MHRA may change advice for young people receiving AZ vaccine

[IloveSooty424]

I just saw this news story on Channel 4 news tonight.

www.channel4.com/news/uk-medicines-regulator-considers-issuing-new-advice-over-oxford-astrazeneca-jab

It seems the MHRA may follow other European countries and Canada and advise that younger people should not receive the AZ vaccine. It seems the decision will be made imminently in the coming days.

I’m due to book my vaccine this week and don’t know whether to wait and see how this plays out. I’m 42. I’m also concerned that if younger people will only be offered the Pfizer vaccine it will slow down the vaccine programme substantially.

Any thoughts?

It shouldn’t be. They’ve already said that the vaccines have broken the link between case numbers and hospitalisations/deaths.

Tbh though, bumbleymummy, it’s the principle. Young people have given up so much for their elders. Is it really too much to ask that those elders now do their bit for the youngsters by taking a free, painless test a couple of times a week?
Our youngest has asthma but won’t receive his vaccine until July. He’ll probably be fine but might not. He’s missed an entire year of face to face teaching for CEV family members, but so much more than that. Friendships, possible relationships. No personal contact with anyone of his own age.
Young people are so often accused of being entitled but I heard the opposite today. An older, close relative who knows his situation perfectly well but isn’t prepared to inconvenience themselves for a couple of months in return.
Wouldn’t that upset you?

Agree completely btw.

I don’t think we should be vaccinating the young at all - unless they are more vulnerable, utterly pointless and a waste of a vaccine to boot, not to mention a pointless risk to them.

What is now bothering me is that we have various vaccines in stage four trials ABs we know there is a very rare but serious issue with at least one of them. Vaccine passports will essentially coerce the young who want their lives back. (and who we should be thanking daily for giving up their lives thus far but i digress).

We now have a pretty good idea that young people will die from the vaccines - or suffer serious health issues which may be permanent. We know this although we don’t know the numbers. Yet these people don’t need the vaccine for any reason at all. But we are forcing them into it - and therefore causing their death or serious illness.

And that’s before we even consider whether there are other risks as yet unquantified (there are reports of capillary damage coming out) or longer term effects, particularly from repeated vaccines that we simply don’t know about.

We want to force this?

It’s making me feel nauseous the extent we have come. These are young people with their whole lives ahead of them.

Im sure plenty of people old and young won't be taking the twice weekly test
We were told the once the most vulnerable had been vaccinated we could start to move on ,

Is it really too much to ask that those elders now do their bit for the youngsters by taking a free, painless test a couple of times a week?

I don't really understand how old people (who are the most at risk) taking a test would benefit young people (who are not at risk) in any way?

I think young people have given up enough for the greater good this past year. None of us got a vote or referendum for these lockdown policies, none of us got asked if we were happy to lose jobs/friends/opportunities. The fact that people on this thread are trying to guilt trip young & healthy people into taking a vaccine which won't benefit them "for the greater good" - to protect older people that are themselves vaccinated - is a pisstake. Makes me think it is government employees trying to bump up the numbers TBH.

People die every day because they can't get an organ transplant. Should we be guilt-tripping young healthy people into donating their kidneys for the greater good too?

I can't understand anyone having a problem with testing twice-weekly aside from those with medical conditions that make it difficult or risky. Surely there is no downside, aside from the fact that it is a bit uncomfortable, and an inconvenience.

@Fieldofmemes

I can't understand anyone having a problem with testing twice-weekly aside from those with medical conditions that make it difficult or risky. Surely there is no downside, aside from the fact that it is a bit uncomfortable, and an inconvenience.

Apart from it being a waste of over £100 billion with no obvious advantage and the possibility of finding thousands of 'asymptomatic' cases that help justify ongoing restrictions and stupid vaccine passports.

@Fieldofmemes

I can't understand anyone having a problem with testing twice-weekly aside from those with medical conditions that make it difficult or risky. Surely there is no downside, aside from the fact that it is a bit uncomfortable, and an inconvenience.

And all the plastic waste

@Fieldofmemes

I can't understand anyone having a problem with testing twice-weekly aside from those with medical conditions that make it difficult or risky. Surely there is no downside, aside from the fact that it is a bit uncomfortable, and an inconvenience.

I can imagine the huge downside for many would be losing their income if they need to isolate after testing positive. For example self employed workers won't get any sick pay. The government has wasted a lot of money during this pandemic and yet still failed to put in place adequate financial support to enable everyone to stick to the isolation rules.

I can't understand anyone having a problem with testing twice-weekly aside from those with medical conditions that make it difficult or risky. Surely there is no downside, aside from the fact that it is a bit uncomfortable, and an inconvenience.

Who will it benefit? All the vulnerable/elderly/anyone who wants it will have been vaccinated and immune. Seems like a huge moneymaking scheme for those chums of the government who own big testing companies. Huge waste of taxpayer funds.

I hear what you're ALL (LOL) saying and ok I agree there are downsides. But isn't the (very important) point of the testing to stop variants in their tracks .... because the spread of a new variant could render all the vaccines useless and then we'd be back to square one. Surely this makes it worthwhile?

I can imagine the huge downside for many would be losing their income if they need to isolate after testing positive. For example self employed workers won't get any sick pay

But that person at least has the knowledge that they might have covid and can take precautions that maybe they wouldn't have done otherwise

Yes, they still can't afford not to work and maybe they feel well enough to do so but they can adapt their behaviour

There's benefit in that imo