49 ms·

AstraZeneca vaccine safe and effective in U.S., Chile, Peru trials

203 points by pasttense01 6y ago

chiaki123 6y ago
By not lowering the age group the govt is delaying again and the cases are rising . If we have the vaccines , we have the doctors and the infrastructure why are we wasting valuable time ? Also the wastage of the vaccine is high as once you open the vaccine you need ppl to vaccinate and not many are coming by lowering the age you will find that the vaccine will be well utilized and it is the younger age group that is travelling and working
mjbeswick 6y ago
In Europe 18 thromboembolic events reported for 20 million immunisations using the vaccine, so it's hard to imagine why some countries there have suspended it's use.
- curiousgal 6y ago
  Because it makes for a great excuse for their failure to negotiate their vaccine contracts. The US/UK contracts have a US/UK first clause whereas the EU's don't, despite them being the first to sign with AstraZeneca for example. Now they are stuck exporting vaccines to the rest of the world.
  - throwaway4good 6y ago
    While it is true that the eu got screwed by the us and the uk - there is no conspiracy wrt the temporary stoppage of the az roll out - the blood clots were first reported in Norway which is not in the eu.
    - throwaway4good 6y ago
      How the EU got screwed by the UK and the US is nicely laid out here: https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1372897635577761803 https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1372897635577761803
      - makomk 6y ago
        Pretty sure this is wrong. The UK and the EU paid to set up separate supply chains for the AstraZeneca vaccine, with the UK having first dibs on the output of the UK one (which ended up with better yields, likely in part due to being agreed on and set up first). The EU kept on blaming AstraZeneca's failure to supply enough vaccines to EU countries on them exporting the EU-produced ones to the UK, but as far as I know there's no evidence that ever happened despite police raids on the production facilities and new requirements to get licenses to export vaccines. Also the numbers don't add up at all. The AstraZeneca vaccine is also the only one with this kind of segregated supply chain, apparently as some kind of contingency plan against vaccine nationalism cutting off imports. All the others, the UK has been content to order from plants within the EU and trust that they won't pull some cynical, Trump-esque vaccine nationalism stunt and cut off exports to distract from their own problems. This appears to have been a serious misjudgement. (And to be clear, distracting from their own problems is pretty much all it would achieve. The UK is so much smaller than the EU that cutting off exports would give very little help to their own vaccine roll-out despite causing massive disruption to the UK one - and that's before even considering the possibility of retaliation.)
        the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
        > The UK and the EU paid to set up separate supply chains for the AstraZeneca vaccine, with the UK having first dibs on the output of the UK one The UK is included in the contract of the EU the same way as the EU is included in the one of the EU. That's why there are discussions about the export of vaccine to begin with. Right now AZ exports a few millions of doses out of the EU to the UK.
  - the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
    The medial regulators are not nearly as political as commenters think. There are legitimate concerns in smaller countries about the vaccine because even just few cases of deaths if young people quickly outweigh the number of young people died from covid.
  - viseztrance 6y ago
    > Because it makes for a great excuse for their failure to negotiate their vaccine contracts. This argument is beyond ridiculous. It was the decision of health officials, and it wasn't just countries part of eu that have suspended AZ vaccinations.
  - raverbashing 6y ago
    Misleading narrative > The US/UK contracts have a US/UK first clause whereas the EU's don't True, and you can see how the UK gov is fearing the export block. Darned if the EU does, darned if it doesn't. But if doing means more vaccines to the EU so be it. Though yes, it was probably a mistake treating AZ as a reliable partner and not someone who'll try find any excuses to skip on their obligations. Though it will be hard to convince a judge they're filling their "best effort" requirements
    - kcartlidge 6y ago
      > "it was probably a mistake treating AZ as a reliable partner and not someone who'll try find any excuses to skip on their obligations." Given they had prior obligations to the UK, I'd say they've been a very reliable partner - to the extent of risking annoying a major market by saying no to the EU.
  - alvah 6y ago
    "the EU's don't, despite them being the first to sign with AstraZeneca" That's an unusual way to write "The EU signed 3 months after the UK"
    - the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
      The EU signed a day before the UK.
      - alvah 6y ago
        The UK was a beneficiary of the original contract signed on May 17. The EU signed its contract on August 27, the day before another contract was signed by the UK. (edited to clarify dates)
- tinus_hn 6y ago
  Because if you cause 1 death by doing something, it’s your fault and you’ll have to defend yourself. But if you don’t to something and 100 people die, you can just blame something or someone else. In this case then it’s just the fault of those anti-maskers, or whatever group you point at.
  - unishark 6y ago
    I think it only counts as sticking one's neck out and being responsible if you deviate from the policy followed by the herd, whether it's to do something or do nothing.
    - tinus_hn 6y ago
      As a politician the only thing that counts is what sticks to you, and those 100 deaths that happened because you were doing nothing will not stick to you. That’s just not the way people think.
- 5cents 6y ago
  In Norway, there are now three deaths after vaccination (antibodies have not yet been reported in all cases, though) in people below 55 years. That's a huge number; for comparison, eight women below 60 years have died from COVID-19 (in total) Source (Norwegian): https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/to-pasienter-dode-av-blodpropp-ved-ous-_-undersoker-sammenheng-med-vaksinering-1.15427519 https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/to-pasienter-dode-av-blodprop...
  - Al-Khwarizmi 6y ago
    Even more so considering that, IIRC, only about 120K people were vaccinated with AstraZeneca in Norway. There is something strange going on in Scandinavia because UK has reported nothing special with two orders of magnitude more people vaccinated. But it's definitely a cause for concern, at the very least.
    - Leparamour 6y ago
      >There is something strange going on in Scandinavia because UK has reported nothing special with two orders of magnitude more people vaccinated. I don't want to start conspiracy theories but I wouldn't be surprised if it came to light that, in the UK, reports about deaths and side-effects have been suppressed. In the wake of a disastrous Brexit, the UK is in desperate need of a success story and with the Astrazeneca/Oxford vaccine seen as the British contender, it might have become a question of national pride to have it succeed. British newspapers (well, tabloids) present the UK vaccination rate as a vindictive competition with the EU.
      - nicoburns 6y ago
        As a UK citizen, I would be very surprised. The government might want to do that, but I can't see the medical professionals standing for it.
      - ChrisKnott 6y ago
