What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Jane1012 · 07-04-2021 07:01PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

Look up the QCovid risk caculator to get an estimate of your actual risk of dying from covid. Its miles off the figures you quoted there.

I’m in cohort 4 but my qcovid score was an age of 34 and risk of dying was 1 in 80,000 but I’ve been told I’m at very high risk of death here so not too sure what to believe

LLMMLL · 07-04-2021 07:03PM

Jane1012 wrote: »

I’m in cohort 4 but my qcovid score was an age of 34 and risk of dying was 1 in 80,000 but I’ve been told I’m at very high risk of death here so not too sure what to believe

Does 1 in 80k include your medical condition?

Even if so it’s a way higher chance than blood clots.

07-04-2021 07:04PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

If it’s restricted for both we can’t vaccinate everyone and this has serious consequences for public health (and individual health).

Doesn’t it make sense to take the current approach that we take for all medicines. List it as a VERY RARE side effect and proceed based on what will give the best outcome.

Yes we can, we've ordered far more vaccines than we actually need.

The other approach is to still offer it and let the people who are happy with the risk take it in order to get vaccinated quicker. But don't penalise people for choosing not to take that particular vaccine.

Jane1012 · 07-04-2021 07:04PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

Does 1 in 80k include your medical condition?

Even if so it’s a way higher chance than blood clots.

Yes it does... I know but a 1 in 80,000 chance does not seem worth chancing the AstraZeneca vaccine while I’m pregnant but I really don’t know what to do

07-04-2021 07:04PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

The point is that we have other vaccines that do not present these safety issues. AZ only makes up a quarter of our supply, so give it to the people who are not at risk of this disorder. There's no reason why it can't be done.

In the short term/medium term all pfzier moderna are for over 70's / second doses.

If you dont want az wait for probably minimum a month or probably considerably longer. Simple choice.

Public will not have huge sympathy for people wanting to wait for preferred
vaccine. Most people over 30 will happily take it, like the 18 million people in the UK have done.

If people dont want az maybe I will get my vaccine quicker.

Always an upside.:)

LLMMLL · 07-04-2021 07:07PM

Jane1012 wrote: »

Yes it does... I know but a 1 in 80,000 chance does not seem worth chancing the AstraZeneca vaccine while I’m pregnant but I really don’t know what to do

So you want to take a higher risk of dying rather than “chance” a lower risk?

Pete_Cavan · 07-04-2021 07:08PM

Interesting info here on which the UK decisions have been based;

https://twitter.com/d_spiegel

stephenjmcd · 07-04-2021 07:08PM

Jane1012 wrote: »

I’m in cohort 4 but my qcovid score was an age of 34 and risk of dying was 1 in 80,000 but I’ve been told I’m at very high risk of death here so not too sure what to believe

I'd say don't believe an online calculator that comes with this warning

"This implementation of the QCovid risk calculator is NOT intended for use supporting or informing clinical decision-making"

07-04-2021 07:09PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

Look up the QCovid risk caculator to get an estimate of your actual risk of dying from covid. Its miles off the figures you quoted there.

Leo gave the figures over the weekend.

Im grand with that tbh.

37 people in my age group died of covid in ireland (35-44), 25 over christmas with new variant. I'm taking the vaccine and getting on with life as will +90% of population.

Vaccination is government policy out of this.

Go with the current, not against.

Why make life harder for yourself for no real benefit?

LLMMLL · 07-04-2021 07:09PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

Yes we can, we've ordered far more vaccines than we actually need.

The other approach is to still offer it and let the people who are happy with the risk take it in order to get vaccinated quicker. But don't penalise people for choosing not to take that particular vaccine.

In Q2 we will have enough to fully vaccinate 2 mil people. AZ is responsible for about half a million people.

You really think not vaccinating half a million people in the hope that we get deliveries of their preferred vaccine later in the year will lead to better outcomes?

take everything · 07-04-2021 07:10PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

I think you’re confusing “happy to take” with “would prefer”. Why would you take a lower efficacy vaccine if you had a completely free choice.

No i'm not.

I don't know what the exact preference is of the sizeable proportion of posters here that would be happy to take it.

But from what I can see, they continue to assert there is no material difference in either its efficacy or safety compared to other vaccines.

So based on that we can infer yes they'd be happy to take it.

