# Fintan O'Toole "feels like an eejit"



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

Fintan O’Toole: Those who did what they were told on vaccines now feel like eejits
					

Vaccine programme has left people in their 60s exposed to the Delta variant




					www.irishtimes.com
				




_The message was clear: get your AstraZeneca now or you will not get vaccinated at all until the autumn, or whenever the rest of the population is done. This was Government policy: the bad (ie the Astra dodgers) will end unhappily.


These warnings were both unnecessary and patronising. As of last week, 92 per cent of us sexagenarians had received our jabs. 

But the threats were also, to be polite about it, fictions. The good have ended unhappily; the bad have been rewarded.

Almost a fortnight ago, on June 14th, pharmacies were allowed to give a Janssen shot to anyone over 50 who had not been vaccinated. No need to register – just call for an appointment, walk in and you’re done in 15 minutes._

I am the same age as Fintan.

From a population point of view, it was and is critical that as many people as possible get vaccinated with one of the approved vaccines as soon as possible.

It would not be feasible to allow everyone choose which vaccine they wanted.

We could end up with a shortage of one type and a surplus of another.

I was delighted to get the AZ vaccine on 3rd May.  I didn't have a choice, so I didn't bother researching which was the safest and most effective.

As far as I remember, at the time, it was as effective as the others.

I don't remember a big stick being waved at me telling me that I wouldn't get vaccinated until the autumn if I didn't go for the AZ. I knew that there was a lot of uncertainty about supplies, so when I was offered a vaccine, I took it.

It might have transpired since that it is less effective than the others against the delta variant.

But even if I had known that, from the population point of view, it was right to take it.

Another variant might develop where the AZ has the edge.

And it might transpire that some people need a booster shot or an additional vaccine.

But the overall job the system has done in vaccinating the population has been very good.

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

_The problem, however, is the arrival of the Delta variant. It has turned the situation of people in their 60s into a serious public health issue. Before Delta, one dose of AstraZeneca gave good enough protection to those of us who have had it. But the new variant changes everything: the effectiveness of our single shot against symptomatic Covid-19 has dropped dramatically, to just 33 per cent. _

But while the effectiveness of the single shot against getting the delta variant may be just 33%, but in the 7 weeks since I got the first shot, the other variants were the dominant variants. 

And if I do get the delta variant, I presume I will be a lot less sick as I have been vaccinated. 

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

_However, the subsequent decision to use the 60 to 69 age group to mop up the supplies of AstraZeneca meant that this system would soon go out of synch. Younger people who get the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines have to wait just four weeks for a second shot. The sexagenarians had to wait at least 12 weeks. So people in their 50s are now fully vaccinated, while many 69-year-olds are still waiting. The programme is no longer calibrated to age-related risk._

But aren't we older folk less vulnerable to blood clots arising from the AZ?   So it made sense to retain the other vaccines for younger people.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

One of the comments on the IT website expresses it better than I did:

_Sorry but it's the government's job to do their best for the entire population. Under 60s can't get AZ, so it makes best sense not to use other vaccines on this cohort.

It is not the government's job to look after Fintan's age group first.

Mrs. Q_


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

And another one

_In the middle of April those if us not in the 60s age bracket were quite envious of their call to be vaccinated. We were all envious of those in UK who were getting AZ and waiting more than 12 weeks in most instances. The gov could not have guaranteed back in April what vaccines would be available in June. It would have been foolish in the extreme to turn down the offer of an AZ jab in April for the hope of a Pfizer one later. And they did not know in April how prevalent the delta variant would be in June. The vast majority of people in their 60s were delighted to get the first job. The gov didn't con you into taking the AZ vaccine, Finton, but you are now definitely trying to con your readers by implying that they did.

Surely it is the ultimate first world privilege that you are now complaining about being vaccinated?

The real scandal is that healthy people in Ireland in their 50s, 40s and 30s are vaccinated at all while health care workers and the very elderly in the developing world are still waiting._


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

It's clear to me that the strategy was right back then.

The question is whether the strategy should change now. 

Should those of us in our 60s who have not yet had the 2nd jab be given an alternative? 

