Boosters

Hippodrome Song Owl · 14-11-2021 2:50pm

Regarding the discussion on updating the covid certs to include the booster - my elderly mother had her booster yesterday. Her gp said the HSE will post out a new cert with just the booster on it. Has anyone else been told this? I hope this is the case as we intend to visit Austria in the new year. But the fact the digital certs aren't updating for those who received the booster over the past month makes me sceptical.

Dav010 · 14-11-2021 2:52pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118164369#Comment_118164369

The Government, like every other Government in the world have consistently said their guidance and procedures will be in response to the changing course of infection rates. Many countries in Europe have changed their messages over the last two weeks due to rising infection rates.

The situation has deteriorated in the past two weeks, why would any Government put in place protocols for three months when infection rates might change again? The aim is to limit disruption to people’s lives and the economy, yet try to keep people safe, so it stands to reason that there will be changes in policy for the foreseeable future.

is_that_so · 14-11-2021 3:05pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118164632#Comment_118164632

The latest Dutch approach is a more honest one. We need to stop not ruling things out and point to possible changes. On one side you have NPHET who are very keen to pile back on restrictions off suspect modelling and the government who don't like some of the NHPET advice and don't want to be seen as rolling back. All that does is deliver mixed, confusing messages.

ddarcy · 14-11-2021 3:17pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118164384#Comment_118164384

Well using this report

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/vaccinationstatusweeklyreports/Vaccination%20Status%20of%20ICU%20admissions.pdf

Statistically from an ICU admittance point of view, the efficacy of being fully vaccinated to having no doses.

efficacy = 1 - ((.27/.92)/(.65/.08))

so if you completed the full course you’re 96.4% less likely to end up in ICU.

if you include only taking one dose it’s around 95% less likely of not having Covid in iCU.

if you want to go on the anti vax statistics,

This would take everyone, not just those that are eligible to take the vaccine, Then you’re 82% less likely of being admitted to ICU and having Covid.

Anything above 50% means you’re better off, even the anti vax lessoning of effect, would still show you are significantly better taking it than not. This is why their tactics are changing.

The p-value is essentially 0 (null hypothesis being you are worse than or equal to having the same outcomes, alternative hypotheses being you have improved outcomes), meaning you are a lot better taking the vaccine than not.

Dayor Knight · 14-11-2021 11:46pm

Amazed to hear Paul Reid today still talking about 6 months for the booster after Minister Donnelly clearly stated on Newstalk on Friday that he had asked the HSE to move to 5 months as standard.

So either Donnelly was telling the truth and the HSE is ignoring the Minister for Health, or Donnelly was bullsh1tting us on a national radio station.

Which is it? I'd like to hear a clear commitment to 5 months, from the HSE. Niac left that door fully open.

radiotrickster · 14-11-2021 11:48pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118164625#Comment_118164625

I got my booster today in a vaccination centre. They said there will be no official record given (as in the digital cert) to say you’ve got the booster but they just give a little cardboard card so you know the batch number.

ginoginelli · 15-11-2021 12:14am

We should be boosting everyone who had a vaccine 5 months ago by now. We have seen the data from Israel. We have a clear way out of this. Niacs procrastination is literally killing people daily. Gobshites.

elperello · 15-11-2021 12:22am

I notice that UK, USA, Canada and Australia seem to be sticking to a six month gap between 2nd jab and booster.

vienne86 · 15-11-2021 9:56am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167278#Comment_118167278

I thought I also heard Paul Reid say that most 60+ should receive their booster by late December. That doesn't really add up with the 6 month thing - I'm 69 and got doese 2 on 20 June.....so 6 months on is 20 December.....and I think I was one of the first in the 60-69 cohort. I wonder what's going on.

15-11-2021 10:53am

I am not sure the data from Israel is as useful or interesting as some have made it out to be. At least if we are talking about the same study I read a week or so ago. Though I am a couple of weeks behind on reading the latest articles on this I admit.

As pro covid vaccine as I am - I am not yet convinced either way on the data of the utility of boosters. Even in isolation. But even less so if the conversation turns to how best to spend limited money and resources. With many poorer countries struggling to even reach 10% vaccination levels - I find myself wonder if globally we would be better off trying to get vaccines where they are needed than getting boosters where (if) they are not.

