What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

astrofool · 12-04-2021 08:56PM

Aegir wrote: »

Well to be fair, you post a lot of words, but with little to back any of it up. I’d call that bluster. Care homes weren’t included in the initial figures, but were added months ago.

You want deaths within 28 days of a positive test, death certificates that mention Covid 19 or a running comparison of excess death rates? All instantly available on the government website, as is all the information in the decision making process around vaccines. It’s all there.

That doesn't change the fact they were under reporting and had to come clean once caught, and likely (in my opinion) missed a lot of early numbers to keep the headline counts down. Again, the fact that your defence is "bluster" for things that are quite easy to look up says a lot. There was also a lot of bluster from certain posters about contracts and expertise on production that also went quiet in recent weeks, for some reason.

Wolf359f · 12-04-2021 09:04PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So Leo tells us a week ago a 40 year old has 1 in a 1000 chance of death of covid.

NIAC this weeks tells us it is not safe for said person to take AZ where mortality has been 1 in a million.

Obviously?

Makes complete sense.

Good messaging overall.

I love the people in charge of our lives.

Full dystopian society at this stage.

40 year old odds would be based on being positive for covid. ( Not all 40 year olds will test positive for covid)

The NIAC odds are based on every 40 year old getting AZ.

The messaging has been horrible, or not explained well.
The UK messaging was basically with current infection rates, if you vaccinated all 18-30 year olds with AZ, more would die from the clotting than would die from covid.
It was explained much better.

Here they seem to be going way too conservative with the age restrictions.

Zipppy · 12-04-2021 09:04PM

Halfdane wrote: »

Crosspost from the main covid thread but I feel it’s actually more relevant here:

At what point does the first dose start to become ineffective? At first there was a three week gap between shots, then 12, now 16. Surely that could have negative effects on the overall efficacy of the vaccine? I’ve seen no data related to a 16 week wait and efficacy figures.

Canada only uses AZ for 55-65 years. 16 weeks between doses for all brands...

Wolf359f · 12-04-2021 09:06PM

brickster69 wrote: »

Because there is none. A bit like France going to mix doses

And a bit like the UK moving the Pfizer dose out to 12 weeks. Was no evidence at the time. But that's ok cause it's the UK, it's not France or Ireland, they are reckless!

Halfdane · 12-04-2021 09:06PM

Wolf359f wrote: »

Where have you seen AZ been used with 3 week ago between doses? Not in the EU, not the UK, so where?

I’ve changed my post, I meant four week gap!

12-04-2021 09:18PM

Wolf359f wrote: »

40 year old odds would be based on being positive for covid. ( Not all 40 year olds will test positive for covid)

The NIAC odds are based on every 40 year old getting AZ.

The messaging has been horrible, or not explained well.
The UK messaging was basically with current infection rates, if you vaccinated all 18-30 year olds with AZ, more would die from the clotting than would die from covid.
It was explained much better.

Here they seem to be going way too conservative with the age restrictions.

Saw NIACs slide for risks tonight.

Every cohort (even 20's) she said covid risk was far higher.

This is a safe vaccine.

Her research from eu said blood clotting risk didnt really increase with age its just covid risk does increase with age.

Statistically if all adults received AZ (4 deaths from blood clots), I wonder how many lives it would save from covid?

astrofool · 12-04-2021 09:25PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Saw NIACs slide for risks tonight.

Every cohort (even 20's) she said covid risk was far higher.

Funnily enough, in this instance, the UK explained it better. The % chance is based on everyone being infected which is unlikely to happen between now and the vaccine rollout getting to them anyway.

I still think (think, not to be confused with bluster) that those young vulnerable to COVID will also be vulnerable to the vaccine anyway, but have a higher mortality rate to COVID.

deeperlearning · 12-04-2021 09:32PM

Two doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine were found to have only a 10.4% efficacy against the B.1.351 South Africa variant, according to a phase 1b-2 clinical trial published on Tuesday in the New England Journal of Medicine.

When restrictions are removed, the South African variant of Covid-19 will rip like wildfire through the UK.

Hopefully, enough people in Ireland will have the Pfizer vaccine to prevent a serious outbreak. At least, the Pfizer vaccine was 100% effective in preventing cases in South Africa, where the B.1.351 lineage is prevalent.

suicide_circus · 12-04-2021 09:35PM

So 2 weeks ago the AZ jab was not to be administered to the over 70s in Ireland. Now it's only suitable for the over 60s. Is this correct?

deeperlearning · 12-04-2021 09:44PM

It's now only suitable for the 60-69 year olds.

It isn't given to under 60s because of the danger of blood clots.

It isn't give to those aged 70 or over as the efficacy is lower and there wasn't enough data to show it was effective in the over 70s.

12-04-2021 09:44PM

Worst vaccine ever.

Bass Reeves · 12-04-2021 09:49PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Worst vaccine ever.

Not neccessiarly if it wsa the only vaccine available we have to use it. However there are other better options out there in J&J, Modernal and Phizer.

brickster69 · 12-04-2021 09:58PM

19 out of 20 UK people over the age of 50 have now had a jab.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/12/all-under-50s-offered-vaccine-ahead-government-deadline

drunkmonkey · 12-04-2021 10:10PM

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Not neccessiarly if it wsa the only vaccine available we have to use it. However there are other better options out there in J&J, Modernal and Phizer.

Mmmm, Australia isn't letting in the J&J one due to it's similarities to the AZ one, same issues..we may tack it onto the thread title.

