The vaccines | vaxxed boosted unvaxxed? New poll

[Paul the Wolf]

Apologies, I wasn't saying thats what I think about the UK regulators, I was saying thats what people on here seem to think.

Some people have genuinely seemingly convinced themselves that the MHRA is full of quacks and government hacks who cut corners, while other regulators are thorough, independent and on a different level. This is what Brwned is talking about. Its really a bit mad that people, in their desire to pile on the Tories/ the UK in general, have pushed themselves into thinking this.

It isn't true at all, the MHRA is an excellent organisation, as is the EMA and the FDA. They all have amazing scientists and structures.

Interesting, there was a grand total of 9 days between when the UK approved the pfizer vaccine and when the USA approved it. And then another 10 days from the USA to the EU.

You'd think there'd been about a year or at least a few months between the authorisation dates reading how people talk about it on here.

Thanks for that.
My beef with the UK and the Tories is about Brexit, as is well documented I didn't want to get involved with Covid related issues but got drawn into as people tried to turn it into a UK vs EU issue.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

The leader of one of the biggest powers in the EU said the AZ Vaccine is quasi-ineffective in 65 and above which is completely false if that isn't playing politics what is.

He could of said there's not enough data currently available which would of been a lot closer to the truth, but your gonna tell me that such sayings from the leader of a country mean nothing and no one pays attention.

Macron was being a dick, sure (and has since retracted those comments). None of what you say there has anything to do with the decision to pause the vaccine though.

 

[massi83]

The leader of one of the biggest powers in the EU said the AZ Vaccine is quasi-ineffective in 65 and above which is completely false if that isn't playing politics what is.

He could of said there's not enough data currently available which would of been a lot closer to the truth, but your gonna tell me that such sayings from the leader of a country mean nothing and no one pays attention.

Of course it was stupid but it has nothing to do with has been happening last couple of days. Norwegian health experts don't give a shit what Macron has said previously. Saying otherwise is nothing short of conspiracy bs.

 

[Ronaldo's Mum Eh?]

It is too soon for peer reviewed journal articles. They take time so they will appear soon especially as we are still adding to the data so when published the error bars will be much reduced and give us more accurate answers. However, the interim data is so overwhelming that it will only be a matter of how much infections are reduced (a difference of a percent or two most likely) and how hugely symptoms/hospitalisations are reduced when infected after vaccination. You seem to think it is possible that the results so far are imaginary.

If it is too soon for peer reviewed articles then why are you disputing the fact that I said there's no conclusive data yet? From your research how much will a vaccine prevent someone from dying from covid? If the numbers are so overwhelmingly in your favour, why do you need those who want to take their time making a decision get the vaccine right away? If you say it's to stop the virus from mutating, I have seen some "overwhelming" data to show that these vacccines can handle the mutations that are currently happening right now. And even if they don't, pro covid vaxxers have told me it should be fairly easy to tweak.

It isn't complusory. You just want the benefits of others taking it yourself. To protection everyone's health as many people as possible must take it and those who don't must be restricted to protect everyone's health, especially those who genuinely can't take. Not different from current practice were yo have to immunise to enrol your kids in school or to be eligible for certain family tax benefits in some countries. personally I'd add a 1% Medicare levy on anyone who refused a covid vaccination without a genuine medical exemption to help cover the cost of their selfishness.



Quite a task but you have topped yourself with baseless idiotic statements.

Everyone I know can't wait for a vaccination irrespective of their age, health or fitness level as it is the way back to normality and that is a country where we are more back to normal than most because we actually took the pandemic seriously. Since you like anecdotal evidence I'll give you 3 examples. Me, 57 years old, not medical predispositons, mild overweight but fit as a fiddle, probably drinks slighly more than is good for me at weekend. My sleeve is already rolled up for any vaccine that is authorsied. Two others I had salad lunch with today. My wife's 27 year old personal trainer, did a triatlon 2 weeks ago, runs daily and of course exercises constantly in his job. He wants the jab yesterday especially as he has elderly sick parents. Then my wife. Same age as me, very fit indeed, exercises more than once daily, runs 10km for fun regularly and will be a qualified PT by the end of the year - more enthusiastic than me for a jab.