I looked over the 10ish larger studies released on the centre for disease control too - and was really unconvinced on the argument for boosters at this time. Especially if - which I do - we use clinical outcomes as a more relevant measure than merely overall covid infection rates.

For me at least it's still a "withhold judgement and opinion" for now.

astrofool · 15-11-2021 11:22am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118168155#Comment_118168155

I have the same questions on boosters, but global rates are more driven by hesitation than availability now.

is_that_so · 15-11-2021 11:38am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167949#Comment_118167949

The guidelines are a minimum of 5 months but ideally 6 months.

is_that_so · 15-11-2021 11:50am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118168155#Comment_118168155

Having more of the world vaccinated is the very obvious choice but in the richer parts of the world they were driven by other considerations. I think the Israel data on boosters has been used to justify decisions which had already been made. Even if boosters are ultimately shown not to have had the benefits claimed one can still say it is probably no bad thing for certain population demographics. In political terms it also looks good and those who can't get vaccinated in other countries don't win votes.

15-11-2021 11:54am

Yeah I am just not someone who looks at the politics of it - just the science of it. So I am probably blinding myself to a whole chunk of the discourse.

But as with any medical intervention we have to look at Risk V. Reward. Anti Vaxxers talk about things like side effects and over inflate that issue. Pro Vaxxers like myself will acknowledge the side effects and try to be realistic about them. So despite the small level of risks of side effects and complications - we can see that the Risk V. Reward wins out.

If however boosters are doing little to no benefit at all - then that is one leg we lose in the argument. And there is also the risk too that that too will then feed back into the anti Vax narrative when they start no notice that the manifestation of poor outcomes scales worse against the benefits of the booster.

So I am just super cautious myself and am holding off judgement. Especially when relying on relatively poor studies like the Israel one. And double especially if someone is reading the Israel study and immediately jumping to conclusions like "anyone procrastination is literally killing people". Such a leap is not justified - yet.

is_that_so · 15-11-2021 12:00pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118168513#Comment_118168513

Judging by the data on the much older age groups, 75+, there does seem to be an effect in terms of risk for them. Waning immune system protection is common in that group so a more blanket approach to boosters is justifiable. However, as you go through down in the age groups, in my view there needs to be more of a level of questioning of the need for them rather than just picking an age, above or below which there is an automatic decision.

15-11-2021 12:06pm

I would still be cautious there in terms of evaluating that data. For example when we speak of the "risks" are we talking infections or clinical outcomes? Because even in that higher age group I have seen data on both. So it pays to be clear which we are talking about.

When reading through the 10ish studies on the Centre for Disease control for example - they had both. And if looking solely at the studies which use base infection rates as their criteria there does seem to be a slightly stronger argument for boosters - and data suggesting waning efficacy of the original vaccine. But even than it's not strong data really. But if looking at clinical outcome data instead - as in evaluating the waning effect of the vaccines ability to prevent severe infections - hospitalisation - and death - it becomes less convincing.

So like you - I would suggest more questioning here and I simply can not rush to a conclusion one way or another. But I certainly do think we can rush in and poo-poo the narratives like we saw above my first post today that procrastination is done by "gobshites" and is "literally" causing deaths. Not sure the data supports that narrative at all at this point. Future data may make us regret procrastination - sure - but I tend to react to actual data not potential maybe data myself :)

ginoginelli · 15-11-2021 1:12pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118168595#Comment_118168595

We are in an emergency situation again. Waiting now will cost lives. The preponderance of data on boosters is showing to have a huge impact globally and is being endorsed by some of the most respected scientists in the field. The fact that NIAC deemed it suitable to be administered to HCWs revealed they too support the data.

The writing is on the wall imo and it looks like the vaccine is eventually going to become a 3 shot program for adults. We have been too slow in this country to adapt to the updated science and consequently people died that really shouldnt have.

I stand by my comments.

Jimi H · 15-11-2021 1:19pm

Kingston Mills was saying this morning to give the elderly and immunocompromised their third shots but to wait in relation to everyone else. He was saying it’s likely there will be a better vaccine next year that’s been tweaked to take account of delta/variants.