And based on their assertion, one could also infer they would have no preference.

So such people taking AZ would ease any issue of supply of mRNA vaccines /Pfizer for those who want to take Pfizer.

Or are you saying such people would prefer an mRNA vaccine.

Jane1012 · 07-04-2021 07:11PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

So you want to take a higher risk of dying rather than “chance” a lower risk?

You’re assuming that the risk of AZ for me personally is lower than 1 in 80,000. You don’t know that, simply the risk of dying is not known right now... if we go by the Norwegian view it could be as high as 1 in 20,000. I’m female, early 30s, pregnant - the odds don’t seem in my favour right now with AZ!

Sono Topolino · 07-04-2021 07:11PM

The risk of severe blood clotting issues after catching Covid is markedly higher than the risk of clotting from the disease. I appreciate the EMA's transparency regarding this, but the fuss that is being made about a risk of 0.0005%. I appreciate the need for caution, but if offering young people an alternative vaccine slows down the campaign, then young people should be offered AstraZeneca in the first instance. If they choose to sign a waiver, they do so on the clear understanding that they go to the back of the queue.

By taking the AstraZeneca vaccine, you are taking on a tiny risk on yourself. By not taking it, you're taking a far greater risk and also putting other people at risk.

Think about it like this - many of your ancestors put themselves in harms way so that you can live the comfortable life that you do now. Some of them even went to war, and some died in war. Are you saying that you won't take a prick in the arm because there is a 0.0005% chance of a blood clotting event?

stephenjmcd · 07-04-2021 07:13PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

Yes we can, we've ordered far more vaccines than we actually need.

The other approach is to still offer it and let the people who are happy with the risk take it in order to get vaccinated quicker. But don't penalise people for choosing not to take that particular vaccine.

We've ordered more than we need IF every single vaccine we've ordered from gets approved, some wont be until 2022, some might not pass trials, either way the "more than enough" isn't happening anytime soon and if / when it does happen we'll be expected to help other countries by providing excess supply to covax

There's so many caveats, it's not near as straightforward as you want it to be.

If someone says no to their appointment and goes against medical advice I'm sorry this might be harsh but they go to the back of the queue, it's not an a la carte

LLMMLL · 07-04-2021 07:17PM

Jane1012 wrote: »

You’re assuming that the risk of AZ for me personally is lower than 1 in 80,000. You don’t know that, simply the risk of dying is not known right now... if we go by the Norwegian view it could be as high as 1 in 20,000. I’m female, early 30s, pregnant - the odds don’t seem in my favour right now with AZ!

That’s not how risk is evaluated. You don’t take the overall sample and then pick the sub sample which gives you the figures that you want to hear to justify your anxiety. Why not just pick the 70 or so people who died and claim the risk of dying is 100%?

It’s also a fact that you that COVID, both symptomatic and a symptomatic, will likely be far more prevalent once we open up. You will also be interacting with healthcare professionals more as a pregnant woman. Your stats for contracting a serious case of COVID are higher than a non pregnant woman in the current setting.

Jane1012 · 07-04-2021 07:22PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

That’s not how risk is evaluated. You don’t take the overall sample and then pick the sub sample which gives you the figures that you want to hear to justify your anxiety. Why not just pick the 70 or so people who died and claim the risk of dying is 100%?

It’s also a fact that you that COVID, both symptomatic and a symptomatic, will likely be far more prevalent once we open up. You will also be interacting with healthcare professionals more as a pregnant woman. Your stats for contracting a serious case of COVID are higher than a non pregnant woman in the current setting.

I’m not picking out the stats that suit, I’m actually trying to do the opposite, I’m trying to figure out what my actual risks are of AZ as the general stats given are for the whole population and all age groups and genders.
I’m well aware the amount of interaction I have to have with people right now, if I wasn’t pregnant I would just have no social contact for a few more months but you are correct I don’t have that option

LLMMLL · 07-04-2021 07:23PM

Sono Topolino wrote: »

The risk of severe blood clotting issues after catching Covid is markedly higher than the risk of clotting from the disease. I appreciate the EMA's transparency regarding this, but the fuss that is being made about a risk of 0.0005%. I appreciate the need for caution, but if offering young people an alternative vaccine slows down the campaign, then young people should be offered AstraZeneca in the first instance. If they choose to sign a waiver, they do so on the clear understanding that they go to the back of the queue.

