Vaccine Megathread No 2 - Read OP before posting

Micky 32

Deeper Blue wrote: »

I thought Holohan said there was data coming out from public health England that the vaccines weren't as effective against the India variant? Or was he misquoted?

The fact that they do work is brilliant, but completely unsurprising

Unfortunately RTE didn’t follow up on this ( on the RTE news app anyway), they only reported Mr H’s comments.

dominatinMC

Micky 32 wrote: »

Unfortunately RTE didn’t follow up on this ( on the RTE news app anyway), they only reported Mr H’s comments.

This is something that's annoyed me throughout the whole pandemic. Maybe they ask these sort of questions, but we never see it. It appears as if they treat Tony as some messiah, and worship at his alter, rather than do their job - which is to investigate and report. If Tony makes these grand statements, he should be asked for this rational? On what grounds is he saying this? The UK are reporting that this Indian variant is not as bad as initially feared - now, where have I heard that before (SA, California, Brittany, etc, etc, etc):eek:

mikeorange

dominatinMC wrote: »

Can you quantify "very poorly"? I'd be interested to see what numbers they have.

33% after 1st dose, for context original strain was over 80% for 1st dose, but 2nd dose gives over 85% so it's not all bad.

Sleeper12

Jim_Hodge wrote:

Any word on a shortage of AZ? I know 4 people all 60 who registered on the first available date but are still waiting on an appointment. Everybody aged 61+ and late 50s that we know are vaccinated. The under 60s were Pfizer. They all contacted the call centre and were just told that they shouldn't be waiting so long and it would be marked for escalation.

I don't believe that has anything to do with the supply of AZ. That age group can & was given just about all of the. Some centers are way behind others. Dublin is on the low 50s & even starting on the 40s. other centres still have some 60s left to get through

astrofool

mikeorange wrote: »

33% after 1st dose, for context original strain was over 80% for 1st dose, but 2nd dose gives over 85% so it's not all bad.

Where are you getting the data for those figures?

The boosters are there to keep the antibody/t-cell count high so there is an expected drop off, but 33% sounds very low given the mutations are already present in other variants.

J&J being 1 shot has shown to have long lasting high immunity levels meaning a second shot isn't required (particular vs. severe disease and death).

Wolf359f

astrofool wrote: »

Where are you getting the data for those figures?

The boosters are there to keep the antibody/t-cell count high so there is an expected drop off, but 33% sounds very low given the mutations are already present in other variants.

J&J being 1 shot has shown to have long lasting high immunity levels meaning a second shot isn't required (particular vs. severe disease and death).

I'm sure there's a more detailed report: https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-pfizer-vaccine-nearly-90-effective-against-indian-variant-public-health-england-study-finds-12314048
The wording is a little weird, they are suggesting 2 weeks after the 2nd dose of AZ, it's 60% effective against the Indian variant compared to 66% with the Kent variant.
All the data presented by PHE had AZ up in the high 80/low 90% efficiency at a time when the Kent strain was dominant in the UK. All of a sudden it's now 66% effective???

mikeorange

astrofool wrote: »

Where are you getting the data for those figures?

The boosters are there to keep the antibody/t-cell count high so there is an expected drop off, but 33% sounds very low given the mutations are already present in other variants.

J&J being 1 shot has shown to have long lasting high immunity levels meaning a second shot isn't required (particular vs. severe disease and death).

Nervtag UK published them

33% is very low yes, 2nd dose is needed based on report they published as it increased to 81% with both doses.

J&J wasn't in use, so no data to prove one dose is enough against Indian. With 33% efficacy from Pfizer/Moderna/AZ its unlikely J&J one and done is enough.

delly

It's hard to try and collate all of the data coming out online, but I've found an epidemiologist who does a great job of updating the efficacy once there is data to back it up. Most recent chart below, along with the link to the page.

https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/vaccine-table-update-may-18-2021?fbclid=IwAR1mKqZBtMKUEkG9AKQSKeZ6regGNJZsdRhHLpxHGOn474rBgJLfbjE2E38

mikeorange

Wolf359f wrote: »

I'm sure there's a more detailed report: https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-pfizer-vaccine-nearly-90-effective-against-indian-variant-public-health-england-study-finds-12314048
The wording is a little weird, they are suggesting 2 weeks after the 2nd dose of AZ, it's 60% effective against the Indian variant compared to 66% with the Kent variant.
All the data presented by PHE had AZ up in the high 80/low 90% efficiency at a time when the Kent strain was dominant in the UK. All of a sudden it's now 66% effective???

