Why only under 30’s?

[Tinkling]

I’m hoping someone can explain the logic to me because I don’t understand it AT ALL.

19 people have died from a side effect after the AZ vaccine and only THREE were under 30.

So why is the offer of a different vaccine only restricted to the under 30’s?

@Terracotta9 apologies I read it yesterday and got the value wrong. It’s 1 in 20. So 5%
www.kcl.ac.uk/news/study-identifies-those-most-risk-long-covid

I’m 32 and you couldn’t pay me to have AZ now with this news. The UK are being reckless with this to as not to waste the supply or scare people off.

I had Pfizer.

I don't understand why the risk/benefit hasn't been split by both age AND sex, especially given men are more susceptible to severe effects of covid therefore their vaccinction benefit weighting is surely higher and therefore skewing that of women in the same age group? Unless they suspect women are more susceptible to blood clots from covid e.g. long covid etc?

Loads of women hit 30 and have combined contraceptive pills removed due to, for e.g. migraines, why is this not considered a risk factor for the vaccine, especially in women?

[quote CovidHalloween]@EasterIssland okay, do you know what these countries’ reasoning is behind their choice of giving AZ only to 55-65 age group?[/quote]
@CovidHalloween I can speak for the current situation. Currently vaccinating between 60-90yo in some area. The 60-65 only started last week (my mum is 61 and is not vaccinated). The 65-80 have been in limbo for a while as they’re waiting for those 80+ being vaccinated.
Today they were deciding whether to extend it (based on current data) to 65-69 az. 70+ is pfizer / moderna.

Makes sense in the current situation to give az to those ages as there is still millions of people Unvaccinated more at risk than those below 60 (last week 55s would have had az , today they don’t).

Makes sense to change the message and keep monitoring. I don’t know what do the countries know that the EMA doesn’t. But , taking into account that currently Spain has got 14% or something like that with 1 dose and 8% with 2, they can vaccinate those 60+ and continue monitoring ans change the advice again if need to

@Easterissland that number makes a lot more sense.I’m glad to see that we are developing a better picture on how to predict who is more likely to suffer from long covid. Most young people are (very reasonably) more afraid of long covid than death.

The article you linked to has some interesting data on long covid risk factors too.

The rates are 10% for 18-49 year olds
22% for over 70s
Younger women are 50% more likely to suffer than men, but not in the older age groups
Being asthmatic and a higher BMI is also a risk factor

@PicsInRed

I don't understand why the risk/benefit hasn't been split by both age AND sex, especially given men are more susceptible to severe effects of covid therefore their vaccinction benefit weighting is surely higher and therefore skewing that of women in the same age group? Unless they suspect women are more susceptible to blood clots from covid e.g. long covid etc?

Loads of women hit 30 and have combined contraceptive pills removed due to, for e.g. migraines, why is this not considered a risk factor for the vaccine, especially in women?

I turned 30 only months ago. My doctor refused to prescribe the pill for me due to my history of migraines and the link to blood clots. This is why I had the mini pill instead. This has been my worry.

[quote EasterIssland]@Terracotta9 apologies I read it yesterday and got the value wrong. It’s 1 in 20. So 5%
www.kcl.ac.uk/news/study-identifies-those-most-risk-long-covid[/quote]
Yes these are the stats my local teaching hospital mentioned. But long covid is often caused by micro clots in the lungs and other places so gor women over 30 AZ would be really beneficial

My conspiracy theory head says it’s because under 30 are more likely to be child bearers. After reading the thread last week about the effects on menstruation cycle from those who had the vaccine, something tells me there’s a link.

@Thewiseoneincognito

My conspiracy theory head says it’s because under 30 are more likely to be child bearers. After reading the thread last week about the effects on menstruation cycle from those who had the vaccine, something tells me there’s a link.

In the Uk women aged 30-40 are more likely to be child bearers. I think that’s why AZ has been reserved for this age group - because clotting due to covid, severe covid, and long covid and death due to covid are much likelier when you’re pregnant

My conspiracy theory head says it’s because under 30 are more likely to be child bearers.

My initial thought was the entire opposite, as people under 30 are more likely to be taking the contraceptive pill which of course increases the risk of clotting. People in their 30s are more likely to be TTC or using more permanent forms of birth control after their family planning is complete. If child bearing really was a factor then 35-40 would be the logical cut-off point.

The risk-benefit analysis many PPs have mentioned basically leaves women in their 30s and 40s with the ultimate lose-lose scenario. So they are MORE at risk from covid complications and therefore need to be vaccinated. But instead of offering them the safer brands, they are still forced to take AZ because Pfizer & Moderna are now reserved for very young people whose risk of a clot is still the same as someone in their 30s but they have a higher relative risk of clots vs a very low risk of covid complications...??? Can't get my head around the logic there?

With my own knowledge of vaccines (medical microbiology degree) and a daughter studying pharmacology I would hasten a bet that if the AZ vaccine carries a risk of clot then so do the other vaccines (given that they are mostly using the protein spike) - it just hasn't been identified yet. I was one of the early people to take Prozac when it was licensed - it lowered my platelet level - a side affect not noted at the time. It is now! As a 1 in 1000 risk. The risk of clots with this vaccine is TINY!! How many of you have read the risk of serious side affect for the childhood vaccinations you give your children? Probably not many of you! I have - but the risk is small (larger than that of these clots) but still have them. Might I add that this is for a vaccine for disease that due to vaccination we have eradicated in the country so are unlikely to get. Get a grip and get the vaccination. It is highly probable that had this vaccination been targeted in the population it was given to and thus rolled out over several years instead of being rolled out to an entire population that the clots (being so rare) would not have been identified as a side affect.

