Why is the AZ vaccine no longer being offered to under 30s?

[Icancelledthecheque]

Just wondering if I need to be concerned... I potentially have an AZ vaccine tomorrow and I’m 32, so not much older! Does anyone know please?

Yes it is because the very remot3e risk of a dangerous blood clot is somewhat elevated (research has shown) in the under-30s. It is still statistically very much fine to have it, but as an extra precaution, and because there is a reasonable alternative, under-30s are being given the Pfizer.

OP please read the info you are given when you have the vaccine and, as with any meds, be aware of and watch out for possible side effects. I am sure you will be fine.

30 is the tipping point where the risk to your health from covid becomes less than the risk from the AZ vaccine.

Because below 30, your risk from blood clots is higher than your risk from Covid. Above 30, that changes.

I’m 30 and had it a while ago, it’s odd to be on the cusp. Most of my friends got it before me; and out of the 10 of us, I had the worst symptoms and I’m fine.

In other countries the age for AZ is above 55/60.
The UK is the only country that is using it for over 30s.

Can you hold off OP until other vaccines are offered?

The EMA held a conference yesterday and AZ clotting is eight or nine times more frequent than Pfizer.

I'm in my 40s, had the first shot and have had ongoing side effects for the past six weeks including trips to A&E and my GP. Nobody can figure out what is wrong. Shortly after I had my shot, AZ was stopped where I live for anyone under the age of 60.
There are numerous posts on MN about AZ affecting periods too. It is worth doing some research on this before getting it.

@anyoldtime It doesn't work like that, as I'm sure you know if you "hold off" there are no guarantees at all you will be offered a different vaccine at any point. Other that any current or future vaccine may also have very rare side effects discovered.

Surely the most cursory of google searches would inform you fully?? At 32 you won’t be offered an alternative at this stage. The risk is super remote.

A previous poster said the risk of clots is higher in under 30s. This isn't correct. The benefit-risk tips the wrong way because covid is less risky to younger people.

Actually the risk of dying from covid is still higher than the risk of getting blood clots from a vaccine for people 20-30. It only looked less risky because the JCVI looked at expected covid risk of going into ICU over only 4 months assuming lower cases than we have now, but vaccines give protection for far longer. The risk of getting blood clots from covid itself is 8-10 times higher than from the vaccine as well and this type of clot tends to occur naturally, with covid or after vaccine more frequently in younger people. There's also long covid risks to consider.

For people in their 30s the clot is thought to occur at a rate of 8 per million and 80% recover, so that's 1 in 125,000 being affected and 1 in 500,000 dying. To visualise how small that risk is, try guessing a 5 digit number, your risk is lower than the chance of getting that correct.

You need to be aware of the symptoms to seek help if needed, because these clots are treatable. Anyone should be seeking treatment if they get these symptoms even without a vaccine. You would notice:

• new onset of severe headache, which is getting worse and does not respond to simple painkillers
• an unusual headache which seems worse when lying down or bending over, or may be accompanied by blurred vision, nausea and vomiting, difficulty with speech, weakness, drowsiness or seizures
• new unexplained pinprick bruising or bleeding
• shortness of breath, chest pain, leg swelling or persistent abdominal pain.

[quote Rosehip10]@anyoldtime It doesn't work like that, as I'm sure you know if you "hold off" there are no guarantees at all you will be offered a different vaccine at any point. Other that any current or future vaccine may also have very rare side effects discovered.[/quote]

I don't think anyone can be sure of anything right now. Every week more stats are being released and it's possible our government may change their guidelines to match other countries who are not giving AZ to under 50's. Some people are holding out to see if that happens. Why has the Netherlands made this decision and the UK not? People are confused by the discrepancy and I don't believe it is all political.

The choice should not be AZ or nothing. We should have the right to choose if the government wants us all to be vaccinated.

People should choose about things that they have experience in, or where there is surplus supply. MHRA and JCVI have experience to do the choosing. Many people simply aren't able to comprehend how tiny the risks are, nor their personal covid risk in comparison.

Copying other countries doesn't make sense because they're all doing something different. Take Canada; they approved AZ, then paused it, then started for over 55s, then authorised it for everyone over 18 again, but each state is still looking at it separately so some states are now over 40, some over 55 still... it's just a confusing mess:
healthycanadians.gc.ca/recall-alert-rappel-avis/hc-sc/2021/75389a-eng.php.