        The UK, like most countries, is very transparent with reporting side effects and has a robust system for capturing the data.
- rataata_jr 6y ago
  One death is too many. I can't imagine that being my mum / sister / kid.
  - afarrell 6y ago
    Emotionally, this is true. Literally, this is false in a way that harms our ability to handle disasters.
  - f6v 6y ago
    That’s why you elect officials who are supposed to think in terms of statistics.
    - sokoloff 6y ago
      They do, but it’s too frequently: if I do this, how does that affect my chance to be re-elected?
      - hef19898 6y ago
        Yep, doesn't help. France has a critical election next year. Germany has a couple this year, including a federal one. And sometimes I wonder whether politicians base COVID measures on their election chances or on effectiveness.
  - kilotaras 6y ago
    You're a public official in Germany. You have a pandemic raging that already killed 75000 with at most 25% of population that had a disease. On the other hand you have a vaccine that kills 37 for 17 000 000 jabs provided (360 if scaled to 2 jabs to everyone). One death is of course too many. 360 even more so. But if an alternative is an extra 75'000 I know which choice I would like my public officials to make.
    - krzyk 6y ago
      Alternative is to extend the vaccination to younger or more willing crowds. It is basically win-win.
- ginko 6y ago
  People seem to think that delivered vaccine doses will get thrown into the trash during the suspension. In reality it just means that the doses accumulate for a week or two and will be administered more quickly after vaccinations are resumed.
- read_if_gay_ 6y ago
  Source? I literally know one case personally and I would be pretty surprised if that was a one in a million.
- Denvercoder9 6y ago
  > it's hard to imagine why some countries there have suspended it's use Really? I can imagine quite a few reasons: * When usage was suspended, it wasn't yet known whether it was limited to 18 cases or that was just the top of the iceberg. * Even 1 death in a million outpaces COVID-19 deaths in young people, so vaccinating could be worse than not doing anything for them. * Vaccins with fatal side effects can significantly reduce the willingness to be vaccinated, so even if statistically it's a good trade-off, the end result can be better by not using it. And it's not like the doses that would've been used in those few days were thrown away. They were simply rescheduled for a week later -- the full vaccination effort isn't going to be done any day later due to this delay.
  - raverbashing 6y ago
    > Even 1 death in a million outpaces COVID-19 deaths in young people It absolutely doesn't https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/11/18/covid-infection-fatality-rates-sex-and-age-15163 https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/11/18/covid-infection-fatalit... In the 20-24 range it is 60 per million 40-49 range it is ~ 10x that
    - Denvercoder9 6y ago
      Well, yes, but you have to consider that (hopefully) everyone will get the vaccine, and not everyone will get COVID. Infection rates are below 1 out of 60 in many countries. To be fair, I shouldn't have said that it'd be better than doing nothing (because in that case eventually everyone will get COVID-19), but it'd still be better to wait for another vaccine.
- krzyk 6y ago
  In only Poland it was 5 cases and 1 death. Previously I heard that there were ~30 cases in EU, I would assume that number would grow not shrink.
oytis 6y ago
Do these trials say anything about South African variant? That's the most important thing that needs to be clarified about AZ vaccine now.
- disillusioned 6y ago
  The most recent news continues to reinforce the idea that AZ is simply not effective at ALL against the B.1.351 SA variant, which is worrisome if it ends up dominating outside of South Africa. Pfizer and Moderna both seem to show lower neutralizing antibody responses, but not nothing, and while there is some question of if "2/3rds less is enough," there's also some other significant considerations around the T-cell response that's triggered by those two and its robust effectiveness even against B.1.351. But not so much with AZ, which continues to show itself as ineffective against the variant: https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/91658 https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/91658
  - oytis 6y ago
    If it is true, then in the long run AZ vaccine is close to useless. B.1.351 will just spread all over the world as quickly the original virus did, and we'll have to revaccinate with something else anyway. Which can also be complicated if something else is a viral vector vaccine too.
    - samtechie 6y ago
      I understand they are already modifying the vaccine to handle the B.1.351 variant so all that will be needed is a third booster shot for people who have already got the AZ vaccine.
    - dageshi 6y ago
      In the UK we vaccinate for whatever variants of the flu are circulating every year, Corona is going to be the same. I've heard experts widely state that since the pandemic started.
  - Denvercoder9 6y ago
734129837261 6y ago
> It will also help allay safety concerns that have disrupted its use in the European Union after a small number of reports of rare blood clots in people who have received the shot. Yes, but that rumour will now never go away, and the tin-foil-hatters will have more of a reason to claim "big pharma" is behind it all. Instead of all this research into proving it's safe (which it already was, even with minimal bad side-effects, I mean, even anti-conception pills have side-effects, a minimal amount of negative side-effects would statistically be fine and not worth a fuss), I wish scientists around the world spent more time on how to properly convince vaccine-skeptics that it's safe AND a good idea to take part. The biggest danger isn't the vaccines, it's people refusing to take them.
- curiousgal 6y ago
  > I wish scientists around the world spent more time on how to properly convince vaccine-skeptics that it's safe AND a good idea to take part. I completely disagree. I think part of why this anti-science attitude is prevalent is because people acknowledge it an try to respond to it. You should not engage in a conversation about whether vaccines cause autism or whether the earth is flat. You simply enact policies that enforce the right thing. Because this shouldn't be a discussion. Responding to those people only validates their stance.
  - 734129837261 6y ago
    These people want the best, too, mostly. Education should ALWAYS be the go-to default in any situation. These people need to be educated, not ignored, nor ridiculed. Enforcing the "right thing" will alienate these people even more than they already are. They won't feel listened to and fall back into their echo-chambers even more.
  - alvah 6y ago
    "You simply enact policies that enforce the right thing" That's a very naïve view of how science (and the world) works. Who gets to decide what "the right thing" is? What if they're later proven wrong, do their good intentions undo whatever damage is caused?
Freak_NL 6y ago
Yesterday scientists reported that they may have found the underlying cause for these few thrombosis cases: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/03/21/979781065/european-scientists-zero-in-on-astrazeneca-blood-clot-link https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/0... So the AstraZeneca vaccine does seem to trigger thrombosis in very rare cases, caused by a strong immune response. But luckily: > The German researchers say the good news is that if their theory is correct, this rare adverse reaction to the jab can be identified and treated. > They say recipients should be on the lookout for unusual bruising, swelling or headaches that start four or more days after getting the vaccination. If identified quickly, they say, the clotting problem can be managed relatively easily by health professionals.