Those who you think are "afraid" of covid (which really should be everyone given the way it has screwed the world) are exactly those who have come out of this the best. Those who haven't e.g. UK, US, Canada etc are the ones living in fear due to covid being allowed to run free. Vaccine reluctance and odd concerns that being made to protect yourself and others is some intolerable infringement to your "freedom" aren't logical. It is such a shame that vaccine refusal isn't just an individual thing as we could just let natural selection sort things out. No not entirely serious.

It isn't complusory. You just want the benefits of others taking it yourself. To protection everyone's health as many people as possible must take it and those who don't must be restricted to protect everyone's health, especially those who genuinely can't take. Not different from current practice were yo have to immunise to enrol your kids in school or to be eligible for certain family tax benefits in some countries. personally I'd add a 1% Medicare levy on anyone who refused a covid vaccination without a genuine medical exemption to help cover the cost of their selfishness.

When you are handing out covid passports, you're essentially forcing people to get the vaccine, if you dispute this I'd love to start a poll and see what the results of the other members here think. And I don't give a feck about reaping the benefits of it myself just so others can take it.. what a bizarre thing to say. My stance is if people want to take it, let them take it.. people should be free to do what they want to with their body.

I don't know where you live whereby vaccination is mandatory to go to school but here in Canada it's not. Do you live in China by any chance? I don't understand how you can have such a strict stance on something that should be optional. Maybe you're a product of your environment so that's why I ask if you live in China as that country tends to have a stricter stance and not value freedom as much as some of the Western countries.

Those who you think are "afraid" of covid (which really should be everyone given the way it has screwed the world) are exactly those who have come out of this the best. Those who haven't e.g. UK, US, Canada etc are the ones living in fear due to covid being allowed to run free. Vaccine reluctance and odd concerns that being made to protect yourself and others is some intolerable infringement to your "freedom" aren't logical. It is such a shame that vaccine refusal isn't just an individual thing as we could just let natural selection sort things out. No not entirely serious.

Stop fear mongering. "Everyone should be afraid of Covid" cmon now. Stop it. If you're healthy with no pre-existing conditions you have almost nothing to worry about if you get it Want stats that back this up? Here you go: https://www.publichealthontario.ca/...s-covid-19-infection-fatality-rates.pdf?la=en

and https://nbc25news.com/news/local/cdc-94-of-covid-19-deaths-had-underlying-medical-conditions

"Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death."

So for someone that is healthy, goes to the gym regularly, eats healthy - why should they fear covid? I just showed you out of deaths that the CDC provided in 2020, only 6% died only FROM covid, the other 94% had an average co-morbidity of 2.6. So i'm going to ask you again, if you don't have pre-existing conditions why fear it? Obviously don't go out there looking for it, be responsible and follow guidelines.. but I wouldn't be fearful.

Furthermore, the infection fatality rate is 0.05% if you're under 70 years old.

You want me to die because I refuse to take a vaccine until more long term data has come about? NOW who's being selfish?

They take as long as it takes to get the funding, the clinicians, the number of trial volunteers and the case numbers to demonstrate efficacy.

They also provide baseline information on safety. In the case of vaccines, the overwhelming majority of safety issues are found in the first 14 days post vaccination. The trials collect data for at least 2 months before applying for "emergency use". By that stage, with the covid vaccines, the earliest volunteers had been fully vaccinated for around 6 months and the bulk of the P3 trialists had been vaccinated for three or more.

The fact is you could continue testing that same group of trialists for the next 5 years or 50 years and you won't find anything new.

What you can't guarantee from any kind of trial is what will happen when you move from 10 thousand people in a trial, to 10 million in a rollout. If there's a problem that's only seen in people with a particular gene, or taking a particular drug, or who catch some disease in the same week or whatever - you don't see it on trials. Even if you run them until the trialists die of old age, you're unlikely to see it, and if you do see it then you'll have seen it within a month or so of injection.

That's why they monitor the vaccines, and will keep monitoring the vaccines as they give them to more people.

Thank you for this writeup jojojo, this was informative. Much appreciated.

 

[Ronaldo's Mum Eh?]

This is fecking mental, thousands of people are dying every single day and they are putting thousands more at risk for the sake of 37 possible reactions in 17,000,000 cases. It's minuscule compared to the risk of dying from Coronavirus. I am not sure what the death rate from Coronavirus, but half a percent of 17,000,000 is 85,000. Kind of puts in perspective, doesn't it? Take the fecking vaccine, it's a no brainer.

Can't help thinking there is a political angle on this to do with Brexit.

