Vaccine Megathread No 2 - Read OP before posting

salmocab

gozunda wrote: »

Part of the issue is the large numbers in the 40-49 age cohort. That plus those missed from previous age groups now being vaccinated and second doses which are in train atm

Yeah I’d think a bit of breathing space to catch up on some missed ones and maybe take some slack up from Center’s that aren’t doing as well is a good idea.

dashoonage

whisky_galore wrote: »

Where giving the perpetrators an extrajudicial hiding is justified imo.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/vandals-hit-marquees-used-to-vaccinate-at-risk-people-in-meath-1132867.html

if the shinners had won these lads would be straight before the army council.

Widescreen

Re Astra Zeneca vaccine.

I heard efficacy of this is not good enough against Indian variant.

I think UK or possibly somewhere else are suggesting that the 2nd dose for anyone who has had first dose of AZ should be pfizer biontech.

Anyone verify this, thanks.

Widescreen

Widescreen wrote: »

Re Astra Zeneca vaccine.

I heard efficacy of this is not good enough against Indian variant.

I think UK or possibly somewhere else are suggesting that the 2nd dose for anyone who has had first dose of AZ should be pfizer biontech.

Anyone verify this, thanks.

No, because its not true

https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210525/pfizer-astrazeneca-vaccines-indian-variant-study

ClosedAccountFuzzy

The Irish population is unusually big in the middle. Our boomer era is basically late 1970s to mid 1980s. That contrasts to North America, where that bulge is in their 60s and 70s.
The 35-45 group in particular is huge.

That’s also a reason why you’ll see a difference in exact age of rollout.

Populations aren’t all the same shape.

Widescreen

Deleted User wrote: »

No, because its not true

https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210525/pfizer-astrazeneca-vaccines-indian-variant-study

Thanks, perhaps it is being suggested due to the 25% better efficacy in Pfizer.

Are those percentages about getting the virus at all? Or protection against hospitalisation, serious illness & death?

Lumen

Widescreen wrote: »

I think UK or possibly somewhere else are suggesting that the 2nd dose for anyone who has had first dose of AZ should be pfizer biontech.

Alan Kelly thinks this is a good idea.

That's good enough for me. I don't need science, in AK47 I trust.

ClosedAccountFuzzy

One point I would make is we’ve access to large numbers of Pfizer/BioNTech doses later this year.

If, and it’s not looking very likely, that there’s a need for a booster with mRNA vaccines for people who got viral vector types, it looks very feasible we could do a 3rd shot, even with a potentially updated version.

At present there’s nothing to suggest that’s needed, but the contingency is there in terms of supplies.

We’ve also got 4.9 million doses available per year for 2022 and 2023 as boosters too. They could never be needed, or could be updated to contain mRNA for new strains.

drunkmonkey

Deleted User wrote: »

No, because its not true

https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210525/pfizer-astrazeneca-vaccines-indian-variant-study

What do you think of the HSE not testing the vaccinated, I reckon the Yankees cases prove it's still useful if asymptomatic spread is still happening, https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/20/health/yankees-covid-19-breakthrough-infections/index.html it's the J&J they had.

Widescreen

Widescreen wrote: »

Thanks, perhaps it is being suggested due to the 25% better efficacy in Pfizer.

Are those percentages about getting the virus at all? Or protection against hospitalisation, serious illness & death?

The study authors said the different effectiveness of the vaccines after two doses might be explained by the earlier rollout of the Pfizer vaccine.

.

marno21

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What do you think of the HSE not testing the vaccinated, I reckon the Yankees cases prove it's still useful if asymptomatic spread is still happening, https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/20/health/yankees-covid-19-breakthrough-infections/index.html it's the J&J they had.

There is little point in testing vaccinated people for SARS-CoV-2 RNA in their noses if we have a high level of confidence that a) the risk of infection is low and b) the risk of transmission is low.

The article actually agrees with this. 8 of the 9 “cases” were asymptomatic, and secondly, they had been vaccinated with the Janssen vaccine which is the least efficacious and the trials showed it takes more than 14 days to reach full efficacy.

Freaky

Got my second AZ dose today in Kerry. Nearly didnt get it, I work in healthcare and many of my coworkers were getting appointments, rang the HSE to see if mine was scheduled soon and they said that I had half an hour to get to my appointment. They said they had the correct mobile number but it was in the wrong format (?), hence why I wasnt notified. The nurse who jabbed me said she had heard similar stories. So no harm to ring them and check if you think you are due your second jab and havent heard from them! I had some worries about getting the second one but now that it is finished its a great feeling

ddarcy

Widescreen wrote: »

Re Astra Zeneca vaccine.