Is that advisable on an individual basis? 
Is it operationally viable on a population basis? 

Brendan


----------



## Prosper (26 Jun 2021)

Brendan Burgess said:


> The good have ended unhappily; the bad have been rewarded.


I think what Fintan O'Toole possibly means by this is that people (i.e. the "bad") turned down their appointment for the AZ shot and were "rewarded" by being given an appointment for the Pfizer jab. I have spoken to two people recently who did exactly that and there's been one poster on AAM that I've seen who also was "rewarded" by refusing the AZ vaccine. These people have all now received their second Pfizer jabs and so are fully vaccinated and so are very much protected against the D variant. Whereas the "good" are still waiting on their second AZ jab and so are therefore much less protected than the "bad".


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

OK.

But they took a risk which paid off. It might not have paid off. They could have become very sick with Covid during the delay.

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

What are the facts here. I can't find them.

1) Do we know what percentage of cases are the delta variant in Ireland? It seems that it will become dominant soon, but so far, it's not the dominant variant. 

2) What is the difference between a double AZ vaccine and an AZ vaccine followed by an mRNA vaccine? 
              How much more likely am I to contract Covid? 
              If I do contract it, how much protection does the Double AZ give me from getting sick. 

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

I am reading the risk assessment from the ECDC 

_Based on the available evidence, the SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) variant of concern (VOC) is 40-60% more transmissible than the Alpha (Β.1.1.7) VOC and may be associated with higher risk of hospitalisation. Furthermore, there is evidence that those who have only received the first dose of a two-dose vaccination course are less well protected against infection with the Delta variant than against other variants, regardless of the vaccine type. However, full vaccination provides nearly equivalent protection against the Delta variant.

Based on the estimated transmission advantage of the Delta variant and using modelling forecasts, 70% of new SARS-CoV-2 infections are projected to be due to this variant in the EU/EEA by early August and 90% of infections by the end of August._

It does not seem to distinguish between the different vaccines?  

And full vaccination provides nearly equivalent protection.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

How effective are the different vaccines against Delta 









						Comparing the COVID-19 Vaccines: How Are They Different?
					

Keeping up with COVID-19 vaccines can be a daunting task. To help people keep up, Yale Medicine mapped out a comparison of the five most prominent ones.




					www.yalemedicine.org
				




Pfizer:  two studies reported by Public Health England that have not yet been peer reviewed showed that full vaccination (after two doses) is 88% effective against symptomatic disease and 96% effective against hospitalization.

Moderna: While more research is needed on Moderna’s efficacy against Delta, some experts believe it may work similarly to Pfizer since both are mRNA vaccines.

Johnson and Johnson: More data is needed to determine the effectiveness the vaccine against the Delta variant.

Astra Zeneca: As far as the Delta variant, two recent studies (neither has been peer-reviewed) showed, respectively, that full vaccination after two doses is 60% effective against symptomatic disease and 93% effective against hospitalization.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (26 Jun 2021)

A good article here









						Experts call for vaccination of younger people amid Delta concerns
					

Preference among some scientists is to stick with mRNA vaccines if they are available




					www.irishtimes.com
				




Kingston Mills, professor of experimental immunology at Trinity College Dublin, said that it would be “sensible” to administer the one-dose J&J jab to younger people who account for a large majority of the new Covid-19 cases given the low risk from blood clotting side effects.

Newly published research this week has shown the effectiveness of mixing vaccines. Prof Mills said that giving people a “primer” first dose of the AstraZeneca with a follow-up booster dose of the Pfizer vaccine has resulted in a “dramatically enhanced” antibody response

“It might be sensible to vaccinate those now especially with any available spare vaccine. That seems to me to be an ideal cohort to give it to,” he said.


He advised that if the Government has substantial spare vaccines available, they should “just get it out as quickly as possible and stop the transmission of the virus.”

*However, not everyone agrees.* Sam McConkey, a professor of infectious diseases at the [broken link removed], said the Government should stick to its strategy.

“Moderna or Pfizer; if we got a large number of mRNA vaccines that would be preferable,” he said, “I’m not sure it should be a priority for us to change our national guidelines to AstraZeneca.”

