Page 31 | Alternatives to AstraZeneca vaccine for under 40s “could be considered” amid rise in blood clots

Whichjab · 2021-04-24T08:52:10+00:00

[[https://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.

Belladonna12 · 04/05/2021 16:24

[quote Desari]@Belladonna12 You’re right of course - that’s why I said for me personally. There will be many for whom the benefits far outweigh the risks, but equally there will be those in a similar position who are concerned.[/quote]
People don't know their individual benefits and risks though in advance of having the vaccine. Even if they have had mild Covid before they don't know if they could get it again and whether it would be just as mild . They also don't know what their individual risk of blood clotting from the vaccine is unless they have had a blood test for the antibodies that cause it (it appears to be an autoimmune problem).

AppleJane · 04/05/2021 16:28

How many astrazeneca deaths a day are acceptable when only a handful of Covid deaths are being reported daily? And does it matter if the Covid deaths are elderly/vulnerable and the astrazeneca deaths healthy and young? I've asked this a number of times before but no-one ever wants to give their opinion 🤔 for me it's an ethically grey area.

Belladonna12 · 04/05/2021 16:37

@AppleJane

How many astrazeneca deaths a day are acceptable when only a handful of Covid deaths are being reported daily? And does it matter if the Covid deaths are elderly/vulnerable and the astrazeneca deaths healthy and young? I've asked this a number of times before but no-one ever wants to give their opinion 🤔 for me it's an ethically grey area.

There haven't been a handful of AstraZeneca deaths reported daily. There have been about 40 in total despite millions of vaccinations. The deaths will hopefully be even lower future now that they know what to watch out for and how to treat.

TruelyWonder · 04/05/2021 16:45

@AppleJane

How many astrazeneca deaths a day are acceptable when only a handful of Covid deaths are being reported daily? And does it matter if the Covid deaths are elderly/vulnerable and the astrazeneca deaths healthy and young? I've asked this a number of times before but no-one ever wants to give their opinion 🤔 for me it's an ethically grey area.

It is a perfectly reasonable question. I think the main problem with it though is we still don't actually have all the information needed to answer that. Neither does any government or scientist.

The main thing needed to answer your question knowing if there is a possibility of a future outbreak or outbreaks. Nobody is sure how big one would be etc. Also will supply of Pfizer and Moderna keep coming.

Therefore what they are doing is working with what we do have supply wise as quickly as possible. Potentially now with the India variant on our tail. However continuingly watching and doing the maths about clots too.

Yes you could say people under 40 should wait until they can supply an alternative. That is one option for anyone that is worried. My fear there is that people could have to wait too long and cases in the under 40s rise. More healthy young people would then potentially die. Goodness knows if that would exceed the number of people with clots or not. Seeing into the future is not my speciality.

AppleJane · 04/05/2021 16:57

We will know more on Thursday when the next yellow card data is released. Last week it showed an increase of 9 deaths over a 7 day period and the average age of 47 remained the same suggesting those deaths were not historic. So would it be acceptable to say for that week it was one death a day? And going forward if that number gets higher I would feel very uncomfortable if it overtook the daily covid deaths, regardless of calculated risks.

Roonerspismed · 04/05/2021 16:59

But one death daily - what are the numbers suffering from the condition but who don’t die? It doesn’t sound minor

AppleJane · 04/05/2021 17:02

And then there's the 685 deaths that were discounted. Which is why I prefer to see what the recent data is doing as I don't think it's likely that only 5 people over the age of 70 have died after having AZ.

Schulte · 04/05/2021 17:40

It is a fair question, @AppleJane. Now we’re down to single figures for daily COVID deaths. We’ll hopefully know more on Thursday.

NotSoLongGoodbye · 04/05/2021 18:05

But it isn't only deaths following AZ - it's also people left with serious long term impacts ... we just don't know any of this information.

PinkSparklyPussyCat · 04/05/2021 18:19

@NotSoLongGoodbye

But it isn't only deaths following AZ - it's also people left with serious long term impacts ... we just don't know any of this information.

You can also apply that argument to Covid and any of the other vaccines

MRex · 04/05/2021 18:40

@AppleJane

And then there's the 685 deaths that were discounted. Which is why I prefer to see what the recent data is doing as I don't think it's likely that only 5 people over the age of 70 have died after having AZ.

Isn't it amazing how you forget information you're given from thread to thread. That's for 22.2m or so doses. 11.2m Pfizer doses with 347 deaths; which is exactly the same percentage. You claim again that the information on Adds is somehow hidden when it is listed in the appendix per vaccine, so you can see the number of heart attacks, strokes etc etc etc. I told you where it was and you were given a link. You think no heart attacks would ever occur in the 95% of over 50s who've been vaccinated, really?

Username198 · 04/05/2021 18:51

My concern is around I just don’t trust the Government. The policy on PPE was based on what was available rather than what was best - first we were told masks were harmful then when we had some all of a sudden they were compulsory. How are we supposed to believe them on AZ risks for those in their 30s/40s?

