51–60 of 288 posts
Astra Zeneca says it's less than 40 cases in 17 million. Are those numbers accurate? That seems like quite a small population affected.
Keep in mind that Norway has only 1 to 2 COVID-19 deaths per day at the moment.
Source: https://www.fhi.no/sv/smittsomme-sykdommer/corona/dags--og-u...
Interesting, and very concerning if it's true. I was given my first shot of the AZ vaccine on Monday afternoon, so I was aware of the reports of blood clots at the time although only in outline. I just don't understand how come the same reaction hasn't been seen in the millions of people vaccinated with AZ outside Norway (edit - it has been, thanks for the info, none of the articles I've come across properly explaine…
I say both risks are totally related. Covid itself causes blood clots. The solution here has been to administer aspirin to Covid patients. So the solution for the AstraZeneca vaccine should be the same. Vaccinate people, give them some aspirin over two weeks, just in case.
Broadly, aspirin works on the one associated with heart attacks. Most strokes are caused by the other. So taking aspirin for strokes doesn't usually help. (Source: had a mild stroke, was told this by multiple neurologists.)
Covid seems related to both.
You need non-trivial blood thinners - Warfarin, rivaroxaban, apixaban - to affect DVT etc, and those are high-maintenance meds with side effects of their own.
But there is some evidence that aspirin does help with Covid clotting, and low doses for short periods seem pretty safe.
So the worst you'll do is improve your odds of avoiding problems from something that's already not much of an issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is a real-life example of the runaway railcar switch dilemma. The train car is heading towards a crowd of millions of people and will plough through the middle of them killing many hundreds, or you can throw the switch and divert the railcar so it hits a handful of people prone to the blood clot reaction. In this situation it's not that much of a dilemma, though. It's not as if those prone to blood clots are n…
Yes, but, there are close to 200 vaccines. It isn't as if all vaccinations have stopped, there are other options, and panic and fear on the side of omg must vaccinate now, now,now! ? Any hint, even the slightest, that complications may be ignored, could result in untold masses refusing vaccination out of fear. So let's pause one vaccine for a few days, and see if moving ahead, or more research is required.
Not with sufficient supply there isn’t. That’s the issue almost every country is facing, and AZ production plants can’t just flip a switch and start making Moderna vaccines instead.
No matter what if you stop using the AZ you’re going to have a sharp drop in the number of vaccinations you’re able to do. That would almost certainly result in more deaths than the side effect of the vaccine.
> Any hint, even the slightest, that complications may be ignored, could result in untold masses refusing vaccination out of fear.
Only if people (and the media especially) hype up a very small danger to be more than it is. The larger danger is and always was COVID itself, especially with the new strains spreading.
Sensationalist and misleading title Yes, it's the vaccine "that caused it". In a 1 in a million case. In the same way you can die eating a donut and choking on it. The real news is that it might have involved a platelet targeting immune reaction. Guess what else causes clotting problems (in much higher frequency)? Covid
3 have had the immune response in about 120.000 vaccinated with AstraZeneca. That's too small a sample to really conclude anything, but as far as Norway is concerned it might be a 1:40000 risk.
Or the UK has, but they are either unreported, or the different demographic group is not showing up with the same numbers so uncomparable.
It's a hard thing to tease out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sort of the theme with Covid ultimately. I’m curious who will have the guts to re-examine the global shutdown as an exaggerated reaction as we go forward.
I think the it will be shown the countries who took it seriously are going to winners both in terms in deaths, long term care for long haulers and economy. Asians countries are booming since their economy wasn't affected because the stringent lock downs controlled the virus.
This is an exaggeration, at best. There may have been countries that grew in the latter part of 2020, but to characterize these as "booming" is misleading.
Japan had its first economic contraction since 2009 (down 4.8% over 2019). They've been flirting with deflation throughout 2020. And they're one of the countries with the lightest responses.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56066065#:~:text=Japan's%2....
Developing countries in Asia are no better off:
"ADB said GDP in developing Asia will contract 0.7% this year and three-fourths of the region’s economies are set to register negative growth for 2020. That includes countries like Singapore, Thailand, India and the Philippines. China, where the coronavirus outbreak was first reported in late-December, is the only country that is expected to register a positive growth, albeit far below normal levels of growth."
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/15/adb-2020-outlook-most-asian-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm fully for that. And when we find out that a hard lockdown would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, I hope we'll also have the guts to lock up the people who advocated against it, simply to further political goals. And try them for murder.
How about trying for murder the people who advocated the global "soft" lockdown that plunged hundreds of millions of people in poor countries into poverty ( https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/10/07/c... ) and killed hundreds of thousands of children ( https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-childr... ), just to increase the life expectancy of their 80 year old grandparents by a year or…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep in mind that Norway has only 1 to 2 COVID-19 deaths per day at the moment.
Indeed, and this far, "only" 8 women below 60 years have died from COVID-19 (in total) Source: https://www.fhi.no/sv/smittsomme-sykdommer/corona/dags--og-u...
Astra Zeneca says it's less than 40 cases in 17 million. Are those numbers accurate? That seems like quite a small population affected.
Keep in mind that Norway has only 1 to 2 COVID-19 deaths per day at the moment.
Astra Zeneca says it's less than 40 cases in 17 million. Are those numbers accurate? That seems like quite a small population affected.
Time will tell, but I'd put my money on a lot of undiscovered cases in Europe and the UK. Vaccinations have mostly been in elderly people who are at high risk of health complications anyway, it's only recently that younger populations started receiving the vaccine. And Norway is among the most paranoid of these countries, with good health data and monitoring. Norway has also had at least three serious cases with 130.…
That's not how numbers work. You can't look at California, for example, and conclude that because 63% of voters chose Biden, his national vote share is certainly higher than 52%.
Is there any history of such reactions to vaccines in the past?
[1]: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/07/why-pandemic-flu-sho...