EMA saying doctors should warn of "very rare side effects" of AZ, no talk of a ban yet
However UK likely to restrict it for under 30s - Sky
This is ridiculous; the risks are tiny
I'm not sure it makes a difference though, the under 30s (more likely under 40s) are all going to get the new vaccines anyway. There really won't be much of a change.
What it does mean is that the jab and go vaccine (J&J) might have the same issues as have already been noted in the US. I think the government was planning to have a vaccine drive using the J&J one for young people and using it as a gateway to be able to travel internationally in a "get jabbed, three weeks later you can fly" sort of way but with Moderna, Pfizer and Novavax there is a 5-6 week minimum time before full immunity is reached.
Roadmap extended. Sky says. They are now expecting a lot of young people already jabbed to refuse a second jab, so they will have to start again
I do not understand. Either the side effects are much more troubling than they admit, or they have all gone insane
I doubt it that's true. Feels like Sky overreacting to me and they won't start again, AZ first dose people can be given Pfizer as a second one, the science behind that is going to be confirmed in a study in the next couple of weeks but we already know it's not an issue.
EMA saying doctors should warn of "very rare side effects" of AZ, no talk of a ban yet
However UK likely to restrict it for under 30s - Sky
This is ridiculous; the risks are tiny
We have enough other vaccines that we can use AZ on people where the risks are closer to zero, and other vaccines for young women.
Seems like the sensible thing to do, even if only likely to avoid a dozen blood clot deaths, as it shouldn't delay a single vaccination.
It sends a terrible signal. It says Yes the vaccine can kill you
Great. Well done
Instead they should be emphasising how safe it is, but all medicines have side effects, and this is a very rare but serious one and should and will be monitored, nonetheless people should still take any vaccine offered, as the risk of death or serious harm from Covid is much greater
it beggars belief that the EMA is being more sensible
Yes, that's also true. Maybe it would have been best to be more subtle about it, while still trying to make sure young women received a different vaccine in preference.
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
What they aren't quantifying is what it will do to vaccine hesitancy. I'd be quite surprised if that effect did not ultimately cost more lives than the lives saved from the blood clots.
Presumably this sort of thing happens a lot. Trials will spot big issues, but they won't - unless by fluke - spot something as rare as this. You only start to spot the very rare things when using it in anger.
EMA saying doctors should warn of "very rare side effects" of AZ, no talk of a ban yet
However UK likely to restrict it for under 30s - Sky
This is ridiculous; the risks are tiny
I'm not sure it makes a difference though, the under 30s (more likely under 40s) are all going to get the new vaccines anyway. There really won't be much of a change.
What it does mean is that the jab and go vaccine (J&J) might have the same issues as have already been noted in the US. I think the government was planning to have a vaccine drive using the J&J one for young people and using it as a gateway to be able to travel internationally in a "get jabbed, three weeks later you can fly" sort of way but with Moderna, Pfizer and Novavax there is a 5-6 week minimum time before full immunity is reached.
Roadmap extended. Sky says. They are now expecting a lot of young people already jabbed to refuse a second jab, so they will have to start again
I do not understand. Either the side effects are much more troubling than they admit, or they have all gone insane
Why would they have to 'start again'? Couldn't they just give them a Moderna or Novavax jab as a mixed mode second dose?
No - the advice is that those who've had the first shot should get the second, which seems sensible. (Except, of course, in the extremely rare case of someone having had a blood clot.)
He's trying to work out how to blame Boris for giving people blood clots without seeming like a slimeball. He probably won't suceed in one or both of those things.
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
What they aren't quantifying is what it will do to vaccine hesitancy. I'd be quite surprised if that effect did not ultimately cost more lives than the lives saved from the blood clots.
Precisely. If a million people under 50 refuse AZ, and so have delayed jabs, how many of THEM fall ill and die?
I'm no fan of this government (a gross understatement), but I don't share the doom and gloom of so many on here.
The government set out a roadmap with which most broadly agreed, in the context of a horrendous death and illness toll in January/February. It's now April. Yes, it was a cautious roadmap - understandable given the history of the virus and some uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccines. That uncertainty has diminished massively, but not completely. As far as I can tell, the government is sticking to the roadmap and restrictions will be eased next week, and more significantly on May 17th and then in June. If the government backtracks on the roadmap without good reason I'll join the complainants, but there's no sign of that yet.
Meanwhile, while the restrictions are a complete pain, they are increasingly less arduous, especially as people interpret them more sensibly. We've started having visitors to the house, because we know infections locally are now very low. The police have not knocked on our door, nor will they. I leave the house several times a day. Next Monday, my daughter has booked a table at a beachfront bar from 2pm - 8pm; we shall visit in shifts of six.
I just wonder if a bit of patience would be wise. We should man the barricades if/when it is clear that conspiracies about extending lockdown and enforcing ID cards are imminent, but not while they are still theoretical risks that I don't actually think will happen.