Is it? The infection fatality rate of Covid for those less than 70 years old was 0.05%. Source: https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

CDC also stated that 6% of deaths last year were as a result of only having covid with no other preconditions. 94% of the rest of the population that died had an average of 2.6 existing preconditions. Now that is sad for those 94% as no one deserves to die, but there are other viruses/illnesses that kill as well. I believe there has been a bit of fear mongering done by the media so I don't blame you for not knowing the stats.

I also would love to know if these figures were talked about in the Caf as I've tried to stay away from this topic as you're almost vilified if you even question covid or the world's response to covid.

 

[Ronaldo's Mum Eh?]

I’m not anti-vax, nor am I selfish. I just think this is being rushed & want to wait & research a bit before putting something in my body. I would argue the selfish ones are the people trying to pressure unsure people into getting it right away. WHO are now reviewing the Oxford vaccine which was “perfectly safe” less than a week ago. This is not like an MMR jab, there is new information all the time. If people want to call me “anti vax” I really couldn’t give a shit. We get one body, of course I’m careful about what I put into mine. Others should be the same. I’m not having a go at anyone for taking it without asking questions, which to me is stupid, because I believe in each to their own. If people wanna take it, great, if people don’t wanna take it, great. Lets make our own choices & not bully people who disagree.

This is what I've been saying in all these threads and yet i'm vilified, labelled an idiot, covid denier, anti vaxxer. This is the state of society nowadays and it's really really sad.

They want to pressure and rush us into taking a vaccine that majority were shocked could be produced this year. Like you said the information is always changing to not only this vaccine but covid as a whole.

How many times have we seen conflicting research, conflicting advice, moving of goalposts by government? The trust has been lost for a lot of people because the way we have handled this has been downright shambolic.

I have tried to tune out those covid conspiracy theorists but some of the stuff they've been predicting is coming to fruition and it sucks to have them come out now and say "told you so".

I can't wait until this thing passes as humanity has never been as divided until now.

 

[Wibble]

When you are handing out covid passports, you're essentially forcing people to get the vaccine, if you dispute this I'd love to start a poll and see what the results of the other members here think.

No you aren't. You are providing them with proof they have been vaccinated so they can do things like travel overseas. The predominantly African countries that require yellow fever vaccinations before you arrive are hideously impinging on your freedom by your view. Or simply looking after everyone's health in reality.

And I don't give a feck about reaping the benefits of it myself just so others can take it.. what a bizarre thing to say. My stance is if people want to take it, let them take it.. people should be free to do what they want to with their body.

I think you have missed the point. Not vaccinating is not something that just affects individuals as not vaccinating can affect if we can get to herd immunity and those who genuinely can't be vaccinated.

And you are free not to be vaccinated. The difference is that you want to be free to not vaccinate but get the benefits that those who have vaccinated get while simultaneously endangering everyone. That selfish level of self-entitled free riding just doesn't cut the mustard.

I don't know where you live whereby vaccination is mandatory to go to school but here in Canada it's not. Do you live in China by any chance?

NSW Australia. There are also family tax benefits that you can't get without vaccinating your kids. There is overwhelming support for it BTW.

I don't understand how you can have such a strict stance on something that should be optional.

Why should it? There are certain obligations that yu comply with as the price of living in a society, tax, seatbelt laws etc many of which are to encourage us to protect ourselves and others. I don't of course think we should be holding people down and sticking then with needles against their will but if you make choices you live with the consequences of that choice.

Maybe you're a product of your environment so that's why I ask if live in China as that country tends to have a stricter stance and not value freedom as much as some of the Western countries.

Half my life in the UK and half in Australia. This is a public health issue and the freedom to be an idiot is always targeted by laws, taxes, regulations or discouragement campaigns. This is no different. Personally I'd like the tax system in add 1% to the Medicare levy if you don't vaccinate to cover some of the cost.

Stop fear mongering. "Everyone should be afraid of Covid" cmon now. Stop it. If your'e healthy with no pre-existing conditions you have almost nothing to worry about. Want stats that back this up? Here you go: https://www.publichealthontario.ca/...s-covid-19-infection-fatality-rates.pdf?la=en

and https://nbc25news.com/news/local/cdc-94-of-covid-19-deaths-had-underlying-medical-conditions

"Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death."

