Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

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

987 replies

Whichjab · 24/04/2021 09:52

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
NuttyinNotts · 03/05/2021 09:26

They're different categories for medicine side effects. Very Common is more than 1 in 10, common is more than 1 in 100, rare is less than 1 in 10,000. Its standard across drug leaflets.

AppleJane · 03/05/2021 09:35

Thanks @NuttyinNotts

Desari · 03/05/2021 09:39

@Roonerspismed I could have written your posts. As a mid thirties woman with no underlying conditions, for whom Covid was a mild illness, I have watched the data over the last few weeks with increasing concern.

Whilst I appreciate the picture is likely to be different on a population level, and the risks are low, I can’t see that the risk/benefit equation re. AZ stacks up in my circumstances.

I don’t envy the JCVI and understand that these are exceptionally difficult decisions for them to make. However with cases as they are at the moment, I do hope they change the guidance and offer an alternative.

Carefulvulvadriver · 03/05/2021 09:43

And yet, that EMA report also says on p33 that the clots “occurred mostly in women under 60 years of age” (p33 here www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/vaxzevria-previously-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-epar-product-information_en.pdf).
So are those population rates (the 1:120k or whatever) whole population, or adjusted for sex? I assume it’s the former.

The EMA and U.K. MHRA seem to not want to be/feel unable to be definitive about the sex issue. But instead of taking precaution, they are going the other way and erring on the side of treating it as non sex specific, despite the evidence they have to date, in their own words, pointing more towards sex being an issue.
If sex is a factor here, that 1:120k rate will be in practice be worse for women. And yet we have silence here in the U.K.

Carefulvulvadriver · 03/05/2021 09:45

Sorry the above was meant to tag @AppleJane and @NuttyinNotts who usefully highlighted that EMA link

Roonerspismed · 03/05/2021 09:51

Indeed vulva.

I think they don’t want to find that. In fact I think they want to delay and dilly dally whilst using as much of the AZ vaccine as possible.

Carefulvulvadriver · 03/05/2021 09:55

@Roonerspismed sadly I think it’s exactly that. And then in addition to the risk being possibly higher for women, we have to remember that we are being asked to spin the roulette wheel twice with it, for 2 jabs. I’m feeling more and more angry about this.

Utini · 03/05/2021 10:04

Had anyone seen any information on whether existing autoimmune disease might be a risk factor for these clots? Evidence points towards this being an autoimmune reaction, and I know that having one autoimmune disease puts you at a much higher risk of developing others.

As the EMA data shows around a 1 in 50k risk at my age, and I have two autoimmune issues, I'm concerned I might be at increased risk for this reaction.

Unfortunately I turn 40 very soon, so even if they raise the age limit I might not be entitled to an alternative!

QueenStromba · 03/05/2021 10:06

@Roonerspismed

Indeed vulva.

I think they don’t want to find that. In fact I think they want to delay and dilly dally whilst using as much of the AZ vaccine as possible.

I suspect they've decided to stop offering it to under 40s but they're trying to get through as many early 40s as possible before announcing it.
Walkaround · 03/05/2021 10:13

@Carefulvulvadriver

And yet, that EMA report also says on p33 that the clots “occurred mostly in women under 60 years of age” (p33 here www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/vaxzevria-previously-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-epar-product-information_en.pdf). So are those population rates (the 1:120k or whatever) whole population, or adjusted for sex? I assume it’s the former.

The EMA and U.K. MHRA seem to not want to be/feel unable to be definitive about the sex issue. But instead of taking precaution, they are going the other way and erring on the side of treating it as non sex specific, despite the evidence they have to date, in their own words, pointing more towards sex being an issue.
If sex is a factor here, that 1:120k rate will be in practice be worse for women. And yet we have silence here in the U.K.

@Carefulvulvadriver - I thought the latest yellow card data showed men and women affected fairly equally. There are certainly far too many men affected to claim it’s a women’s problem only. The EMA data was said to be affected because 2/3 of the recipients of the vaccine had been women. The US data relates to a different vaccine, so of no use in assessing the risks of AZ. My unscientific, personal opinion, if the low platelet blood clotting is an autoimmune response, is that women could be slightly more affected, because more women suffer from autoimmune diseases than men, so may be more prone to such unusual responses. That is an unscientific, personal opinion not based on the data, though!
Jakie7700 · 03/05/2021 10:20

Yes they are trying to get through as many as possible before guidance is changed a nurse pretty much told me when I was called early for my 2nd AZ

AppleJane · 03/05/2021 10:38

My unscientific, personal opinion (which I like to call my gut feeling) is that there may be some connection with women who still menstruate as their immune system changes depending on where they are in their cycle.

