I've decided not to go ahead with my 2nd dose of the AZ vaccine. I'm happy having the Pfizer - will this be allowed?

[Ashleys63]

I've just lost all confidence in the AZ vaccine and regret having it at all.
I know the risks are tiny etc etc but I want a vaccine without these associated risks.
I'm 56 so in one of the top groups but just feel so uneasy about it all now.

I think there is a lot of politics at play, concerning the AZ vaccine. It is no surprise that the EU seems to be hell bent on finding fault with a vaccine that the UK has been so heavily involved with, both financially and in terms of scientific collaboration. Also, it is being sold at cost by AZ during the pandemic, which makes other pharma companies look quite greedy.

I had my first AZ jab a month ago and will be happy to have my second in May. I think our government has done well to procure vaccine supplies quickly by pre-ordering them before they even existed, and they have done a brilliant job in rolling out the vaccines so quickly. I'm sure there is research going on to determine whether the blood clots that occurred were a direct result of the vaccine, or just an unconnected coincidence, but currently the stats indicate that the risk is tiny so I'm not going to dwell on it.

Some of these replies make me angry. How dare some posters scoff and mock those with genuine concerns due to personal medical history.

There are not enough eye rolls for the twaddle being spouted about the pill etc.. it's not the same bloody clots. The most ignorant are always the most dismissive.

Personal risk assessment has been tampered with so much in the past 12 months. It's become too complicated to work out between fact and fiction and even when you have all the facts it's still baffling

@Willyoujustbequiet I agree, it's unkind to mock those people who have such concerns. The trouble is, the talk of side effects is stoking people's fears, and plays into the hands of people with an anti vax agenda. Everyone has to weigh up their own risk factors.

@Willyoujustbequiet

What does it matter if it’s the same type of clot? No-one is comparing them like for like.

They are simply trying to show that there is a cognitive dissonance in happily taking the contraceptive pill or flying (especially long haul) where there is a much higher risk of a (similarly dangerous) side effect, yet refusing this vaccine that 100% prevents you from getting a disease severely enough to kill you.

That the problem.... People can't weigh up their own risks... If they could almost every one would be having the vaccine.
The OP has had her first az vaccination so there is no risk of these rare blood clots... She has no other risk factors, but she has weighed it up and decided its too risky.
A perfect example of the fact the statistics and risks get distorted by the media, and people get scared and rational weighing up of risks vs benefits is impossible.
Vaccinators or health care professionals are trained to be able to talk people through the risks vs benefits and so instead of people making decisions based on the daily mail and mn maybe they should get the correct information from someone who can give them facts untarnished with hyperbole and emotion.

@Kettledodger

Personal risk assessment has been tampered with so much in the past 12 months. It's become too complicated to work out between fact and fiction and even when you have all the facts it's still baffling

I think that is part of the problem - no one has all the facts. It is far too new a virus for that to happen. Researchers will be researching for a decade or more. Scientists and medics just dont know sometimes even relatively simple questions. And we are 1 year on already. And how can personal risk assessment be done? Each individual is unique, even amongst twins triplets etc.

@roguetomato

I just wondered, since the blood clotting is immune reaction, if those had a reaction would have got same result if they contracted covid?

That is what is bothering me - had blood issues with long covid - what would a vaccine do to me? The longer the issue about blood clots goes on, the more concerned I am. Why I told the NHS I am delaying the vaccine. I was wondering whether I would have got a reply back but I didnt. How could they reassure me anyway? Hoping to get an antibody test soon. Hoping I have high antibodies.

How can the Germans say there is no issue with mixing and matching vaccines when initially they would not approve AZ for over 65s due to lack of data?

Apples and oranges.

AZ wasn't tested on over 65s at the time. They had limited AZ vaccines and a large cohort of working age HCPs/others to vaccinate. In that situation it makes sense to direct the Pfizer jabs to older people and the AZ to younger. That advice changed as data from vaccinating older people accumulated.

Now it may be sensible to vaccinate the other way around and direct Pfizer to younger people to reduce the already very small risk of clotting

Mixed vaccinations was a debate held early on in many countries, we didn't go down that path and others did. Same debate was held about delaying the second jab to 12 weeks - we went down that path others didn't.

With many different decisions to make in a short time with limited data its not surprising if some countries made different decisions for their own population needs.

I did see a figure on how common blood clots are if you get covid and was shocked at it being so high (i cant for the life of me find it again though unfortunately).

It never ceases to amaze me how incapable of assessing risk statistics people are. Its been studied and found that even some doctors who are supposed to give this information about risks to patients dont properly understand statistics.