All those cross comparison percentage efficacy rates are meaningless unless you know exposure rate to each variant.

Goldengirl

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Don't know to be honest, my mum has said she's 'waiting to see' whatever that means, worried she has read some of the unsubstantiated claims online about the vaccines online and won't get them because of that. I appreciate vaccine hesitance because of clots issue, but don't think it's because of that, she said she doesn't fear Covid as much anymore, but she would be considered in groups that are at risk.

All you can do is support them and give them any proper information if they ask. You are very well up on everything but maybe too close.
Is your GP any good ? Could you ask him or her to discuss it with them ?
Or have they contact with any nurses they trust who might go through the pluses and ...pluses with them ?
I am so sorry as I know you must be worried for them .

Wolf359f

mikeorange wrote: »

All those cross comparison percentage efficacy rates are meaningless unless you know exposure rate to each variant.

I'm not sure what you mean by exposure rate?

Clinical trials are usually done with various vaccines, at different times (so different strains) and with a different demographic. So that's 3 variables, which means making vaccine to vaccine comparison on efficiency a little meaningless.

PHE compared 2 vaccines at the start of the year (AZ & Pfizer) when the Kent strain was dominant, it found AZ was ~90% effective after 2 doses.
Based on new reports, it appears AZ is now only 66% effective against the Kent variant.

I wish they would just crunch the numbers and say:
unvaccinated: X% chance of hospitalisation.
1 dose of X vaccine against Y strain: Z% chance of hospitalisation.
2 doses of X vaccine against Y strain: W% chance of hospitalisation.
etc...

astrofool

mikeorange wrote: »

Nervtag UK published them

33% is very low yes, 2nd dose is needed based on report they published as it increased to 81% with both doses.

J&J wasn't in use, so no data to prove one dose is enough against Indian. With 33% efficacy from Pfizer/Moderna/AZ its unlikely J&J one and done is enough.

Do you have the link? I took a look around and couldn't find anything with a few different queries.

astrofool

Wolf359f wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean by exposure rate?

Clinical trials are usually done with various vaccines, at different times (so different strains) and with a different demographic. So that's 3 variables, which means making vaccine to vaccine comparison on efficiency a little meaningless.

PHE compared 2 vaccines at the start of the year (AZ & Pfizer) when the Kent strain was dominant, it found AZ was ~90% effective after 2 doses.
Based on new reports, it appears AZ is now only 66% effective against the Kent variant.

I wish they would just crunch the numbers and say:
unvaccinated: X% chance of hospitalisation.
1 dose of X vaccine against Y strain: Z% chance of hospitalisation.
2 doses of X vaccine against Y strain: W% chance of hospitalisation.
etc...

I don't think they have the numbers to do that yet.

Wolf359f

astrofool wrote: »

I don't think they have the numbers to do that yet.

It's very simple, anyone hospitalized with covid would be tested. You can check the strain they have (with hospitalizations so low, it's extremely important strains are sequenced). They can also access records if the patient was vaccinated and which vaccine it was. They would also know if they received 2 doses and how long after a dose they may have contracted covid.

Sounds simple to me.

Wolf359f

astrofool wrote: »

Do you have the link? I took a look around and couldn't find anything with a few different queries.

These are the links:
https://khub.net/documents/135939561/430986542/Effectiveness+of+COVID-19+vaccines+against+the+B.1.617.2+variant.pdf/204c11a4-e02e-11f2-db19-b3664107ac42
https://khub.net/documents/135939561/430986542/B.1.617.2+vaccine+effectiveness+supplementary+figures.pdf/daab9f52-7092-d024-fcf6-4557b95b2257

Lumen

Relative efficacy only matters when we are not supply limited.

Until then, the best protection comes from not being exposed, and that requires all available doses to be used.

The fine tuning can happen over autumn/winter when we're swimming in vaccines.

