Alternatives to AstraZeneca vaccine for under 40s “could be considered” amid rise in blood clots 2

[Whichjab]

Just starting another thread as so much information still coming out. Interesting that Germany have just allowed AZ for all that want it.

Note, this is not an Anti-Vaccs thread. It is just a discussion about alternatives.

It will be released once the vast majority of people who have had 1 dose have had the second his my bet. They cannot risk the rollout.

No, but if you could see a weekly breakdown of vaccination by age group then you could go back and see how many blood clot reports there were within certain time periods . It would be useful to have those figures to compare to reports coming in over the next few weeks too. Of course it’s not going to be entirely accurate but it’s better than using the total vaccination figures from across all age groups.

I've given you the link twice @Walkaround I'm not going to spoon feed you.

And lots of carers etc under 50 have been given AZ long enough ago for us to look at the data. As @Goodasgolden says, they are playing the waiting game and I'm pretty sure you know it too.

@bumbleymummy - Personally, I think people thinking they can make those sorts of links between different bits of information is a good reason for not giving it out in that way. You would need far more detailed information than that to make a sensible calculation - or could rely on the fact that the detailed information is actually being given to organisations that have the skills to generate accurate statistics from it.

@AppleJane - I’ve looked at the link. Where does he say what he would do with the information that he is better qualified to do than those organisations that have been given the information and then published risk assessments on the back of it? Why does he not trust the organisations that have been given the data?

I'd be interested to know how many under 40s actually choose AZ when given the choice between that and one of the others.

@Walkaround well personally I think it’s ridiculous too find it acceptable to calculate a risk based on the total number of vaccines given rather than breaking it down by age group. It’s not accurate at all. Each to their own though.

@bumbleymummy - the risk is broken down by age group.

Based on what walkabout? Incidence of clots in that age group out of all vaccines given or out of vaccines given to that specific age group? At the moment, I think it’s the former.

[quote Walkaround]@bumbleymummy - Personally, I think people thinking they can make those sorts of links between different bits of information is a good reason for not giving it out in that way. You would need far more detailed information than that to make a sensible calculation - or could rely on the fact that the detailed information is actually being given to organisations that have the skills to generate accurate statistics from it.[/quote]

And yet the rest of Europe managed it didn't they?

@bumbleymummy

Based on what walkabout? Incidence of clots in that age group out of all vaccines given or out of vaccines given to that specific age group? At the moment, I think it’s the former.

I think it's the former too.

@AppleJane - but the EMA haven’t specified how many 40-49 year olds have had the vaccine, either? Isn’t that the data you want?

And yet the rest of Europe managed it didn't they?

If the EMA have managed it then you can use that data to assess your risk. There is no reason for it to be different in the UK compared with the rest of Europe.

@bumbleymummy

No, but if you could see a weekly breakdown of vaccination by age group then you could go back and see how many blood clot reports there were within certain time periods . It would be useful to have those figures to compare to reports coming in over the next few weeks too. Of course it’s not going to be entirely accurate but it’s better than using the total vaccination figures from across all age groups.

I don't agree that it's better to publish inaccurate figures across all age groups compared with total vaccination figures . Regardless , I'm sure that it will be published when they have the data and have been able to analyse it accurately.

Actually @Walkaround no, I don't want the data IF those with the data do the right thing and raise the cut off age. But after they sat on the decision all over the bank holiday and Election Day, it's clear to me they don't have the same concept of 'the right thing to do' as me. All trust is gone. They've gambled and I think a lot of people are going to be angry in the coming weeks.

@LondonWFuck

I'd be interested to know how many under 40s actually choose AZ when given the choice between that and one of the others.

Very few given all the media reports. No age group would choose it at the moment but there are not enough alternatives for everyone so they have had to make a decision to allocate according to the benefits/risks for the different age groups.

Yea I agree very few. I'm 40 and waiting for something other than AZ, which I should be able to get in a couple of weeks.

@AppleJane

Actually *@Walkaround* no, I don't want the data IF those with the data do the right thing and raise the cut off age. But after they sat on the decision all over the bank holiday and Election Day, it's clear to me they don't have the same concept of 'the right thing to do' as me. All trust is gone. They've gambled and I think a lot of people are going to be angry in the coming weeks.

Interesting that you don't have a problem with a cut-off age per se. You just want it raised so it's above your age.

I'm 32 and have had both az vaccines now. I had my second dose last Saturday. I did not realize this was going to change. Is it now under 40s?

And that’s my point, @AppleJane, you are not asking for data that most people would find remotely helpful in the form you are asking for it in, you are just wanting to find evidence you are being lied to.

Interesting that you don't have a problem with a cut-off age per se. You just want it raised so it's above your age.

Cheap shot @Belladonna12 I've always argued it should be in line with the rest of Europe but don't let that get in the way of a snarky opportunity.

@Belladonna12 I’m not asking for inaccurate figures of vaccines given weekly by age group. I’d like those figures to be accurate. I just said the above method would still not be completely accurate because, for example, some adverse reaction reports could come in later. It would still be better than just comparing reactions in those age groups to total vaccines given across all age groups though.

@AppleJane

Interesting that you don't have a problem with a cut-off age per se. You just want it raised so it's above your age.

Cheap shot @Belladonna12 I've always argued it should be in line with the rest of Europe but don't let that get in the way of a snarky opportunity.

Yes, you always wanted to be in line with the countries that have raised the limit above your age.

Balance of risks aside, at the current rates of vaccine coverage and disease prevalence giving everyone not yet vaccinated a choice of 1st dose looks like the more practical and pragmatic approach anyway surely?

(latest data per .Gov has adult population above 67% already given 1st dose - take out the under 40s and that doesn't leave many)

You're not just talking to me @Belladonna12, you're also talking to all the people reading this thread and they can see what you're doing.

And nope, wrong again. I just trust the decisions of the countries who haven't stuck their heads in the sand and hoped it would all go away. Remind me again, have you been vaccinated?