- ddlsmurf 6y ago
  My understanding was that the rate was still lower than it is in the unvaccinated population; and while they conclude "only the vaccine could explain these cases", I wonder how many cases in the unvaccinated population are investigated this thoroughly.
  - m12k 6y ago
    Just spitballing here, but it might be possible that these individuals have an immune system that is pre-disposed to an auto-immune attack on their platelets. If so it might have happened eventually anyway (hence no deviation from normal stats), but the vaccine happens to trigger it pretty consistently. If so, and if the thrombosis turns out to be treatable like the German researchers think, then getting the AZ vaccine might turn out to be a relatively safe, controlled way for people with the condition to find out that they have it (compared to something else triggering it at some random time where they are not on the lookout for symptoms, and thus more likely to die from the blood clots). All theoretical at this point, but it would be a pretty good outcome if this side effect of the vaccine in reality turns out to become a screening method for a previously unknown condition.
  - the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
    That depends on the country. Norway had four cases of fatal blood clothing in young people which is significant considering only 9 people below 50 died of covid there.
f6v 6y ago
I overheard a rather loud phone conversation yesterday where a guy was urging his friend not to use AstraZeneca under any circumstances. Such things spread like fire.
- thehappypm 6y ago
  It's reasonable. It's kind of a trolley problem scenario. Do I actively play Russian roulette with 1 bullet in a 100,000 chamber gun, or do I passively try to avoid the game altogether?
  - Avamander 6y ago
    > passively try to avoid the game altogether Can't be done, you're avoiding yourself into a ~3/100 game.
    - thehappypm 6y ago
      Why 3/100? Covid is clearly killing far less than 3% of the infected, and far less than 3% of the general population when you factor in that not everyone is going to catch it.
      - Avamander 6y ago
        Okay 3/100 is too high, latest sources estimate IFR ~1%, so 1/100 would be correct.
        thehappypm 6y ago
        Still not right, because not 100% of people will get covid naturally.
        Avamander 6y ago
        Close enough, you can multiply by 0.75-0.5 if you wish, still awful odds.
flexie 6y ago
It's underreported, but the EU hesitance towards the AZ vaccine really started with the Danish government putting the vaccine on hold. Hours after, Austria followed and many other EU nations. Whereas it may make sense to err on the side of safety for the Danish government, who has already vaccinated the oldest and weakest 10 percent of population, who has no third wave yet, who can afford the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, who has the infrastructure for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, and who has a generally well educated population, it really complicates things in many other places. I live in Bulgaria, where the population and even health care personnel are already skeptical. Medical doctors are old, many don't speak English. They get their news from Russia. My own physician called her patients warning us not to get a jab back in February. A third wave is well underway now. When people here heard about richer and more well functioning nations suspending the vaccine, they lost the last confidence. Although Bulgaria has since reassumed vaccinations with AZ, I fear the damage is done. Few people are getting a jab now. I really wish richer nations would think more globally before they rush to such decisions. Thousands of people will die in poorer nations due to the delays it causes.
- martin_bech 6y ago
  As a Dane myself, I completely agree. And we should have resumed once EMA affirmed the vaccine being safe and efficient. But there is a feeling here that we have thing under control, and in a weird way we do.. we had about 6 covid deaths total, last week.
  - jopsen 6y ago
    We do for now, but we all know it can blow up any second.
  - kossTKR 6y ago
    This makes zero sense to me from a stats point of view. Denmark has only had 11 deaths in total in the age bracket [0-60], without known underlying conditions. Most of them close to sixty and overweight. 4 [0-60] bracket women have already died in Norway, and 2 in Denmark with one 30 year old in intensive care. All healthy relatively young health workers, a group of people that have simply not died from Covid. Norway has zero deaths below 60 without underlying conditions, and 4 deaths from the vaccine. So it's only the vaccine killing healthy people. Same in Denmark. You won't find a single dead healthy 50 yr woman among the dead. All the data is publically available. It's almost incomprehensible to me that people don't understand that Covid almost exlusively kills 80+ people, or with many comorbidities. Close to zero healthy people below 60 have died from Covid in the west. Sacrificing 4 healthy people after only 120K vaccinations in NO is crazy. Or 2 after 140K in Denmark with one in critical. I wouldn't take the AZ vaccine. There is about a in 1 / 25000 of sudden death for a healthy|<60 person compared to zero with Covid at the moment. 1 / 25000 chance of dying is crazy high for a 30 year old, and here we haven't even counted non fatal haemorrhages which is higher.
vixen99 6y ago
Relative risk! If over 65 the risk of severe illness with Covid is much increased and with it, the risk of blood clots is very substantial as any search on this topic reveals. Seems the reported cases of blood clots for AstraZenica vaccinations (17 million so far) is 37. Not a difficult risk assessment then unless there are predispossing factors for an individual.
- psychiatrist24 6y ago
  The people who died from the vaccine were younger than 65.
benevol 6y ago
Vaccines are usually developed and tested over a period of 6-10 years. If, and only if, after that much time, you don't observe any side-effects, then it is honest to declare it "safe". Everything else is just a lie to sell the product.
- christkv 6y ago
  People also forget that the vaccines are only approved for emergency use only. This is not the normal approval process.
  - chki 6y ago
    That's not true, all three vaccines authorised in the EU are approved under a conditional market authorisation, which is a sped up process but not an emergency authorisation. The United Kingdom did authorise (some?) vaccines for emergency supply.
kebman 6y ago
According to Norwegian mainstream tabloid Dagbladet (The Daily Paper), two more people have died due to complications following vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine. Norwegian language source: https://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/to-nye-personer-dode-etter-vaksinasjon/73555301 https://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/to-nye-personer-dode-etter-...
cehrlich 6y ago
I received my first dose of AstraZeneca yesterday (I'm in Austria, and qualify as teaching staff). I had severe flu-like symptoms last night and today, to the point of having to cancel my classes. It's the worst my body has felt in several years. I don't recall receiving another vaccine in my life that was half as bad. However of course I'll be the first to line up in three week's time to get my second shot. I think a big problem in communication has been that people believe that in order to oppose the anti-vaxxers you need to create a narrative that the vaccine has no negative side effects at all - which isn't true, and thus gives the anti-vaxxers more fuel. It would have been much smarter to present the argument in favor of the vaccine as a cost-benefit analysis from the start. As harsh as it sounds, making everyone feel bad for a few days and possibly causing more severe effects in a small minority is much better than allowing the virus to continue spreading for another year. Not even close.
