What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

goingnowhere

Take what you are given, or its to the back of the queue. The best vaccine is the one you get soonest.

Only those over 70 are assured of a mRNA based vaccine, given the distribution of deliveries AZ make up about 30% so odds are you won't get AZ.

We might get news on curevac soon, thats the mRNA vaccine which has no complex storage requirements and the EU has tied up a very large order, probably will be too late but with AZ unable to get its house in order it might be just in time to fill the gap.

mick087

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

That is bonkers. Why should they have to wait for every one to get a free vaccine? Hundreds of millions of people arent even at risk of illhealth from covid. Private purchase of vaccines would massively speed up production. The EU was only willing to pay 3 euro per an astrazeca vaccine. I would pay 300 for it. or more

Yes it would speed it up for those who could afford to pay 300 like yourself.

No a very good idea.

is_that_so

BonnieSituation wrote: »

No choice.

As I said before, Astra Zeneca are shysters. But they're shysters with an effective vaccine.

If you feel you are at risk of developing symptoms talk to your doctor. Don't be soliciting advice on a thread on boards.

There's gonna be no private vaccines til well into next year. Practically the whole planet has to get vaccinated. Be realistic.

I don't think that's fully accurate and it might have been Merck, which would have been good for everyone if bad for Britain initially. As a newbie they had no idea what they were doing but were armed with a vision. Added to this was wild overpromising where really only one country ended up being supplied. One might argue about contracts but TBH they were never going to be able to do both the UK and EU at the same time and now there's a whole load of wide boy tactics being employed to cover their asses.

Hector Savage

So why have Germany halted it in the under 60s ?
I know it's unlikely to develop side effects and die, but relatively speaking comparing it to pfizer/moderna it seems enough that it's halted.

BonnieSituation

is_that_so wrote: »

I don't think that's fully accurate and it might have been Merck, which would have been good for everyone if bad for Britain initially. As a newbie they had no idea what they were doing but were armed with a vision. Added to this was wild overpromising where really only one country ended up being supplied. One might argue about contracts but TBH they were never going to be able to do both the UK and EU at the same time and now there's a whole load of wide boy tactics being employed to cover their asses.

What? You can't be for real to start that post as you have and end it as you did? Madness.

is_that_so

BonnieSituation wrote: »

What? You can't be for real to start that post as you have and end it as you did? Madness.

As the teacher says show your work...

Shyster: A person, especially a lawyer, who uses unscrupulous, fraudulent, or deceptive methods in business.

I do believe women under 60 have reason to be concerned about AZ. It's not unreasonable for someone in that group to prefer literally any other approved vaccine over AZ. I don't think comments like 'get to the back of the queue then' are helpful here.

As a woman in my 30s, who is on the pill and who has lost a parent due to covid, I very much hope I won't be told it's AZ or nothing, when there's clearly a safety issue for my cohort.

BonnieSituation

is_that_so wrote: »

As the teacher says show your work...

You are so SMRT. And what had that added?

Anyway...

Flying Fox

Flying Fox wrote: »

I do believe women under 60 have reason to be concerned about AZ. It's not unreasonable for someone in that group to prefer literally any other approved vaccine over AZ. I don't think comments like 'get to the back of the queue then' are helpful here.

As a woman in my 30s, who is on the pill and who has lost a parent due to covid, I very much hope I won't be told it's AZ or nothing, when there's clearly a safety issue for my cohort.

Indeed. I will be closing watching any further emerging evidence to help decide whether or not to take the second dose.

Igotadose

Flying Fox wrote: »

I do believe women under 60 have reason to be concerned about AZ. It's not unreasonable for someone in that group to prefer literally any other approved vaccine over AZ. I don't think comments like 'get to the back of the queue then' are helpful here.

As a woman in my 30s, who is on the pill and who has lost a parent due to covid, I very much hope I won't be told it's AZ or nothing, when there's clearly a safety issue for my cohort.

There's not a safety issue for your cohort. There's speculation is all. Remember that tens of millions of AZ shots have been administered, it's been repeatedly investigated, most recently by the EMA, and found to be safe.

But, don't let that get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

FWIW in Germany you can still get the vaccine if you consent. Ireland should do the same.

One thing you can be assured of, the risk of Covid is FAR higher than the risk of a rare blood clotting disorder. And by not being vaccinated, you volunteer to be culture media for the next round of variants.

is_that_so

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You are so SMRT. And what had that added?

Anyway...

If posts were vetted for quality or adding things it would be an empty site! We disagree, such is life.

fly_agaric

Kivaro wrote: »

You'd have to wonder why the US is taking so long to approve the Astrazeneca vaccine, compared to the approval of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

Think I read somewhere they wanted their own trial of it in the US.
So that would have to be completed first (?).