15-11-2021 1:23pm

People do have a tendency to stand by their comments - its very human. Standing by them does not add credence or evidence to them though.

"Waiting" will cost lives for sure. But we are not "waiting". We are constantly researching - studying - and evaluating. That is the opposite of waiting. And this is a good thing.

Arbitrarily picking one thing - like boosters - and proceeding with it without evidence of it's utility is not what I would define as a useful contrast to "waiting" though. Rushing blindly head long into something is not the useful alternative to "waiting". We are not "waiting" at all. We are just not rushing into your personal opinion on how things should go. Shouting "emergency" then panicking and feeling like we should just do something is not a useful alternative to "waiting". Though that too is a very human need when confronted with emergency or panic. Our species feels better doing Something than nothing. Even if there is no reason to think that something is useful. (Stocking up on toilet paper springs to mind).

"The preponderance of data" is an interesting phrase given you have cited almost none of it. You merely referred to a single data point that I think I have indeed read (assuming you are referring to the same study I think you are). One study is not a "preponderance". And the study in question is not as convincing as some people who refer to it think it is. Quite the opposite - there are issues with it I am happy to go through with you if you like. Nor are nearly 10 other studies on the subject I have read from the centre of disease control any more convincing here.

Boosters are not new though. So acknowledging that is a useful starting point. Many vaccines require them. And each one has a different half life so when the booster is useful varies from vaccine to vaccine. One that jumps to mind right away requires a booster after 10 years. Others not so long.

So we certainly need to watch this covid vaccine which is A) new and B) produced using relatively new technology and be stringent and strident in our efforts to identify what it's half life is - whether boosters are required - and when. And then act on this when we have useful data and evidence. Boosters were recommended for people who took the "one shot" vaccine too - in order to bring it up to the efficacy of it's competitors. That too might be a useful avenue to look into rather than boosters across the board in all age groups.

But the "preponderance of evidence" you think is there that we need to panic and rush into producing and administering them right away is simply not there and I am not sure what you falsely call "waiting" is costing any lives at all.

Further evidence might validate that position and if it does we should act on it. But until actual evidence shows up (or you get around to actually citing one because by all means there can be papers there I have not read yet and I have been out of touch in the last week or two due to other commitments) then your proudly declaring your willingness to stand by your own comments - actually says zero useful content about anything at all.

So by all means - what is this preponderance of evidence? What is the "huge" impact you referred to? And how are you specifically defining what is "huge" here as it sounds remarkably vague and subjective. Do you think an absolute risk reduction of 7 cases per 100,000 person days is "huge"?

ginoginelli · 15-11-2021 2:16pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118169044#Comment_118169044

The Israel booster study data is excellent, as was the pfizer 3 phase booster study. Real world reports from countries that commenced boosters in some age groups is also very encouraging. The top scientists internationally are now nearly all espousing and endorsing the benefits of boosters. Their opinions certainly hold a lot more weight for me that some patronising pseudo intellect on boards.

Its getting to the point now were we are just being too overcautious. If we wait until the complete data is available its going to be too late.

15-11-2021 2:26pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118169318#Comment_118169318

Again if you can cite the studies directly I can be sure you are talking about the same content I am. I am also not sure of your standards for "Excellence". Or at least refer to it's contents. What did it claim? Based on what data? What were it's conclusions following from it's claims? You are being remarkably vague here in all your posts - and now refusing to acknowledge or answer direct questions too.

I was assuming - falsely perhaps - that you are referring to the study "Protection of BNT162B2 vaccine booster against Covid in Israel" (NEJM). If however you are referring to this then it is by no means "excellent" at all. Again as I said I can happily go through the concerns about this study if you want. It is certainly an interesting study but by no means "excellent" and definitely by no means convincing overall.

Your "top scientists" comment is irrelevant. Especially as you for some reason needed to bolster it with an oblique and petty personal insult. I have treated you with respect. Perhaps you can return that favour? I asked you direct questions which very much pre-supposed you to be intelligent and informed. You decided to ignore them and simply throw out an insult instead. What should this tell the reader of this conversation - me included - about the veracity of your claims or evidence???

