What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

12-04-2021 03:15PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

The point is that we have other vaccines available that are not causing deaths in otherwise healthy people. Not to mention that the age groups most affected by the clotting issue are very unlikely to die from covid.

This isn’t true, a causal link has yet to be established. Furthermore there have been deaths recorded in the other vaccines but again causal links remain to made (this kind of thing involves so many confounding factors that may predispose someone to clotting - covid status, smoker or not, oral contraceptive user or not etc etc etc, the numbers affected are still too small).

Where public health matters are concerned things have to be viewed from a cost/benefit standpoint. It might appear cold and clinical but the fact remains this vaccine has saved thousands upon thousands of lives - do we throw all that away because there may be a risk to 0.0000001% of people?

12-04-2021 03:22PM

Batrachotox wrote: »

This isn’t true, a causal link has yet to be established.

That's not entirely true now is it? The EMA confirmed a link and have determined that it be listed as a side effect.

I suppose the rates of an extremely rare clotting disorder rising by several multiples in people vaccinated with AZ must be coincidental?

Sono Topolino · 12-04-2021 03:25PM

I really wonder what the people involved in making these decisions are thinking - what trade-offs they are making etc. AstraZeneca seems to be the most scrutinised vaccine of all, and do we have any reason to believe that the mRNA vaccines are any safer? Surely those who want to take this vaccine should be given the choice.

My 25 year old son would gladly take the AZ vaccine if he was allowed to meet his girlfriend. I'm sure he's far from alone in this.

Pity the compliant youth.

astrofool · 12-04-2021 03:28PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Basically they made the wrong judgement call and gave wrong vaccine to wrong cohort. Uk happily gave to over 60's/70's

Yep, the fact that the UK made a judgement call with a brand new medicine is a ridiculous state to be in, you deliver based on the data, not a judgement call. The UK massively high case and death rate influenced this judgement.

Deleted User wrote: »

19 people died of blood clots to brain. These vaccines in any given day saved multiples of this amount and will continue to.

The data right now says that those 19 could have been alive had they not taken the AZ vaccine (I believe we'll find a link between those young and vulnerable to COVID-19 and those that suffer clotting issues, but that's my judgement, not a scientific fact).

Deleted User wrote: »

Unless this reversed in time, everyone will be waiting longer for a vaccine. I would take Az in morning.

I would also take AZ in the morning, hopefully by the time it's my turn more data will be available to identify those at risk.

Deleted User wrote: »

If 5 people in ireland where to die of this due to AZ limited to say over 30's, it would have saved hundreds of lives from covid, thousands of businesses. NIAC/NPHET/Govt with regards dealing with AZ, fiddling while Rome burns.[/B]

Those 5 people would be alive and others would be dead, we don't get to make that trade off in lives.

astrofool · 12-04-2021 03:30PM

Sono Topolino wrote: »

I really wonder what the people involved in making these decisions are thinking - what trade-offs they are making etc. AstraZeneca seems to be the most scrutinised vaccine of all, and do we have any reason to believe that the mRNA vaccines are any safer? Surely those who want to take this vaccine should be given the choice.

My 25 year old son would gladly take the AZ vaccine if he was allowed to meet his girlfriend. I'm sure he's far from alone in this.

Pity the compliant youth.

The mRNA vaccines are under the same scrutiny, but don't seem to have this particular side effect noted.

12-04-2021 03:30PM

Sono Topolino wrote: »

I really wonder what the people involved in making these decisions are thinking - what trade-offs they are making etc. AstraZeneca seems to be the most scrutinised vaccine of all, and do we have any reason to believe that the mRNA vaccines are any safer? Surely those who want to take this vaccine should be given the choice.

My 25 year old son would gladly take the AZ vaccine if he was allowed to meet his girlfriend. I'm sure he's far from alone in this.

Pity the compliant youth.

Alot of will be angry at this decision.

I would happily sign waiver if something went wrong with me.

Good enough for 28 million in uk good enough for me.

This decision will slow whole rollout.

We will all suffer indirectly.

But the two people that might or might not have died will now be saved.

Snake Plisken · 12-04-2021 03:32PM

First dose didn't kill me so if offered the second dose I'd take it. Have to say still have aches and pains for over a week since my first dose but thats more like something you would get from a mild flu

12-04-2021 03:35PM

astrofool wrote: »

Yep, the fact that the UK made a judgement call with a brand new medicine is a ridiculous state to be in, you deliver based on the data, not a judgement call. The UK massively high case and death rate influenced this judgement.