It's unfair to tell people 'you're not educated enough to make a choice'. We understand that the AZ vaccine (and others such as J&J) work differently to the pfizer and moderna. We just want a choice between the two types. We still want to be vaccinated. We are not anti-vax.

This is a strange thread, OP. Have you been living in a cave for the past few weeks?

If you listen/watch/read the news, the reason for this was broadcast constantly for a few days.

You are clearly a regular MN user, there has been thread after thread after thread about this.

I was thinking that all the fear mongering posts about AZ had calmed down recently...maybe not

@Scottishgirl85

A previous poster said the risk of clots is higher in under 30s. This isn't correct. The benefit-risk tips the wrong way because covid is less risky to younger people.

Yes you're quite right, I phrased it badly; I meant that the risk around a blood clot is a more serious issue because the COVID risk is lower. thank you.

@AppleJane I have not used the word "educated". I said "experienced". Those with scientific experience understand that there is risk with every medication and vaccine, what's different here is that we don't usually embark on a programme to vaccinate everyone, so all those tiny risks become more visible. There are side effects and risks with all the vaccines, but those risks outweigh the benefits and experienced scientific opinions are that AZ is a safe and effective vaccine. When have you ever selected a specific brand of vaccine before? Did you sit with your GP to discuss each brand for your child's vaccines? Do you even look at your brand of paracetamol? Have you looked at paracetamol side effects (including thrombocytopenia)?

Have you read statements from the doctor in Germany who found this rare side effect? He was horrified that vaccinations were stopped. At the time AZ was paused in Germany doctors there all warned it would increase vaccine hesitancy, and it has. It's awful that the UK is being affected by this too. Worse that other countries around the world who have no other options are seeing people decline a lifesaving vaccine. Based on such tiny risks that would be written on.the leaflet as rare side effects to watch out for and simply accepted at other times.

The problem with 'tiny risks' though is that it WILL happen to someone and no-one can know who that will be. Not everyone is happy to play Russian roulette, especially if they are happy to continue to self isolate until further information comes out.

Who has experience of a pandemic and rushed vaccines? I still have not found the answer to my question. Why 30 in the UK and 50 elsewhere? I just want to know why! Or I will assume it's just so the government can hit their vaccination targets.

Or I will assume it's just so the government can hit their vaccination targets.

But hitting their vaccination targets is a good thing for the country even if it doesn't suit you individually.

It's not unreasonable for you to want a choice AppleJane but it would be unreasonable for JCVI to prioritise choice over effective, speedy roll out.

It is not "Russian roulette", that's hyperbole.

The vaccines haven't been rushed. The roots of their development began as vaccines for SARS and MERS. Then the pandemic hit and enormous amounts of money and resources were flung at COVID-19 vaccine programmes, money and resources which would normally take years to obtain.

The vaccines aren't "rushed", they are simply new, and to find a handful of cases out of millions you have to have vaccinated millions, that's just how maths of tiny numbers work.

The EMA has actually licensed it for age 18+, as have MHRA. It is individual country regulators who have then made varying decisions and in the UK the JCVI who added recommended restrictions (for JCVI this is just a recommendation, people at risk who can't have Pfizer/ Moderna and are under 30 can still take it). The differences are:

1. Covid risk perception; some countries with lower death rates so far consider risk of people catching covid to be lower; in the UK we have the more contagious B.1.1.7, so the risk from covid is higher as we reopen. (If those countries are in the EU with rates as they are, then I believe they are simply wrong.)
2. Vaccine hesitancy; some countries have lower vaccine uptake for others illnesses and believe there is lower acceptance of risk from vaccines. On balance, even though they know more will be seriously ill from covid then they believe the perception is still better to be more cautious with vaccines. (Also they have to pay compensation for illness from vaccine side effects, but not covid illness).
3. Risk of clots increase with younger people and risk of covid increases for older people; either you accept all the risks, none of the risks, or put a line somewhere; each country has different covid risks so they put the line in a different place. Denmark for example said while cases are low they won't take the risks, but if cases get high they will recommend the vaccine. Canada has different age rates in different provinces right now, how confusing is that!
4. Who is being vaccinated right now per country? If it's over 65s anyway and a few healthcare workers then it's easy to divert supplies and say only older people get one type of vaccine, they aren't vaccinating under 55s regardless so what does it matter which vaccine they say each is to have? Kick the can down the road and then higher covid cases can change the risk picture. In the UK you have a choice to get a vaccine now, or not, that choice isn't even an option in most EU countries. Any of the vaccines you might be offered (AZ, Pfizer, Moderna and soon Novovax), are safe and effective.