I heard efficacy of this is not good enough against Indian variant.

I think UK or possibly somewhere else are suggesting that the 2nd dose for anyone who has had first dose of AZ should be pfizer biontech.

Anyone verify this, thanks.

A number of countries are doing this now: Spain, France, Germany. There is also a clinical trial ongoing in the UK and they are starting to give results from that (although it’s mainly the side effects are a bit worse but efficacy is good without any real numbers). Spain also did a clinical trial and basically said the same thing.

This is a decent article, also points to problems with AZ as continual dosing becomes less effective (why they are doing clinical trials with the third jab for AZ right now)

[url] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01359-3[/url]

ClosedAccountFuzzy

The BIG advantage of the mRNA vaccines is the delivery system isn’t biological, so your immune system doesn’t see it and it gets the mRNA code into cells effectively.

The viral vector vaccines use a virus - a biological vector to carry code. That’s something your immune system does see and can decide to take action against, making it less and less effective with subsequent doses.

You could end up basically being vaccinated against the viral vector.

missmelo

Has anybody here seen the studies on the animal trials for this vaccine?

Do you know if you have antibodies if you are protected without the vaccine? As in if you already had covid.

Are we in a live trial as per what luke o Neill stated?
I know 2 people who have died from this vaccine and I'm not willing to go into a trial without full and informed consent.

timsey tiger

missmelo wrote: »

Has anybody here seen the studies on the animal trials for this vaccine?

Do you know if you have antibodies if you are protected without the vaccine? As in if you already had covid.

Are we in a live trial as per what luke o Neill stated?
I know 2 people who have died from this vaccine and I'm not willing to go into a trial without full and informed consent.

You know of two people or you know two people?

JDD

missmelo wrote: »

Has anybody here seen the studies on the animal trials for this vaccine?

Do you know if you have antibodies if you are protected without the vaccine? As in if you already had covid.

Are we in a live trial as per what luke o Neill stated?
I know 2 people who have died from this vaccine and I'm not willing to go into a trial without full and informed consent.

When you say "this vaccine" which brand do you mean.

And really? You know two people who died from the vaccine? In Ireland?

seamus

missmelo wrote: »

Has anybody here seen the studies on the animal trials for this vaccine?

You can inspect them yourself:
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-announce-data-preclinical-studies-mrna

Do you know if you have antibodies if you are protected without the vaccine? As in if you already had covid.

Maybe. You are protected for a certain amount of time, but there is insufficient data to tell if this protection is long-term.

Are we in a live trial as per what luke o Neill stated?

No. Data is collected on all medicines after approval so that any unforeseen issues can be picked up and accounted for in the general population.
This doesn't make it a "live trial" any more than people driving cars are participating in beta testing.

I know 2 people who have died from this vaccine

No, you don't.

ClosedAccountFuzzy

Given the huge, population wide rollout we are actually having very very few side effects overall.

If you look at any medication (or even food) you’ll have a small % of allergic reactions.

The clotting issue with the AstraZeneca and J&J vaccines is small but significant and has been mitigated against in a very conservative way.

Overall they seem extremely safe.

I don’t mean to make this seem trivial, but you can eat a sandwich with some ingredient that you don’t know you’re highly allergic to and have huge reactions, never mind a vaccine.

Does that mean we just ban sandwiches? Nope - that would be ridiculous.

You can’t entirely eliminate all risk from anything you’re consuming or injecting, but they’ve come very close to that.

GLaDOS

They're opening another vaccination centre in UCD (I've seen the signs in the car park). Was that part of the original planned centres, or is it in addition? I don't remember it being mentioned before.

missmelo

missmelo wrote: »

Has anybody here seen the studies on the animal trials for this vaccine?

Do you know if you have antibodies if you are protected without the vaccine? As in if you already had covid.

Are we in a live trial as per what luke o Neill stated?
I know 2 people who have died from this vaccine and I'm not willing to go into a trial without full and informed consent.

You know 2 people dead out of 100s of millions vaccinated..
2
And you know them personally

xboxdad

marno21 wrote: »

There is little point in testing vaccinated people for SARS-CoV-2 RNA in their noses if we have a high level of confidence that a) the risk of infection is low and b) the risk of transmission is low.

The article actually agrees with this. 8 of the 9 “cases” were asymptomatic, and secondly, they had been vaccinated with the Janssen vaccine which is the least efficacious and the trials showed it takes more than 14 days to reach full efficacy.