Yes, I'm broadly with you. I think the problem for me is that I don't trust the government, particularly given its predilection for following lumpen opinion over science and principle. Johnson want to be liked, and I don't think that's doing us any favours. If the road map is adhered to (inc international travel 17 May (in conjunction with traffic light system) ) then I'll heave a huge sigh of relief.
My view is almost the same but slightly nuanced re: Boris. I think Boris is a metro liberal at heart and his instincts are towards liberty. The same cannot be said, sadly, for many others in his party –the Patels and the rump Red Wallers, who love a bit of authoritarian lock'em and flog'em. The Tory version of the Sandy Rentool Tendency if you will.
I reflect northern working class opinion.
North London handwringers should take note.
By North London hand wringers, presumably you mean "people who live in north London (like Anabobazina) who have a different worldview to me?"
He does. And it includes me too. In spades it does. But Sandy is a Red Wall voice and we don't have that many.
I'm a Red Wall voice by birth and upbringing, but for the last 20 years have lived in the Epicentre of Right-On Wokeness.
As a result, I have several identity crises.
Exact same. I live in Hampstead now but I'm from the coalfields of South Yorkshire and both my g'dads were miners. 1st to go to uni. Etc etc. Somewhere on this journey I have lost my identity. Except not really, cos I'm not sure I had one.
If being a 'Somewhere' means I had to continue to live in the shit northern satellite town that I spent much of my childhood in, I prefer being a North London 'Nowhere'.
This is what is known around the tracks as the truth.
Yes, same here. I'm honestly not sure that this is going to make any real difference. Firstly the group in question aren't due the vaccine until some time in June, secondly it always seemed unlikely that the government would give them AZ as it needs a 12 week gap between doses meaning someone who got the first AZ dose at the end of the programme in June wouldn't be fully vaccinated until the middle to end of September, that always felt unlikely.
The plan, IMO, has always been to give under 50s the new vaccines and I don't think that's changed. In two weeks we're getting volume deliveries of Moderna, in 4 weeks we're getting volume deliveries of Novavax and in late May we'll start to have Pfizer availability for first doses again. Those were always going to be the three vaccines for the under 50s. The programme has been geared towards that from the start. Pfizer and AZ for Phase 1, Novavax and Moderna for Phase 2.
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
What they aren't quantifying is what it will do to vaccine hesitancy. I'd be quite surprised if that effect did not ultimately cost more lives than the lives saved from the blood clots.
The problem is that the alternative - a small number of people dying of blood clots, and the government being seen not to do anything about it - isn't great for vaccine hesitancy either.
My assumption is that women under 35 (who aren't next in line for the vaccine anyway) will not be taking AZ in future. But for the rest, the risk will be considered acceptable.
This is great news for the billions of people worldwide who were relying on not-for-profit AZ, the vaccine workhorse of the planet
Most of them will now refuse. AZ is finished
I simply do not agree with your observation
My father is involved in the vaccine rollout, when the French and others decided to stop using AZN it had an impact in people wanting to have it here.
I suspect many people who now book will now insist they don't want the AZN.
In which case it means more available vaccine for those further down the pecking order. Personally I think that now most of the vulnerable groups are vaccinated we should apply the principle of "next" each time someone declines a vaccine that is statistically safer than most OTC medicines. More fool them. Let them stand aside
I'm no fan of this government (a gross understatement), but I don't share the doom and gloom of so many on here.
The government set out a roadmap with which most broadly agreed, in the context of a horrendous death and illness toll in January/February. It's now April. Yes, it was a cautious roadmap - understandable given the history of the virus and some uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccines. That uncertainty has diminished massively, but not completely. As far as I can tell, the government is sticking to the roadmap and restrictions will be eased next week, and more significantly on May 17th and then in June. If the government backtracks on the roadmap without good reason I'll join the complainants, but there's no sign of that yet.
Meanwhile, while the restrictions are a complete pain, they are increasingly less arduous, especially as people interpret them more sensibly. We've started having visitors to the house, because we know infections locally are now very low. The police have not knocked on our door, nor will they. I leave the house several times a day. Next Monday, my daughter has booked a table at a beachfront bar from 2pm - 8pm; we shall visit in shifts of six.
I just wonder if a bit of patience would be wise. We should man the barricades if/when it is clear that conspiracies about extending lockdown and enforcing ID cards are imminent, but not while they are still theoretical risks that I don't actually think will happen.
Yes, I'm broadly with you. I think the problem for me is that I don't trust the government, particularly given its predilection for following lumpen opinion over science and principle. Johnson want to be liked, and I don't think that's doing us any favours. If the road map is adhered to (inc international travel 17 May (in conjunction with traffic light system) ) then I'll heave a huge sigh of relief.
My view is almost the same but slightly nuanced re: Boris. I think Boris is a metro liberal at heart and his instincts are towards liberty. The same cannot be said, sadly, for many others in his party –the Patels and the rump Red Wallers, who love a bit of authoritarian lock'em and flog'em. The Tory version of the Sandy Rentool Tendency if you will.
I reflect northern working class opinion.
North London handwringers should take note.
By North London hand wringers, presumably you mean "people who live in north London (like Anabobazina) who have a different worldview to me?"