The 2.7 million+ people who have died of this in the last would disagree if they were still around, as will their families and the millions more who are suffering debilitating long covid, as will the many millions who have suffered in various ways in the last year. Not being scared enough of it has been the biggest problem in most countries.

So for someone that is healthy, goes to the gym regularly, eats healthy - why should they fear covid? I just showed you out of deaths that the CDC provided in 2020, only 6% died only FROM covid, the other 94% had an average co-morbidity of 2.6. So i'm going to ask you again, if you don't have pre-existing conditions why fear it?

Have you not noticed what the pandemic has done to the world in the last 12 months? Left to run free things would have been far far worse and the only real way back to normality involves mass vaccination beyond the HIT, if that is possible.

Furthermore, the infection fatality rate is 0.05% if you're under 70 years old.

The fatality rate start rising much younger than that. The majority of countries have a fatality rate higher than 0.5% once you are over 50 and over 60 it is between 2 and 4%. Older people have death rates of up to 15-20%. Older people are people to you know?

And 0.5% of the world's population is 38.3 million dead people. Well over 50 million in reality as there are lots of older people where the death rate is 10-20%. If we vaccinate but don't reach HIT many of those deaths will be avoided but nowhere near all of them. I value one of those lives more highly than your self-centered version of freedom.

You want me to die because I refuse to take a vaccine until more long term data has come about? NOW who's being selfish?

Did you see the white text when you answered at least? Hard to miss.

I don't want anyone to die but if someone is stupid enough to not get vaccinated and if that choice didn't endanger us all (which it does), then if they then become infect and died I'm not going to shed too many tears TBH. But that decision does endanger us all which is which it isn't simply an individual choice.

 

[Wibble]

If it is too soon for peer reviewed articles then why are you disputing the fact that I said there's no conclusive data yet? From your research how much will a vaccine prevent someone from dying from covid? If the numbers are so overwhelmingly in your favour, why do you need those who want to take their time making a decision get the vaccine right away? If you say it's to stop the virus from mutating, I have seen some "overwhelming" data to show that these vacccines can handle the mutations that are currently happening right now. And even if they don't, pro covid vaxxers have told me it should be fairly easy to tweak.

The data is highly convincing. Only the minor detail may change as we get bigger sample sizes. So no. I don't agree with you.

In some studies infections have been reduced by up to 87%. Israeli data suggests that the Phizer vaccine reduces severe illness by 92%, hospitalisations by 87. Public Health England pre-print data shows that a single dose of either Pfizer or the Oxford vaccine cuts the risk of hospitalisation by 80%.

Peer reviewed yet? No. Going to be fictional once more data collected and/or peer reviewed? No.

There may be movement in the data to some degree but It would be utterly idiotic to believe it will be a huge difference or to act as if it weren't true. Why do you want it not to be true so badly?

 

[Grinner]

I've officially ben offered the ability to make an appointment to get vaccinated in California. I'm impressed how quick this has happened. My insurance will also reimburse me for the Covid test that I have to take to fly to Heathrow to connect to a NorCal flight.

I checked the online appointment system and I can get it tomorrow if I were in town.

 

[Wibble]

This is what I've been saying in all these threads and yet i'm vilified, labelled an idiot, covid denier, anti vaxxer. This is the state of society nowadays and it's really really sad.

Vilified? Get a grip. If you posts the nonsense that you do you have to expect to be challenged.

They want to pressure and rush us into taking a vaccine that majority were shocked could be produced this year. Like you said the information is always changing to not only this vaccine but covid as a whole.

None of the "rush" compromised safety. Why do you insist on ignoring this fact?

How many times have we seen conflicting research, conflicting advice, moving of goalposts by government? The trust has been lost for a lot of people because the way we have handled this has been downright shambolic.

You seem to actively want to do nothing and delight in any ambiguity so you can deliberately take the wrong meaning from things.

I have tried to tune out those covid conspiracy theorists but some of the stuff they've been predicting is coming to fruition and it sucks to have them come out now and say "told you so".

Really? Which bit? 5G? Bill Gates? Your DNA will be altered? George Soros? Enlighten us.

 

[Wibble]

CDC also stated that 6% of deaths last year were as a result of only having covid with no other preconditions.

So you not only don't care if old people die but also people who dare to have another health issue. What other group do you want to ignore who are overly represented in death statistics?

 

[christy87]

So you not only don't care if old people die but also people who dare to have another health issue. What other group do you want to ignore who are overly represented in death statistics?