I read the article and it seems to be focusing on what happens to the vaccinated individual.
For me the question/issue is very different:

After all restrictions are lifted, vaccinated teacher walks into a room with 40 unvaccinated children.

What happens to the children?

If the adult was vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine:
Numbers indicate that there's a 5% chance he'll spread the virus to the 40 children. (if I understand correctly)

What if the adult was vaccinated with AZ/J&J?
What is that number?


(this is just one example of course, the same could be asked between different groups of adults)

ClosedAccountFuzzy

So, do we think that the 40-44 window will open before Friday?

is_that_so

FuzzyThinking wrote: »

So, do we think that the 40-44 window will open before Friday?

IT article says next week.

Furze99

Widescreen wrote: »

Re Astra Zeneca vaccine.

I heard efficacy of this is not good enough against Indian variant.

I think UK or possibly somewhere else are suggesting that the 2nd dose for anyone who has had first dose of AZ should be pfizer biontech.

Anyone verify this, thanks.

The issue seems not to be so much the relative effectiveness of the mRNA and AZ vaccines but that two doses are needed plus time for them to bed in. One dose is reported as not good enough against newer variants which threaten to spread here.

The weakness that Alan Kelly has pointed out is the gap between the doses of the respective vaccines, a few weeks for Pfizer etc and 3 months for AZ. When you further take into account that the longer gap has been allocated to an older age group, it doesn't make sense from the stated public health policy.

It was a bad idea from the start to have significantly differing vaccines for different parts of the population. We should have ditched the AZ for general population use and donated elsewhere. It's looking likely that those who got AZ will have a shortened gap between doses and then be called back in time for Pfizer or Moderna vaccine. This is poor vaccination policy IMHO - bound to be met by hesitancy.

Necro

missmelo wrote: »

Has anybody here seen the studies on the animal trials for this vaccine?

Do you know if you have antibodies if you are protected without the vaccine? As in if you already had covid.

Are we in a live trial as per what luke o Neill stated?
I know 2 people who have died from this vaccine and I'm not willing to go into a trial without full and informed consent.

You can provide me of proof of the claims you are making via PM

Until then don't post in this thread again

drunkmonkey

Furze99 wrote: »

This is poor vaccination policy IMHO - bound to be met by hesitancy.

Impossible to do proper due diligence on, mixing and matching vaccines with variants at play with no data to back up any medium to long term results, even short term there's no peer reviewed sizable study data to my knowledge saying this is a good idea.

LuckyLloyd

xboxdad wrote: »

How do the numbers look like for AZ & J&J, do you know?

AZ is 82% (CI 63 - 92%)
J and J is 72% in the US

They all offer near 100% protection against severe illness, hospitalisation and death.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It' has to be more than 5% now, the positivity in close contacts increased from 12% to 35% with the UK variant by February, I'm seeing figures the indian strain is possibly 20% more transmissible than the UK variant, wouldn't logic dictate that the 5% chance in the vaccinated has now shifted above the pre February odds in the unvaccinated of catching it via a close contact taking into account increased transmission and slightly increased vaccine evasion.

If it is is born out in statistics then Public Health guidelines can change. For the moment, we can only work on the data we have.

RavenBea17b

Tyrone212 wrote: »

Strange. A link has been found between AstraZeneca and blood clots. No link has been found between Pfizer and myocarditis. A load of rubbish.

A statement from the US CDC Advisory group (17th May)announced an investigation and further study into events of myocarditis in teens and young adults (mainly men) for Pfizer. Whilst not clear yet, members of the advisory committee for vaccinations felt that healthcare providers should be made aware of the reports and aware of potential events and monitor- so not quite "a load of rubbish" as you say.

I'd prefer that these events are given due diligence and continuously monitored, - there have been other events including in the US army, France and in Israel.

And this continued monitoring for all vaccines.

drunkmonkey

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

AZ is 82% (CI 63 - 92%)
J and J is 72% in the US

They all offer near 100% protection against severe illness, hospitalisation and death.

If it is is born out in statistics then Public Health guidelines can change. For the moment, we can only work on the data we have.

I think the suggestion is they offer no protection for anyone without a vaccine yet we know they still spread it.
If we're not testing vaccinated for symptomatic, asymptomatic, presymtomatic you can't have reliable data, the statistics can only go one way in that cohort.

If you tell me asymptomatic or presymtomatic spread isn't really a thing it should apply to both groups.