He does. And it includes me too. In spades it does. But Sandy is a Red Wall voice and we don't have that many.
I'm a Red Wall voice by birth and upbringing, but for the last 20 years have lived in the Epicentre of Right-On Wokeness.
As a result, I have several identity crises.
Exact same. I live in Hampstead now but I'm from the coalfields of South Yorkshire and both my g'dads were miners. 1st to go to uni. Etc etc. Somewhere on this journey I have lost my identity. Except not really, cos I'm not sure I had one.
Being working class by origin but being able to live a middle class lifestyle does create a complex identity.
Buying organic mushy peas from Waitrose. That sums it up.
My wife, who is a strong labour supporter, but privately educated very middle class. My observations, as a young urchin from a rough council estate..
- When go on holiday middle class people put their dogs in kennels, instead of farming them off to friends... - At some point gone on holiday to a Centre Parcs, but would be horrified at the thought of going to Butlins. - Believe that Frey Bentos pies are the type of food poor people eat and we shouldnt judge their bad decisions. - A knife and fork must be placed on a plate together in parallel and at a slight angle when you've finished your meal.
That pretty much rules me out of being middle class then. Fail all four.
EMA saying doctors should warn of "very rare side effects" of AZ, no talk of a ban yet
However UK likely to restrict it for under 30s - Sky
This is ridiculous; the risks are tiny
I'm not sure it makes a difference though, the under 30s (more likely under 40s) are all going to get the new vaccines anyway. There really won't be much of a change.
What it does mean is that the jab and go vaccine (J&J) might have the same issues as have already been noted in the US. I think the government was planning to have a vaccine drive using the J&J one for young people and using it as a gateway to be able to travel internationally in a "get jabbed, three weeks later you can fly" sort of way but with Moderna, Pfizer and Novavax there is a 5-6 week minimum time before full immunity is reached.
Roadmap extended. Sky says. They are now expecting a lot of young people already jabbed to refuse a second jab, so they will have to start again
I do not understand. Either the side effects are much more troubling than they admit, or they have all gone insane
I doubt it that's true. Feels like Sky overreacting to me and they won't start again, AZ first dose people can be given Pfizer as a second one, the science behind that is going to be confirmed in a study in the next couple of weeks but we already know it's not an issue.
Yes. AZ plus Pfizer is highly likely to be more, rather than less, effective.
I guess this explains why the PM is pushing for vaccine passports.
It also confirms the theory that they are all, now, terrified of the inevitable inquiry, and they are being super-cautious. Hence vaxports. Hence an extended roadmap
Presumably this sort of thing happens a lot. Trials will spot big issues, but they won't - unless by fluke - spot something as rare as this. You only start to spot the very rare things when using it in anger.
We are still involved in a massive trial of all the Covid vaccines. Vaccine development and approval normally takes years. What is amazing so far is how few and tiny the problems have been.
This is going to destroy vaccine acceptance in the EU, and maybe harm it badly in the UK
What if they find the same in Pfizer, J&J, Novavax? Very rare side effects? Do we stop all vaccines, because 1 in 600,000 keel over?
Nope because the risk is lower than the risk of covid.
Of course it is, so why the UK move (if true)?
A very rare side effect is no reason to cease delivering an excellent vaccine DURING A TERRIBLE PLAGUE
The risks of Covid in the UK are a lot, lot lower than the risk of Covid in Europe. I trust the MHRA, if they've made a decision they'll have done so for the right reasons, if they haven't fair enough too.
The odds of a healthy under-30 catching Covid and dying from it now in the UK must be very, very low.
30 cases of blood clot in 18 million doses
If you get Covid age 18-29 the chances of death are higher, the chances of disease/hospitalisation are much higher, the chances of passing the disease on are obviously higher
Nuts
Not nuts.
You can't compare the odds of getting injected with the odds of dying if injected with the odds of dying if infected, that's incorrect.
If you are injected you are definitely injected so definitely at risk of whatever side effects there are (which are potentially higher amongst the young).
If you are not injected, you might not get infected. You might have already been infected and already be immune, you might get a different vaccine, or you might simply be lucky enough to never be infected. So you need to multiple the odds of what happens if you get sick, with the odds of getting sick.
For vaccination its simply Pr (Vaccine.Risk)
For not using the vaccine its Pr (△ Covid.InfectionOdds) * Pr (Covid.InfectionRisk)
Which is(are) precisely the calculation(s) the MHRA have done.
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
What they aren't quantifying is what it will do to vaccine hesitancy. I'd be quite surprised if that effect did not ultimately cost more lives than the lives saved from the blood clots.
Precisely. If a million people under 50 refuse AZ, and so have delayed jabs, how many of THEM fall ill and die?
They said, for the affected segments, to "discuss the relative risks with your GP" or somesuch.
This is great news for the billions of people worldwide who were relying on not-for-profit AZ, the vaccine workhorse of the planet
Most of them will now refuse. AZ is finished
I simply do not agree with your observation
My father is involved in the vaccine rollout, when the French and others decided to stop using AZN it had an impact in people wanting to have it here.
