who receive the vaccine.

Given the current state of the epidemic in Denmark, the Danish Health Authority does not consider that the benefits of using the COVID-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson outweigh the risks.

However, if the situation in Denmark changes – in terms of infection pressure, disease burden, epidemic control, or other vaccines' availability, for example – we may reverse this decision and include the COVID-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson in our mass vaccination programme.

..and plenty more where that came from.

By selectively quoting out of context (and failing even to identify the country) you're misrepresenting the guidance.

Jerry Attrick

Necro wrote: »

Mine is just a card showing the batch number and type of vaccine I received, and the date of my second appointment. Dunno if you get anything more final afterwards, I'll let you know on 28th May if nobody else knows by then

When I got my first jab the vaccinator told me that after my second one I'd be given a document confirming that I had received both vaccines.

(She also explained that they aren't giving anything other than what you (and I) got after the first jab to try and ensure that people came back for their second one!)

bodhrandude

Jerry Attrick wrote: »

When I got my first jab the vaccinator told me that after my second one I'd be given a document confirming that I had received both vaccines.

(She also explained that they aren't giving anything other than what you (and I) got after the first jab to try and ensure that people came back for their second one!)

I never got a card myself after the first dose, where do you get the card, mines was done at my GP's.

Tyrone212

Kildare (260) close to over taking Donegal (270) with the highest incidence rate in the country.

KrustyUCC

Judge orders "outrageous" Longford wedding party organisers to court to explain "flagrant" breach of public health guidelines

'Dogs on street knew this was a complete breach of all public health regulations'

https://www.longfordleader.ie/news/home/630985/judge-orders-outrageous-longford-wedding-party-organisers-to-court-to-explain-flagrant-breach-of-public-health-guidelines.html

They'll probably still only get a slap on the wrists but hopefully there is some consequences after that outrageous breach of restrictions

RTÉ running a segment about Irish colleges devastated by severe restrictions, at a loss of about €50 million to the local economy. The same organisation striking a mordant tone has been an enthusiastic advocate of lockdown from day one. "Stay at home" was glued to the top right corner of our screens for months. Unashamed hypocrites.

morebarn

Jerry Attrick wrote: »

When I got my first jab the vaccinator told me that after my second one I'd be given a document confirming that I had received both vaccines.

(She also explained that they aren't giving anything other than what you (and I) got after the first jab to try and ensure that people came back for their second one!)

My husband got his second Pfizer jab in mid April.
There was no certificate or document given
They just filled in the rest of the card you are given at the first appointment and you keep that as proof of full vaccination.
At least that’s what he was told!

podgeandrodge

Lumen wrote: »

The important context that you've missed is the implied in Denmark.

This is the relevant guidance from the Danish Health Authority:

https://www.sst.dk/en/English/Corona-eng/Vaccination-against-COVID-19/The-COVID-19-vaccine-from-Johnson-_-Johnson

Extracts:


Quote:
As the COVID-19 epidemic in Denmark is currently under control, and the vaccination rollout is progressing satisfactorily with other available vaccines, the Danish Health Authority has concluded that the benefits of using the COVID-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson do not outweigh the risk of causing the possible adverse effect, VITT, in those who receive the vaccine.

Quote:
Given the current state of the epidemic in Denmark, the Danish Health Authority does not consider that the benefits of using the COVID-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson outweigh the risks.

However, if the situation in Denmark changes – in terms of infection pressure, disease burden, epidemic control, or other vaccines' availability, for example – we may reverse this decision and include the COVID-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson in our mass vaccination programme.


..and plenty more where that came from.

By selectively quoting out of context (and failing even to identify the country) you're misrepresenting the guidance.

Firstly, with all due respect, I quoted from a newspaper article which didn't have Denmark within the quotes, so my sincere apologies for simply saying an EU country (didn't think it mattered but I stand corrected by you).

Secondly, again, I didn't "selectively quote out of context" - as said, I just quoted an article. I'm not trying to create some false story here, and clearly said I'd take the first vaccine offered to me.

Thirdly, you're right, there is plenty more from where you quoted. The actual full press release elaborated on it further, and, importantly, rather than simply say that the currrent situation allowed it to ignore J&J, which, as I think you are suggesting, means there was no disadvantage in doing so, said:

"However, taking the present situation in Denmark into account, what we are currently losing in our effort to prevent severe illness from COVID-19 cannot outweigh the risk of causing possible side effects in the form of severe blood clots in those we vaccinate."

So clearly, there is an impact on them from pausing.

"The decision to continue the rollout without the COVID-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson will significantly affect the last two target groups – those between 20 and 39 years old. They are facing a delay of up to four weeks. The remaining target groups will experience a delay of about one week.."


There's a certain irony in that your pulling me up on this is in relation to a post I, and others, made about the reasonableness of having a vaccine preference, when your post confirms quite clearly that it would be reasonable for some people to have a preference against J&J - that an EU country (sorry DENMARK) believes it's better to delay vaccinating its citizens for a period of time, rather than risking J&J. That's what they said. In my opinion.

bodhrandude

Necro wrote: »

Mine is just a card showing the batch number and type of vaccine I received, and the date of my second appointment. Dunno if you get anything more final afterwards, I'll let you know on 28th May if nobody else knows by then

Why did you get a card and I didn't? We were jabbed at the same time, you get your second shot same time as me on 28th. Mines was done at my GP, were they handing out cards at the MVC?