- thebruce87m 6y ago
  I wonder if the reaction from the vaccination is proportional to the reaction from the actual virus - e.g. would you have been hospitalised with the actual virus?
  - hef19898 6y ago
    My understanding is that the heavy reaction after inoculation of a vaccine means that your immune system is working, as expected. So I'd say rather opposite, as a fast, strong immune reaction would fight COVID better. But I am working from decades old biology knowledge here.
- ggm 6y ago
  You feel ill possibly because you had a strong immune response. This is a good thing.
  - powerapple 6y ago
    so not feeling ill is probably bad?
thrwoi4u23434 6y ago
ZDoggMD had a video on this which is very informative. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUnL3x9W53w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUnL3x9W53w I wish the public health experts dictating state policies were half as effective at communicating as this podcast.
levosmetalo 6y ago
AZ ban game in EU has more to do with the internal politics than with the medical argumentation. For many of the corrupt governments it's easier to say "we don't vaccinate because AZ is not safe" that the cold truth "we don't vaccinate because we were not able to order enough vaccines on time." The reason why we don't have enough vaccines in the EU is: - Can't get Moderna, Pfizer/Biontech because "America first" - Can't get enough AZ because UK was faster with ordering - Can't get Sputnik, Sinovac because US doesn't want that their vassals buy from their enemies
- that_guy_iain 6y ago
  > - Can't get enough AZ because UK was faster with ordering The EU contract was signed the day before the UK one, no?
  - nickpp 6y ago
    Maybe, but it didn't contain a priority clause, which the UK one did.
    - that_guy_iain 6y ago
      Not according to https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/17/europe/uk-astrazeneca-vaccine-contract-details-intl/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/17/europe/uk-astrazeneca-vac...
  - detritus 6y ago
    From a very brief Google, it looks like there was a near three month difference: UK, May 2020: https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/business/astrazeneca-to-begin-supplying-100-million-doses-of-covid-19-vaccine-to-uk-from-september-if-trials-succeed-9110892/ https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/business/astrazeneca-... EU, August 2020: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_20_1438 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_20_... (Thanks for making me check - I've read that there was a few-month delay from some newspapers, but never bothered to verify)
freddealmeida 6y ago
So what would normally take 8-10 years of well structured clinical trials with blinds, is now considered safe? And when a country carefully shows that bloodclots are occurring with high predictability should just be ignored?
powerapple 6y ago
One thing I don't understand about the whole vaccine business is that can't they just license it to everyone in the world, so every country can produce their own vaccine already? Take AZ for example, Oxford was to go with Merck, then went for AZ, Why not both? And many more companies.
- Slartie 6y ago
  Because it's mostly not like you can throw a folder with a "recipe" over a fence and just have someone manufacture a vaccine in the required amounts and quality. The closest ones to this are probably vector vaccines like the AZ one, because they use a "relatively" well-known delivery technique (as in: one that was at least already used for a single market-ready vaccine before the Covid-19 ones). For that reason, AZ has several production partnerships around the world already, for example with the Serum Institute of India, and the AZ vaccine is considered the likely "workhorse" for global immunization because of this relative ease of manufacturing (and storage, of course). But it quickly gets harder with the mRNA vaccines. While those are also produced in production partnerships and subcontractor scenarios, the original producer appears to be much more intertwined with its subcontractors, performing some steps by themselves and outsourcing other steps. mRNA vaccine mass production technology is relatively proprietary and new, even newer than the already-pretty-new vector vaccine stuff, and the entire mass production scale-up has only been done very recently under massive time pressure for these Covid-19 vaccines. This basically dictates that with these outsourcing initiatives, the original producer cannot simply hand over some instructions and wait for finished vaccines to appear at the loading bay of a subcontractor, but has to transfer significant amounts of very specialized know-how to the subcontractors, which makes such operations very personnel-intensive and hard to scale. Two highly recommended links that provide very informative details about mRNA manufacturing hurdles in particular are these: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/02/02/myths-of-vaccine-manufacturing https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/02/02/my... https://blog.jonasneubert.com/2021/01/10/exploring-the-supply-chain-of-the-pfizer-biontech-and-moderna-covid-19-vaccines/ https://blog.jonasneubert.com/2021/01/10/exploring-the-suppl...
  - valarauko 6y ago
unixhero 6y ago
2 new deaths due to blood clotting in Norway[0], which finds itself in the third Coronavirus wave (2021-03-21)* [0] https://www.tv2.no/a/13902162 https://www.tv2.no/a/13902162 In Norwegian * = I am pro vaccine, and will take it, AstraZeneca vaccine, if offered. But I am a huge fan of facts.
erokar 6y ago
Two more deaths after the AZ vaccine in Norway yesterday. So far 120-130k vaccinated here, all of them under 65. 4 of them dead after very unusual and hard to treat thrombosis. Treating doc at Oslo university hospital has said the vaccine is very likely the cause. This vaccine is halted in Norway in it will likely stay that way for the foreseeable future.
shrubble 6y ago
Remember that all these vaccines are authorized under emergency use exceptions only. The full trials done under 'normal' circumstances are not yet complete.
T3RMINATED 6y ago
Blut Clots in Europa
parrellel 6y ago
AstraZenica is always going to have a shadow over it because of their initial marketing number fudging. After that trust was already broken. Then of course "turns your blood to pudding, sometimes" Sounds worse than "anaphylaxsis, sometimes" even if people end up just as dead.
apercu 6y ago
It's unfortunate that there is fear, but if governments didn't try to err on the side of caution and there are issues later, we'd all be pretty upset at those in charge for steaming full speed ahead with warning signs. Reality is not black and white.
calltrak 6y ago
So two rats where talking and one rat said to the other rat hey are you getting the dna altering jib jab? because it's not really a vaccine you know. And the other rat said, are you crazy, they have not yet finished testing on those humans yet.
thehappypm 6y ago
The blood clotting issue is a real challenge for world leaders. It's very much a question of how many of these blood clot deaths are worth exchanging for COVID deaths from a vaccinated populace. What's the trade? 1 young and healthy person dies to prevent 1 covid death? 1000 covid deaths?

