Vaccine.. another sad story

[BountyIsUnderrated]

I've just read the below article, one little boy left without a mother and the poor father left alone to raise him.

There have been so many stories about this happening I don't know what to feel anymore.. I've been vaccinated myself but I can see why people are scared of the AZ.

It's rare yes but I don't think that would be very reassuring if someone I loved died... Is this the cost of protecting against covid?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9732583/Mother-three-47-dies-AstraZeneca-Covid-jab-caused-blood-clots-brain.html

@IncessantNameChanger

I was in hospital with suspected stroke after my first jab. It wasnt a stroke and my CT and bloods was fine. Nothing to do with the vaccine in the end.

But I strongly feel that even if your only a one in million statistic, it's no comfort on a personal level.

I had my second dose and it was fine. I'm pro vax but these things need to be shared with the public. Who really wants it to be hushed up or covered up and lied about.

Better to be told you have more chance of winning the lottery or whatever than getting a serious complication than a bear faced lie surely

Yes it's hard not to feel resentful when we know that there is a more effective and supposedly safer alternative out there that people our age in other Countries are able to choose.

I think when I had my first shot there was very little about clots in the news but by the time I arrived at hospital a few weeks later the paramedics and drs was very interested in my vaccine date and make.

I was extremely worried about my second dose but you cant mix and match. By my second dose they was much clearer on the risks and what to look out for. Tbh if I could have had another vaccine I cant honestly say I wouldnt. As I say, if your the one in a million the great statistics are no comfort at a personal level.

I agree also I would rather read about this in the New Scientist but more people read tabloids than proper researched sources without the emotion factor. Tabloids are one step better than social media. At least the tabloids get sued occasionally

The vast majority of people I know have been vaccinated and saving for menstrual irregularities the only ones who have had adverse effects have all had the AZ.

However that is two known adverse effects from approx two hundred people.

Strange now when I think back to my original supposition that AZ would necessarily be safer than the MRNA vaccines.

Although due to profit there is a vested interest in underreporting of Pfizer etc side effects...

We need a longer period to elapse before we can make a truly equivocal comparison I suppose.

I agree also I would rather read about this in the New Scientist but more people read tabloids than proper researched sources without the emotion factor. Tabloids are one step better than social media. At least the tabloids get sued occasionally

This is an important point for me when I’m looking at anything I’m not an expert in. Who is the person relaying the information accountable to whether it’s a professional panel or their peers. It’s not just to have an idea of their qualifications but to consider any bias. Neither of those are deal-breakers as a rule but it’s an important part of building up a picture of reliability.

All deaths are tragic. Deaths from accidents, cancer,ckvud and the vaccine.
All these people are resl human beings with families.
Yet a few on here were happy to dismiss a huge number of COVID deaths as low hanging fruit who have had their lives etc etc.
Many if these were in their forties either you'd children too

Forties or 50s with young dc too.
Indeed dh and I are over 50 with Primary aged dd

Sorry deaths for any other reason

Not awake yet

It’s sad, but a lot more have died from Covid and they’re not in the papers.
I had my first AZ just before the risk was made public, and I had my second and was aware that if I got any bad headache etc I’d go to A&E - was weeks ago now.
The stats say that risk of dying from Covid over age 40 is higher than risk of AZ clots so AZ is still rec’d.
Every time you take medication/go out/drive you take a risk, life is about judging risk. Everyone knows vaccines have side-effects, it’s weighing up the risk to you and the public of having them.

I had Covid March 2020. I had AZ jab Feb 2021.

Still have localised head pain over four months on. Had bloods, waiting on an MRI. I’ve refused my second AZ jab.

What annoys me is the recommendation that those previously infected are blanket vaccinated.

Why exactly?

We are being given no information on how well naturally acquired immunity is faring against vaccination immunity. You cannot insist people in this previously group are vaccinated without giving people verifying data to back it.

We are not being given the information. If you have naturally acquired immunity, what is the relative risk? We are not told.

Where are the 'gold standard' studies to back these claims of superior protection through vaccination? There have been none. They also demand these 'gold standard' proofs for other therapeutics, but where the Covid vaccines are concerned, proof in favour of the vaccines seems to be a set at a much lower bar.

I've read nothing to explain why a vaccine that utilises a synthesised part of the virus can provide anything but equal protection as compared to full exposure to the wild virus. Surely, the mechanism produces identical (at best) protection & nothing ‘superior’ ?