The Delta strain of the virus is now accounting for one-fifth of Irish cases,

*UCD virologist Dr Gerald Barry said supply should influence decisions.* While mRNA is preferable, AstraZeneca could be appropriately used on younger people, if the only vaccine available.

The risk of clots amongst young people from AstraZeneca is small compared with the risk posed by the more contagious Delta variant, said Dr Barry: “That’s the risk equation that they are weighing up,” he said


----------



## odyssey06 (26 Jun 2021)

Brendan Burgess said:


> How effective are the different vaccines against Delta
> 
> Pfizer:  two studies reported by Public Health England that have not yet been peer reviewed showed that full vaccination (after two doses) is 88% effective against symptomatic disease and 96% effective against hospitalization.
> 
> ...



Given that Johnson is a similar profile vaccine to Astra Zeneca, I would be concerned about its effectiveness v Delta variant with only single dose.

I was keen on Johnson from the outset, single dose and done - in the end I got Pfizer and in light of Delta am relieved about that.
I would not be surprised if we see a situation where people over 50 who received Johnson require an mRNA booster.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (26 Jun 2021)

Brendan Burgess said:


> What are the facts here. I can't find them.
> 
> 1) Do we know what percentage of cases are the delta variant in Ireland? It seems that it will become dominant soon, but so far, it's not the dominant variant.
> 
> ...


I'll have a go at these.

(1) The delta variant is believed to be about 20 % of cases last week. However as its transmission is thought to be 70% higher than other variants to date.

(2) Very little,  there are observational studies where this was done and no decrease in efficacy was noted. I seem to remember a study in Spain that showed there might be increased protection. But these are small studies and aren't peer reviewed. 

Good question,  you have received one AZ dose and that offers some protection in itself.  However as the Delta variant transmits very easily,  some say in seconds and in fleeting contacts, Scottish footballer for example, I would imagine if you continue good hygiene and observe social distancing etc and with your first dose its probably harder for you to become infected than someone who isn't vaccinated at all.

It's very difficult to be certain though.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (26 Jun 2021)

odyssey06 said:


> Given that Johnson is a similar profile vaccine to Astra Zeneca, I would be concerned about its effectiveness v Delta variant with only single dose.
> 
> I was keen on Johnson from the outset, single dose and done - in the end I got Pfizer and in light of Delta am relieved about that.
> I would not be surprised if we see a situation where people over 50 who received Johnson require an mRNA booster.


We all will need a booster Odyssey and it's going to be Pfizer no matter what your primary vaccine was. AZ aren't being ordered from next month and AZ will only fulfill a portion of its contract. 

Pfizer are preparing hard for security of supply by getting Dublin, Zagreb and 2 plants in Austria producing drug substances for the vaccine.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (26 Jun 2021)

My personal opinion is that all those over 60 and those deemed vulnerable need to be vaccinated fully first ,using everything we have that will take 10days to a week based on rollout run rate and deliveries to date.
Keep the registration going and then focus on the 2nd doses for 59 58.....until they can say that all over 50s are fully vaccinated then the 40s and so on.

Pfizer is dropping 1m doses a month now (250 a week) that dwarfs all other supplies by just over 2:1, but there are risks in this too.

If we let the Delta variant run wild in the younger age class we risk having thousands of cases a day. But many advocates of full reopening now say the younger people "can handle it" ?


----------



## Prosper (26 Jun 2021)

Brendan Burgess said:


> But they took a risk which paid off. It might not have paid off. They could have become very sick with Covid during the delay.


Most of them didn't take a risk because word quickly went around the grapevine that if you refused the AZ jab you would then be offered the Pfizer. As a result they (as O'Toole calls them "the Astra dodgers" or "the bad") would be fully vaccinated weeks before "the good" who followed the official advice. O'Toole ends his article with _"And if you make people feel foolish for obeying the authorities in a crisis, they will be less inclined to do so when the next one arrives"_. He's absolutely right.