203 points by pasttense01 6y ago

By not lowering the age group the govt is delaying again and the cases are rising . If we have the vaccines , we have the doctors and the infrastructure why are we wasting valuable time ? Also the wastage of the vaccine is high as once you open the vaccine you need ppl to vaccinate and not many are coming by lowering the age you will find that the vaccine will be well utilized and it is the younger age group that is travelling and working

mjbeswick 6y ago

In Europe 18 thromboembolic events reported for 20 million immunisations using the vaccine, so it's hard to imagine why some countries there have suspended it's use.

curiousgal 6y ago
Because it makes for a great excuse for their failure to negotiate their vaccine contracts. The US/UK contracts have a US/UK first clause whereas the EU's don't, despite them being the first to sign with AstraZeneca for example. Now they are stuck exporting vaccines to the rest of the world.
- throwaway4good 6y ago
  While it is true that the eu got screwed by the us and the uk - there is no conspiracy wrt the temporary stoppage of the az roll out - the blood clots were first reported in Norway which is not in the eu.
  - throwaway4good 6y ago
    How the EU got screwed by the UK and the US is nicely laid out here: https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1372897635577761803 https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1372897635577761803
    - makomk 6y ago
      Pretty sure this is wrong. The UK and the EU paid to set up separate supply chains for the AstraZeneca vaccine, with the UK having first dibs on the output of the UK one (which ended up with better yields, likely in part due to being agreed on and set up first). The EU kept on blaming AstraZeneca's failure to supply enough vaccines to EU countries on them exporting the EU-produced ones to the UK, but as far as I know there's no evidence that ever happened despite police raids on the production facilities and new requirements to get licenses to export vaccines. Also the numbers don't add up at all. The AstraZeneca vaccine is also the only one with this kind of segregated supply chain, apparently as some kind of contingency plan against vaccine nationalism cutting off imports. All the others, the UK has been content to order from plants within the EU and trust that they won't pull some cynical, Trump-esque vaccine nationalism stunt and cut off exports to distract from their own problems. This appears to have been a serious misjudgement. (And to be clear, distracting from their own problems is pretty much all it would achieve. The UK is so much smaller than the EU that cutting off exports would give very little help to their own vaccine roll-out despite causing massive disruption to the UK one - and that's before even considering the possibility of retaliation.)
      - the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
        > The UK and the EU paid to set up separate supply chains for the AstraZeneca vaccine, with the UK having first dibs on the output of the UK one The UK is included in the contract of the EU the same way as the EU is included in the one of the EU. That's why there are discussions about the export of vaccine to begin with. Right now AZ exports a few millions of doses out of the EU to the UK.
- the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
  The medial regulators are not nearly as political as commenters think. There are legitimate concerns in smaller countries about the vaccine because even just few cases of deaths if young people quickly outweigh the number of young people died from covid.
- viseztrance 6y ago
  > Because it makes for a great excuse for their failure to negotiate their vaccine contracts. This argument is beyond ridiculous. It was the decision of health officials, and it wasn't just countries part of eu that have suspended AZ vaccinations.
- raverbashing 6y ago
  Misleading narrative > The US/UK contracts have a US/UK first clause whereas the EU's don't True, and you can see how the UK gov is fearing the export block. Darned if the EU does, darned if it doesn't. But if doing means more vaccines to the EU so be it. Though yes, it was probably a mistake treating AZ as a reliable partner and not someone who'll try find any excuses to skip on their obligations. Though it will be hard to convince a judge they're filling their "best effort" requirements
  - kcartlidge 6y ago
    > "it was probably a mistake treating AZ as a reliable partner and not someone who'll try find any excuses to skip on their obligations." Given they had prior obligations to the UK, I'd say they've been a very reliable partner - to the extent of risking annoying a major market by saying no to the EU.
- alvah 6y ago
  "the EU's don't, despite them being the first to sign with AstraZeneca" That's an unusual way to write "The EU signed 3 months after the UK"
  - the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
    The EU signed a day before the UK.
    - alvah 6y ago
      The UK was a beneficiary of the original contract signed on May 17. The EU signed its contract on August 27, the day before another contract was signed by the UK. (edited to clarify dates)
tinus_hn 6y ago
Because if you cause 1 death by doing something, it’s your fault and you’ll have to defend yourself. But if you don’t to something and 100 people die, you can just blame something or someone else. In this case then it’s just the fault of those anti-maskers, or whatever group you point at.
- unishark 6y ago
  I think it only counts as sticking one's neck out and being responsible if you deviate from the policy followed by the herd, whether it's to do something or do nothing.
  - tinus_hn 6y ago
    As a politician the only thing that counts is what sticks to you, and those 100 deaths that happened because you were doing nothing will not stick to you. That’s just not the way people think.
5cents 6y ago
In Norway, there are now three deaths after vaccination (antibodies have not yet been reported in all cases, though) in people below 55 years. That's a huge number; for comparison, eight women below 60 years have died from COVID-19 (in total) Source (Norwegian): https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/to-pasienter-dode-av-blodpropp-ved-ous-_-undersoker-sammenheng-med-vaksinering-1.15427519 https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/to-pasienter-dode-av-blodprop...
- Al-Khwarizmi 6y ago
  Even more so considering that, IIRC, only about 120K people were vaccinated with AstraZeneca in Norway. There is something strange going on in Scandinavia because UK has reported nothing special with two orders of magnitude more people vaccinated. But it's definitely a cause for concern, at the very least.
  - Leparamour 6y ago
    >There is something strange going on in Scandinavia because UK has reported nothing special with two orders of magnitude more people vaccinated. I don't want to start conspiracy theories but I wouldn't be surprised if it came to light that, in the UK, reports about deaths and side-effects have been suppressed. In the wake of a disastrous Brexit, the UK is in desperate need of a success story and with the Astrazeneca/Oxford vaccine seen as the British contender, it might have become a question of national pride to have it succeed. British newspapers (well, tabloids) present the UK vaccination rate as a vindictive competition with the EU.
    - nicoburns 6y ago
      As a UK citizen, I would be very surprised. The government might want to do that, but I can't see the medical professionals standing for it.
    - ChrisKnott 6y ago
      The UK, like most countries, is very transparent with reporting side effects and has a robust system for capturing the data.
rataata_jr 6y ago
One death is too many. I can't imagine that being my mum / sister / kid.
- afarrell 6y ago
  Emotionally, this is true. Literally, this is false in a way that harms our ability to handle disasters.
- f6v 6y ago
  That’s why you elect officials who are supposed to think in terms of statistics.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    They do, but it’s too frequently: if I do this, how does that affect my chance to be re-elected?
    - hef19898 6y ago
      Yep, doesn't help. France has a critical election next year. Germany has a couple this year, including a federal one. And sometimes I wonder whether politicians base COVID measures on their election chances or on effectiveness.
- kilotaras 6y ago
  You're a public official in Germany. You have a pandemic raging that already killed 75000 with at most 25% of population that had a disease. On the other hand you have a vaccine that kills 37 for 17 000 000 jabs provided (360 if scaled to 2 jabs to everyone). One death is of course too many. 360 even more so. But if an alternative is an extra 75'000 I know which choice I would like my public officials to make.
  - krzyk 6y ago
    Alternative is to extend the vaccination to younger or more willing crowds. It is basically win-win.
ginko 6y ago
People seem to think that delivered vaccine doses will get thrown into the trash during the suspension. In reality it just means that the doses accumulate for a week or two and will be administered more quickly after vaccinations are resumed.
read_if_gay_ 6y ago
Source? I literally know one case personally and I would be pretty surprised if that was a one in a million.
Denvercoder9 6y ago
> it's hard to imagine why some countries there have suspended it's use Really? I can imagine quite a few reasons: * When usage was suspended, it wasn't yet known whether it was limited to 18 cases or that was just the top of the iceberg. * Even 1 death in a million outpaces COVID-19 deaths in young people, so vaccinating could be worse than not doing anything for them. * Vaccins with fatal side effects can significantly reduce the willingness to be vaccinated, so even if statistically it's a good trade-off, the end result can be better by not using it. And it's not like the doses that would've been used in those few days were thrown away. They were simply rescheduled for a week later -- the full vaccination effort isn't going to be done any day later due to this delay.
- raverbashing 6y ago
  > Even 1 death in a million outpaces COVID-19 deaths in young people It absolutely doesn't https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/11/18/covid-infection-fatality-rates-sex-and-age-15163 https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/11/18/covid-infection-fatalit... In the 20-24 range it is 60 per million 40-49 range it is ~ 10x that
  - Denvercoder9 6y ago
    Well, yes, but you have to consider that (hopefully) everyone will get the vaccine, and not everyone will get COVID. Infection rates are below 1 out of 60 in many countries. To be fair, I shouldn't have said that it'd be better than doing nothing (because in that case eventually everyone will get COVID-19), but it'd still be better to wait for another vaccine.
krzyk 6y ago
In only Poland it was 5 cases and 1 death. Previously I heard that there were ~30 cases in EU, I would assume that number would grow not shrink.