Jim_Hodge

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I don't believe that has anything to do with the supply of AZ. That age group can & was given just about all of the. Some centers are way behind others. Dublin is on the low 50s & even starting on the 40s. other centres still have some 60s left to get through

That doesn't work. The particular centre did all 61+ plus and then moved on to 50s but skipped 60 year Olds.

duffman13

Well the main substance of the PHE report is to get 2nd doses out ASAP particularly with AZ. Lots due 2nd doses around now to end of June particularly with HCW. Hopefully they will be sped up where possible

mikeorange

duffman13 wrote: »

Well the main substance of the PHE report is to get 2nd doses out ASAP particularly with AZ. Lots due 2nd doses around now to end of June particularly with HCW. Hopefully they will be sped up where possible

What I would like to see is more detail provided in our daily figures, as in who's getting infected.

So people get a sense how good the vaccines are

524 daily cases

500 cases in non vaccinated/ previous non pcr confirmed

24 cases in vaccinated etc

iguana

With the 45 year olds registering today is there any word on if we're moving on to the 44-40s from tomorrow or if we have to wait a few days?

Sleeper12

astrofool wrote:

Where are you getting the data for those figures?

Data is available on the BBC news app. I'm on phone at the moment and can't post links.

The UK decision to spread out the first & 2nd dose might come back to bite them in the ass. 12 weeks between first and second dose of pfizer when it should be 4 weeks

km79

iguana wrote: »

With the 45 year olds registering today is there any word on if we're moving on to the 44-40s from tomorrow or if we have to wait a few days?

No word yet

iguana

km79 wrote: »

No word yet

I'm getting so antsy about it. I mean I know that if we aren't invited to start registering from tomorrow it's because we would be waiting longer to get an actual appointment. But I've had it in my head all week that I might get to register on Wednesday and I don't want to wait!:o

km79

iguana wrote: »

I'm getting so antsy about it. I mean I know that if we aren't invited to start registering from tomorrow it's because we would be waiting longer to get an actual appointment. But I've had it in my head all week that I might get to register on Wednesday and I don't want to wait!:o

It’s hard being so close alright

Hollister2020

Hi folks, im due to get my vaccine tomorrow afternoon... i seem to have developed a headcold over the weekend.. its only slight, definitely have had worse ! Was hoping i might be better by tomorrow but so far there is no sign of it clearing ! I cant seem to find any info anywhere which says whether there are any stipulations to getting the vaccine while having a cold/flu etc. Do any of you know if i can still go ahead and get it ?

civdef

You’re not supposed to if you have had COVID like symptoms in the past 7 days.

Hollister2020 wrote: »

Hi folks, im due to get my vaccine tomorrow afternoon... i seem to have developed a headcold over the weekend.. its only slight, definitely have had worse ! Was hoping i might be better by tomorrow but so far there is no sign of it clearing ! I cant seem to find any info anywhere which says whether there are any stipulations to getting the vaccine while having a cold/flu etc. Do any of you know if i can still go ahead and get it ?

HBC08

civdef wrote: »

You’re not supposed to if you have had COVID like symptoms in the past 7 days.

A headcold isn't Covid symptoms.

Hollister2020

HBC08 wrote: »

A headcold isn't Covid symptoms.

I was just about to reply, the only thing i have is a VERY SLIGHT stuffy nose ! I have googled the symptoms and it doesnt come up as a symptom of covid !

Deeper Blue

mikeorange wrote: »

What I would like to see is more detail provided in our daily figures, as in who's getting infected.

So people get a sense how good the vaccines are

524 daily cases

500 cases in non vaccinated/ previous non pcr confirmed

24 cases in vaccinated etc

I'm not sure that's a great idea

There are probably a fair few infections in the days immediately after vaccination due to the protection not properly kicking in.

But if people see that there were 40 cases in vaccinated individuals many would panic and the likes of ISAG would be on rte saying the vaccines aren't working etc. Even if those 40 cases were within a few days of the first dose.

Micky 32

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1396409964239917056?s=21

Cluedo Monopoly

I am getting Pfizer tomorrow. I have been looking forward to it for a long time but weirdly the closer I get to the jab, the more nervous I get. I suppose mRNA is still an experimental/trial vaccine and not a true vaccine by traditional standards. I will certainly take it but I will do so under the knowledge that I will be genetically modified tomorrow
Did anyone else feel apprehensive the closer they got to the jab?

seamus

km79 wrote: »

It’s hard being so close alright

Based on past experience, it's highly likely they'll just make an announcement today or tomorrow saying "alright lads, vaccine portal for 40-44 year olds is opening today".

We're so used to getting weeks or months notice of appointments that the speed of the vaccination programme is still catching us off guard.

