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.

The fact is, if you actually get covid you have a far higher risk of dying of covid or having long term complications from it than you have of dying from the AZ vaccine if you are in your 20s or 30s (and I think also late teens). So by avoiding the vaccine, you are hoping that lots of unvaccinated 20 and 30 somethings don’t go travelling and partying and causing an epidemic of covid in that age group.

Dying from a medical intervention that is meant to save others is ethically not okay Again, I suspect you have misunderstood something!

I don’t think there’s any proof of this. Do you have a source for the hospitalisation rates still being too high for the NHS to handle?

Well, just as a rough marker, I think under 40s have something like a 2% chance of hospitalisation. Which doesn’t sound much, but scales up quickly if infections are widespread.

Plus the issues around variants, if the virus is still circulating widely. That’s arguably the much bigger issue.

They estimated that they’d need 80% vaxxed to achieve herd immunity and that has to take into consideration those who can’t be.

And even excluding the risk of long term complications, you are more likely to die if you get actual covid in your 20s or 30s than you are to die from vaccination, given the phenomenally low risk of dying from the vaccination.

If you had no significant problems with your first jab, it would be completely illogical not to get the second one. Your risk from Covid is far, far higher.

@Walkaround

The fact is, if you actually get covid you have a far higher risk of dying of covid or having long term complications from it than you have of dying from the AZ vaccine if you are in your 20s or 30s (and I think also late teens). So by avoiding the vaccine, you are hoping that lots of unvaccinated 20 and 30 somethings don’t go travelling and partying and causing an epidemic of covid in that age group.

No one thinks that 20yr olds are going to die in large numbers after partying unvaccinated. It was always that they’d spread it to their elderly family members.

Well, now they are vaccinated, so why not just let them get on with life?

@UsedUpUsername I’m sure the travel was for family reasons so not so easy to stop in practical terms
e.g. attending weddings? Bit galling when we're not sure our UK wedding will be ok to go ahead this year, having been moved from last year, with talk of the impact of foreign travel and variants.

@UsedUpUsername - nobody thinks vaccinated 20 somethings are going to die in large percentages (numbers depends on percentage infected and that depends on behaviour and mutations). They do, however, have a far higher risk from the real disease than the vaccination, so should be offered the vaccination. Simples.

*unvaccinated 20 somethings!

No one thinks that 20yr olds are going to die in large numbers after partying unvaccinated. It was always that they’d spread it to their elderly family members. Really? You may have missed some interesting data in JAMA back in December. Covid susceptibility seems not to have much of an age characteristic and long covid might be something younger cohorts suffer from, as opposed to mortality rates in elders!

Well, now they are vaccinated, so why not just let them get on with life Which them? Given the "Bastard Boomers going on Holiday" threads your point in't all that clear!

Well, now they are vaccinated, so why not just let them get on with life?

Because wide circulation among this age group still causes a lot of problems.

Firstly, numbers requiring hospitalisation could be too high for comfort. Secondly, it increases the likelihood of vaccine resistant variants emerging.

Really? You may have missed some interesting data in JAMA back in December. Covid susceptibility seems not to have much of an age characteristic and long covid might be something younger cohorts suffer from, as opposed to mortality rates in elders!

Link?

Because when it comes to death and hospitalisation, age is the primary risk factor.

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.

That’s not quite true. IIRC the change was because the balance of risk in looking at one measure ie ICU admissions was more finely balanced for under 30s re AZ.

“Secondly, it increases the likelihood of vaccine resistant variants emerging.”

Oh shush. Have you seen Brazil and India?

Link? Oh so demanding when it is other people asserting things

Because when it comes to death and hospitalisation, age is the primary risk factor. Again, you misunderstood something!

Oh shush. Have you seen Brazil and India?

Yes I have. What’s your point?

Abitod Here is the latest yellow card report
www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting

It has 168 blood clot reports, only one of which was after a 2nd dose.

The report before that had, as I recall, 99 reports after the first and 1 after the 2nd.

As they are both total reports, that means in the time interval between them (9-10 days, as the previous have data up to 5th April and this as it up to 14th) no incidences have been reported after the 2nd dose.

So ‘clotting cases’ plural after the 2nd dose is not (yet) true.

And the ratio of first doses to second doses would expect much higher clotting reports if the risk was equal between both doses.

There might be a higher rate of long Covid than that of blood clots after the vaccine but the blood clots are more likely to be fatal. Most cases of long Covid, while unpleasant do appear to resolve eventually. The risk of having a case of long Covid that lasts over 12 weeks with significant debilitating effects (more than a change of smell) - is that still higher than the risk of a blood clot?

@TheKeatingFive

Oh shush. Have you seen Brazil and India?

Yes I have. What’s your point?

I think it’s ridiculous to worry about vaccine resistant strains arising in the U.K. if we don’t vaccinate all young people when you can see what the situation is like in other countries. If a vaccine resistant strain is going to arise it would have plenty of opportunity in other countries and vaccinating young people in the U.K. would have very little impact on that.

If a vaccine resistant strain is going to arise it would have plenty of opportunity in other countries

Yes, which is why I advocate strong border monitoring.

However doing that absolutely doesn’t guard against resistant strains emerging in the UKs own, unvaxxed population.

🙄

Do you disagree?

but the blood clots are more likely to be fatal. That is becoming far less an eventuality than was inititally the case, as we now know what to look for and how to treat them.

And some cases of long covid seem to condemn people to a life like mine has been, beset with ME. I wouldn't wish that on anyone!

1 in 10 people who test positive for covid have symptoms for 12 weeks or longer. And 1 in 5 who have symptoms of covid for 5 weeks or longer. The NIH report tens of thousands of people as being 'long haulers', most of whom had mild symptoms only. And not new either. SARS studies showed a large % of people going on to form ME like symptoms, upt to 27%. So not an insignificant number.

@TheKeatingFive

Do you disagree?

As I’ve already said, I think it’s a ridiculous thing to worry about. You carry on though.