EMA say AZ is safe.

[pinkearedcow]

Such good news!

@MythicalBiologicalFennel

They have no clue if the vaccine is causing these events and it needs further investigation

I've said this on the other thread. So much fuss and basically we are in the same situation as before this "review".

There is no evidence so far to say the vaccine caused these issues. The fact that further studies are going to be commissioned is surely what you would hope and expect from a responsible regulator. If the EMA had just said, "well we can't find an obvious link at the moment, so we'll just leave it there" that would not be very responsible of them.

Maybe just nettle tea or something.

Ever read anything on herbal remedies? All responsible books and websites carry warnings even for herbal remedies.

[quote doireallyneedaname]@pinkearedcow Sure, side effects. But death?[/quote]
If we expand the UK 1 death and 4 hospitalization from 11 million vaccines, we get 6 deaths and 25 hospitalisations. Total. Would you like to compare that with covid?

@RedToothBrush

Maybe just nettle tea or something.

Ever read anything on herbal remedies? All responsible books and websites carry warnings even for herbal remedies.

True. Perhaps making burnt offerings to the gods is the way forward, then. Although even that runs the risk of severe scorching of oneself!

One thing they haven't mentioned at all is risk factors. They're saying that venous thromboembolism happens as standard at a rate of about 1 in 500 every year, but those people will have specific risk factors - lack of mobility, use of HRT etc. They haven't mentioned at all whether the people who have developed VTE after the vaccine had any risk factors - ie would they be people who would be expected to develop VTE in the normal course of things, or are they considered unusual cases? I suppose they might be still in the process of investigating that, but I haven't seen it mentioned (would appreciate a link if there's something I've missed on that front).

As for the benefits outweighing the risks - for someone under the age of 50 it's absolutely not a given that the potential benefit outweighs the risk. For most people under 50 the personal risk (EMPHASIS: personal risk to the person themselves, not the risk the their relatives or people around them repeat, NOT THE RISK TO THEIR RELATIVES OR PEOPLE AROUND THEM - I will still get responses referring to this but I will ignore them as I've answered them twice here already) is extremely low, so the risk of the vaccine should be pretty much zero in order to be personally, repeat personally to the the person themselves worth it. If there is a genuine risk of a serious adverse event, even if that risk is very small then there is a judgement to be made about whether it's worth it for younger people to take on a health risk for the benefit of others (ie they will get the vaccine to prevent the spread, rather than to mitigate any personal risk). For older people, whose risk of covid is higher, the balance of personal risks is likely to more in favour of taking the vaccine (and even then depending on the actual risk, that may not be the case even for some very elderly people).

Given that many people have lost a year of their lives, had massive stress, have seen their children deprived of education and may have lost businesses and futures, asking people to take on a health risk on top of that is way way too far IMO. It should not be the case that elderly people are protected at all costs but younger people are expected to sacrifice and sacrifice and sacrifice some more. The question around whether the vaccine poses a health risk has to be answered because it's people's lives you're gambling with and it is not the case that covid is the only risk worth considering.

It's a calculated risk assessment
Exactly. I think this is the key. Personally I had to stop taking the pill due to the side effects. Right now I am on medication with gruelling side effects which are preferable to the alternative. I guess the positive of this is that now we have more information to make a decision.

pinkearedcow
That was my point. That at the moment there isn't enough information to prove or disprove a link.

[quote doireallyneedaname]@pinkearedcow Sure, side effects. But death?[/quote]
Aspirin can cause death. The Pill can cause death. Anti depressants can cause death....

@TheDailyCarbunkle They were asked about smokers being at higher risk of this and if the link between younger women and the contraceptive pill could play a part - they said they’re investigating it.

@TheDailyCarbunkle hwta is the point of posting with the advance caveat that you will ignore certain responses?

@eckerslike Toxic doses, absolutely. Not one pill.

hwta=what.

[quote doireallyneedaname]@TheDailyCarbunkle They were asked about smokers being at higher risk of this and if the link between younger women and the contraceptive pill could play a part - they said they’re investigating it.[/quote]
Interesting thanks @doireallyneedaname, I couldn't find that information.