Nodal · 03/05/2021 10:45

Or that they are on artificial hormones that change their blood vessels. In all the write up I have read (Denmark, Germany, US) the women were all on oral contraceptives or HRT apart from one or two (who might have recently come off the pill). Most of the men had high blood pressure, which also changes the structure of the blood vessel walls.

I suspect women on the pill will be asked to come off it for a few months or be given the Pfizer or another mRNA vaccine. We're lucky we have these 2 vaccine platforms now.

AppleJane · 03/05/2021 10:56

That's interesting @Nodal and would also explain why men are affected (even if in lower numbers)

I've read a lot of women saying they had started their period shortly after receiving the jab and it had made me wonder if the blood in all cases was actually menstrual blood.

Schulte · 03/05/2021 10:59

If they really are trying to use up as much AZ as possible before changing the guidance then that is the most cynical and irresponsible thing I’ve ever heard of.

AppleJane · 03/05/2021 11:04

I thought the latest yellow card data showed men and women affected fairly equally.

Last week's report showed cases up 41 from 168 to 209.

27 women and 14 men.

Jakie7700 · 03/05/2021 11:11

Yes it is irresponsible but it does not surprise me given alot of other countries have already stopped using the AZ in the under 40s and we are STILL giving it to them should show people everything you need to know about how much the government care about the risks to the individual

PinkSparklyPussyCat · 03/05/2021 11:12

I suspect women on the pill will be asked to come off it for a few months or be given the Pfizer or another mRNA vaccine. We're lucky we have these 2 vaccine platforms now.

How would that work for those of us who've already had one jab? I'm 46 and had the first one two weeks ago and I'm also on the combined pill. There is absolutely no way I would come off it for a few months as I'm on it for medical rather than contraceptive reasons.

Nodal · 03/05/2021 11:44

No idea, I'm not a doctor.

It's not going to affect every woman on the pill, it's a tiny fraction and there's probably co-founding factors - not least individual immune systems behaving oddly. I'd have the second AZ if it were me (and I have, but I'm not on the pill). They tell you what to look out for now at the vaccine centre and they have a treatment protocol in the unlikely case you are one of the few people affected.

PinkSparklyPussyCat · 03/05/2021 12:58

Sorry @Nodal, it was more of a hypothetical question. I'll definitely be having the second jab, nothing I've read so far has put me off as to me the benefits outweigh the risks.

The only thing that would stop me is if they said you couldn't have it if you were on the pill as I wouldn't want to risk it coming off.

Fieldofmemes · 03/05/2021 13:19

@Schulte a bit like the NHS PPE "guidance" at the beginning of the UK's first wave - which was updated according to what PPE was available...

Fieldofmemes · 03/05/2021 13:34

@AppleJane

[[https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/vaxzevria-previously-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca]]

This is the European Medicines Agency page for Vaxzevria (new name for Astrazeneca)

In the section 'what are the risks associated with Vaxzevria' it states:

Thrombosis (formation of blood clots in the blood vessels) in combination with thrombocytopenia occurred in less than 1 in 10,000 people.

I thought the official stat was 1 in 126,000? Can anyone explain the difference to me please?

@AppleJane What? The EMA state that the risk is "less than 1 in 10,000"? You're right - that's ten times higher than the MHRA are claiming! And this is the same EMA report that shows that the risk from the AZ vaccine outweighs the risk of Covid in a low infection environment (i.e. UK, now) UP TO AGE 49.... see p.11 : www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/chmp-annex/annex-vaxzevria-art53-visual-risk-contextualisation_en.pdf WTH???
AppleJane · 03/05/2021 13:49

[quote Fieldofmemes]@Schulte a bit like the NHS PPE "guidance" at the beginning of the UK's first wave - which was updated according to what PPE was available...[/quote]

Yep the 'masks don't work' thing. That's when my trust was lost.

rainbowunicorn · 03/05/2021 15:06

@Fieldofmemes the less tah 10,000 is simply how these things are phrased. It means that for something to be comsidered rare the less than 1 person in every 10,000 has that particular side effect.

It does not mean that the risk has changed to 1 in 10,000.