@MummyPop00 I heard an explanation for this on radio 4 (excuse the Chinese whispers); as I understand it the argument is that with a natural covid infection there’s no way to pinpoint which part of the virus the body has built immunity to because you can’t tell when antibodies were produced. With vaccines they all use the spike protein to train the immune system which is the first part of the virus to interact with the body. Vaccines don’t contain any other part of the covid virus so it produces a reliable antibody that recognises the spike protein which in turn means that your antibodies will recognise and fight off the virus at the first opportunity. If natural infection has produced antibodies that react to a layer stage of infection it’s a weaker position in terms of containing the contagious period and serious illness.

Layer = later

I am truly truly boggled by the blase approach to the vaccine risk. It is a requirement that if you inject someone with a substance, that substance is safe, otherwise what you are doing has another name, it's known as poisoning.

Regardless of covid, a medication that is directly killing people is a huge safety risk and should have been pulled as soon as it emerged what was happening. Instead they've continued injecting people with it, on the threat that if people don't submit they won't get their lives back. It's beyond crazy and I think will lead to huge litigation and backlash in the future when people wake up and realise what was done to them.

It makes sense to take a dangerous medication - chemotherapy for example - if it's your only choice and the alternative is certain death. But for the government to pretty much insist that healthy people are injected with a potentially deadly substance when they could happily not have and be fine, or have alternative and also be fine? Beyond unacceptable. I think history will look back in utter disbelief.

I had mine yesterday.
All I can do is trust the advice, I'm not a scientist, I haven't done any "research", I've just done what has been recommended and so far no issues and just accept that there is a risk as there is with every medical intervention

@MummyPop00 - I guess with the vaccine you get a set dose. With the natural infection, your “dose” is less predictable - people with significant exposure had an increased chance of severe illness, others with lighter exposure may have been more likely to get a milder illness and recover more easily, because their bodies could react in time to keep the viral load of the illness down, making it easier to fight off. Presumably this can have an effect on the immune response and how long it lasts???

I'm also genuinely surprised at how effective the 'anti-vaxx' slur is at disconnecting people's brains. All you have to do is wheel out that phrase and suddenly people can't look at the risk anymore, it all becomes about preserving their self-image as someone who isn't a 'stupid anti-vaxxer' and voila compliant, trusting, ready to be injected and take their chances.

It is perfectly normal to ask questions about what's being injected into you. It's also normal to expect that substance to be safe. It is not normal to have government programmes that directly cause unnecessary deaths.

@TheDailyCarbunkle

Its not a huge safety risk, the numbers dying from the vaccine are extremely small.

However because of the risk, nobody should be pressured to having the vaccine and made to feel that the choice is the vaccine vs a bad bout of covid/death.

And mandating this for social care workers, essentially preventing them form acknowledging the risk and declining the vaccine is barbaric and in contravention of their human rights.

@Cornettoninja

Interesting.

Point still stands regarding verification on natural immunity.

Other than the PHE SIREN health worker study, which showed natural immunity holding up pretty well, we aren’t hearing much on its longevity are we? Yet, in the meantime it’s blanket vaccinations a go-go. Even though those with prior Covid ‘may suffer more profound side effects’. Like me for instance.

[quote ZednotZee]@TheDailyCarbunkle

Its not a huge safety risk, the numbers dying from the vaccine are extremely small.

However because of the risk, nobody should be pressured to having the vaccine and made to feel that the choice is the vaccine vs a bad bout of covid/death.

And mandating this for social care workers, essentially preventing them form acknowledging the risk and declining the vaccine is barbaric and in contravention of their human rights.[/quote]
It is a huge safety risk. A prophylactic medication (ie a medication that you are not taking to treat an illness but on that you are taking to prevent something) should never and that means never have a mechanism by which is kills people. What people don't seem to get is that these deaths are not from allergic reactions or liver toxicity or any of the side effects that inevitably happen with any medication, the vaccine itself has a mechanism whereby in some people it causes a catastrophic breakdown in the body's ability to regulate the blood. For the people who are susceptible, the vaccine is a poison - for the first sufferers, the mortality rate was a massive 50% - that has reduced now that they're aware of the signs and can treat it, but the mortality rate is still 19%, ie approx 1 in every 5 sufferers will die. This isn't some minor side effect - it is very serious and if you don't die it can have life changing consequences.

I'll say it again - the people being injected with this are healthy people who could well not take the medication or take an alternative and be absolutely fine. There is no compelling reason for their lives to be put at risk. But their lives are put at risk and they're convinced to take that risk by a government that has convinced them to fear covid and to believe they won't get their lives back if they don't comply. It's beyond dystopian and people can't even see it.