oytis 6y ago

Do these trials say anything about South African variant? That's the most important thing that needs to be clarified about AZ vaccine now.

disillusioned 6y ago
The most recent news continues to reinforce the idea that AZ is simply not effective at ALL against the B.1.351 SA variant, which is worrisome if it ends up dominating outside of South Africa. Pfizer and Moderna both seem to show lower neutralizing antibody responses, but not nothing, and while there is some question of if "2/3rds less is enough," there's also some other significant considerations around the T-cell response that's triggered by those two and its robust effectiveness even against B.1.351. But not so much with AZ, which continues to show itself as ineffective against the variant: https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/91658 https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/91658
- oytis 6y ago
  If it is true, then in the long run AZ vaccine is close to useless. B.1.351 will just spread all over the world as quickly the original virus did, and we'll have to revaccinate with something else anyway. Which can also be complicated if something else is a viral vector vaccine too.
  - samtechie 6y ago
    I understand they are already modifying the vaccine to handle the B.1.351 variant so all that will be needed is a third booster shot for people who have already got the AZ vaccine.
  - dageshi 6y ago
    In the UK we vaccinate for whatever variants of the flu are circulating every year, Corona is going to be the same. I've heard experts widely state that since the pandemic started.
- Denvercoder9 6y ago

734129837261 6y ago

> It will also help allay safety concerns that have disrupted its use in the European Union after a small number of reports of rare blood clots in people who have received the shot. Yes, but that rumour will now never go away, and the tin-foil-hatters will have more of a reason to claim "big pharma" is behind it all. Instead of all this research into proving it's safe (which it already was, even with minimal bad side-effects, I mean, even anti-conception pills have side-effects, a minimal amount of negative side-effects would statistically be fine and not worth a fuss), I wish scientists around the world spent more time on how to properly convince vaccine-skeptics that it's safe AND a good idea to take part. The biggest danger isn't the vaccines, it's people refusing to take them.

curiousgal 6y ago
> I wish scientists around the world spent more time on how to properly convince vaccine-skeptics that it's safe AND a good idea to take part. I completely disagree. I think part of why this anti-science attitude is prevalent is because people acknowledge it an try to respond to it. You should not engage in a conversation about whether vaccines cause autism or whether the earth is flat. You simply enact policies that enforce the right thing. Because this shouldn't be a discussion. Responding to those people only validates their stance.
- 734129837261 6y ago
  These people want the best, too, mostly. Education should ALWAYS be the go-to default in any situation. These people need to be educated, not ignored, nor ridiculed. Enforcing the "right thing" will alienate these people even more than they already are. They won't feel listened to and fall back into their echo-chambers even more.
- alvah 6y ago
  "You simply enact policies that enforce the right thing" That's a very naïve view of how science (and the world) works. Who gets to decide what "the right thing" is? What if they're later proven wrong, do their good intentions undo whatever damage is caused?