I'm mid thirties and had covid fairly mildly six months ago. I won't be getting any vaccine at least for the next few months. For me it feels unnecessary at present.

@Thewiseoneincognito

My conspiracy theory head says it’s because under 30 are more likely to be child bearers. After reading the thread last week about the effects on menstruation cycle from those who had the vaccine, something tells me there’s a link.

If that was the case it’d be 20-40 more likely

Valneva uses inactivated virus in its vaccine. Would that one be less likely to provoke the sort of immune response which is giving rise to this clotting disorder?

@PicsInRed

I don't understand why the risk/benefit hasn't been split by both age AND sex, especially given men are more susceptible to severe effects of covid therefore their vaccinction benefit weighting is surely higher and therefore skewing that of women in the same age group? Unless they suspect women are more susceptible to blood clots from covid e.g. long covid etc?

Loads of women hit 30 and have combined contraceptive pills removed due to, for e.g. migraines, why is this not considered a risk factor for the vaccine, especially in women?

Could the reason for more women having reported issues be that women are more likely to work in health and social care than men and therefore more likely to have had the jab at all? It would be interesting to see the statistics on this.

@User5485421134

My conspiracy theory head says it’s because under 30 are more likely to be child bearers.

My initial thought was the entire opposite, as people under 30 are more likely to be taking the contraceptive pill which of course increases the risk of clotting. People in their 30s are more likely to be TTC or using more permanent forms of birth control after their family planning is complete. If child bearing really was a factor then 35-40 would be the logical cut-off point.

The risk-benefit analysis many PPs have mentioned basically leaves women in their 30s and 40s with the ultimate lose-lose scenario. So they are MORE at risk from covid complications and therefore need to be vaccinated. But instead of offering them the safer brands, they are still forced to take AZ because Pfizer & Moderna are now reserved for very young people whose risk of a clot is still the same as someone in their 30s but they have a higher relative risk of clots vs a very low risk of covid complications...??? Can't get my head around the logic there?

AZ is the only vaccine that definitely prevents severe and long covid. As S and L covid is more likely in women aged 30-50 I imagine that’s part of the reason AZ is for them.

@onlyreadingneverposting8

With my own knowledge of vaccines (medical microbiology degree) and a daughter studying pharmacology I would hasten a bet that if the AZ vaccine carries a risk of clot then so do the other vaccines (given that they are mostly using the protein spike) - it just hasn't been identified yet. I was one of the early people to take Prozac when it was licensed - it lowered my platelet level - a side affect not noted at the time. It is now! As a 1 in 1000 risk. The risk of clots with this vaccine is TINY!! How many of you have read the risk of serious side affect for the childhood vaccinations you give your children? Probably not many of you! I have - but the risk is small (larger than that of these clots) but still have them. Might I add that this is for a vaccine for disease that due to vaccination we have eradicated in the country so are unlikely to get. Get a grip and get the vaccination. It is highly probable that had this vaccination been targeted in the population it was given to and thus rolled out over several years instead of being rolled out to an entire population that the clots (being so rare) would not have been identified as a side affect.

I think that it has been established that Pfizer does indeed have similar rates of clotting. In fact a friend of a colleague is a survivor of it.

@DdraigGoch Nowhere near the same rate! Last time I checked there were two cases which would have been in line with what happened naturally. No link at all between Pfizer and blood clotting issues.

@GrumpyHoonMain Who on earth told you that AZ is the only vaccine that prevents severe covid!? Simply not true.

@User5485421134

From a medical perspective there are zero cut-off points between 29 to 30. European countries using 55-60 makes more sense since that‘s the age of menopause with significant changes in hormone levels, lifestyle, contraception etc.

I think the UK are throwing people in their 30-40s under a bus here. They have too much AZ to scrap it all so it needs to be used on someone. Or perhaps they’re worried that too many young people are going to refuse the vacccine and now trying to sway them the better options of Pfizer and Moderna.

People between 30-40 are sensible enough to understand the importance of vaccination and the coronavirus board shows that many are more than keen to get AZ despite the risks.

Completely agree with you there. I'm late 30s and I feel like we have been given the short straw. Making me feel very uncomfortable about the az vaccine. To me it would make sence to give the lower risk vaccine to those who are at higher risk of clots. When I'm called I will go for the vaccine but I'm having second thoughts about if I will take it if its the az vaccine, family history of blood clots!

Whatisgoingon89

I posted this link already. Blood clotting issues from Pfizer and Moderna too (in the US). Still also low numbers (as AZ)

www.nytimes.com/2021/02/08/health/immune-thrombocytopenia-covid-vaccine-blood.html

[quote mustlovegin]Whatisgoingon89

I posted this link already. Blood clotting issues from Pfizer and Moderna too (in the US). Still also low numbers (as AZ)

www.nytimes.com/2021/02/08/health/immune-thrombocytopenia-covid-vaccine-blood.html[/quote]
But this is only talking about Pfizer giving low platelet levels, whereas AZ gives both that AND clots.

@mustlovegin No mention of CVST which is the problem with AZ.

I’m 35 and have had my first dose of AZ as a carer for my disabled son. I will have the second with no concerns.

I’m a teacher in London and before Christmas the new variant went through our primary school. I have a colleague in her early 30s who has still be unable to return to work due to long Covid. The risk of complications from long Covid is higher than the risk of a clot following the AZ vaccine.