@TheDailyCarbunkle

OK, so you're going to have to.provide links for your claims here or you will be labelled a crazy conspiracy theorist anti vaxxer.

Of course they could not take the vaccine and be absolutely fine. Not every individual genotype is going to be susceptible to covid infection.
As I have said previously, this is not an indiscriminate virus.

Sorry, I don't make the rules.

But their lives are put at risk and they're convinced to take that risk by a government that has convinced them to fear covid and to believe they won't get their lives back if they don't comply. It's beyond dystopian and people can't even see it.

I don't think this is necessarily true in a lot of cases. Most believe that being vaccinated is generally a good thing hence why we get kids vaccinated and know the idea is get vaccine create antibodies have a better chance of surviving an illness whilst being aware not everything is safe. Sounds like you have the fear and believe the government are trying to control everyone.

I find it chilling that people are even considering vaccinating their children with any of the covid vaccines to be quite honest.

@TheDailyCarbunkle

I am truly truly boggled by the blase approach to the vaccine risk. It is a requirement that if you inject someone with a substance, that substance is safe, otherwise what you are doing has another name, it's known as poisoning.

Regardless of covid, a medication that is directly killing people is a huge safety risk and should have been pulled as soon as it emerged what was happening. Instead they've continued injecting people with it, on the threat that if people don't submit they won't get their lives back. It's beyond crazy and I think will lead to huge litigation and backlash in the future when people wake up and realise what was done to them.

It makes sense to take a dangerous medication - chemotherapy for example - if it's your only choice and the alternative is certain death. But for the government to pretty much insist that healthy people are injected with a potentially deadly substance when they could happily not have and be fine, or have alternative and also be fine? Beyond unacceptable. I think history will look back in utter disbelief.

Where does it say in any of the criteria NICE use that a treatment must be safe.

No treatments are completely safe. They just need to be better than the alternative. The difficulty with a mass vaccination program is that you also need to factor in the chances of getting the virus in the first place.

Other things that are 'directly killing people' but are not only allowed by the government, but can be bought over the counter - paracetamol, ibuprofen, aspirin, alcohol, cigarettes.

All of those things would almost certainly fail to be approved under the standards that the coronavirus vaccines have passed.

@TheDailyCarbunkle but we already have a precedent with the risk that vaccinations carry that recognises the fact the risk/benefit profile is different to other medications. The vaccine damage fund has been in place since 1979 and there’s a detailed plan of steps to take in the event someone is adversely harmed by vaccines.

If the covid vaccines had been developed in normal circumstances the current issues we’re aware of now likely wouldn’t have been identified for a much longer period after a roll out because we don’t normally issue vaccines to this many people in this short time frame. That’s the biggest difference between this and other vaccines in accepted, regular use. I appreciate where you’re coming from but I don’t think you’re taking everything into account for a balanced perspective.

I believe a like for like comparison with other vaccines on numbers of dosages administered would show a similar, slightly increased, risk profile. I’m happy to be proved wrong since I don’t have any figures to back up that belief. I think a slightly increased risk is acceptable in the circumstances on a population level although awful on an for those who experience these on an individual level,

@MummyPop00, I do occasionally see reports on natural immunity like the studies on that Brazilian city (the name escapes me at the moment, Manaus?) that was thought to have achieved natural herd immunity but if they did this didn’t prevent a second wave.

There are studies ongoing, they just take time. There’s a board on Reddit (COVID19) that is strictly serious discussion of papers and studies if you were interested in looking for various studies globally.

@TheDailyCarbunkle

I'll say it again - the people being injected with this are healthy people who could well not take the medication or take an alternative and be absolutely fine

Or they could well not take it and end up in hospital or dead from COVID.

I'm not going to disagree with you that their is pressure from the government and from peers to be vaccinated, nor that the government has helped to create a state of fear in order to drive compliance but in the end, unless you actually do not believe the figures they are giving us regarding the chances of both serious effects of COVID and the vaccines, then you have to put aside the kind of histrionics in your post and look at it as dispassionately as possible.

There is risk from both having the vaccine (including pfizer and moderna) and from not having the vaccine. The risk is higher in not having the vaccine (becoming progressively higher the older you are). Therefore it makes more sense to have it than to not.

All I can do is trust the advice, I'm not a scientist, I haven't done any "research", I've just done what has been recommended and so far no issues and just accept that there is a risk as there is with every medical intervention

But many medical interventions have had years of rigorous testing behind them, vaccines especially. That said, I do think, overwhelmingly, that we can trust the science and that the science will improve over time as we get to know the virus itself better.