Alternatives to AstraZeneca vaccine for under 40s “could be considered” amid rise in blood clots

[Whichjab]

www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/astrazeneca-vaccine-side-effects-blood-clots-under-40-b931498.html

This is concerning, especially as there is limited research into combining vaccinations. I feel that the trust in vaccination is being eroded. I have always been pro vacc but feeling much less so atm.
I'm not sure I will get my second jab now.

They don't say they will combine vaccines though, just that that age group maybe should have an alternative one. They haven't got to that age group yet in my area (scotland) - I'm 47 and not had my first

Why would you not have your second jab when the risk of clots is overwhelming associated with the first jab?

@paralysedbyinertia

Why would you not have your second jab when the risk of clots is overwhelming associated with the first jab?

Currently it's only overwhelming associated with first jab because most people haven't had their second (and the earliest jabs were Pfizer so a bigger proportion of second jabs given are pfizer)

I'm 33 and had AZ yesterday.

My only concern is will it be difficult for me to get AZ for my second jab! 😂

@Fieldofmemes the facts are that you are statistically at far greater risk from COVID complications than from vaccine complications at any age

[quote Porcupineintherough]@Fieldofmemes the facts are that you are statistically at far greater risk from COVID complications than from vaccine complications at any age [/quote]
This is not true. Some people are at greater risk of covid than vaccine complications. It's already been decided that the risk to the under 30's from vaccine complications outweighs the risk from covid.

Fieldofmemes but what about those that have already had the first dose?

@Whichjab statiatically we are all at more risk from COVID than from the vaccine. On a individual level of course it is impossible to know but for either sex at any age the outcomes for COVID are worse than the outcomes for vaccination.

In Norway they gave the AZ vaccine to a mainly young, female group and the death rate was 1 in 40 000 - that's why they banned it. Demand another vaccine.

You don't get to 'demand' a vaccine given to you for free by the NHS.

Also, some might consider a one in 40000 risk to be one worth taking. I would.

@Whichjab the vast majority of VITT cases have occurred following first jabs. Only one following the second.

@IcedPurple and this is exactly the problem. Young, healthy people are being coerced into having a medical intervention which carries a known risk of death. NO choice is being offered, other than NOT having a vaccine AT ALL - even if you are willing to pay! - and choosing no vaccine at all not only leaves you vulnerable to Covid but also will shut you out of certain parts of society and leave you marginalised. We are supposed to be a democratic society and the medical profession is supposed to proceed on the basis of "do no harm" and "informed consent". I have never seen the UK democratic process threatened in such a fundamental way as it has been regarding the AZ vaccine. Lives are being put at risk in order to promote the agenda of the government (extensive, fast vaccine rollout which they can trumpet as a great success in order to make up for the appalling mismanagement of the past year). The high risk have now been vaccinated; the UK should slow the rollout to the low risk cohorts while they get OTHER VACCINES. We should give spare AZ vaccines to countries that are in a desperate state and need them as an emergency (where the risks are justified). And this viewpoint isn't just mine - it is shared by at least 10 other countries.

[quote Fieldofmemes]@Whichjab the vast majority of VITT cases have occurred following first jabs. Only one following the second.[/quote]
But, and I've asked this loads and not had any reassurance, that is because there have been a lot more first jabs given even then it took over a month for a link to be proven.
Only those who had their first jab in January are over the 12 week mark and the real volume of first jabs increased in mid Feb.

To be honest I thought the 30 limit was rather low when most of Europe is 60, so 40 would make more sense. It’s a dilemma for those who already had the first jab.

Young, healthy people are being coerced into having a medical intervention which carries a known risk of death.

The known risk of death is tiny, even for the most at risk groups. And nobody is being 'coerced'. They are being offered a free vaccine but are not obliged to take it.

We are supposed to be a democratic society and the medical profession is supposed to proceed on the basis of "do no harm" and "informed consent".

All medicines and vaccines carry some risk, even aspirin or paracetemol. If the medical profession refused to administer any treatment which carred a risk - in this case statistically tiny - then we'd be back in the stone age.