I suspect many people who now book will now insist they don't want the AZN.
In which case it means more available vaccine for those further down the pecking order. Personally I think that now most of the vulnerable groups are vaccinated we should apply the principle of "next" each time someone declines a vaccine that is statistically safer than most OTC medicines. More fool them. Let them stand aside
There's not many people further down the pecking order than the under 30s.
EMA saying doctors should warn of "very rare side effects" of AZ, no talk of a ban yet
However UK likely to restrict it for under 30s - Sky
This is ridiculous; the risks are tiny
I'm not sure it makes a difference though, the under 30s (more likely under 40s) are all going to get the new vaccines anyway. There really won't be much of a change.
What it does mean is that the jab and go vaccine (J&J) might have the same issues as have already been noted in the US. I think the government was planning to have a vaccine drive using the J&J one for young people and using it as a gateway to be able to travel internationally in a "get jabbed, three weeks later you can fly" sort of way but with Moderna, Pfizer and Novavax there is a 5-6 week minimum time before full immunity is reached.
Roadmap extended. Sky says. They are now expecting a lot of young people already jabbed to refuse a second jab, so they will have to start again
I do not understand. Either the side effects are much more troubling than they admit, or they have all gone insane
I doubt it that's true. Feels like Sky overreacting to me and they won't start again, AZ first dose people can be given Pfizer as a second one, the science behind that is going to be confirmed in a study in the next couple of weeks but we already know it's not an issue.
Yes. AZ plus Pfizer is highly likely to be more, rather than less, effective.
Also, given the small number of people this affects I doubt it's going to be any kind of an issue. We're talking about under 30s in groups 2, 4 and 6 who have had AZ as a first dose and are still waiting for their second. It must be a few hundred thousand at best.
I'm no fan of this government (a gross understatement), but I don't share the doom and gloom of so many on here.
The government set out a roadmap with which most broadly agreed, in the context of a horrendous death and illness toll in January/February. It's now April. Yes, it was a cautious roadmap - understandable given the history of the virus and some uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccines. That uncertainty has diminished massively, but not completely. As far as I can tell, the government is sticking to the roadmap and restrictions will be eased next week, and more significantly on May 17th and then in June. If the government backtracks on the roadmap without good reason I'll join the complainants, but there's no sign of that yet.
Meanwhile, while the restrictions are a complete pain, they are increasingly less arduous, especially as people interpret them more sensibly. We've started having visitors to the house, because we know infections locally are now very low. The police have not knocked on our door, nor will they. I leave the house several times a day. Next Monday, my daughter has booked a table at a beachfront bar from 2pm - 8pm; we shall visit in shifts of six.
I just wonder if a bit of patience would be wise. We should man the barricades if/when it is clear that conspiracies about extending lockdown and enforcing ID cards are imminent, but not while they are still theoretical risks that I don't actually think will happen.
Yes, I'm broadly with you. I think the problem for me is that I don't trust the government, particularly given its predilection for following lumpen opinion over science and principle. Johnson want to be liked, and I don't think that's doing us any favours. If the road map is adhered to (inc international travel 17 May (in conjunction with traffic light system) ) then I'll heave a huge sigh of relief.
My view is almost the same but slightly nuanced re: Boris. I think Boris is a metro liberal at heart and his instincts are towards liberty. The same cannot be said, sadly, for many others in his party –the Patels and the rump Red Wallers, who love a bit of authoritarian lock'em and flog'em. The Tory version of the Sandy Rentool Tendency if you will.
I reflect northern working class opinion.
North London handwringers should take note.
By North London hand wringers, presumably you mean "people who live in north London (like Anabobazina) who have a different worldview to me?"
He does. And it includes me too. In spades it does. But Sandy is a Red Wall voice and we don't have that many.
I'm a Red Wall voice by birth and upbringing, but for the last 20 years have lived in the Epicentre of Right-On Wokeness.
As a result, I have several identity crises.
Exact same. I live in Hampstead now but I'm from the coalfields of South Yorkshire and both my g'dads were miners. 1st to go to uni. Etc etc. Somewhere on this journey I have lost my identity. Except not really, cos I'm not sure I had one.
Being working class by origin but being able to live a middle class lifestyle does create a complex identity.
Buying organic mushy peas from Waitrose. That sums it up.
My wife, who is a strong labour supporter, but privately educated very middle class. My observations, as a young urchin from a rough council estate..
- When go on holiday middle class people put their dogs in kennels, instead of farming them off to friends... - At some point gone on holiday to a Centre Parcs, but would be horrified at the thought of going to Butlins. - Believe that Frey Bentos pies are the type of food poor people eat and we shouldnt judge their bad decisions. - A knife and fork must be placed on a plate together in parallel and at a slight angle when you've finished your meal.
That pretty much rules me out of being middle class then. Fail all four.
I thought everyone left their doggies with one of the staff when they went on hols?
This is going to destroy vaccine acceptance in the EU, and maybe harm it badly in the UK
What if they find the same in Pfizer, J&J, Novavax? Very rare side effects? Do we stop all vaccines, because 1 in 600,000 keel over?