Johnson & Johnson's one-dose COVID-19 vaccine won't be coming to Australia due to AstraZeneca similarities
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-13/johnson-johnson-covid-19-vaccine-australia/100064454

This would throw a major spanner in the works but it needs to be addressed now.

stephenjmcd · 12-04-2021 10:11PM

deeperlearning wrote: »

It's now only suitable for the 60-69 year olds.

It isn't given to under 60s because of the danger of blood clots.

It isn't give to those aged 70 or over as the efficacy is lower and there wasn't enough data to show it was effective in the over 70s.

It can be used on over 70s.

That advice was changed a few weeks ago

drunkmonkey · 12-04-2021 10:22PM

stephenjmcd wrote: »

It can be used on over 70s.

That advice was changed a few weeks ago

What has the manufacturer to say about all these changes to ages and times between doses, using a different product for the second shot etc.
Government agencies seem to be making it up as they're going, maybe not but it looks like it.

brendanwalsh · 12-04-2021 10:27PM

Sorry guys but this vaccine is done.

Too much bad publicity .

Young healthy people dying from brain clots.

If you’ve quarantined for 14 months, hang on another few until you get a Pfizer

PaulJoseph22 · 12-04-2021 10:32PM

The advice is, if you’re attending an AstraZeneca clinic tomorrow don’t go. How does one know if it’s AstraZeneca when you’re not told on the letter or text you get?

astrofool · 12-04-2021 10:34PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What has the manufacturer to say about all these changes to ages and times between doses, using a different product for the second shot etc.
Government agencies seem to be making it up as they're going, maybe not but it looks like it.

No manufacturer recommends mixing vaccines (yet, trials are occurring). I don't think mixing vaccines is the best idea yet either, and it seems highly unlikely that the second shot of AZ would cause a reaction if the first didn't, I think by extending it to 16 weeks, it lets the data come in from the UK to stick to the recommended vaccine (or at least I hope it does).

Halfdane · 12-04-2021 10:35PM

PaulJoseph22 wrote: »

The advice is, if you’re attending an AstraZeneca clinic tomorrow don’t go. How does one know if it’s AstraZeneca when you’re not told on the letter or text you get?

If you’re under 60 you were getting AZ.

drunkmonkey · 12-04-2021 10:35PM

PaulJoseph22 wrote: »

The advice is, if you’re attending an AstraZeneca clinic tomorrow don’t go. How does one know if it’s AstraZeneca when you’re not told on the letter or text you get?

Don't you have to sign a form before getting it or did someone make that up.

KrustyUCC · 12-04-2021 10:36PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Mmmm, Australia isn't letting in the J&J one due to it's similarities to the AZ one, same issues..we may tack it onto the thread title.

Johnson & Johnson's one-dose COVID-19 vaccine won't be coming to Australia due to AstraZeneca similarities
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-13/johnson-johnson-covid-19-vaccine-australia/100064454

This would throw a major spanner in the works but it needs to be addressed now.

That would be some disaster when NIAC do similar here

PaulJoseph22 · 12-04-2021 10:39PM

Halfdane wrote: »

If you’re under 60 you were getting AZ.

My sister is over 60 and she was told it was AZ on Saturday.

drunkmonkey · 12-04-2021 10:40PM

KrustyUCC wrote: »

That would be some disaster when NIAC do similar here

Isn't their hand going to be forced we can't exactly go Gung ho considering all the leaking news about it.
It's main selling point is it's a one jab shot but the second jab is in phase 3.

josip · 12-04-2021 10:42PM

KrustyUCC wrote: »

That would be some disaster when NIAC do similar here

J&J delivered 20m doses in the US in March.
And there have been 4 clot cases incl 1 death reported.
How does that stack up against AZ?

astrofool · 12-04-2021 10:42PM

PaulJoseph22 wrote: »

The advice is, if you’re attending an AstraZeneca clinic tomorrow don’t go. How does one know if it’s AstraZeneca when you’re not told on the letter or text you get?

I'd say, if in doubt, go anyway, at worst you won't get vaccinated. If the follow up appointment was 12+ weeks away, it's AZ, if it's 3-4 weeks away, it's mRNA.

Bass Reeves · 12-04-2021 10:43PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Mmmm, Australia isn't letting in the J&J one due to it's similarities to the AZ one, same issues..we may tack it onto the thread title.

Johnson & Johnson's one-dose COVID-19 vaccine won't be coming to Australia due to AstraZeneca similarities
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-13/johnson-johnson-covid-19-vaccine-australia/100064454

This would throw a major spanner in the works but it needs to be addressed now.

One advantage of the J&J is it has good effacy against South African variants so it will probably get more leeway because of that.

astrofool · 12-04-2021 10:46PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Isn't their hand going to be forced we can't exactly go Gung ho considering all the leaking news about it.
It's main selling point is it's a one jab shot but the second jab is in phase 3.

As far as I know the trial is with a different dosing and/or to see if the efficacy goes up significantly with a second jab, the one dose schedule was the primary trial being run (just as Moderna and Pfizer are running additional trials for boosters and children and also tracking data from Israel closely to see if there is any guidance they should change).

re: clotting cases, it will depend on the age groups being vaccinated as to whether it's an issue or not.

12-04-2021 10:48PM

stephenjmcd wrote: »

It can be used on over 70s.

That advice was changed a few weeks ago

But in reality how many over 70's will be vaccinated with this...?

Happydays2020 · 12-04-2021 10:49PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But in reality how many over 70's will be vaccinated with this...?

Not many.

What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Comments