I still have not found the answer to my question. Why 30 in the UK and 50 elsewhere? I just want to know why! Or I will assume it's just so the government can hit their vaccination targets.

To a great extent yes, it is about getting everyone vaccinated as quickly as possible because that is safer for us all. Scientists are still predicting another wave of infections as more things open up in May so time is really of essence. Obviously the UK has ordered much, much more of the AZ vaccine than anything else, and many of our vaccination centres are only able to administer AZ due to the cold storage requirements of the other vaccines. It is much easier for some other countries to decide to make the cut off 50 or 60 out of abundance of caution if their vaccination programme relies mostly on the other vaccines anyway.

UK doesn't have enough Pfizer and Moderna for everyone under 50 still waiting to be vaccinated, and the J&J vaccine also seems to have a very rare risk of the same type of blood clots as AZ does.

Personally I would rather have Pfizer or Moderna too (I'm in my late 30s) but would rather have AZ than no vaccine at all, though.

There have been more cases with Pfizer than with J&J, but there have been more doses of Pfizer given. There have also been a tens of millions more doses of Oxford AZ / Covishield given to younger people in particular.

I still have not found the answer to my question. Why 30 in the UK and 50 elsewhere? I just want to know why! Or I will assume it's just so the government can hit their vaccination targets.

This is what we think ie people in other countries looking at the UK’s AZ programme.

I had the first dose of AZ (mid 40s). I have been unwell since. AZ has been stopped here now for under 60s and I wouldn’t have had a second shot anyway,

The problem is once you are injected, you can’t do anything about it so my advice is don’t get it in the first place! It’s fine saying side effects are rare (rubbish - it wouldn’t have been pulled in twenty five other countries if they were so rare).

Someone upthread said you can be treated. A&E and GPS told me it’s too new. They don’t know all the side effects yet.
Someone else said you can’t pick and choose, the Govs are so anxious to get e wry one vaccinated, they will have other vaccines in time. Hold off for now. It’s only three months since the vaccines came on board.

The risk for clots is tiny, really really tiny, which is why it didn't get discovered during the trials stage.

The risk for an under 30 yo dying of covid is also tiny, and tbh the risk for a 32 yo dying of covid is also tiny but just marginally less tiny than for a 29 yo. On balance, the risks from not getting vaccinated are worse than the risks of taking the AZ vaccine if you are 32 but there is really not a lot in it. On balance, the risks from getting the AZ vaccine is worse than the risk of not getting vaccinated if you are 29 or younger and are otherwise totally healthy. However you will be doing riskier things on a daily basis for all sorts of reasons and there is no substantial cause for concern whichever age group you are in. The chances of you being affected are near negligible and the overwhelming likelihood is that you will be absolutely fine. Given that there are also social benefits to being vaccinated in terms of preventing infections from spreading and helping to bring the pandemic to a swifter close, it seems to me to be a risk worth taking to go ahead and have the jab, acknowledging that you are taking a (very very small) risk doing so, for the sake of the wider benefits.

It's amazing how many threads you're able to join saying the same things again and again despite being "unwell" @anyoldtime. Who are you to encourage people not to be vaccinated and run the risk of covid and long covid? Why are you conducting this campaign anyway?

I've also been vaccinated with Astrazeneca and know of well over a hundred more who have been, none of whom had severe side effects; some had 24 hours of chills / fever / aches and some just had mild headaches. That's why the yellow card scheme exists though, so that it can track actual effects across the full population and calculate for every vaccine how likely the effects are rather than relying on the word of random people on the internet.

@anyoldtime Until (and assuming they do) they become available privately, covid vaccines are not going to be available on a "pick and choose" basis - certain vaccines may be applied based on a persons age or medical conditions, but selection "cause I think moderna is best!" no.

@anyoldtime
There are numerous posts on MN about AZ affecting periods too. It is worth doing some research on this before getting it

Just wanted to say that they’ve started a study in the US about the possible effect of period issues after the vaccine.

They only use Pfizer and Moderna in the US so I don’t thing this possible side effect should only be attributed to AZ.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/vaccine/ct-vaccine-side-effects-period-menstruation-20210420-i4fy7a7tnnbchi654z3o64a7my-story.html%3foutputType=amp