Freak_NL 6y ago

Yesterday scientists reported that they may have found the underlying cause for these few thrombosis cases: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/03/21/979781065/european-scientists-zero-in-on-astrazeneca-blood-clot-link https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/0... So the AstraZeneca vaccine does seem to trigger thrombosis in very rare cases, caused by a strong immune response. But luckily: > The German researchers say the good news is that if their theory is correct, this rare adverse reaction to the jab can be identified and treated. > They say recipients should be on the lookout for unusual bruising, swelling or headaches that start four or more days after getting the vaccination. If identified quickly, they say, the clotting problem can be managed relatively easily by health professionals.

ddlsmurf 6y ago
My understanding was that the rate was still lower than it is in the unvaccinated population; and while they conclude "only the vaccine could explain these cases", I wonder how many cases in the unvaccinated population are investigated this thoroughly.
- m12k 6y ago
  Just spitballing here, but it might be possible that these individuals have an immune system that is pre-disposed to an auto-immune attack on their platelets. If so it might have happened eventually anyway (hence no deviation from normal stats), but the vaccine happens to trigger it pretty consistently. If so, and if the thrombosis turns out to be treatable like the German researchers think, then getting the AZ vaccine might turn out to be a relatively safe, controlled way for people with the condition to find out that they have it (compared to something else triggering it at some random time where they are not on the lookout for symptoms, and thus more likely to die from the blood clots). All theoretical at this point, but it would be a pretty good outcome if this side effect of the vaccine in reality turns out to become a screening method for a previously unknown condition.
- the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
  That depends on the country. Norway had four cases of fatal blood clothing in young people which is significant considering only 9 people below 50 died of covid there.

f6v 6y ago

I overheard a rather loud phone conversation yesterday where a guy was urging his friend not to use AstraZeneca under any circumstances. Such things spread like fire.

thehappypm 6y ago
It's reasonable. It's kind of a trolley problem scenario. Do I actively play Russian roulette with 1 bullet in a 100,000 chamber gun, or do I passively try to avoid the game altogether?
- Avamander 6y ago
  > passively try to avoid the game altogether Can't be done, you're avoiding yourself into a ~3/100 game.
  - thehappypm 6y ago
    Why 3/100? Covid is clearly killing far less than 3% of the infected, and far less than 3% of the general population when you factor in that not everyone is going to catch it.
    - Avamander 6y ago
      Okay 3/100 is too high, latest sources estimate IFR ~1%, so 1/100 would be correct.
      - thehappypm 6y ago
        Still not right, because not 100% of people will get covid naturally.
        Avamander 6y ago
        Close enough, you can multiply by 0.75-0.5 if you wish, still awful odds.

flexie 6y ago

It's underreported, but the EU hesitance towards the AZ vaccine really started with the Danish government putting the vaccine on hold. Hours after, Austria followed and many other EU nations. Whereas it may make sense to err on the side of safety for the Danish government, who has already vaccinated the oldest and weakest 10 percent of population, who has no third wave yet, who can afford the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, who has the infrastructure for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, and who has a generally well educated population, it really complicates things in many other places. I live in Bulgaria, where the population and even health care personnel are already skeptical. Medical doctors are old, many don't speak English. They get their news from Russia. My own physician called her patients warning us not to get a jab back in February. A third wave is well underway now. When people here heard about richer and more well functioning nations suspending the vaccine, they lost the last confidence. Although Bulgaria has since reassumed vaccinations with AZ, I fear the damage is done. Few people are getting a jab now. I really wish richer nations would think more globally before they rush to such decisions. Thousands of people will die in poorer nations due to the delays it causes.

martin_bech 6y ago
As a Dane myself, I completely agree. And we should have resumed once EMA affirmed the vaccine being safe and efficient. But there is a feeling here that we have thing under control, and in a weird way we do.. we had about 6 covid deaths total, last week.
- jopsen 6y ago
  We do for now, but we all know it can blow up any second.
- kossTKR 6y ago
  This makes zero sense to me from a stats point of view. Denmark has only had 11 deaths in total in the age bracket [0-60], without known underlying conditions. Most of them close to sixty and overweight. 4 [0-60] bracket women have already died in Norway, and 2 in Denmark with one 30 year old in intensive care. All healthy relatively young health workers, a group of people that have simply not died from Covid. Norway has zero deaths below 60 without underlying conditions, and 4 deaths from the vaccine. So it's only the vaccine killing healthy people. Same in Denmark. You won't find a single dead healthy 50 yr woman among the dead. All the data is publically available. It's almost incomprehensible to me that people don't understand that Covid almost exlusively kills 80+ people, or with many comorbidities. Close to zero healthy people below 60 have died from Covid in the west. Sacrificing 4 healthy people after only 120K vaccinations in NO is crazy. Or 2 after 140K in Denmark with one in critical. I wouldn't take the AZ vaccine. There is about a in 1 / 25000 of sudden death for a healthy|<60 person compared to zero with Covid at the moment. 1 / 25000 chance of dying is crazy high for a 30 year old, and here we haven't even counted non fatal haemorrhages which is higher.

vixen99 6y ago

Relative risk! If over 65 the risk of severe illness with Covid is much increased and with it, the risk of blood clots is very substantial as any search on this topic reveals. Seems the reported cases of blood clots for AstraZenica vaccinations (17 million so far) is 37. Not a difficult risk assessment then unless there are predispossing factors for an individual.

psychiatrist24 6y ago
The people who died from the vaccine were younger than 65.

benevol 6y ago

Vaccines are usually developed and tested over a period of 6-10 years. If, and only if, after that much time, you don't observe any side-effects, then it is honest to declare it "safe". Everything else is just a lie to sell the product.

christkv 6y ago
People also forget that the vaccines are only approved for emergency use only. This is not the normal approval process.
- chki 6y ago
  That's not true, all three vaccines authorised in the EU are approved under a conditional market authorisation, which is a sped up process but not an emergency authorisation. The United Kingdom did authorise (some?) vaccines for emergency supply.

kebman 6y ago

According to Norwegian mainstream tabloid Dagbladet (The Daily Paper), two more people have died due to complications following vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine. Norwegian language source: https://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/to-nye-personer-dode-etter-vaksinasjon/73555301 https://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/to-nye-personer-dode-etter-...

cehrlich 6y ago

I received my first dose of AstraZeneca yesterday (I'm in Austria, and qualify as teaching staff). I had severe flu-like symptoms last night and today, to the point of having to cancel my classes. It's the worst my body has felt in several years. I don't recall receiving another vaccine in my life that was half as bad. However of course I'll be the first to line up in three week's time to get my second shot. I think a big problem in communication has been that people believe that in order to oppose the anti-vaxxers you need to create a narrative that the vaccine has no negative side effects at all - which isn't true, and thus gives the anti-vaxxers more fuel. It would have been much smarter to present the argument in favor of the vaccine as a cost-benefit analysis from the start. As harsh as it sounds, making everyone feel bad for a few days and possibly causing more severe effects in a small minority is much better than allowing the virus to continue spreading for another year. Not even close.