----------



## jupiter (26 Jun 2021)

Prosper said:


> Most of them didn't take a risk because word quickly went around the grapevine that if you refused the AZ jab you would then be offered the Pfizer. As a result they (as O'Toole calls them "the Astra dodgers" or "the bad") would be fully vaccinated weeks before "the good" who followed the official advice. O'Toole ends his article with _"And if you make people feel foolish for obeying the authorities in a crisis, they will be less inclined to do so when the next one arrives"_. He's absolutely right.


Agreed.   I missed out on that grapevine information but had rung my GP in mid-April to ask whether they could vaccinate me.  No, but they would put me on 'the list'.  A week later, I registered for AZ (age 68), though I was annoyed at being bullied by Leo: I would _go to the back of the queue / not be vaccinated till Autumn_ if I didn't take it.

On 28 April, I was vaccinated with first AZ.    On 3 May, the GP rang to say I could get Pfizer with them _if I hadn't registered_. 

Shortly afterwards, I was told officially I had a 'vaccine bonus' and was 'fully vaccinated' with AZ after 4 weeks - yes those words were used though they seemed bizarre and I wondered if they were a patronising sop to those of us who realised our compliance had not necessarily served us. 

Now waiting for second AZ vaccine, which should come in the next couple of weeks.  

I get it: it's a global pandemic, it's a moving target and we've secured and paid for these vaccines.  I am deeply grateful for geographical privilege.   Future compliance is not encouraged by patronising and threatening this cohort.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (27 Jun 2021)

jupiter said:


> Agreed.   I missed out on that grapevine information but had rung my GP in mid-April to ask whether they could vaccinate me.  No, but they would put me on 'the list'.  A week later, I registered for AZ (age 68), though I was annoyed at being bullied by Leo: I would _go to the back of the queue / not be vaccinated till Autumn_ if I didn't take it.
> 
> On 28 April, I was vaccinated with first AZ.    On 3 May, the GP rang to say I could get Pfizer with them _if I hadn't registered_.
> 
> ...


I really don't understand why that cohort would feel they were patronised or threatened.
At that time the Delta variant wasn't understood fully, the AZ vaccine was very effective against all the variants that were present in our communities and decisions were made based on scientific evidence that the AZ vaccine was safe for people of a certain age profile and this wasn't just the Irish medical profession saying this,this was the EMA and other European countries.

At that time supply was ropey to say the least and while AZ had improved its supply it was still behind their commitments. The decision to use AZ exclusively for that cohort and protect that cohort as much as possible had the effect of limiting what the rest of the population would receive or indeed push the rollout schedule out beyond the stated goals.
There were very few criticisms of that move by the cohort who are now claiming to be " bullied " by the statement by Leo that they might have to put to the back of the queue.
At that time both Pfizer,AZ and Moderna were almost equal in the level of protection from serious sickness or hospitalisation from the virus and if there wasn't another variant now yes that would be described as a " bonus " as the original cohorts were scrapped and an age based system introduced in order to protect more of our older population earlier than was first decided.

Whatever about the past the future will be a lot simpler in that booster jabs will be all mRNA and the vast majority will be Pfizer.


----------



## SoylentGreen (27 Jun 2021)

Tánaiste Leo Varadkar says people who refuse AstraZeneca jab will go to back of queue | JOE.ie
					

Tánaiste Leo Varadkar says people who refuse AstraZeneca jab will go to back of queue




					www.joe.ie
				




Just a reminder.


----------



## jupiter (27 Jun 2021)

I wasn’t really speaking to the Delta issue and I didn’t mention it in my post.

I do understand the reasons for confining the AZ vaccine (largely but not exclusively) to the 60s cohort earlier this year.   In March and April, it was clear that a lot of hard work and money was going into the difficult work of securing any of the 3 approved vaccines, and that how they would be used was based on the risk/benefit profiles known at the time in order to optimise vaccination rates and minimise hospitalisations.

Hence: _NIAC said that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were “associated with higher overall protection which supports the preference to use them in those at highest risk of severe illness and death from Covid-19″ (unable to insert link to journal.ie 3 Feb 2021)._

I don’t think there were complaints last Spring from people in their 60s being offered the AZ vaccine (despite such official statements implying they were not getting the higher level of protection offered by the approved mRNA vaccines, as well as some other European countries officially advising that sections of this population should not receive it – see, for example, the article above) because most intelligent people understood the complexities of supply and the need to priortiise the even-higher-risk groups with any available mRNA vaccines.  