The thing is some people aren't used to this sort of cautious language. Scientists hardly ever say anything in definite terms, there are always caveats.

This is a good thing, when things are delivered with absolute certainty, then you know you can't really trust it.

[quote pinkearedcow]@TheDailyCarbunkle hwta is the point of posting with the advance caveat that you will ignore certain responses?[/quote]
Because people will say over and over and over and over and over that people take the vaccine to protect other and I can't be arsed to answer that a million times.

I know that people take the vaccine to protect others.

I'm talking about the personal risk/benefit to the person themselves.

the risk of the vaccine should be pretty much zero in order to be personally, repeat personally to the the person themselves worth it

There is never going to be a zero risk vaccine. No medical intervention is ever going to be zero risk.

@TheDailyCarbunkle - people have concerns about long covid, particularly if they have other risk factors. It might not do to presume you speak for everyone under 50, many of us on this site are under 50 ourselves.

@pinkearedcow

the risk of the vaccine should be pretty much zero in order to be personally, repeat personally to the the person themselves worth it

There is never going to be a zero risk vaccine. No medical intervention is ever going to be zero risk.

That's why I said 'pretty much zero.' I'll explain my point one more time.

The risk of covid to people under 50 is very very low. So if the risk of the vaccine is any higher than the covid risk (and I mean the real risk, not the imaginary world where people believe covid means certain death/disability) then by taking the vaccine people are increasing rather than decreasing their personal health risk.

This is not a political, conspiracy-based argument, before those posts start. This is logic.

If you take a medication in order to prevent an illness, and that medication is more dangerous than the illness itself then you've made a poor personal choice in terms of protecting your own health. If you still want to make that choice, so be it. But at the very least you need to know that that's the choice you are making. Therefore, complete information is needed, not 'oh well medications are always dangerous' which amounts to 'take your medicine and shut up.'

[quote MRex]@TheDailyCarbunkle - people have concerns about long covid, particularly if they have other risk factors. It might not do to presume you speak for everyone under 50, many of us on this site are under 50 ourselves.[/quote]
I don't dispute that people have concerns about long covid.

That is totally unrelated to the point I'm making which is about balancing the real, evidenced risk of covid (as detailed by actual data, not by concerns) against the real, evidenced risk of the vaccine and making an informed judgement.

The risk of covid to people under 50 is very very low. So if the risk of the vaccine is any higher than the covid risk (and I mean the real risk, not the imaginary world where people believe covid means certain death/disability) then by taking the vaccine people are increasing rather than decreasing their personal health risk

Ok @TheDailyCarbunkle - so do you have figures on the risk in the under 50s of dying from covid vs the risk of dying from the vaccine?

Well, quite. All this furore over a 1 in 2 million vaccine event (if it is a vaccine event, which isn't proven) is illogical.

@pinkearedcow

The risk of covid to people under 50 is very very low. So if the risk of the vaccine is any higher than the covid risk (and I mean the real risk, not the imaginary world where people believe covid means certain death/disability) then by taking the vaccine people are increasing rather than decreasing their personal health risk

Ok @TheDailyCarbunkle - so do you have figures on the risk in the under 50s of dying from covid vs the risk of dying from the vaccine?

No of course not, because that data isn't available, which is why the current problem exists. Surely you know that?

Oh just switch the tv on and listen to Chris Whitty...

I'm not a medic.

But I've taken the vaccine and weighed up the risks of doing so. On current data, it is not unsafe.

So as the EMA says it's ok - it's carry on and vax without any concerns - the EU God has deemed it so. As you were.

@doireallyneedaname

I hate to break it but that’s not really what they’ve said.

They kept saying it’s safe but also said they can’t confirm the vaccine didn’t cause these issues and are therefore adding a warning to the patient leaflet.

And there it is, first response, which is quite depressing!

And then the longer one. Which takes a good point of logic and then applies it absolutely with no scientific basis, whilst saying it is a scentific basis!

Circularity is never particularly impressive!