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.

Why should vaccines be immune to basic safety protocols?

How has the AZ vaccine been immune to basic safety protocols @PlanDeRaccordement? It passed all clinical trials. After reviewing the incidences of blood clots the EMA, MHRA have concluded it is still incredibly safe and the benefits outweigh the risks. So where is it bypassing safety protocols?

Yes suspending would temporarily remove choice to have the AZ vaccine. But it’s no different from any manufacturer issuing a safety recall and pulling products off the shelves after a few dozen deaths are linked to their product. Why should vaccines be immune to basic safety protocols?

It would also slow down the roll out, meaning those of us who are happy to take the risk having to wait and take the bigger risk of Covid. I had my first AZ vaccine last week and, like most people I know, I had no hesitation when I was told which vaccine I was getting.

Can’t see the yellow fever vaccine being recalled despite causing severe organ failure in every 250,000 people.

yellow fever has a much higher CFR than COVID.

Can anyone do this? Latest figures suggest risk of blood clot from jab now 1 in 126,000 whereas before it was 1 in 250,000
Now 2 people in 250,000 will be affected rather than 1?

Is that what you mean?

Risk according to those numbers has doubled

What's the risk of long covid?

What's the risk of long covid?

According to Tim Spector (Zoe app), true risk of long covid (i.e. risk of developing long-term conditions significantly impacting quality of life) is around 2%.

Of course, there are much higher numbers floating around but as we discussed multiple times, those percentages include people who display mild to moderate lingering symptoms (including coughs) after 4 to 5 weeks from the date of positive test.

What is the percent of the rare clots linked to vaccines? Less than 2%?

@UsedUpUsername Where’s the evidence that asthmatics are vulnerable?

From the Finnish health department, on why they are prioritising asthmatics (second risk group, out of two groups)
"Finnish coronavirus patients aged 20–69 years who had been in primary care for asthma had more than twice the risk of hospitalization and more than three times the risk of intensive care compared with cases without asthma, taking into account age and gender."

That seems to indicate that people with asthma (which they are classifying as those that use continuous medication i.e. daily preventative inhaler) are at increased risk.

@Roonerspismed

I don’t know what to think. I am shaken that the trials didn’t pick this up, and that the MHRA was so slow to pick it up. They only found the extra cases after the Germans pointed it out. The AZ trials I read yesterday used a meningitis vaccine as a control - I need to find out if that is true - but that’s also hugely pissed me off as surely a proper RCT would have used a saline only control? I’m told to trust scientists but it all sounds half baked to me.

And the nagging doubt with all these vaccines is what else has been missed? What is there longer term

I’m aware I sound neurotic but I have become this way due to years of medical mistakes and cock ups. I just don’t trust “experts”.

The reason that they use meningitis vaccine as a control (which obviously participants consented to) is to control against bias in behaviour if people experienced side effects and then changed their behaviour as a result. Eg people dropping social distancing whilst still in the study, so using another vaccine with similar side effects arm pain, flu like symptoms is a very logical way of ensuring the validity of the trial. The trials didnt pick up on the blood clot issue because of how rare it is, despite the large number of recruits in the OZ trials you simply cant account for every issue which may arise in rare cases in vaccine trials and that's always been true whether its CV/flu/mmr vaccine.

Please everyone .......

Regardless of your age, If you get a headache, a week or so after getting the AZ , I beg you, please do not just pop paracetamol, please seek medical advice. Tell them you had your vaccine a week previous.

😢😢😢

What is the percent of the rare clots linked to vaccines? Less than 2%?

Yes, of course it is much lower, but the risk of long Covid at an individual level is 2% multiplied by probability of catching Covid. When prevalence is low (like it is now), the overall number also goes down.

I think the JCVI analysis linked to previously is an "intellectually honest" illustration of risks and benefits from vaccinations and needs to be updated in the light of new facts. I agree it makes sense to include impact of long Covid (again, using an "intellectually honest" rather than overstated number). The case in favour of vaccines will remain strong but people will be able to assess risks and benefits and make informed decisions.