Nope because the risk is lower than the risk of covid.
Of course it is, so why the UK move (if true)?
A very rare side effect is no reason to cease delivering an excellent vaccine DURING A TERRIBLE PLAGUE
The risks of Covid in the UK are a lot, lot lower than the risk of Covid in Europe. I trust the MHRA, if they've made a decision they'll have done so for the right reasons, if they haven't fair enough too.
The odds of a healthy under-30 catching Covid and dying from it now in the UK must be very, very low.
30 cases of blood clot in 18 million doses
If you get Covid age 18-29 the chances of death are higher, the chances of disease/hospitalisation are much higher, the chances of passing the disease on are obviously higher
Nuts
One thing that stands out is how poor our own medicines surveillance was at picking this up. Other countries picked it up at far fewer doses, Germany at just 2.5 million for example. I wonder why.
The other point is that there is a difference between giving a drug to a sick person with a rare side effect, and giving it to a healthy person.
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
What they aren't quantifying is what it will do to vaccine hesitancy. I'd be quite surprised if that effect did not ultimately cost more lives than the lives saved from the blood clots.
Will the plan not be that young people get a different vaccine? Replace a near zero risk with a nearer zero risk?
This is going to destroy vaccine acceptance in the EU, and maybe harm it badly in the UK
What if they find the same in Pfizer, J&J, Novavax? Very rare side effects? Do we stop all vaccines, because 1 in 600,000 keel over?
Nope because the risk is lower than the risk of covid.
Of course it is, so why the UK move (if true)?
A very rare side effect is no reason to cease delivering an excellent vaccine DURING A TERRIBLE PLAGUE
The risks of Covid in the UK are a lot, lot lower than the risk of Covid in Europe. I trust the MHRA, if they've made a decision they'll have done so for the right reasons, if they haven't fair enough too.
The odds of a healthy under-30 catching Covid and dying from it now in the UK must be very, very low.
30 cases of blood clot in 18 million doses
If you get Covid age 18-29 the chances of death are higher, the chances of disease/hospitalisation are much higher, the chances of passing the disease on are obviously higher
Nuts
One thing that stands out is how poor our own medicines surveillance was at picking this up. Other countries picked it up at far fewer doses, Germany at just 2.5 million for example. I wonder why.
The other point is that there is a difference between giving a drug to a sick person with a rare side effect, and giving it to a healthy person.
Yes, their surveillance was so good they picked up the fact that AZ was only 8% effective in the old
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
What they aren't quantifying is what it will do to vaccine hesitancy. I'd be quite surprised if that effect did not ultimately cost more lives than the lives saved from the blood clots.
Precisely. If a million people under 50 refuse AZ, and so have delayed jabs, how many of THEM fall ill and die?
The problem is that the official message about risk isn't what people are seeing online on social media. The conspiracists are claiming thousands have fallen ill due to the vaccine. No matter how well intended the decision today will fan the flames.
This is going to destroy vaccine acceptance in the EU, and maybe harm it badly in the UK
What if they find the same in Pfizer, J&J, Novavax? Very rare side effects? Do we stop all vaccines, because 1 in 600,000 keel over?
Nope because the risk is lower than the risk of covid.
Of course it is, so why the UK move (if true)?
A very rare side effect is no reason to cease delivering an excellent vaccine DURING A TERRIBLE PLAGUE
The risks of Covid in the UK are a lot, lot lower than the risk of Covid in Europe. I trust the MHRA, if they've made a decision they'll have done so for the right reasons, if they haven't fair enough too.
The odds of a healthy under-30 catching Covid and dying from it now in the UK must be very, very low.
30 cases of blood clot in 18 million doses
If you get Covid age 18-29 the chances of death are higher, the chances of disease/hospitalisation are much higher, the chances of passing the disease on are obviously higher
Nuts
Not nuts.
You can't compare the odds of getting injected with the odds of dying if injected with the odds of dying if infected, that's incorrect.
If you are injected you are definitely injected so definitely at risk of whatever side effects there are (which are potentially higher amongst the young).
If you are not injected, you might not get infected. You might have already been infected and already be immune, you might get a different vaccine, or you might simply be lucky enough to never be infected. So you need to multiple the odds of what happens if you get sick, with the odds of getting sick.
For vaccination its simply Pr (Vaccine.Risk)
For not using the vaccine its Pr (△ Covid.InfectionOdds) * Pr (Covid.InfectionRisk)
Which is(are) precisely the calculation(s) the MHRA have done.
The EU has us over a barrel now. They have the Pfizer we desperately need to keep on the roadmap. They could demand we hand over the Crown Jewels AND Gary Lineker AND 10% of our budgerigars
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
What they aren't quantifying is what it will do to vaccine hesitancy. I'd be quite surprised if that effect did not ultimately cost more lives than the lives saved from the blood clots.
Precisely. If a million people under 50 refuse AZ, and so have delayed jabs, how many of THEM fall ill and die?
The problem is that the official message about risk isn't what people are seeing online on social media. The conspiracists are claiming thousands have fallen ill due to the vaccine. No matter how well intended the decision today will fan the flames.