AppleJane · 04/05/2021 18:52

Are you saying the official statistic of 5 deaths over the age of 70 is incorrect? As I keep saying it is my personal belief the early data is incorrect. You can believe what you want. If the data is wrong then so are the calculated risks. Let's see what Thursdays data shows (now they are providing more charts, as I told you before)

nordica · 04/05/2021 19:22

@Username198

My concern is around I just don’t trust the Government. The policy on PPE was based on what was available rather than what was best - first we were told masks were harmful then when we had some all of a sudden they were compulsory. How are we supposed to believe them on AZ risks for those in their 30s/40s?

This is the thing for me, too. The comments in the press last week from some JCVI members saying it's a difficult decision clearly reflect the fact they DO have some concerns about it. Obviously the supply is what it is though and I understand there's not much anyone can do about that...

NotSoLongGoodbye · 04/05/2021 19:30

@PinkSparklyPussyCat
I suppose my post was about the life-threating side effect that is linked to AZ, rather than a general there could be long term harms. Unless there is research reviewing every single clotting case over the last 6 months to see if the person received the AZ jab within 31 days of the clotting event, we just won't know the extent of the possible interaction.
Older people are more prone to clots so no-one has necessarily been making the links.

Also, there has been a lot of talk that there are better treatments for the rare clotting event now - that may be - but I have only seen papers that say people have 'recovered well' - what does this actually mean? Is there a chance that you could be left with significant brain impairment but still be classed as 'recovered well"?

Walkaround · 04/05/2021 19:40

@NotSoLongGoodbye - could you be left with significant brain impairment from covid and still be classed as “recovered well”?

MRex · 04/05/2021 19:44

@AppleJane

Are you saying the official statistic of 5 deaths over the age of 70 is incorrect? As I keep saying it is my personal belief the early data is incorrect. You can believe what you want. If the data is wrong then so are the calculated risks. Let's see what Thursdays data shows (now they are providing more charts, as I told you before)

"5" is not a number I can see on the yellow card report, so I've no idea where you got it from, nor what it's supposed to be linked to.

Data changed as over 50 m people in the UK and hundreds of millions worldwide were vaccinated. Logically, when you understand the scale of what's going on, it would be expected to change. If you aren't happy to be vaccinated yet then wait and take your chances with catching covid until you are happy. It's really that easy.

AppleJane · 04/05/2021 20:07

Look at your own link again then. If you'd bothered reading the whole thread you'd know most of us here are discussing the fact we are waiting.

We don't need your permission to wait nor to discuss the matter of waiting nor to believe the recent data is more reliably than the old data.

MRex · 04/05/2021 20:18

I don't reply for your sake, but because you keep stating incorrect assumptions that risk confusing others. I don't know if it's intentional or genuine errors at this point. The report doesn't have a statistic stating only 5 deaths over 70; it has 5 thromboembolism with thrombocytopenia deaths for over 70s, that is not all deaths for that age group but for one specific risk.

TruelyWonder · 04/05/2021 20:21

@Username198

My concern is around I just don’t trust the Government. The policy on PPE was based on what was available rather than what was best - first we were told masks were harmful then when we had some all of a sudden they were compulsory. How are we supposed to believe them on AZ risks for those in their 30s/40s?

It is not just are government that has made this guidance. South Korea and some other countries have also made it the same cut off age. People seem to only look at the EU and even their the EMA have said over 18.

AppleJane · 04/05/2021 20:40

Yes @MRex, 5 deaths over age 70 recorded as being due to the blood clots. I don't believe that figure. I think it more likely other cases were missed. And as I also said previously, last week's report showed an increase of 9 deaths over a 7 day period with the average age remaining the same. Are you saying we are not allowed to be concerned about that? So all the older people died of natural causes and there isn't a greater risk to younger people either? I simply do not believe that nor do I agree that we should all be quiet so as not to upset the over-sensitive.

TruelyWonder · 04/05/2021 21:08

Nothing to do with clots but this information needs sharing as a awesome game changer.

In case anyone isn’t aware, there HAS not been one case thus far of a FULLY (2-weeks post second dose by definition) vaccinated individual transmitting the virus (in the case of a rare breakthrough infection).

Vaccine rocks

AppleJane · 04/05/2021 21:16

The title of this thread is 'Alternatives to AstraZeneca vaccine for under 40s “could be considered” amid rise in blood clots'.

It is not anti vaccine. It is a discussion about whether there will be a change coming shortly to the age cut off for AstraZeneca. Vaccines are good. Choice is good.

TruelyWonder · 04/05/2021 21:27

I have posted this information on a lot of other threads. Go have a look. Not personal to this one. I am just spreading the joy❤ So wonderful news

Fieldofmemes · 04/05/2021 22:10

@TruelyWonder

Nothing to do with clots but this information needs sharing as a awesome game changer.

In case anyone isn’t aware, there HAS not been one case thus far of a FULLY (2-weeks post second dose by definition) vaccinated individual transmitting the virus (in the case of a rare breakthrough infection).

Vaccine rocks

Correction: the PFIZER vaccine rocks. Both vaccines may stop transmission but Pfizer isn't killing young, healthy people at a rate of approximately 10 per week. Unlike Astrazeneca.