The problem is I often get headaches and they don't go with paracetamol. They are usually either hormonal/stress related or after looking at a screen all day. At what point can I think 'oh it's just a headache'? My hayfever is also really bad at the moment and I get headaches with that

www.gov.uk/government/news/mhra-issues-new-advice-concluding-a-possible-link-between-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-and-extremely-rare-unlikely-to-occur-blood-clots

@Lightout that’s already out of date apparently, someone needs to update the new findings.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/23/astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-blood-clots-what-side-effects-under-30s/

Thanks for that @Lightout. I usually wouldn't think anything of a bad persistent headache but I'd definitely pick up on the other effects. I notice it says from 4 days but doesn't give an 'end date' but I seem to remember reading 4-20 days.

athing I’m no scientist but that sounds utter horse shit. All vaccines have side effects and some are serious and so if using another vaccine as a control you will surely miss adverse effects, serious or not

If I could be arsed I would have a look at the data myself. Whose to say there wasn’t a case or two of low platelets in the trial and perhaps it presented in the control group too?

I think their data says there were none of these specific blood clots identified in the study, they would have noticed whether they were in the control or the active vaccine group, it's not statistically surprising if none showed up during the early phases of the trial.

For what it’s worth, Pfizer, Moderna and J&J all used saline placebos in their trials. AZ used a meningococcal vaccine. Here is the link to the AZ safety trial.

There are ethical reasons why you might avoid using a placebo in a vaccine trial - if there is an efficacious treatment or vaccine which already exists then it’s clearly unethical to withhold it from the control arm of the study. The WHO talks about this conundrum in this report.

They also acknowledge that not using a placebo does compromise the safety assessment:

The motivation for using active rather than inert “placebos” is to fulfil the ethical duty of beneficence and, sometimes, to avoid giving an injection with an inert substance. A methodological disadvantage, however, is that trials using these types of placebos provide a less perfect control. It may be difficult or impossible to assess fully the safety and reactogenicity of the trial vaccine, although its efficacy can usually be assessed satisfactorily. Such trials may also be less acceptable to regulators. Some regulators and/or public health authorities may prefer data from a placebo-controlled trial on which to make decisions whether or not to approve or adopt a vaccine.

@Terracotta9

For what it’s worth, Pfizer, Moderna and J&J all used saline placebos in their trials. AZ used a meningococcal vaccine. Here is the link to the AZ safety trial.

There are ethical reasons why you might avoid using a placebo in a vaccine trial - if there is an efficacious treatment or vaccine which already exists then it’s clearly unethical to withhold it from the control arm of the study. The WHO talks about this conundrum in this report.

They also acknowledge that not using a placebo does compromise the safety assessment:

The motivation for using active rather than inert “placebos” is to fulfil the ethical duty of beneficence and, sometimes, to avoid giving an injection with an inert substance. A methodological disadvantage, however, is that trials using these types of placebos provide a less perfect control. It may be difficult or impossible to assess fully the safety and reactogenicity of the trial vaccine, although its efficacy can usually be assessed satisfactorily. Such trials may also be less acceptable to regulators. Some regulators and/or public health authorities may prefer data from a placebo-controlled trial on which to make decisions whether or not to approve or adopt a vaccine.

Fuck me. I've not read this before.

The only stats I believe usually are on More or Less (radio 4). They explained the whole clot risk benefit situation. The bottom line is that at 30 the risk of serious disease from covid falls below the risk of the vaccine. Ultimately it's 1:250000 and every day I do far more dangerous things like driving on the motorway to work, at weekends I ride on a motorcycle even do I had my jab as did our 20 something year old DD's (had health risks/sn putting them into group 6). We are now 8 weeks out and fine btw.

If you are worried, it's not compulsory but don't go complaining you aren't vaccinated

@Roonerspismed

The trials didn't pick it up because it's very rare, 1:250000.