Yes, to put it technically, this is fucking stupid
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
What they aren't quantifying is what it will do to vaccine hesitancy. I'd be quite surprised if that effect did not ultimately cost more lives than the lives saved from the blood clots.
Will the plan not be that young people get a different vaccine? Replace a near zero risk with a nearer zero risk?
On social media the wisdom of the likes of JVT is boiled down to "vaccines kill". The people who spread that message will be saying "I told you so" today.
This is going to destroy vaccine acceptance in the EU, and maybe harm it badly in the UK
What if they find the same in Pfizer, J&J, Novavax? Very rare side effects? Do we stop all vaccines, because 1 in 600,000 keel over?
Nope because the risk is lower than the risk of covid.
Of course it is, so why the UK move (if true)?
A very rare side effect is no reason to cease delivering an excellent vaccine DURING A TERRIBLE PLAGUE
The risks of Covid in the UK are a lot, lot lower than the risk of Covid in Europe. I trust the MHRA, if they've made a decision they'll have done so for the right reasons, if they haven't fair enough too.
The odds of a healthy under-30 catching Covid and dying from it now in the UK must be very, very low.
30 cases of blood clot in 18 million doses
If you get Covid age 18-29 the chances of death are higher, the chances of disease/hospitalisation are much higher, the chances of passing the disease on are obviously higher
Nuts
One thing that stands out is how poor our own medicines surveillance was at picking this up. Other countries picked it up at far fewer doses, Germany at just 2.5 million for example. I wonder why.
The other point is that there is a difference between giving a drug to a sick person with a rare side effect, and giving it to a healthy person.
We started vaccinating the vulnerable.
The Germans started out vaccinating the young and healthy. 🤦♂️
The odds for the young are very, very different compared to the old.
EMA saying doctors should warn of "very rare side effects" of AZ, no talk of a ban yet
However UK likely to restrict it for under 30s - Sky
This is ridiculous; the risks are tiny
We have enough other vaccines that we can use AZ on people where the risks are closer to zero, and other vaccines for young women.
Seems like the sensible thing to do, even if only likely to avoid a dozen blood clot deaths, as it shouldn't delay a single vaccination.
It sends a terrible signal. It says Yes the vaccine can kill you
Great. Well done
Instead they should be emphasising how safe it is, but all medicines have side effects, and this is a very rare but serious one and should and will be monitored, nonetheless people should still take any vaccine offered, as the risk of death or serious harm from Covid is much greater
it beggars belief that the EMA is being more sensible
Yes, that's also true. Maybe it would have been best to be more subtle about it, while still trying to make sure young women received a different vaccine in preference.
A bit of a paradox because they can't be subtle about it because there is so much interest, including here.
The problem from my point of view is the benefit / harm might be ignoring long Covid risks for which women in this age-group are at more risk.
This is going to destroy vaccine acceptance in the EU, and maybe harm it badly in the UK
What if they find the same in Pfizer, J&J, Novavax? Very rare side effects? Do we stop all vaccines, because 1 in 600,000 keel over?
Nope because the risk is lower than the risk of covid.
Of course it is, so why the UK move (if true)?
A very rare side effect is no reason to cease delivering an excellent vaccine DURING A TERRIBLE PLAGUE
The risks of Covid in the UK are a lot, lot lower than the risk of Covid in Europe. I trust the MHRA, if they've made a decision they'll have done so for the right reasons, if they haven't fair enough too.
The odds of a healthy under-30 catching Covid and dying from it now in the UK must be very, very low.
30 cases of blood clot in 18 million doses
If you get Covid age 18-29 the chances of death are higher, the chances of disease/hospitalisation are much higher, the chances of passing the disease on are obviously higher
Nuts
One thing that stands out is how poor our own medicines surveillance was at picking this up. Other countries picked it up at far fewer doses, Germany at just 2.5 million for example. I wonder why.
The other point is that there is a difference between giving a drug to a sick person with a rare side effect, and giving it to a healthy person.
Really? Surely it's just a function of the different age-profiles the vaccine was being administered to. Much harder to rule out other causes in frail, multimorbid populations (UK) versus young and healthy (in Germany).
JVT: No effect on the timing of the program. What were sky talking about?
It was a prediction of how people will react. Many will refuse their 2nd dose of AZ, many middle aged people will also refuse first doses of AZ. Vaccine hesitancy will explode in the UK.
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
What they aren't quantifying is what it will do to vaccine hesitancy. I'd be quite surprised if that effect did not ultimately cost more lives than the lives saved from the blood clots.
Precisely. If a million people under 50 refuse AZ, and so have delayed jabs, how many of THEM fall ill and die?
The problem is that the official message about risk isn't what people are seeing online on social media. The conspiracists are claiming thousands have fallen ill due to the vaccine. No matter how well intended the decision today will fan the flames.
Yes, to put it technically, this is fucking stupid
No you've lost your head while everyone around you has kept theirs.