@Whichjab that's a good point, and this is exactly why it would be helpful if the MHRA would break down the figures and give percentages (e.g. how many second jabs given versus VITT cases arising from them) rather than just a blanket number. The fact that they DON'T do that just raises suspicion. There is still the (medical) argument that if you are going to react to the vaccine you probably would have done so already. If I were in your position and worried about the risk I would get an antibody test (you can even measure your levels but it's a more expensive test) and if they are reasonably high postpone your second jab until more data becomes available.

If AZ was the only vaccine, then yes, the risks outweigh the benefits.

But it is not the only vaccine. Pfizer and Moderna do not have this risk. So giving Pfizer and Moderna to younger women is an absolute no-brainer.

It's already been decided that the risk to the under 30's from vaccine complications outweighs the risk from covid.

But they do still need the vaccine to protect the elderly and vulnerable. It's not just about them.

@IcedPurple yes, the known risk of death is tiny, but I don't think 1 in 40 000 is THAT tiny when you are vaccinating millions of people. The "1 in a million" level that was being bandied about in the press a week ago has been proven to be far too low (no surprise when you compare it to the data from other countries). Plus the risk of death from Covid if you are a young, healthy person is ALSO tiny. The AZ/VITT figures published by the MHRA have been very heavily massaged to reassure the public (hence the fact that the rates have mysteriously "doubled" in the past week - what a surprise). The point is that people have NOT been fully informed. Patterns started to emerge in Scandinavia and Germany in March and the MHRA did nothing (and said nothing) - meanwhile other countries were restricting AZ use to over 55s. Full information about the side effects has only been handed out to vaccinees in the last two weeks. I have no doubt people have died because the public and doctors simply did not know what to look for and (understandably) refused to believe a vaccine could cause such a reaction. VITT requires very specific treatment as well - normal anticoagulation agents don't work. This was flagged by German researchers weeks ago and should have been immediately publicised here - it wasn't. And yes, other medicines carry risk - but the risks are known and included in the information supplied to the consumer. And you take a medicine to cure a problem that you are suffering - therefore you take the risk. And you usually have a choice - for example, you can take paracetamol instead of ibuprofen if you are worried about the gastrointestinal risks.

@Fieldofmemes i totally agree with everything you have said. As i healthy 41yr old im really not comfortable with the lack of info as they move down the age groups. The fact the other countries with more data on the younger groups have said no to under 60's, 50's etc has made me nervous

@User135644

It's already been decided that the risk to the under 30's from vaccine complications outweighs the risk from covid.

But they do still need the vaccine to protect the elderly and vulnerable. It's not just about them.

I actually have no words.

Bore off & refuse your jab. These threads are exhausting. I’ve taken the contraceptive pill for 20 years which also carries a risk of clots & death at a far higher rate. Me & millions of others. I’ll continue to take my pill & I’ll get my jab. Life is a risk, I also enjoy sky diving, deffo risk of death 😅

I think it’s worth noting that we’re ahead of where we were weeks ago in terms of detecting and treating this condition.

This article in the Guardian today is about 3 new cases found in Australia and the patients being stable.

This is a little extract:

“All three patients are clinically stable, have responded well to treatment and are recovering,” the TGA said.

“Two of the three cases appear to be milder forms of the syndrome that were recognised very early by the treating health professionals and are responding well to treatment, and in one of the cases platelet counts were depressed to a limited extent and the patient developed symptoms unusually late.”

www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/apr/23/australian-authorities-say-three-new-cases-of-blood-clots-very-likely-linked-to-astrazeneca-vaccine

It’s not just about each individual’s perception of the risk though, is it? Fieldofmeme raises some very important points re whether it is ethical for the UK to proceed and NOT offer alternatives.

Yep, it’s good that there is more awareness and doctors now know how to treat it, which has brought the death rate from this condition down. But, people are still dying from it. And as @Fieldofmemes pointed out, more transparency earlier on might have saved lives.