The clotting issue may affect the J&J vaccine also as it has similar profile...We could be in the same boat with AZ. Clots, reduced effectiveness against variants, supply issue. What next?!
Who's liable for Covid-19?Are you basing this on something? History would suggest that we have no issue with seeking compensation when things that could have been avoided resulted in some suffering.
They too can cause clots but not affect platelets. Once companies apply for full licences they'll have to answer what is causing these issues.The clotting issue may affect the J&J vaccine also as it has similar profile...
So it'll be all about the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna).
Could be wrong - I thought they caused 'normal' clots more easily dealt with, whereas the deeper concern with AZ was these brain clots?They too can cause clots
Sorry I was editing my post, " normal " clots aren't pleasant either and can travel to heart and lungs. It's really up to the companies to get the answer's, nearly all side effects from vaccines come from the adjuvants used to get the vaccine into your system.Could be wrong - I thought they caused 'normal' clots more easily dealt with, whereas the deeper concern with AZ was these brain clots?
Are you basing this on something? History would suggest that we have no issue with seeking compensation when things that could have been avoided resulted in some suffering.
Better late than never but looks like others in Europe were acting quicker again.NIAC to recommend restriction of AstraZeneca vaccine to over-60s
NIAC recommends restriction of AZ jab to over-60s
The National Immunisation Advisory Committee (NIAC) has recommended that only people over 60 years of age should get the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine.www.rte.ie
Better late than never but looks like others in Europe were acting quicker again.
Also wonder if anyone already did an analyze here of the impact on the roll out.
I think it is a debatable/not quite clear yet in regards to the occurrence. Seems to vary as well per country.I understand fully why they made this call for under 50s. Their covid risk is low. The fatal clot risk is 1 in a million but a lot more ppl will get the vaccine than covid.
But for example 50 something family member is in health care and received first dose and is now in limbo for second dose to be considered fully vaccinated.
High risk cohort who already received first dose will get second dose as scheduled.
Well we were to receive almost 900,000 AZ doses between April and June and from the data I've seen supply has settled down and weekly deliveries have increased.Better late than never but looks like others in Europe were acting quicker again.
Also wonder if anyone already did an analyze here of the impact on the roll out.
Accepting my lack of medical expertise, it does seem strange that we have managed to develop and produce at least four highly effective vaccines in such a short period of time because a number of companies/sectors worked together and managed to collaborate. We now have a situation where we start off saying we take all our guidance from the EMA which led to the vaccine being suspended for older people to being allowed for all cohorts, to the vaccine being paused before starting again saying it was safe to saying the vaccine was safer for the older cohorts to the EMA saying the AZ vaccine should be taken but it is up to National Regulators to design their own programmes. On the back of the same science, we have the UK giving the same vaccine to over 30's. France to over 55's, Germany and Ireland to over 60's and places like Bulgaria and Hungary not having restrictions at all. Indeed, Ireland don't give AZ to the over 70's so we are basically saying that the vaccine should only be given to people between the ages of 60 to 70.
As I said, not a scientist but why on earth would a 69 year old want that vaccine if they are saying a 70 year old should take an alternative. Likewise, telling a 59 year old that they will have to wait for an alternative vaccine while a 60 year old is injected with Astrazeneca doesn't make much logical sense to me. You had Ronan Glynn saying last night they could have picked a younger age but it was through an 'abundance of caution' that they chose 60. What does that mean? Why wasn't 65 chosen through an abundance of caution? Or the use of AZ paused completely? How much extra risk is France taking by giving it to 55-60 age cohort. How much extra risk is UK taking allowing 30-60 cohort take it? How did they decide the risk of clots versus the reward of successful covid vaccinations? If this decision delays rollout and easing of lockdown, what is the economic cost of 'picking' 60? Did that even factor into discussions? We have had thousands die from Covid but seem to have decided that the potential risk of losing less than 5 people due to the vaccine is unacceptable. Just seems odd.
The alternative to all of the above is that like the famous American Defence Secretary says: 'we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. ... But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know'
We aren't giving AZ to over 70s due to lack of trials data.
Although there's no trials data for extending second AZ dose to 16 weeks so they are contradicting themselves there.
If you look at the numbers, for under 30s, the clot risk is too high versus the benefit in terms of reduced deaths for that demographic.
Bearing in mind many more under 30s would be vaccinated than would be infected with covid.
Over 60, the benefits far outweigh the risk.
For people in the 50s the benefits are still much larger, so that's where the abundance of caution kicks in.
For over 30s the benefits still significantly outweigh the clot risk.
It's a balancing act.
You could draw the line and say AZ for over 50s and vulnerable.
If we only had AZ we would be using it on everyone over 30 for sure.
Or for certain groups, MVCs where you voluntarily sign up for AZ to skip the queue.
Lack of trial data is what was cited. it's also the reason they don't space out Pfizer vaccines even though other countries are doing it.Lack of trial data? The vaccine has been given out to millions of over 70's since December in the UK alone which is longer than the trial periods done to get approval so not only do we have some trial data, we have significant real world data.
We are talking about a one in a one million chance of dying from a blood clot so the risk of vaccinating the whole population with the AZ vaccine is that we could potentially see less than 5 deaths. The risk of under 30's and indeed the under 60's getting covid isn't just to their own health. It is that they spread it to people who are more susceptible to getting very ill from covid. We are still nowhere near fully vaccinating the over 70's or medically exposed and today we cancelled 15,000 appointments alone. We are told we still have high community transmission rates so the chances seeing another wave and significant covid related deaths seem to be me a lot greater than the risk of getting blood clots from the AZ vaccine.
They shouldn't be afraid of that. No one should be forced to be vaccinated or be vaccinated with a certain vaccine. Also people shouldn't panic about Covid either.I think the fear that most people have now is....what happens if they refuse to take the AZ vaccine.......will they be told to sit on the naughty boy step and wait until they are called.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?