The EU has us over a barrel now. They have the Pfizer we desperately need to keep on the roadmap. They could demand we hand over the Crown Jewels AND Gary Lineker AND 10% of our budgerigars
Total garbage
The people that needed to be vaccinated, have been. Mostly double vaccinated. Average age of covid death? still 80 plus.
Govt leaked or hinted or wanted the info to go to Sky that the roadmap will be put back and hence now that it doesn't appear it will be, we all feel a surge of relief and happiness.
As expected. It's going to make no real world difference because by the time the programme reaches the group's in question we won't be using AZ anyway. This is for under 30s in groups 2, 4 and 6. Not under 30s in phase 2. I also wonder whether it's actually only group 2 where the recommendation will apply becuase in group 4 and 6 the risk differential will not be as unfavorable given their risk of death from COVID being so much higher.
Govt leaked or hinted or wanted the info to go to Sky that the roadmap will be put back and hence now that it doesn't appear it will be, we all feel a surge of relief and happiness.
This is going to destroy vaccine acceptance in the EU, and maybe harm it badly in the UK
What if they find the same in Pfizer, J&J, Novavax? Very rare side effects? Do we stop all vaccines, because 1 in 600,000 keel over?
Nope because the risk is lower than the risk of covid.
Of course it is, so why the UK move (if true)?
A very rare side effect is no reason to cease delivering an excellent vaccine DURING A TERRIBLE PLAGUE
The risks of Covid in the UK are a lot, lot lower than the risk of Covid in Europe. I trust the MHRA, if they've made a decision they'll have done so for the right reasons, if they haven't fair enough too.
The odds of a healthy under-30 catching Covid and dying from it now in the UK must be very, very low.
30 cases of blood clot in 18 million doses
If you get Covid age 18-29 the chances of death are higher, the chances of disease/hospitalisation are much higher, the chances of passing the disease on are obviously higher
Nuts
One thing that stands out is how poor our own medicines surveillance was at picking this up. Other countries picked it up at far fewer doses, Germany at just 2.5 million for example. I wonder why.
The other point is that there is a difference between giving a drug to a sick person with a rare side effect, and giving it to a healthy person.
We started vaccinating the vulnerable.
The Germans started out vaccinating the young and healthy. 🤦♂️
The odds for the young are very, very different compared to the old.
Indeed, the decision to ban it for older people is up there for the most utterly stupid decision through this whole pandemic.
Mind you, if the rest of the world had targeted as well as us, would we have noticed? It might have taken a bit longer for this to show up as the numbers are very small.
As expected. It's going to make no real world difference because by the time the programme reaches the group's in question we won't be using AZ anyway. This is for under 30s in groups 2, 4 and 6. Not under 30s in phase 2. I also wonder whether it's actually only group 2 where the recommendation will apply becuase in group 4 and 6 the risk differential will not be as unfavorable given their risk of death from COVID being so much higher.
You presume everyone reacts with cool rationality.
They are now saying everyone should *really* have a vaccine whatever it is, FFS
The EU has us over a barrel now. They have the Pfizer we desperately need to keep on the roadmap. They could demand we hand over the Crown Jewels AND Gary Lineker AND 10% of our budgerigars
Total garbage
The people that needed to be vaccinated, have been. Mostly double vaccinated. Average age of covid death? still 80 plus.
FFS.
Ever heard of Long Covid as you clearly don't seem to know anyone who has that or by the sounds of it even had a mild case of Covid?
Just because deaths are falling that doesn't mean there aren't other long term issues here.
As expected. It's going to make no real world difference because by the time the programme reaches the group's in question we won't be using AZ anyway. This is for under 30s in groups 2, 4 and 6. Not under 30s in phase 2. I also wonder whether it's actually only group 2 where the recommendation will apply becuase in group 4 and 6 the risk differential will not be as unfavorable given their risk of death from COVID being so much higher.
The danger is that the risks, relatively, are so tiny but we magnify the whole issue.
Risk, say, of four in a million vs eight in a million has everyone running around saying "it's twice the risk".
I'm not sure these graphs showing the risk during a 16 week period are very helpful. They give a wrongly inflated view of the risks from the vaccine.
Needs a politician to say "we can't stay locked down forever" so pay attention to those high exposure figures.
The 'low exposure risk' graph implied the risk from the vaccine was higher than the risk from covid, which is an absurd misrepresentation. We know covid isn't going to go away so they should assume that people will be exposed to covid at some point and base the risk/benefit profile on that.
Govt leaked or hinted or wanted the info to go to Sky that the roadmap will be put back and hence now that it doesn't appear it will be, we all feel a surge of relief and happiness.
I certainly do/did.
Tinfoil hat and body armour on. Govt leaked the info to Sky to encourage viewers to move from Sky to GB News. Tinfoil off.
The EU has us over a barrel now. They have the Pfizer we desperately need to keep on the roadmap. They could demand we hand over the Crown Jewels AND Gary Lineker AND 10% of our budgerigars
And we have the lipids they need to make their Pfizer.
Alternatively, a company with a plant in the EU has the Pfizer vaccines we have ordered, and a company based in the UK has the lipids that that company has ordered.