Which was correct.

The data right now says that those 19 could have been alive had they not taken the AZ vaccine (I believe we'll find a link between those young and vulnerable to COVID-19 and those that suffer clotting issues, but that's my judgement, not a scientific fact).

Could?

UK has lowest covid pravelence in europe currently.

I would also take AZ in the morning, hopefully by the time it's my turn more data will be available to identify those at risk.

Those 5 people would be alive and others would be dead, we don't get to make that trade off in lives.

That trade off happens every day.

Will i drive my car this year. There is a 66000 to 1 chance i could die in car accident. To sit at home and not live is not worth trade off. Life is not zero risk and trying to bring it to zero is not the aim. Hopefully reversed soon. Bonkers

brickster69 · 12-04-2021 03:37PM

What about cigarettes. They kill people 100% but it is ok to make and sell them.

Dyr · 12-04-2021 03:38PM

Sono Topolino wrote: »

I really wonder what the people involved in making these decisions are thinking - what trade-offs they are making etc. AstraZeneca seems to be the most scrutinised vaccine of all, and do we have any reason to believe that the mRNA vaccines are any safer? Surely those who want to take this vaccine should be given the choice.

My 25 year old son would gladly take the AZ vaccine if he was allowed to meet his girlfriend. I'm sure he's far from alone in this.

Pity the compliant youth.

These are the most tested vaccinnes ever produced/Trust The Science/Don't be an antivaxxer and so on and so forth.

Christy42 · 12-04-2021 03:38PM

Seems to be no shortage of volunteers anyway so personally I say there should be a waiver for it. Course I won't be signing it but if enough volunteer for the AZ jab there won't be any delay for me anyway!

Seriously, AZ is not a massive make up of our vaccine rollout and is expected to go lower. As is there are still plenty of over 60s to vaccinate. There are still plenty of 2nd doses for AZ required. People seem to be acting like their vaccination tomorrow was cancelled for October when I am not convinced it will be a particularly long delay overall. Especially as the numbers now will seem small as production lines are ramped up.

12-04-2021 03:40PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

That's not entirely true now is it? The EMA confirmed a link and have determined that it be listed as a side effect.

I suppose the rates of an extremely rare clotting disorder rising by several multiples in people vaccinated with AZ must be coincidental?

It’s not an established causal link. There is a correlation such that it’s probably wise to take some precautionary measures but yes there have been no studies to prove definitively that the vaccine is what brought about these clotting events.

astrofool · 12-04-2021 03:46PM

Deleted User wrote: »

That trade off happens every day.

Will i drive my car this year. There is a 66000 1 chance i could die in accident. To sit at home and not live is not worth trade off. Life is not zero risk and trying to bring it to zero is not the aim.Hopefully reversed soon.

Yes, if you average driving your car once a day in a year you have a 1 in 24,090,000 chance (using your figures) of dying in an accident each time you use your car. Getting the AZ vaccine is a single event, hence why they're changing the guidelines around it.

People using the driving car analogy don't understand probabilistic events.

The UK's judgement was clouded by their high case and death rates, we do not have high case and death rates so we don't need to use our judgement, we can use data to drive the decision.

brendanwalsh · 12-04-2021 03:52PM

Batrachotox wrote: »

Every single medicinal agent from aspirin to advanced cancer therapies carry risks that can be difficult to predict.

With regards to this vaccine these events are so extremely rare that clinical trials with c. 50,000 patients revealed no indications of this - it’s literally only become visible now that patients vaccinated are numbering in the hundreds of millions.

Obviously it’s tragic that these people died but your response is over emotional and childish honestly - what do you have to say to the thousands upon thousands of people who received this vaccine with no ill effect that would otherwise have succumbed to covid 19 and died?

The clinical trials done by AstraZeneca were dirty .

This is not an FDA approved vaccine .

FDA came out three weeks ago and said the data was sketchy

Hurrache · 12-04-2021 03:52PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I really dislike this goernment/niac/nphet.

All well and good, but what's the got to do with the rest of your post considering it was neither of them that developed the vaccine, ran the tests, or had a time machine to see what affects it may have?