Maybe you should just put him on your ignore list, he’s clearly put plenty groups of people on that list and there is no talking to some people, 2 of the polish fellas at work still think it’s a plandemic.

 

[prateik]

So you not only don't care if old people die but also people who dare to have another health issue. What other group do you want to ignore who are overly represented in death statistics?

It's not even that they make up a small number of the population . ..


Over 40% of the US adult population is obese..
google shows the prevalence of Diabetes in the US is over 10% and hypertension is nearly 50%

Nearly half of adults in the United States (108 million, or 45%) have hypertension defined as a systolic blood pressure ≥ 130 mm Hg or a diastolic blood pressure ≥ 80 mm Hg or are taking medication for hypertension.

and then there are all the other health conditions that are considered to be high risk.

Even if there is a huge overlap, its still a significant number of people who have "health issues"

 

[Wibble]

Maybe you should just put him on your ignore list, he’s clearly put plenty groups of people on that list and there is no talking to some people, 2 of the polish fellas at work still think it’s a plandemic.

Where would the fun be in that? Well not fun but ....

 

[Phil]

Well I got a Pfizer vaccine over the weekend and am still not having a great time. Heavy headed and sick feeling since. Fortunately the arm pain has subsided at least. Of course the rest of my family felt nothing.

 

[11101]

Apologies, I wasn't saying thats what I think about the UK regulators, I was saying thats what people on here seem to think.

Some people have genuinely seemingly convinced themselves that the MHRA is full of quacks and government hacks who cut corners, while other regulators are thorough, independent and on a different level. This is what Brwned is talking about. Its really a bit mad that people, in their desire to pile on the Tories/ the UK in general, have pushed themselves into thinking this.

It isn't true at all, the MHRA is an excellent organisation, as is the EMA and the FDA. They all have amazing scientists and structures.

Interesting, there was a grand total of 9 days between when the UK approved the pfizer vaccine and when the USA approved it. And then another 10 days from the USA to the EU.

You'd think there'd been about a year or at least a few months between the authorisation dates reading how people talk about it on here.

What's your opinion on why the MHRA approved the AZ vaccine quickly and in full, the EMA approved it with limitations (technically individual countries did that, but still), and the FDA sent them away and told them to come back with better data?

 

[balaks]

I got my second Pfizer yesterday and apart from a bit of a sore arm today I feel fine.

 

[Wolverine]

I have tried to tune out those covid conspiracy theorists but some of the stuff they've been predicting is coming to fruition and it sucks to have them come out now and say "told you so".

Really? I don't know i was told I was microchipping people, sterilising them and being called a nazi the first day I showed up to a vaccination clinic to give what is probably one of the safest and most effective forms of medical intervention.

Happy to say that you are in the minority, even amongst a vaccine-hesitant population group/demographic I serve as a GP - mostly south asian diaspora, uptake in the aggregate has been good, and continues to be.

This vaccine is really staggering in its efficacy and safety profile. Genuinely a medical miracle.

 

[Hernandez - BFA]

This whole “clots risk with AstraZenica” is ridiculous. Putting politics over health. Absolutely shambolic.

40 in 17 million cases isn’t it?

The risk of a clot for the combined contraceptive pill, that is prescribed on an annual basis for decades, is 1 in 10,000 - yet no one bats an eyelid.

 

[groovyalbert]

 

[Wolverine]

This whole “clots risk with AstraZenica” is ridiculous. Putting politics over health. Absolutely shambolic.

40 in 17 million cases isn’t it?

The risk of a clot for the combined contraceptive pill, that is prescribed on an annual basis for decades, is 1 in 10,000 - yet no one bats an eyelid.

To be fair that was my initial thinking to but I can't comment on why they've made that decision as I don't know the details of the cases reported

The Norwegians predicated the pause based on reporting 3 or 4 young people over a short period of time of with a rare combination of symptoms, this is from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, so different to a classical DVT or PE I'd imagine but like I said we don't know too much about the clinical conditions of that cluster this decision is based on
https://www.fhi.no/en/news/2021/nor...fied-of-blood-clots-and-bleeding-in-younger-/

The Norwegian Medicines Agency has received several adverse event reports about younger vaccinated people with bleeding under the skin (tiny dots and /or larger blue patches) after coronavirus vaccination.
Yesterday, the Norwegian Medicines Agency and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH) informed about an unexpected death from a brain haemorrhage in Tynset after vaccination with COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca.
Today (March 13), we received three more reports of severe cases of blood clots or brain haemorrhages in younger people who have received the AstraZeneca vaccine. These are now receiving hospital treatment. Common to these patients is that they have had a reduced number of blood platelets. Blood clots and subsequent brain haemorrhages are a rare condition.
The NIPH and the Norwegian Medicines Agency have initiated analyses to investigate the association between the vaccine and various forms of blood clots, such as stroke and blood clots in the lungs. These analyses will take time.