The age-risk profile was well publicised, understood and supported.  Everyone celebrated those in their 70sand older getting their mRNA vaccines first, as well as groups of frontline workers and other vulnerable people getting vaccinated as early as possible. 

The part that was infantilising and patronising at that time was Leo stating ‘you *will* go to the back of the queue, and have to wait for an alternative to be offered by the State’. He didn’t say ‘might’, he said ‘will’.   _(unable to insert link to rte.ie 15 April 2021)_

The ‘feeling like a fool’, and loss of trust, comes from quickly realising this was a lie; from knowing that my fellow 60s cohort who were ‘cute’, or ‘in the know’, and did not comply with the rollout to their group, were not deprived of a vaccine as threatened, but rather rewarded almost immediately with a vaccine that NIAC had acknowledged offed 'higher overall protection' (and had no known rare serious side effects as had emerged with AZ).

Those fully-vaccinated-for-several-weeks-non-compliers  have now been joined by the fully-vaccinated in the 50s cohort, many in the 40s cohort and, if you are still waiting for your second AZ vaccine, you are in a similar posiiton to those in their 30s who have now had their first vaccine.

All of this pales when one looks at the injustice of vaccine supply in most African countries: less than 1% of the population across the African continent have been fully vaccinated.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (27 Jun 2021)

Let's be honest here if there was no Delta variant we wouldn't be discussing this.

In Feb AZ published widely that their vaccine provided a very high level of protection against the then dominant Alpha variant and went on to say that it was 100% effective in preventing serious illness and hospitalisation. 

It was known that all vaccines at that time were/are two dose regimens with AZ themselves saying that the 12 week interval between doses was the optimum time to achieve those figures above.

No other vaccine made that claim, So it could be argued that the over 60s etc got the "best" vaccine available. 

And I'll repeat again if there wasn't a Delta variant this wouldn't be an issue. Or, if we were still only getting Pfizer contracted quantity in the 2nd quarter we'd probably be still in the 60s group. 

On the point of Leo saying what he said I'm still unsure why this has caused offence. 

The goal of the rollout was, and still is to vaccinate the population and if some were playing " silly buggers" by choosing what vaccine they wanted a  message needed to be sent.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (27 Jun 2021)

Paul O Mahoney said:


> The goal of the rollout was, and still is to vaccinate the population and if some were playing " silly buggers" by choosing what vaccine they wanted a message needed to be sent.



Fully agree.  Vaccinating the population should take precedence over my personal requirements.

Brendan


----------



## Sophrosyne (27 Jun 2021)

Well, Fintan O’Toole is not speaking for this sexagenarian nor any I know.

I don’t feel like an “eejit”, rather I was damn glad to get _any_ vaccine.

No vaccine provides 100% protection.

Like my fellow vaccinated sexagenarian family and friends, we don’t put ourselves in the way of contracting and so spreading the virus and are happy to do it for as long as it takes.

Some people grow older but sadly, not wiser.


----------



## Prosper (27 Jun 2021)

jupiter said:


> I registered for AZ (age 68), though I was annoyed at being bullied by Leo: I would _go to the back of the queue / not be vaccinated till Autumn_ if I didn't take it.


The piece written by Fintan O'Toole is what started this thread. I believe he was right in what he wrote but he's a journalist and can take the high moral ground and pick holes in government policy and in what politicians say. But politicians in government, such as Varadkar, have to actually make and implement decisions. I don't think Varadkar was wrong to put his head above the parapet in order to discourage people from refusing to take the AZ vaccine. He couldn't micro manage the situation and so I'm sure he knew that some people would play the system in order to get the vaccine they wanted.


jupiter said:


> Future compliance is not encouraged by patronising and threatening this cohort.


This was a main point of O'Toole's piece but my guess is that if Varadkar and government had not tried their best to discourage people from turning down the AZ vaccine in the hope of getting the Pfizer then a lot more people would have "tried it on". If you look back on AAM you will see people were considering this course of action. If too many people had taken this "mé féin" approach (mainly because of the very very very small risk of blood clots and the shorter gap to the second jab) then the vaccine rollout would have been impacted badly. The fact that the rollout has gone very well might be partly due to successfully discouraging many people from taking the "mé féin" approach.