Hurrache · 12-04-2021 03:56PM

And back to reality, estimates, despite the age restrictions and AZ yet again lowering what they said they could deliver, it's not expected to delay the rollout by very much.

A graph also highlights at which point the risk/benefit crosses over from one to the other.

https://twitter.com/RachelLavin/status/1381623575455621121

12-04-2021 03:56PM

astrofool wrote: »

Yes, if you average driving your car once a day in a year you have a 1 in 24,090,000 chance (using your figures) of dying in an accident each time you use your car. Getting the AZ vaccine is a single event, hence why they're changing the guidelines around it.

People using the driving car analogy don't understand probabilistic events.

The UK's judgement was clouded by their high case and death rates, we do not have high case and death rates so we don't need to use our judgement, we can use data to drive the decision.

I do understand it. I have a degree in economics and a masters in finance. I have done more statistic courses over the years than is good for me. I actually feel driving a car is far more risky thing to do than take this vaccine. I think you know that too tbh.

We dont have high death rates?

More people in ireland have died of covid in 2021 than 2020.

No data in ireland also drives decisions (over 70's).

12-04-2021 04:02PM

Hurrache wrote: »

All well and good, but what's the got to do with the rest of your post considering it was neither of them that developed the vaccine, ran the tests, or had a time machine to see what affects it may have?

This vaccine is a gift.

If your stupid enough not to take advantage of such gifts, you deserve all the consequences.

12-04-2021 04:02PM

Hurrache wrote: »

And back to reality, estimates, despite the age restrictions and AZ yet again lowering what they said they could deliver, it's not expected to delay the rollout by very much.

A graph also highlights at which point the risk/benefit crosses over from one to the other.

https://twitter.com/RachelLavin/status/1381623575455621121

Further down the thread she also estimates that the rollout will only be delayed by two weeks, which is good news.

astrofool · 12-04-2021 04:06PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I do understand it. I have a degree in economics and a masters in finance. I have done more statistic courses over the years than is good for me. I actually feel driving a car is far more risky thing to do than take this vaccine. I think you know that too tbh.

We dont have high death rates?

More people in ireland have died of covid in 2021 than 2020.

No data in ireland also drives decisions (over 70's).

Statistically, your chance of dying from blood clots if you take AZ vaccine today is multiple times higher than dying in your car today.

The chances of both are low, dying in your car is much lower statistically.

Our death rates have been very low throughout the pandemic apart from the Jan/Feb period (driven by high case counts over Dec/Jan).

I don't disagree that the chances are low, but you need to be able to see things from the top level and understand why the decisions are being made the way they are irrespective of your own biases. I would take AZ whenever offered to me, but I also understand why the decisions are being made the way they are given the data available.

It's unfortunate that there is clotting issues at all, and hopefully an understanding of the issue will allow new decisions to be made.

Christy42 · 12-04-2021 04:13PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I do understand it. I have a degree in economics and a masters in finance. I have done more statistic courses over the years than is good for me. I actually feel driving a car is far more risky thing to do than take this vaccine. I think you know that too tbh.

We dont have high death rates?

More people in ireland have died of covid in 2021 than 2020.

No data in ireland also drives decisions (over 70's).

And yet the obvious point is that there is no great alternative for a car available that provides the same utility. We are constantly changing safety measures there too within cars as technology improves.

There are other vaccines which provide the same benefit.

12-04-2021 04:31PM

astrofool wrote: »

Statistically, your chance of dying from blood clots if you take AZ vaccine today is multiple times higher than dying in your car today.

The chances of both are low, dying in your car is much lower statistically.

Our death rates have been very low throughout the pandemic apart from the Jan/Feb period (driven by high case counts over Dec/Jan).

I don't disagree that the chances are low, but you need to be able to see things from the top level and understand why the decisions are being made the way they are irrespective of your own biases. I would take AZ whenever offered to me, but I also understand why the decisions are being made the way they are given the data available.

It's unfortunate that there is clotting issues at all, and hopefully an understanding of the issue will allow new decisions to be made.

If it doesnt slow rollout I dont massively care.

If it slows rollout materially its a complete over reaction.

Over 40's would have been reasonable cut off in my opinion.

UK will do this.

As regards vaccination they have not put one foot wrong and saved 10's of 1000's of lives this spring.