Also note how they phrased this pause

“I would like to point out that this pause does not mean that we advise against vaccination with AstraZeneca in the future. The AstraZeneca vaccine has good documentation, and having sufficient doses to ensure protection for as many people as possible in the risk groups as early as possible is also important, says Bukholm. “We are in a situation of increasing transmission where protection against COVID-19 disease is increasingly important.”

Also to note as mentioned we have not noted analogous clinical issues based on the larger sample size from the millions we've given this thing out for and worries about clots being a safety signal.

 

[africanspur]

What's your opinion on why the MHRA approved the AZ vaccine quickly and in full, the EMA approved it with limitations (technically individual countries did that, but still), and the FDA sent them away and told them to come back with better data?

FDA probably because they currently don't need it. They've ramped up vaccination massively with their 2 American vaccines and don't need any other candidates. I believe they've already given 75 million people at least one dose, which is exceptional.

As you rightly pointed out, the EMA did not put any restrictions on the use of the AZ vaccine and it was individual countries who did so, decisions they have now reversed.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

This whole “clots risk with AstraZenica” is ridiculous. Putting politics over health. Absolutely shambolic.

40 in 17 million cases isn’t it?

The risk of a clot for the combined contraceptive pill, that is prescribed on an annual basis for decades, is 1 in 10,000 - yet no one bats an eyelid.

It’s not that simple unfortunately. The safety profile of the OCP has been established over decades. We can say that the 1 in 10000 risk is based on a huge amount of data. Despite this the PRAC have met twice in the last few years, reviewing all available data, then coming up with new recommendations around how to prescribe the pill more safely.

This vaccine has been around for months, not decades. We’re in the very early stages of understanding its overall safety profile. Obviously the fact we’re talking about low numbers of overall serious adverse events is very reassuring.

However we’re seeing clusters of unusual, serious adverse events (and these aren’t run of the mill DVTs/PEs, to be clear) in a specific cohort of people that have been exposed in relatively low numbers (young HCWs). The UK has been mainly using the AZ vaccine in the elderly and mainly with a very long gap between doses (license is 4 to 12 weeks but mainly used with 12 week gap in the UK) So we need to be careful we’re comparing apples with apples before using UK data to dismiss these concerns.

There’s every chance the vaccine still has an overall positive risk:benefit profile but it’s also possible there is some specific small cohort of people in whom it would be better to prescribe a different vaccine. This could be for any reason from an underlying condition to something as simple as another medicine they’re taking. A lot of these cases seem to be young/female. Maybe it’s an interaction with the OCP?

When you have alternatives available and the cohort being made to wait just a few days longer for their vaccines are either at at relatively low risk from covid anyway (young HCW) or have potentially complex medical needs and are on multiple medications (young high risk) then it really isn’t that crazy to take a few days to try and get to the bottom of these clusters and see if there’s any way the (already safe) vaccine could be used in a slightly safer way.

If anything, it’s the unwarranted hysteria about clinical decisions being made for political reasons that is the bigger problem in terms of undermining our faith in the way the safety of these vaccines is being monitored.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

One thing this has shown me is that there are experts within experts and when it comes to niche expertise the media are terrible at indentifying the right people to talk to. I’ve seen numerous physicians rolled out in front of cameras on the basis of their angry tweets to tell everyone what a terrible idea this is when they clearly have very little understanding of pharmacovigilance. The equivalent of getting a gastroenterologist on tv to talk about brain surgery. Whereas to the lay viewer they must be an expert because they have Prof or Dr in front of their name. It’s immensely frustrating to watch

 

[Wolverine]

One thing this has shown me is that there are experts within experts and when it comes to niche expertise the media are terrible at indentifying the right people to talk to. I’ve seen numerous physicians rolled out in front of cameras on the basis of their angry tweets to tell everyone what a terrible idea this is when they clearly have very little understanding of pharmacovigilance. The equivalent of getting a gastroenterologist on tv to talk about brain surgery. Whereas to the lay viewer they must be an expert because they have Prof or Dr in front of their name. It’s immensely frustrating to watch

Definitely, mind you there are very well-credentialed signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration who are probably vastly more well credentialed physicians comparing to some of us when it comes to talking about key aspects of the pandemic but we can see are spouting pseudoscientific nonsense/specious reasoning. So I do think the appeal to authority fallacy does occasionally apply.

