3 ms·

I think now, almost everybody knows someone with your problem. This seems unlikely, given the relative rarity of these events. No vaccine should damaged an he

I think now, almost everybody knows someone with your problem. This seems unlikely, given the relative rarity of these events. No vaccine should damaged an healthy person Every vaccine ever created can have adverse effects on healthy people. Why governments don't push for studies You are literally commenting on a study. I remember doctors and media denying AstraZeneca Blood cloths for months Your memory is wrong.

jcbrand 5y ago
>> I remember doctors and media denying AstraZeneca Blood cloths for months > Your memory is wrong. There are "fact-checks" still online claiming that AZ doesn't cause blood clots. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/03/25/fact-check-astrazeneca-vaccine-blood-clots-not-definitively-linked/4721828001/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/03/25/fact...
- technothrasher 5y ago
  The early "fact-check" you linked to doesn't claim "that AZ doesn't cause blood clots". Its conclusion: "Whether there is an actual connection is still under investigation and will be closely monitored as vaccination with AstraZeneca's vaccine resumes."
- matthewmacleod 5y ago
  You linked to an article that literally concludes with the sentence: "Whether there is an actual connection is still under investigation and will be closely monitored as vaccination with AstraZeneca's vaccine resumes." This is exactly what we should all expect to happen. I don't doubt for a second that there will be citable examples of doctors or media claiming that this particular vaccine did not—or was unlikely to—cause clots. But the statement "I remember doctors and media denying AstraZeneca Blood cloths for months" is clearly intended to misrepresent the actual situation.
hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
> Your memory is wrong. I don't think so, you can still find the traces of it everywhere. You can't deny the fact that the people in charge decided to misinform the public several times for specific reasons. It started with masks: people wanted to wear them and all the media was parroting that "there is no evidence that masks protect against COVID-19" (or was it called the "Wuhan virus" still back then?). While technically correct, it was against common sense and the aim was to limit the demand for masks used by healthcare institutions. Once they secured the masks, they turned 180 degrees and started to force everyone to wear the masks. What a great way to build credibility. Regarding vaccines, more openness would be great. What we were promised was efficiency at the level of >90%. What we see now, after mutations and with time after taking the vaccine, the efficiency levels are much lower and it looks like - at least in some countries - people will have to take the vaccine perpetually 2 or maybe even 3 times a year in order to be able to work. In this case, we better study the possible adverse reactions well and assess the overall lifetime risk, especially for younger persons.

jcbrand 5y ago

>> I remember doctors and media denying AstraZeneca Blood cloths for months > Your memory is wrong. There are "fact-checks" still online claiming that AZ doesn't cause blood clots. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/03/25/fact-check-astrazeneca-vaccine-blood-clots-not-definitively-linked/4721828001/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/03/25/fact...

technothrasher 5y ago
The early "fact-check" you linked to doesn't claim "that AZ doesn't cause blood clots". Its conclusion: "Whether there is an actual connection is still under investigation and will be closely monitored as vaccination with AstraZeneca's vaccine resumes."
matthewmacleod 5y ago
You linked to an article that literally concludes with the sentence: "Whether there is an actual connection is still under investigation and will be closely monitored as vaccination with AstraZeneca's vaccine resumes." This is exactly what we should all expect to happen. I don't doubt for a second that there will be citable examples of doctors or media claiming that this particular vaccine did not—or was unlikely to—cause clots. But the statement "I remember doctors and media denying AstraZeneca Blood cloths for months" is clearly intended to misrepresent the actual situation.

hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago

> Your memory is wrong. I don't think so, you can still find the traces of it everywhere. You can't deny the fact that the people in charge decided to misinform the public several times for specific reasons. It started with masks: people wanted to wear them and all the media was parroting that "there is no evidence that masks protect against COVID-19" (or was it called the "Wuhan virus" still back then?). While technically correct, it was against common sense and the aim was to limit the demand for masks used by healthcare institutions. Once they secured the masks, they turned 180 degrees and started to force everyone to wear the masks. What a great way to build credibility. Regarding vaccines, more openness would be great. What we were promised was efficiency at the level of >90%. What we see now, after mutations and with time after taking the vaccine, the efficiency levels are much lower and it looks like - at least in some countries - people will have to take the vaccine perpetually 2 or maybe even 3 times a year in order to be able to work. In this case, we better study the possible adverse reactions well and assess the overall lifetime risk, especially for younger persons.