thebruce87m 6y ago
I wonder if the reaction from the vaccination is proportional to the reaction from the actual virus - e.g. would you have been hospitalised with the actual virus?
- hef19898 6y ago
  My understanding is that the heavy reaction after inoculation of a vaccine means that your immune system is working, as expected. So I'd say rather opposite, as a fast, strong immune reaction would fight COVID better. But I am working from decades old biology knowledge here.
ggm 6y ago
You feel ill possibly because you had a strong immune response. This is a good thing.
- powerapple 6y ago
  so not feeling ill is probably bad?

thrwoi4u23434 6y ago

ZDoggMD had a video on this which is very informative. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUnL3x9W53w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUnL3x9W53w I wish the public health experts dictating state policies were half as effective at communicating as this podcast.

levosmetalo 6y ago

AZ ban game in EU has more to do with the internal politics than with the medical argumentation. For many of the corrupt governments it's easier to say "we don't vaccinate because AZ is not safe" that the cold truth "we don't vaccinate because we were not able to order enough vaccines on time." The reason why we don't have enough vaccines in the EU is: - Can't get Moderna, Pfizer/Biontech because "America first" - Can't get enough AZ because UK was faster with ordering - Can't get Sputnik, Sinovac because US doesn't want that their vassals buy from their enemies

that_guy_iain 6y ago
> - Can't get enough AZ because UK was faster with ordering The EU contract was signed the day before the UK one, no?
- nickpp 6y ago
  Maybe, but it didn't contain a priority clause, which the UK one did.
  - that_guy_iain 6y ago
    Not according to https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/17/europe/uk-astrazeneca-vaccine-contract-details-intl/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/17/europe/uk-astrazeneca-vac...
- detritus 6y ago
  From a very brief Google, it looks like there was a near three month difference: UK, May 2020: https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/business/astrazeneca-to-begin-supplying-100-million-doses-of-covid-19-vaccine-to-uk-from-september-if-trials-succeed-9110892/ https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/business/astrazeneca-... EU, August 2020: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_20_1438 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_20_... (Thanks for making me check - I've read that there was a few-month delay from some newspapers, but never bothered to verify)

freddealmeida 6y ago

So what would normally take 8-10 years of well structured clinical trials with blinds, is now considered safe? And when a country carefully shows that bloodclots are occurring with high predictability should just be ignored?

powerapple 6y ago

One thing I don't understand about the whole vaccine business is that can't they just license it to everyone in the world, so every country can produce their own vaccine already? Take AZ for example, Oxford was to go with Merck, then went for AZ, Why not both? And many more companies.

Slartie 6y ago
Because it's mostly not like you can throw a folder with a "recipe" over a fence and just have someone manufacture a vaccine in the required amounts and quality. The closest ones to this are probably vector vaccines like the AZ one, because they use a "relatively" well-known delivery technique (as in: one that was at least already used for a single market-ready vaccine before the Covid-19 ones). For that reason, AZ has several production partnerships around the world already, for example with the Serum Institute of India, and the AZ vaccine is considered the likely "workhorse" for global immunization because of this relative ease of manufacturing (and storage, of course). But it quickly gets harder with the mRNA vaccines. While those are also produced in production partnerships and subcontractor scenarios, the original producer appears to be much more intertwined with its subcontractors, performing some steps by themselves and outsourcing other steps. mRNA vaccine mass production technology is relatively proprietary and new, even newer than the already-pretty-new vector vaccine stuff, and the entire mass production scale-up has only been done very recently under massive time pressure for these Covid-19 vaccines. This basically dictates that with these outsourcing initiatives, the original producer cannot simply hand over some instructions and wait for finished vaccines to appear at the loading bay of a subcontractor, but has to transfer significant amounts of very specialized know-how to the subcontractors, which makes such operations very personnel-intensive and hard to scale. Two highly recommended links that provide very informative details about mRNA manufacturing hurdles in particular are these: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/02/02/myths-of-vaccine-manufacturing https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/02/02/my... https://blog.jonasneubert.com/2021/01/10/exploring-the-supply-chain-of-the-pfizer-biontech-and-moderna-covid-19-vaccines/ https://blog.jonasneubert.com/2021/01/10/exploring-the-suppl...
- valarauko 6y ago

unixhero 6y ago

2 new deaths due to blood clotting in Norway[0], which finds itself in the third Coronavirus wave (2021-03-21)* [0] https://www.tv2.no/a/13902162 https://www.tv2.no/a/13902162 In Norwegian * = I am pro vaccine, and will take it, AstraZeneca vaccine, if offered. But I am a huge fan of facts.

erokar 6y ago

Two more deaths after the AZ vaccine in Norway yesterday. So far 120-130k vaccinated here, all of them under 65. 4 of them dead after very unusual and hard to treat thrombosis. Treating doc at Oslo university hospital has said the vaccine is very likely the cause. This vaccine is halted in Norway in it will likely stay that way for the foreseeable future.

shrubble 6y ago

Remember that all these vaccines are authorized under emergency use exceptions only. The full trials done under 'normal' circumstances are not yet complete.

T3RMINATED 6y ago

Blut Clots in Europa

parrellel 6y ago

AstraZenica is always going to have a shadow over it because of their initial marketing number fudging. After that trust was already broken. Then of course "turns your blood to pudding, sometimes" Sounds worse than "anaphylaxsis, sometimes" even if people end up just as dead.

apercu 6y ago

It's unfortunate that there is fear, but if governments didn't try to err on the side of caution and there are issues later, we'd all be pretty upset at those in charge for steaming full speed ahead with warning signs. Reality is not black and white.

calltrak 6y ago

So two rats where talking and one rat said to the other rat hey are you getting the dna altering jib jab? because it's not really a vaccine you know. And the other rat said, are you crazy, they have not yet finished testing on those humans yet.

thehappypm 6y ago

The blood clotting issue is a real challenge for world leaders. It's very much a question of how many of these blood clot deaths are worth exchanging for COVID deaths from a vaccinated populace. What's the trade? 1 young and healthy person dies to prevent 1 covid death? 1000 covid deaths?