The numbers for covid are interesting in that younger people aren't necessarily more at risk as such. Its that the risk of dying of blood clots from the vaccine appears to be greater than that of dying from covid in the under 30s. So there risk/benefit analysis differs and its why they have drawn the line there.

In terms of having a history of blood clots, they had someone on bbc news yesterday talking about this. This type of clotting is unusual and associated with covid. And its different to other common clotting issues. Theyve not found a link with people with a history or family history of clots apparently. And they stressed that even if there were they would worry that you were more at risk of clots if you got covid itself.

Their response was if you have particular concerns about a condition you have and whether this affects your personal risk to seek professional advice from a doctor and discuss it with them otherwise just get on with having the vaccine as per the general advice.

I think this is entirely reasonable and sensible.

We know that Pfizer and Jansen vaccines have had issues with blood clotting.

There are lots of unknowns here but on the basis of what we do know, the numbers dont stack up as scary. Its just pot luck and the risk of being alive. We cannot fully eliminate risk of anything and understanding this is important to our sanity.

@RedToothBrush that’s exactly why there’s a strong feeling from some groups that the focus on AZ is political isn’t it?

I’m an eternal fence sitter, I recognise the logic and stats but also think if an issue has been raised it’s right it should be investigated. That shouldn’t be turned into the media/propaganda circus that we’ve witnessed over AZ though.

I’ve said it before, but if there had been a mythical millions of people trial with AZ and the SVT had shown up at the same rates I’m pretty sure it would have still been approved with the same advice we’re seeing now (happy to be corrected on that) but obviously that’s just not a realistic expectation. My go to comparison is Aspirin and children - that link took decades to establish because the reaction isn’t common or clear cut but we haven’t just stopped using Aspirin at all and still use it for children where the risk/benefit equation tilts in its favour.

[quote Cornettoninja]@RedToothBrush that’s exactly why there’s a strong feeling from some groups that the focus on AZ is political isn’t it?

I’m an eternal fence sitter, I recognise the logic and stats but also think if an issue has been raised it’s right it should be investigated. That shouldn’t be turned into the media/propaganda circus that we’ve witnessed over AZ though.

I’ve said it before, but if there had been a mythical millions of people trial with AZ and the SVT had shown up at the same rates I’m pretty sure it would have still been approved with the same advice we’re seeing now (happy to be corrected on that) but obviously that’s just not a realistic expectation. My go to comparison is Aspirin and children - that link took decades to establish because the reaction isn’t common or clear cut but we haven’t just stopped using Aspirin at all and still use it for children where the risk/benefit equation tilts in its favour.[/quote]
I'm pretty dam sure there are politics going on over AZ.

Whats interesting is how the UK doesn't have a politically led anti-vax movement of any size. This can't be said of most other places in Europe or North America.

The UK is very much being led by science rather than political decisions on vaccines. I know people will argue with this but I genuinely think this is true.

On the balance of known trial data, probabilities and knowledge of other vaccines the MHRA approved the AZ vaccine for all age groups. The EMA did the same. However INDIVIDUAL GOVERNMENTS came to a different conclusion and issued different guidance citing a lack of information. To an extent this was fair enough, as there wasn't evidence for the AZ vaccine itself - but the decision by the EMA and MHRA was based on scientific knowledge of how vaccines work AND the data for Pfizer wasn't huge either. This had the effect of undermining confidence rather than the intention of adding confidence. And when the evidence was produced they have ended up in a right mess with conflicting and confusing information. If individual governments hadn't questioned the scientific opinion of the EMA I'm not sure we'd be in quite the same mess we are today.

The MHRA and EMA both staked their reputation on the vaccine being safe and effective. They haven't been proved incorrect, no matter how much you argue it. Even with the possibility (still yet properly proven) that AZ can cause blood clots (and ignoring the evidence that there is a possibility that both Pfizer and Jansen seem to be showing a similar issue too and lower instances may merely be a reflection of which age groups each vaccine has been rolled out to in various countries rather than showing AZ is fundamentally more problematic - indeed the fact that there is so few cases occuring for any vaccine makes it difficult to assess whether we are seeing an unlucky pattern in AZ or something more signicant within margins of error).

I am confident in AZ and would tell friends and family on the basis of the data I've seen that I've no worries about it. I don't think I could really go further in expressing my lack of anxiety over it. All this news has produced a voice at the back of my head questioning things but honestly its just stupid media bollocks rather than anything more serious when you sit down and look at the numbers involved.

I find it enormously frustrating and its likely to cost far more lives than vaccine side effects will.

I think there's politics involved as well.