However this comment about "top scientists" is what is called "Appeal to authority fallacy". Who is espousing things is not at all relevant to me. Nor should it be. The basis for what they are espousing is. Can you offer or cite this? Because so far you appear to not want to.

You final paragraph is more of the "panic" I referred to before. Bordering on scare mongering. It holds no convincing data at all. In fact no data of any kind at all. If there is a "preponderance of evidence" you should be able to cite it when asked. I asked. You cited nothing. This is telling and informative. The panic is not.

As I said I am as against "waiting" as you are. But we clearly have very different definitions as to what constitutes "waiting". I mean I am one of the last people who can be accused to being "Too cautious" when it comes to the Covid Vaccine. I have been pushing it since early on - and if you go back through the threads you will find me making absolute mince meat of many of the anti covid vax and anti vax in general commentary we have received here.

ginoginelli · 15-11-2021 2:52pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118169368#Comment_118169368

I'm not going to wipe your arse for you. I've cited the studies. go read them yourself. A quick google will also bring up Fauci, SAGE members and numerous others citing their belief in the booster campaign.

As for my "petty" insult - I spoke the truth. I was initially respectful with you, but your pedantic nitpicking and patronizing tone changed that dynamic.

I'm finished engaging with you on this now.

15-11-2021 2:55pm

You have cited nothing. I did. I just named a study directly for example - why can you not. I offered to lay out the concerns with that study too. You refuse to even acknowledge the offer - let alone accept or reject it. I suspect (just a suspicion not evidence) that only one of us has read it. And it's not you.

It is amazingly telling that you keep talking about a "preponderance" of evidence and refuse when asked to cite or name any of it. While similarly refusing to acknowledge - let alone answer - some very clear, direct questions on the matter. Not even one of them!

Once again you are suggesting I look up specific names and refer to their "beliefs". I already explained _ who _ is espousing it is irrelevant to me. The basis for their espousing it is all that should be of concern. You can give me 1 name or 1 million names. I would still be waiting for the evidence. Name dropping is not evidence. Opinions are not evidence. Beliefs are not evidence.

Evidence is evidence. Got any? Or is it just going to be the petty personal insults for people who have shown you nothing but respect and decorum?

schmoo2k · 15-11-2021 5:23pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118164384#Comment_118164384

Have a play with: Confirmed Cases v Deaths - Nov 5, 2021 / Gordon Smith / Observable (observablehq.com) and compare countries with good vaccination rates to those with poor ones.

Also compare when we had to lockdown previously and the impact that had...

Tim Robbins · 15-11-2021 6:24pm

I got a message to say my booster will be this Friday because I am in a risk group.

I have moderate Asthma (on two forms of preventative medication, so Cohort 7 last time) so wasn't expecting this as thought they'd be doing the more serious conditions first. I got my second vaccine towards the end of June last time.

Dayor Knight · 15-11-2021 6:42pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118168433#Comment_118168433

Ideally this question wouldn't be arising in the run up to Christmas, with a rampant virus. If it's minimum 5 months the that's enough - get it done after 5 months. I for one don't prefer to wait for the 'ideal' timing.

HSE, get on with the 5 month standard as Minister for Health says he asked you to do last Thursday.

Can't believe Paul Reid was again insisting 6 months with Pat Kenny this morning until Pat pushed him on it, and he then agreed yes, 6 months or minimum 5 months. So it's minimum 5 months.

With Christmas coming and the Covid numbers running out of control, there's no justification to holding older peoples' protection back beyond the timing allowed.

4570 cases today.

Dayor Knight · 15-11-2021 6:42pm

is_that_so · 15-11-2021 6:47pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118170943#Comment_118170943

Some of the older people, the over 70s, are supposed to be done by GPs but it seems some of those are opting out so that will mean referrals to MVCs. I'd also forgotten that ever expanding Group 2/HCWs, which got to 270,000 IIRC. Some of them were done in MVCs and are being called now as well.

SusanC10 · 15-11-2021 9:13pm

Looking like NIAC is going to approve Boosters for everyone Age 50+. UK are going with 40+.

SusanC10 · 16-11-2021 1:47pm

Any update on the Boosters here ?

And are they still going for 6 month gap ?

Boosters

Comments