By taking the AstraZeneca vaccine, you are taking on a tiny risk on yourself. By not taking it, you're taking a far greater risk and also putting other people at risk.

Think about it like this - many of your ancestors put themselves in harms way so that you can live the comfortable life that you do now. Some of them even went to war, and some died in war. Are you saying that you won't take a prick in the arm because there is a 0.0005% chance of a blood clotting event?

The problem is people are TERRIBLE at risk evaluation.

I think the issue here is that a vaccine is something you choose whereas COVID is something that happens to you.

People seem to assess the risk of consequences following a choice as far more risky than the risk of consequences of something happening to you when you didn’t directly choose what caused it.

So even if you’re far more likely to die of covid, people seem to think it’s less risky because they didn’t choose whatever caused it.

It isn’t logical or smart but it’s the way we think.

LLMMLL · 07-04-2021 07:25PM

Jane1012 wrote: »

I’m not picking out the stats that suit, I’m actually trying to do the opposite, I’m trying to figure out what my actual risks are of AZ as the general stats given are for the whole population and all age groups and genders.
I’m well aware the amount of interaction I have to have with people right now, if I wasn’t pregnant I would just have no social contact for a few more months but you are correct I don’t have that option

But the issue is your risk assessment is not going to be rational. It’s pretty obvious from what we’ve seen of other posters doing the same that you will focus on the facts that will Stoke your anxiety and lead you to the decision you’ve pretty much already made. To not get the vaccine and put yourself at higher risk.

How do you think you will be a better evaluator of your risk than medical professionals?

Lesalare · 07-04-2021 07:27PM

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Look at the end of the day the only person who can discuss it with you is your GP or consultant if you have one. They're the ones who'll be able to best advise, not anyone here.

But there is no paying for a vaccine etc, it's a yes or no question, no backup list for another vaccine etc.

I'm not expecting anyone for advice, I'm just expressing my concerns like others on here.

johnnyskeleton · 07-04-2021 07:28PM

Probably good that by the time it gets to the general population it will be administered by local GPs, who people know and trust and so will hopefully listen to their advice, whereas going into a large vaccination hall might be an intimidating place to go

Jane1012 · 07-04-2021 07:29PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

But the issue is your risk assessment is not going to be rational. It’s pretty obvious from what we’ve seen of other posters doing the same that you will focus on the facts that will Stoke your anxiety and lead you to the decision you’ve pretty much already made. To not get the vaccine and put yourself at higher risk.

How do you think you will be a better evaluator of your risk than medical professionals?

I’d suggest going back to you day job and not dabbling in mind reading. I’m actually getting my vaccine in a few days.

07-04-2021 07:29PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

The problem is people are TERRIBLE at risk evaluation.

I think the issue here is that a vaccine is something you choose whereas COVID is something that happens to you.

People seem to assess the risk of consequences following a choice as far more risky than the risk of consequences of something happening to you when you didn’t directly choose what caused it.

So even if you’re far more likely to die of covid, people seem to think it’s less risky because they didn’t choose whatever caused it.

It isn’t logical or smart but it’s the way we think.

Yes I think your right some people do think like that.

Covid is not going away in ireland any time soon.

Not one person was hospitalised or died of covid that took any of the vaccines in any of trials.

Thats good enough for me.

Take the vaccine/dont take the vaccine.

10% of the population I believe have their own logic that I cant and will
never understand.

Don't take the first available vaccine and take your chances with avoiding covid.

Its that simple.

The government is not trying to get you by offering you a vaccine.

They feel they are trying to help you and I in the main trust them.

LLMMLL · 07-04-2021 07:31PM

take everything wrote: »

No i'm not.

I don't know what the exact preference is of the sizeable proportion of posters here that would be happy to take it.

But from what I can see, they continue to assert there is no material difference in either its efficacy or safety compared to other vaccines.

So based on that we can infer yes they'd be happy to take it.

And based on their assertion, one could also infer they would have no preference.

So such people taking AZ would ease any issue of supply of mRNA vaccines /Pfizer for those who want to take Pfizer.

Or are you saying such people would prefer an mRNA vaccine.

Literally nobody is saying that AZ has the same efficacy or safety profile as the other vaccines. Not sure where you got that idea.