@ceilingsand

I think there's politics involved as well.

I do feel that too. This disproportionate focus on AZ while none for others, but if you look at the data, none of them are risk free either.

[quote thatonehasalittlecar]@Willyoujustbequiet

What does it matter if it’s the same type of clot? No-one is comparing them like for like.

They are simply trying to show that there is a cognitive dissonance in happily taking the contraceptive pill or flying (especially long haul) where there is a much higher risk of a (similarly dangerous) side effect, yet refusing this vaccine that 100% prevents you from getting a disease severely enough to kill you.[/quote]
It’s not as simple as that though. The people at the highest risk of blood clots from AZ are the ones at the lowest risk of Covid killing them. The ones at the highest risk from Covid are older, and they have a lower risk profile from AZ.

Young people are being asked to vaccinate for community benefit. Not their own, in most cases. Hardly surprising if some caulk at this request, after the year they’ve had.

Baulk, not caulk. Autogibberish, sorry.

My second AZ jab is in two weeks. I can't wait. I've had two strokes and had no problems with the first jab.

[quote roguetomato]So it seems like the blood clot isn't exclusive to AZ.
www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/91813[/quote]
That’s very interesting, thanks for posting the link

“Clots in the U.S.

In the U.S., a Miami physician died following complications of immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) after his first dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. ITP is a rare autoimmune condition in which the body generates autoantibodies to its own platelets, resulting in low platelet counts, blood clots, and bleeding if the platelet count drops very low. About 50,000 adults are diagnosed with ITP in the U.S. per year. Risk is increased in young women and people with other autoimmune conditions.

In a case series, James Bussel, MD, and colleagues reviewed 20 reports of thrombocytopenia after receipt of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S. Bussel is professor emeritus of pediatrics at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City who has published extensively on ITP. His group found that 17 of these patients did not have pre-existing thrombocytopenia. Patients' median age was 41 and 11 were women.

"It is not surprising that 17 possible de novo cases would be detected among the well over 20 million people who have received at least one dose of these two vaccines in the United States as of February 2, 2021," they wrote in the American Journal of Hematology. "The incidence of an immune‐mediated thrombocytopenia post SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination appears either less than or roughly comparable to what would be seen if the cases were coincidental following vaccination, perhaps enhanced somewhat by heightened surveillance of symptomatic patients."

However, they note that "all but one" of these cases occurred after the first dose of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.”

It’s not as simple as that though. The people at the highest risk of blood clots from AZ are the ones at the lowest risk of Covid killing them. The ones at the highest risk from Covid are older, and they have a lower risk profile from AZ.

Its possible that a) a pattern is showing for AZ more than other vaccines because of how it was given to younger age groups earlier than Pfizer b) that there is an 'unlucky' distribution for AZ showing at this stage because of how few cases there are (not enough to draw a distinct pattern) and that this will even up as more vaccines are administered.

Absence of evidence doesn't 'prove' something. We are still collecting information and it may be too early to conclude that AZ is definitely 'worse' than Pfizer. Its simply not straightforward.

The Johnson and Johnson vaccine is also beign looked at now by EMA:

Reuters reports:

While Anglo-Swedish drugmaker AstraZeneca has been caught in a turmoil over possible links to rare blood clots in the brain and abdomen, and subsequent restriction on usage of its vaccine, this is a formal disclosure of the J&J probe.

Four serious cases of rare blood clots with low platelets, one of which was fatal, have been reported after inoculation with J&J’s vaccine from its Janssen unit, the European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) said.

It said five cases of capillary leak syndrome linked to AstraZeneca’s vaccine were reported. The condition, in which blood leaks from the smallest of vessels into muscles and body cavities, is characterised by swelling and a drop in blood pressure.

However, the EMA has said that “at this stage, it is not yet clear whether there is a causal association” between the vaccines and the reported conditions.

AstraZeneca and US-based J&J did not immediately respond to requests for comments.

Re: The J&J vaccine: That’s the first I’ve heard of abdominal clots @pinkearedcow. Is that the same thing as an AAA?

I’m wondering if clotting is going to be a feature of the vaccines in general due to the way covid works. I’ve seen people saying in a lot of places for a long time that covid is more of a disease of the blood rather than respiratory (although the lungs is where the problems tend to manifest).

Not sure Cornetto if it's the same as abdominal aortic aneurysm. It does seem to be looking as though clots could possibly be a tiny risk factor of all the vaccines.

Thanks @pinkearedcow - I gave up trying to spell aneurysm when even autocorrect didn’t know what the f I was on about

I cut and pasted from NHS website Cornetto!