My slight annoyance in this whole thing is a distinct lack of nuance in recent reporting around european countries pausing AZ. Yes there is no evidence from our vaccination monitoring that it increases clotting risk but they might well have their own reasons for pausing it on their end based bioethically. Neither side is necessarily "wrong" and possibly political decision may be a factor but we don't know, so lets just wait and see before giving out our hot takes. Its the surety of people spouting their opinions thats grating.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Definitely, mind you there are very well-credentialed signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration who are probably vastly more well credentialed physicians comparing to some of us when it comes to talking about key aspects of the pandemic but we can see are spouting pseudoscientific nonsense/specious reasoning. So I do think the appeal to authority fallacy does occasionally apply.

My slight annoyance in this whole thing is a distinct lack of nuance in recent reporting around european countries pausing AZ. Yes there is no evidence from our vaccination monitoring that it increases clotting risk but they might well have their own reasons for pausing it on their end based bioethically and neither side is necessarily "wrong" and possibly political decision may be a factor but we don't know, so lets just wait and see before giving out our hot takes. Its the surety of people spouting their opinions thats grating.

Yeah, definitely.

I’ve had dealings with a few of the main players here. The MHRA, the EMEA and (in Ireland) the HPRA. I have nothing other than absolute faith in their scientific rigour. As well as their status as organisations set up to operate completely independent of political influence. I genuinely believe the pharmaceutical regulators are second to none.

So it does boil my piss when so many people seem so willing to assume they’re making decisions based on the whims of politicians. We saw this with the MHRA being criticised for licensing the AZ vaccine so quickly and now the HPRA (amongst others) are getting shit for this pause. It’s all absolute nonsense IMHO.

 

[redshaw]

In Germany there's 7 rare cases, hence the pause, these aren't the usual cases that both Pfizer and AZ have which are unrelated to the vaccine.


WHO will be the last to know if there's any evidence. There's no evidence of human to human transmission they said as well. WHO only receive the evidence once it's found and sent to them, we'll see what Norway and Germany find, could be coincidence, batch specific, rare genetics that need further investigation.

 

[Wolverine]

Yeah, definitely.

I’ve had dealings with a few of the main players here. The MHRA, the EMEA and (in Ireland) the HPRA. I have nothing other than absolute faith in their scientific rigour. As well as their status as organisations set up to operate completely independent of political influence. I genuinely believe the pharmaceutical regulators are second to none.

So it does boil my piss when so many people seem so willing to assume they’re making decisions based on the whims of politicians. We saw this with the MHRA being criticised for licensing the AZ vaccine so quickly and now the HPRA (amongst others) are getting shit for this pause. It’s all absolute nonsense IMHO.

Part of it though I understand because reporting around the subject hasn't been great but also its natural to get slightly hyper-reflexively defensive about this jab given what we have to convey to our population who are already surrounding by misinformation and might tip the hesitants over to declining it. There is a bit of emotional investment given what health professionals have been through that might be affecting how we response.

But to be fair we should be reassured that we don't have just the one vaccine candidate here and so anything discovered as a side effect that pauses that particular vaccine may not mean the end of what we want to achieve in terms of the inoculation program.

On a wider note as mentioned before this pandemic could have been a good opportunity to promote scientific literacy and its been missed a bit I feel, through no one particular person/things fault.

 

[UweBein]

This whole “clots risk with AstraZenica” is ridiculous. Putting politics over health. Absolutely shambolic.

40 in 17 million cases isn’t it?

The risk of a clot for the combined contraceptive pill, that is prescribed on an annual basis for decades, is 1 in 10,000 - yet no one bats an eyelid.

It's not as simple, though.
This particular clot is very rare and it seems to be a problem for young people (below 50), mainly female.