Kivaro wrote: »

Of course if they do not grant approval to AZ, then that would cause pressure points on their own vaccination program in the States, as other countries would probably stop using AZ and look for more supplies of Pfizer and Moderna.

It will make no difference whatsoever because US has a lock on local production of vaccines until the govt. decides otherwise. Other customers will have to be served by the Western Pharma companies making vaccines from plants outside the US (which at the moment seems to mean from production of plants located in the EU).

This obviously stems from a Trump decision but I think it will be impossible for Biden to unwind it now until perhaps June or so (other than supplying nearby countries like Canada and Mexico) because it will slow down US vaccinations and open him to attacks by the Republican party.

mick087

Deleted User wrote: »

Indeed. I will be closing watching any further emerging evidence to help decide whether or not to take the second dose.

You will always find evidence to support the decision you want to take or not to take.

Reading a medical book can be dangerous.

BonnieSituation

is_that_so wrote: »

If posts were vetted for quality or adding things it would be an empty site! We disagree, such is life.

The issue is not that you disagree with me, it's that you questioned that they were shysters and then followed all that up with calling them wide boys. And then had the temerity to 'define' shysters for me. You were only short of going "well, actually..." As I said, you are so SMRT.

Igotadose

Igotadose wrote: »

There's not a safety issue for your cohort. There's speculation is all. Remember that tens of millions of AZ shots have been administered, it's been repeatedly investigated, most recently by the EMA, and found to be safe.

But, don't let that get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

FWIW in Germany you can still get the vaccine if you consent. Ireland should do the same.

One thing you can be assured of, the risk of Covid is FAR higher than the risk of a rare blood clotting disorder. And by not being vaccinated, you volunteer to be culture media for the next round of variants.

How is the medical data reported by the Norwegian, German and Danish authorities 'speculation'?

The EMA stated that they couldn't rule out a link between AZ and the clotting disorder, but overall the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks. This was before the German cases were notified.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, as someone who lost my dad to covid I cannot stand them. I want a vaccine that is safe for me to take. I would take Pfizer or Moderna this minute if it was offered to me.

29 of the 31 cases in Germany were in women aged 20-63. It's not general blood clots, it's an extremely rare blood disorder which is now presenting in much larger numbers amongst women recently vaccinated with AZ. There's a clear pattern here, and countries are not restricting its use just for the fun of it.

is_that_so

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The issue is not that you disagree with me, it's that you questioned that they were shysters and then followed all that up with calling them wide boys. And then had the temerity to 'define' shysters for me. You were only short of going "well, actually..." As I said, you are so SMRT.

Wide boy tactics is just how they are trying to get out of it IMO. It's not how they've wanted to approach this. I called them naive in the sense that they are not quite sure what they are doing. That's not a shyster, just a currently unreliable supplier. And don't you wave temerity at me! BTW does SMRT mean something in some dark part of the interweb? Seems a bit pointless to just to drop a vowel.

murphaph

Flying Fox wrote: »

I do believe women under 60 have reason to be concerned about AZ. It's not unreasonable for someone in that group to prefer literally any other approved vaccine over AZ. I don't think comments like 'get to the back of the queue then' are helpful here.

As a woman in my 30s, who is on the pill and who has lost a parent due to covid, I very much hope I won't be told it's AZ or nothing, when there's clearly a safety issue for my cohort.

Several respected public health agencies such as those in Scandinavia, Germany, France and Canada agree with that position.

Kivaro

There is a legitimate concern with the Astrazeneca vaccine, especially for younger women. While it could be a logistical nightmare, maybe they should be tested for low levels of blood platelets before getting the AZ jab.

Also, we should expect for this thread to get busy, as major rollouts of AZ started today and those getting appointment phone calls will be concerned by the latest AZ news from Germany and Canada.

Scuid Mhór

Kivaro wrote: »

There is a legitimate concern with the Astrazeneca vaccine, especially for younger women. While it could be a logistical nightmare, maybe they should be tested for low levels of blood platelets before getting the AZ jab.

Also, we should expect for this thread to get busy, as major rollouts of AZ started today and those getting appointment phone calls will be concerned by the latest AZ news from Germany and Canada.

What are the ballpark figures for a major AZ rollout?

Kivaro

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

What are the ballpark figures for a major AZ rollout?

Not sure Scuid. I was looking for AZ statistics yesterday, compared to Pfizer and Moderna, and could not really get an accurate count. I know Wales said that they've had no issues with blood clots, and I wondered what our AZ count was. Either way, it is going to get ramped up big time starting today ..... unless some major news breaks e.g. another EU country stops AZ rollout.