Micky 32

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

I am getting Pfizer tomorrow. I have been looking forward to it for a long time but weirdly the closer I get to the jab, the more nervous I get. I suppose mRNA is still an experimental/trial vaccine and not a true vaccine by traditional standards. I will certainly take it but I will do so under the knowledge that I will be genetically modified tomorrow
Did anyone else feel apprehensive the closer they got to the jab?

I was nervous and worried. Once i got in there ( hardly even felt the jab) i now couldn’t careless and glad i got it done.

Lumen

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

I am getting Pfizer tomorrow. I have been looking forward to it for a long time but weirdly the closer I get to the jab, the more nervous I get. I suppose mRNA is still an experimental/trial vaccine and not a true vaccine by traditional standards. I will certainly take it but I will do so under the knowledge that I will be genetically modified tomorrow
Did anyone else feel apprehensive the closer they got to the jab?

It is not experimental or trial. The experiments and trials have completed long ago. One entire country has been vaccinated with it. No bravery is required here.

astrofool

Wolf359f wrote: »

It's very simple, anyone hospitalized with covid would be tested. You can check the strain they have (with hospitalizations so low, it's extremely important strains are sequenced). They can also access records if the patient was vaccinated and which vaccine it was. They would also know if they received 2 doses and how long after a dose they may have contracted covid.

Sounds simple to me.

Sure, but they probably aren't doing that. I honestly don't think the medical community is as worried about the variants as the media are about it, no variant so far has shown an immune escape which is really the only thing to be worried about.

What would be a worry is for people who won't get vaccinated for whatever reason, the virus will become endemic at least until the world is vaccinated, those at risk (older than 40 or have a condition) and not getting vaccinated are not going to have a great life for the next 18 months.

Wolf359f wrote: »

These are the links:
https://khub.net/documents/135939561/430986542/Effectiveness+of+COVID-19+vaccines+against+the+B.1.617.2+variant.pdf/204c11a4-e02e-11f2-db19-b3664107ac42
https://khub.net/documents/135939561/430986542/B.1.617.2+vaccine+effectiveness+supplementary+figures.pdf/daab9f52-7092-d024-fcf6-4557b95b2257

Thanks for that, so it's not a reduced effectiveness but a comparison of those presenting with symptoms and/or tested after being dosed with 1 shot of a vaccine and looking at the incidence of those variants vs. incidence in the non-vaccinated. It also doesn't cover when people got infected (1 week after dose 1 vs. 12 weeks after dose 1 for example) but is really saying that if you're on a 2 shot dosing schedule go back and get the second shot.

This doesn't look like it would cause a worry for J&J given that their phase 3 trials were done when similar variant strains were around but there is no data in those studies covering J&J so it's only possible to make educated guesses.

User1998

Lumen wrote: »

It is not experimental or trial. The experiments and trials have completed long ago. One entire country has been vaccinated with it. No bravery is required here.

Actually all vaccines are currently still in their trial stage. The ones that have been approved are currently at trial stage 4.

Still no bravery required

iguana

seamus wrote: »

Based on past experience, it's highly likely they'll just make an announcement today or tomorrow saying "alright lads, vaccine portal for 40-44 year olds is opening today".

We're so used to getting weeks or months notice of appointments that the speed of the vaccination programme is still catching us off guard.

It is what happened last week. The portal opening for 45-49 was announced the afternoon before. So hopefully we'll hear later today that it's continuing down in the morning. But even if it doesn't, it doesn't mean any difference in how long it will take for us to actually get vaccinated. (I still want to register on Wednesday!)

drunkmonkey

mikeorange wrote: »

What I would like to see is more detail provided in our daily figures, as in who's getting infected.

The CDC have changed the guidelines for detecting cases in the vaccinated, sequencing should now have an RT-PCR Ct value ≤28 for vaccinated. It remains 35-40 for the unvaccinated depending on manufacturer.
I'm not sure why they don't have the same value for both but a lower CT count is going to produce lower cases so it's not really comparing like for like if you've different guidence for different people.
If we were to start reporting cases in each group I'd hope we would keep the tests the same.

It would be interesting to see it broken down by region and place of infections, Limerick for example is being called out for people not behaving but the University Hospital is over capacity again with 83 people on trolleys the other day, that environment can't be great for controlling spread.