 

[11101]

FDA probably because they currently don't need it. They've ramped up vaccination massively with their 2 American vaccines and don't need any other candidates. I believe they've already given 75 million people at least one dose, which is exceptional.

As you rightly pointed out, the EMA did not put any restrictions on the use of the AZ vaccine and it was individual countries who did so, decisions they have now reversed.

That's dodging the question.

The FDA made them start a new trial months ago, when they definitely did need all the vaccines they could get, and the individual regulation agencies of the largest European countries are hardly any less qualified than the EMA.

I'm not trying to corner you. I would just like to know your opinion on why credible, qualified regulators have all come to very different decisions on the same data.

 

[Wolverine]

In Germany there's 7 rare cases, hence the pause, these aren't the usual cases that both Pfizer and AZ have which are unrelated to the vaccine.


WHO will be the last to know if there's any evidence. There's no evidence of human to human transmission they said as well. WHO only receive the evidence once it's found and sent to them, we'll see what Norway and Germany find, could be coincidence, batch specific, rare genetics that need further investigation.

My understanding is incidence for CVST can be around 2-5 per million annually, it is rare but does happen. But occurs usually in women in the 30s, with increased risk from factors like contraceptive pill and pregnancy. Maybe covid itself.

 

[RoyH1]

I'm sorry, there is absolutely no way the Norwegian, Swedish or Danish health authorities would do such a thing for a political gain. An overabundance of caution bordering on the cowardly, yes, but I don't think for a moment that there is a political element in it. Something in the data spooked them and they're doing their due diligence. I expect the vaccination with AZ to be given the green light soon.

 

[UweBein]

My understanding is incidence for CVST can be around 2-5 per million annually, it is rare but does happen. But occurs usually in women in the 30s, with increased risk from factors like contraceptive pill and pregnancy. Maybe covid itself.

That's the thing, in Germany that bar was reached within 6 weeks.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

 

[Pogue Mahone]

This fecking guy. He was on Irish telly last night. Presumably on the basis of similar tweets over last few days. Exactly who I was thinking of when I mentioned medical experts who don’t understand pharmacovigilance.

 

[Dumbstar]

Got my jab booked for Monday. So, so happy!! Got a text out of the blue, must be all the new shipment of vaccines or lots of cancellations of AZ. Either way, woohoo.

 

[Wolverine]

That's the thing, in Germany that bar was reached within 6 weeks.

Yup its right that that is explored further then. It would have been more unusual had that disease been noted outside of the typical demographic (which are young, females of reproductive age), certainly incidence wise it is a bit more raised.

Very often misdiagnosed and possibly underdiagnosed as migraine though. John Hopkins says around 1 in 200000
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/cerebral-venous-sinus-thrombosis

 

[Wolverine]

This fecking guy. He was on Irish telly last night. Presumably on the basis of similar tweets over last few days. Exactly who I was thinking of when I mentioned medical experts who don’t understand pharmacovigilance.

Its difficult though for reporters to not see "Pulmonary Vascular Physician" in this guy's twitter bio and not think his opinion on a clot-related medical story would be credible especially as it reinforces the working narrative they want to convey

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Its difficult though for reporters to not see "Pulmonary Vascular Physician" in this guy's twitter bio and not think his opinion on a clot-related medical story would be credible especially as it reinforces the working narrative they want to convey

Yeah, absolutely. What made me want to put my fist through the screen was that the other guy they’d brought along to try and make the case for NIAC was even less qualified than him! So PVP man wiped the floor with his hapless opponent, despite gaping flaws in his argument that showed he had a fairly terrible grasp of the important issues here.

It was a bit of an eye-opener tbh. Makes me think about all the times I’ve listened to experts on, say, finance without taking a moment to think whether it might be a niche issue that they don’t fully understand.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Its difficult though for reporters to not see "Pulmonary Vascular Physician" in this guy's twitter bio and not think his opinion on a clot-related medical story would be credible especially as it reinforces the working narrative they want to convey

Yeah, absolutely. What made me want to put my fist through the screen was that the other guy they’d brought along to try and make the case for NIAC was even less qualified than him! So PVP man wiped the floor with his hapless opponent, despite gaping flaws in his argument that showed he had a fairly terrible grasp of the important issues here.

It was a bit of an eye-opener tbh. Makes me think about all the times I’ve listened to experts on, say, finance without taking a moment to think whether it might be a niche issue that they don’t fully understand.

Is this chap qualified enough to have an opinion?