Paul O Mahoney said:


> decisions were made based on scientific evidence that the AZ vaccine was safe for people of a certain age profile and this wasn't just the Irish medical profession saying this,this was the EMA and other European countries.


I agree. If I recall correctly, the threat of blood clots was greater for the younger half of the population.


jupiter said:


> The part that was infantilising and patronising at that time was Leo stating ‘you *will* go to the back of the queue, and have to wait for an alternative to be offered by the State’. He didn’t say ‘might’, he said ‘will’.


As I said above he couldn't micro-manage it but he could put his head above the parapet and do his best to discourage people from taking the selfish approach. My guess is that some people turned down the AZ and pressured their GP's to give them an mRNA vaccine.


jupiter said:


> this was a lie


It wasn't a lie. Could the authorities have taken greater efforts to discourage the "mé féiners"? No doubt they could, but then they would have been accused of bullying the older age group. Time will tell if any systems were put in place by the HSE to back up Varadkars threat. However, no matter how good the system there will always be some who get through the net.


Paul O Mahoney said:


> It was known that all vaccines at that time were/are two dose regimens with AZ themselves saying that the 12 week interval between doses was the optimum time to achieve those figures above.


I think that the it was known a couple of months back that the Pfizer was a 4 week gap and the AZ a 16 (then 12 and now 8) week gap between jabs. On AAM months ago you could see how some people put a very high value of travelling abroad for holidays. Getting the Pfizer would have been a high priority for them because they would have been fully vaccinated  two months ahead of the AZ.


Paul O Mahoney said:


> The goal of the rollout was, and still is to vaccinate the population and if some were playing " silly buggers" by choosing what vaccine they wanted a message needed to be sent.


Agreed. When the dust settles, I'd love to know how many people turned down the AZ or JJ vaccines and received the Pfizer or Moderna without much of a delay and if they got it through the HSE (i.e. at vaccination centres) or through their GP's.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (27 Jun 2021)

Sophrosyne said:


> Well, Fintan O’Toole is not speaking for this sexagenarian nor any I know.
> 
> I don’t feel like an “eejit”, rather I was damn glad to get _any_ vaccine.
> 
> ...


It's a tribute to you and your family that you posted this. Mind you with you all begin  " sexagarians " , my mind says " groovy baby" ,and being happy really is the nectar of what will hopefully get us to a better place.

I have no issue with the article or its point of view, and I'm sure it reflects the view of many,  but when it decides to become a " rallying rant" , in his own head , it loses credibility as the facts counter so much of it.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (27 Jun 2021)

Prosper said:


> The piece written by Fintan O'Toole is what started this thread. I believe he was right in what he wrote but he's a journalist and can take the high moral ground and pick holes in government policy and in what politicians say. But politicians in government, such as Varadkar, have to actually make and implement decisions. I don't think Varadkar was wrong to put his head above the parapet in order to discourage people from refusing to take the AZ vaccine. He couldn't micro manage the situation and so I'm sure he knew that some people would play the system in order to get the vaccine they wanted.
> 
> This was a main point of O'Toole's piece but my guess is that if Varadkar and government had not tried their best to discourage people from turning down the AZ vaccine in the hope of getting the Pfizer then a lot more people would have "tried it on". If you look back on AAM you will see people were considering this course of action. If too many people had taken this "mé féin" approach (mainly because of the very very very small risk of blood clots and the shorter gap to the second jab) then the vaccine rollout would have been impacted badly. The fact that the rollout has gone very well might be partly due to successfully discouraging many people from taking the "mé féin" approach.
> 
> ...


I'll have to piece through this tomorrow,  but an answer to your last paragraph would be......not a hope.


----------



## Purple (28 Jun 2021)

Fintan O'Toole "feels like an eejit"​When I saw the title I was going to have a go at @Brendan Burgess for such a vague thread title; when it comes to Fintan there are so many topics it could apply to.


----------