Everyone is aware there are material differences between the two.

What people who are happy to take it are saying is that the benefits of taking what they are offered now, outweigh taking their chances later on.

Strazdas · 07-04-2021 07:31PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

But the issue is your risk assessment is not going to be rational. It’s pretty obvious from what we’ve seen of other posters doing the same that you will focus on the facts that will Stoke your anxiety and lead you to the decision you’ve pretty much already made. To not get the vaccine and put yourself at higher risk.

How do you think you will be a better evaluator of your risk than medical professionals?

I can see from this both sides. Risk from Covid itself is far greater but one can see how people might not feel entirely comfortable taking a vaccine that might potentially kill them, even if the risk of this is much, much smaller (it's unfortunate that we're hearing reports about a particular vaccine that has caused deaths....this would always spark fear in people).

LLMMLL · 07-04-2021 07:32PM

Jane1012 wrote: »

I’d suggest going back to you day job and not dabbling in mind reading. I’m actually getting my vaccine in a few days.

That’s great. I’m glad to be proven wrong in this case.

07-04-2021 07:40PM

appledrop wrote: »

Well tell that to government who are banging on about not vaccinating younger teachers because according to their soundbites, 70 times less likely to be hospitalised.

The government can't have it everyway, one minute it's a deadly disease next minute it's grand if your a young teacher in class of 25+ won't affect you.

It's a load of nonsense at this stage.

Thats not what the government said.

Age is biggest risk factor of dying of covid.

Why would you vaccinate a "young teacher in class of 25" before a factory worker of 55.

Young teacher mortality risk might be 1 in 5000

55 year old factory worker 1 in 500

Vaccinate the people who are most likely to get sick and die of covid first, especially when supply is limited.

Thats the logic and i agree. Sure the 55 year old teacher will probably now be vaccinated earlier than previously.

take everything · 07-04-2021 07:45PM

LLMMLL wrote: »

Literally nobody is saying that AZ has the same efficacy or safety profile as the other vaccines. Not sure where you got that idea.

Everyone is aware there are material differences between the two.

What people who are happy to take it are saying is that the benefits of taking what they are offered now, outweigh taking their chances later on.

Most of this thread seemed to be about ignoring any difference in efficacy and safety and asserting no material difference. Until a couple of days ago when the dam broke as it were and the problems with AZ couldn't be dismissed any longer.

To be honest i'm still not sure what the preferences are of such posters.

If they would prefer mRNA vaccines now, it's a bit rich for them to suggest people should take AZ or criticise them in their decision not to take it.

07-04-2021 07:45PM

When are NIAC due to meet/ issue any further reccommendations on Astrazeneca? I heard it briefly on the news.

07-04-2021 07:51PM

take everything wrote: »

Most of this thread seemed to be about ignoring any difference in efficacy and safety and asserting no material difference. Until a couple of days ago when the dam broke as it were and the problems with AZ couldn't be dismissed any longer.

To be honest i'm still not sure what the preferences are of such posters.

If they would prefer mRNA vaccines now, it's a bit rich for them to suggest people should take AZ or criticise them in their decision not to take it.

In an ideal world we would have 10 million pfzier jabs waiting for everyone in the audience.

I would prefer Pfzier if had a choice, but I know the above scenario does not exist. Therefore I make the best decision given current circumstances (not the circumstances I want in my head). In reality I expect to be offered AZ and if I get offered anything else that is a bonus.

A solution if efficacy is a problem with AZ will be got.

UK are looking at efficacy of mixing and matching vaccines.

All AZ vaccinated could be offered one shot of pfzier in September if that helped with variants efficacy etc.

This is a process not the finish line.

There are too many AZ vaccinated people out there for a solution not to be got.

LLMMLL · 07-04-2021 07:58PM

take everything wrote: »

Most of this thread seemed to be about ignoring any difference in efficacy and safety and asserting no material difference. Until a couple of days ago when the dam broke as it were and the problems with AZ couldn't be dismissed any longer.

To be honest i'm still not sure what the preferences are of such posters.

If they would prefer mRNA vaccines now, it's a bit rich for them to suggest people should take AZ or criticise them in their decision not to take it.

How is someone who would prefer mRNA but is happy to take AZ being in any way hypocritical? Makes no sense.

What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Comments