Leon, breathe. This is one of your catastrophising moments. (They can have Lineker though. Smug little crisp-salesman.)
I agree that the comms is not great but the look of letting this info slip out the back door would be even worse.
Also, most people are sensible. There may be a fall-off, but I don't see it derailing us.
I see this as an ethical issue: everyone injected should have better than evens chance of having their life saved by it compared with being killed by it. That there is very chance of either happening in young healthy adults doesn't remove the equation.
The reason for vaccinating young people is to stop community spread. But that isn't enough on its own. Each person inoculated needs to have an individual potential benefit - we can't ask them to take one for the community.
The EU has us over a barrel now. They have the Pfizer we desperately need to keep on the roadmap. They could demand we hand over the Crown Jewels AND Gary Lineker AND 10% of our budgerigars
Total garbage
The people that needed to be vaccinated, have been. Mostly double vaccinated. Average age of covid death? still 80 plus.
FFS.
The only reason we really need it now is so our young people can go on holiday and spend currency in EU economies.
Now they're saying if you're 30 or 31 decide for yourself..... if you want the jab...
The messaging is all over the place. This is the problem. in the light of that incoherence, all that most people will take away is AZ CAN KILL YOU WITH A BLOODCLOT
Comments
My father is shaking his so much at this statement I'm worried his head might fly off, he thinks this is a staggering overreaction from the MHRA.
God, we used to laugh at Macron for pulling stunts like this.
Makes sense what they're saying, actually.
Risk of Covid to young people very small; risk of vaccine to young people very, very (very) small.
Hence for younger people one minus the other is tiny but less tiny than for older people.
I'm not worried about this causing problems.
Is my take.
Where's Scott when we need him?
I suspect many people who now book will now insist they don't want the AZN.
AZ fans nothing to see here
AZ fans feel free to ignore
(Except, of course, in the extremely rare case of someone having had a blood clot.)
The plan, IMO, has always been to give under 50s the new vaccines and I don't think that's changed. In two weeks we're getting volume deliveries of Moderna, in 4 weeks we're getting volume deliveries of Novavax and in late May we'll start to have Pfizer availability for first doses again. Those were always going to be the three vaccines for the under 50s. The programme has been geared towards that from the start. Pfizer and AZ for Phase 1, Novavax and Moderna for Phase 2.
My assumption is that women under 35 (who aren't next in line for the vaccine anyway) will not be taking AZ in future. But for the rest, the risk will be considered acceptable.
So for 20-29 the risk of harm from vaccine can be higher than the risk of Covid itself, at low exposure.
ICU admissions prevented by AZ 0.8 per 100k in same age group
In people with a low exposure risk
The 12-week gap between doses is a bit of a pain, but such is life.
He's scared of another wave.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-56663830
This is the most important news of the day.
Interesting conversations those will be.
The other point is that there is a difference between giving a drug to a sick person with a rare side effect, and giving it to a healthy person.
Seems to me that none of those presenting today on the highest board in the country on this are white males.
If there's another wave it would be a wave of millenials with bad colds feeling sorry for themselves.
Very sensible by the MHRA.
Effect on timing of our overall programme is zero as long as Pfizer and Moderna supplies continue as planned
The Germans started out vaccinating the young and healthy. 🤦♂️
The odds for the young are very, very different compared to the old.
The problem from my point of view is the benefit / harm might be ignoring long Covid risks for which women in this age-group are at more risk. Really? Surely it's just a function of the different age-profiles the vaccine was being administered to. Much harder to rule out other causes in frail, multimorbid populations (UK) versus young and healthy (in Germany).
I fear they are right
What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
The people that needed to be vaccinated, have been. Mostly double vaccinated. Average age of covid death? still 80 plus.
FFS.
Govt leaked or hinted or wanted the info to go to Sky that the roadmap will be put back and hence now that it doesn't appear it will be, we all feel a surge of relief and happiness.
I certainly do/did.
Mind you, if the rest of the world had targeted as well as us, would we have noticed? It might have taken a bit longer for this to show up as the numbers are very small.
They are now saying everyone should *really* have a vaccine whatever it is, FFS
Just because deaths are falling that doesn't mean there aren't other long term issues here.
Risk, say, of four in a million vs eight in a million has everyone running around saying "it's twice the risk".
https://twitter.com/1974Hamilton/status/1379796735862657027?s=20
Alternatively, a company with a plant in the EU has the Pfizer vaccines we have ordered, and a company based in the UK has the lipids that that company has ordered.
Leon, breathe. This is one of your catastrophising moments.
(They can have Lineker though. Smug little crisp-salesman.)
I agree that the comms is not great but the look of letting this info slip out the back door would be even worse.
Also, most people are sensible. There may be a fall-off, but I don't see it derailing us.
The reason for vaccinating young people is to stop community spread. But that isn't enough on its own. Each person inoculated needs to have an individual potential benefit - we can't ask them to take one for the community.
AIUI.
The messaging is all over the place. This is the problem. in the light of that incoherence, all that most people will take away is AZ CAN KILL YOU WITH A BLOODCLOT