Scuid Mhór

Kivaro wrote: »

Not sure Scuid. I was looking for AZ statistics yesterday, compared to Pfizer and Moderna, and could not really get an accurate count. I know Wales said that they've had no issues with blood clots, and I wondered what our AZ count was. Either way, it is going to get ramped up big time starting today ..... unless some major news breaks e.g. another EU country stops AZ rollout.

Thanks for the response. I guess we’ll see the numbers go up over the next few days anyway. The lack of a definite figure is probably just weariness with regard to AZ’s previous supply performance.

BonnieSituation

is_that_so wrote: »

Wide boy tactics is just how they are trying to get out of it IMO. It's not how they've wanted to approach this. I called them naive in the sense that they are not quite sure what they are doing. That's not a shyster, just a currently unreliable supplier. And don't you wave temerity at me! BTW does SMRT mean something in some dark part of the interweb? Seems a bit pointless to just to drop a vowel.

Naivety is certainly in evidence here, but it ain't on the side of AZ.

They have form of being "unreliable".

Also SMRT...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv4eTE0aUiQ

is_that_so

Kivaro wrote: »

Not sure Scuid. I was looking for AZ statistics yesterday, compared to Pfizer and Moderna, and could not really get an accurate count. I know Wales said that they've had no issues with blood clots, and I wondered what our AZ count was. Either way, it is going to get ramped up big time starting today ..... unless some major news breaks e.g. another EU country stops AZ rollout.

The new Irish head of AZ wouldn't commit to actual numbers, just large volumes in the coming weeks. That seems to be as close as we'll get for now.

murphaph

I am most curious to see what happens in the UK as they get to the younger age groups with wide scale AZ vaccination. Unless something is completely amiss with the reporting in Germany, Denmark and Norway, we should see cases of VIPIT increase dramatically in the UK.

Wolf359f

murphaph wrote: »

I am most curious to see what happens in the UK as they get to the younger age groups with wide scale AZ vaccination. Unless something is completely amiss with the reporting in Germany, Denmark and Norway, we should see cases of VIPIT increase dramatically in the UK.

The UK don't seem to be transparent about what groups got what vaccine, so it's just speculation that the older population got AZ and the young HCW's got Pfizer.
I'm be more curious if there's reports of the blood disorder after the second jab and not the first. It would mean the risk would be doubled.

Kivaro

Regarding the blood clots, from the best of my recollection looking at previous reports, the danger of clotting occurs generally 9 days up to 3 weeks after the first AZ dose only. So after that period and after the 2nd dose, it should not be an issue. Open to correction of course.

Something to remember also was that there was a study a number of weeks ago where there was more clotting associated with Pfizer than Astrazeneca, but then again I am unsure what factors were taken into consideration in that study. The important point to remember is that these adverse effects were still comparatively extremely small, so at the moment I understand the stance that the benefits of AZ still far outweighs the possible negatives.

Wolf359f

Wolf359f wrote: »

The UK don't seem to be transparent about what groups got what vaccine, so it's just speculation that the older population got AZ and the young HCW's got Pfizer.
I'm be more curious if there's reports of the blood disorder after the second jab and not the first. It would mean the risk would be doubled.

There has been no rigid structure as to who gets what. Turn up one day and it’s Pfizer, the next could be AZ. It’s one of the things that has helped the roll out flow smoothly.

murphaph

Wolf359f wrote: »

The UK don't seem to be transparent about what groups got what vaccine, so it's just speculation that the older population got AZ and the young HCW's got Pfizer.
I'm be more curious if there's reports of the blood disorder after the second jab and not the first. It would mean the risk would be doubled.

Well we do know that the UK got 21m doses of Biontech and the first tranche was a good month before they started injecting any AZ and HCW's were vaccinated early on and they have no prioritisation for younger people in other employment sectors. I think it's very likely that the UK hasn't yet given "many" AZ vaccinations to people under 55.

We shall see what happens (trying not to sound morbid here).

murphaph

Kivaro wrote: »

Regarding the blood clots, from the best of my recollection looking at previous reports, the danger of clotting occurs generally 9 days up to 3 weeks after the first AZ dose only. So after that period and after the 2nd dose, it should not be an issue. Open to correction of course.

Something to remember also was that there was a study a number of weeks ago where there was more clotting associated with Pfizer than Astrazeneca, but then again I am unsure what factors were taken into consideration in that study. The important point to remember is that these adverse effects were still comparatively extremely small, so at the moment I understand the stance that the benefits of AZ still far outweighs the possible negatives.

You have to differentiate between blood clots in general and these VIPIT cases.

Wolf359f

murphaph wrote: »

You have to differentiate between blood clots in general and these VIPIT cases.

People who think this is a regular blood clot issue, just show they have no clue about the seriousness of the issue. Even some media like Reuters are now calling it a blood disorder and distancing it from blood clots which occur with the same frequence in the vaccinated vs unvaccinated population.