I dont care about what happened in the UK in 2020, its history now. Reflect when its over.

rm212 · 12-04-2021 04:33PM

I posted this in the general vaccination thread, but it's probably more appropriate here:

rm212 wrote: »

What an absolute shambles by NIAC. Firstly, I personally think the restriction to over 60s is too severe and they should lower that to maybe 40 or 50, but that's not even the point, so let's set aside the point as to whether or not it should be restricted by age group.

If they're going to make the decision to limit the vaccine to certain age groups, it is a disgrace that they left it so long after the EMA released their results. This decision should have been made last week, or use of AZ should have been suspended again while they made their decision on this. Them coming out and saying to continue vaccinating cohort 4 with the vaccine while they deliberate on whether it is safe for almost a week, then turning around and limiting it, is highly unprofessional and will cause stress for those who got it in the last couple of days.

What are they going to do now regarding the second dose for those under 60 who got the first dose already?

Christy42 · 12-04-2021 04:52PM

rm212 wrote: »

I posted this in the general vaccination thread, but it's probably more appropriate here:

Anyone who has received a first vaccine will get a 2nd one I suspect. Not sure about mixing vaccines doses. I am also not sure how many of the issues were after the 2nd dose as well and how that effects the numbers.

fly_agaric · 12-04-2021 04:52PM

Deleted User wrote: »

We will not have enough arms for az now.

1 milliin doses q2.

Where's your 1m AZ in Q2 coming from?

Are we not due ~ 700k if AZ deliver to their massively reduced target? (1.1 % of 70 million).

There's definite signs they will not manage to supply that many given the huge variance in delivery amounts (does anyone understand reason for that?) & the history of cutting targets right at the last possible date.

I'd say we'd do well to get 400-500k for Q2 going by past performance. So this decision is of course bad from supply point of view, but may not end up being as disastrous as you make out in reality given the targets and projections provided by AZ cannot be injected into people.

Stark · 12-04-2021 04:53PM

Hurrache wrote: »

And back to reality, estimates, despite the age restrictions and AZ yet again lowering what they said they could deliver, it's not expected to delay the rollout by very much.

Flying Fox wrote: »

Further down the thread she also estimates that the rollout will only be delayed by two weeks, which is good news.

Until they apply the same **** to J&J that is.

Sono Topolino · 12-04-2021 04:55PM

Hurrache wrote: »

And back to reality, estimates, despite the age restrictions and AZ yet again lowering what they said they could deliver, it's not expected to delay the rollout by very much.

A graph also highlights at which point the risk/benefit crosses over from one to the other.

https://twitter.com/RachelLavin/status/1381623575455621121

The cost/benefit analysis doesn't take into account the benefit of reopening society quickly and allowing the under 30s to socialise, go to the gym etc.

Keeping people cooped up at home isn't good for their health.

astrofool · 12-04-2021 05:01PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I dont care about what happened in the UK in 2020, its history now. Reflect when its over.

I've seen a few people saying this, but people don't understand how inextricably linked the UK failures in 2020 are to their vaccination rollout, one informed the other and led to them taking chances that other countries didn't need to take, trying to separate the timelines doesn't make sense.

Sono Topolino · 12-04-2021 05:09PM

astrofool wrote: »

I've seen a few people saying this, but people don't understand how inextricably linked the UK failures in 2020 are to their vaccination rollout, one informed the other and led to them taking chances that other countries didn't need to take, trying to separate the timelines doesn't make sense.

The UK relied primarily on theory instead of hypotheses which had been tested on data. The EU did the exact opposite. It's not to say that the UK didn't use data and hypotheses tested on data, they were just much more comfortable using theoretical models when data wasn't available.

Data driven decision-making is great, but you need to wait for data to be collected. That takes time, and in a pandemic, wasitng time costs lives. It seemed (based on commentary from Ireland/EU) in January and February the UK was taking wild risks, increasing the waiting time between vaccine doses etc. However, looking at what medical professionals already knew (or claimed to know) about the immune system, it actually seems like a fairly sensible decision. Now everybody is doing it, because we have the data.

12-04-2021 05:17PM

astrofool wrote: »

I've seen a few people saying this, but people don't understand how inextricably linked the UK failures in 2020 are to their vaccination rollout, one informed the other and led to them taking chances that other countries didn't need to take, trying to separate the timelines doesn't make sense.

it really really upsets you that the UK is doing such a good job of vaccinating its population, doesn't it?

What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Comments