I'm not sure they'll release the data based on what Micky32 said above.

astrofool

iguana wrote: »

It is what happened last week. The portal opening for 45-49 was announced the afternoon before. So hopefully we'll hear later today that it's continuing down in the morning. But even if it doesn't, it doesn't mean any difference in how long it will take for us to actually get vaccinated. (I still want to register on Wednesday!)

Are they doing it by birth year or by birth date? i.e. does someone born in 1976 count as 45 or do they have to wait for their birthday to have passed before they can register.

Happydays2020

astrofool wrote: »

Are they doing it by birth year or by birth date? i.e. does someone born in 1976 count as 45 or do they have to wait for their birthday to have passed before they can register.

Yes by year of birth. Which makes sense in terms of portal design.

mikeorange

Deeper Blue wrote: »

I'm not sure that's a great idea

There are probably a fair few infections in the days immediately after vaccination due to the protection not properly kicking in.

But if people see that there were 40 cases in vaccinated individuals many would panic and the likes of ISAG would be on rte saying the vaccines aren't working etc. Even if those 40 cases were within a few days of the first dose.

People need to know that too, hiding information is how we are in this mess

No harm in letting people know they have to be careful till 2nd dose.

Micky 32

mikeorange wrote: »

No harm in letting people know they have to be careful till 2nd dose.

Yes totally agree. The good thing is in the grand scheme of things it won’t be long before we are all sporting our second shots

Degag

mikeorange wrote: »

No harm in letting people know they have to be careful till 2nd dose.

Should kinda be common sense though

astrofool

It's in the news properly now but numbers against Indian variant look very similar to SA variant:
https://www.breakingnews.ie/covid-vaccine/vaccines-offer-high-levels-of-protection-against-indian-variant-1131368.html

I'd also call issue with them saying 33% effective vs. 50% effective for UK variant vs. original strain when really effectiveness is keeping severe symptoms away and not dying which they don't mention at all... (let alone that later vaccines efficacy reports will be with the new strains in their trials so Curvac, J&J, Novavax numbers won't be comparable to AZ/Pfizer/Moderna).

Cloudio9

iguana wrote: »

It is what happened last week. The portal opening for 45-49 was announced the afternoon before. So hopefully we'll hear later today that it's continuing down in the morning. But even if it doesn't, it doesn't mean any difference in how long it will take for us to actually get vaccinated. (I still want to register on Wednesday!)

Lots of people seem to forget there was a 6 day gap between the portal opening from 50 to 49 year olds.

Degag

Cloudio9 wrote: »

Lots of people seem to forget there was a 6 day gap between the portal opening from 50 to 49 year olds.

Yeah, would expect similar here.

Think so far the portal has roughly an average opened every 2 weeks?

Opens and has 5 separate registration days and then closes for about 1 - 1.5 weeks again.

Roughly.

iguana

Cloudio9 wrote: »

Lots of people seem to forget there was a 6 day gap between the portal opening from 50 to 49 year olds.

There was a gap between each decade but no gap within each decade. So a gap between 60 and 59 and between 50 and 49 but no gap from 65 to 64 or 55 to 54. Which is why everyone is wondering. Will the 40s be the first decade to have a gap within it. Which there could be as it's a larger demographic.

stephenjmcd

astrofool wrote: »

It's in the news properly now but numbers against Indian variant look very similar to SA variant:
https://www.breakingnews.ie/covid-vaccine/vaccines-offer-high-levels-of-protection-against-indian-variant-1131368.html

I'd also call issue with them saying 33% effective vs. 50% effective for UK variant vs. original strain when really effectiveness is keeping severe symptoms away and not dying which they don't mention at all... (let alone that later vaccines efficacy reports will be with the new strains in their trials so Curvac, J&J, Novavax numbers won't be comparable to AZ/Pfizer/Moderna).

Yes there's a large misunderstanding really when the word effective is used.

I don't think most of the public really understand what is meant by efficency of the vaccine but that's the fault of the reporting on such.

stephenjmcd

Paul Reid on Radio 1 saying its difficult to get exact numbers of vaccines administered through GPs given the issues being faced however he expects close to 300k doses in the coming week to be administered in total

Happydays2020

iguana wrote: »

There was a gap between each decade but no gap within each decade. So a gap between 60 and 59 and between 50 and 49 but no gap from 65 to 64 or 55 to 54. Which is why everyone is wondering. Will the 40s be the first decade to have a gap within it. Which there could be as it's a larger demographic.

I expect there will be 3/4 days gap before the portal opens for 40 - 44.