Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 344 posts

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#211

Post by erk__ »

devit wrote: post #106
londons_explore wrote: post #53

This decision seems illogical to many commenters here, but I assume the decision was made by professionals with all the data in front of them. Which then raises the question, why did these professionals make a decision so different than the "obvious" opinion here?

Not sure it's that illogical. mRNA vaccines are apparently better and don't seem to have serious side effects, so only using those is correct if it doesn't delay immunity too long. According to the article, this might cause a 4 weeks delay: currently Denmark has around 2 deaths per day, thus possibly causing 60 additional deaths, which would match a vaccine death rate of 1/100000. Denmark has a 6 million population,…

The note [0] (in Danish) published by the danish health authority with the reasoning for this puts the number a bit higher at around 5 to 10 per 1,000,000 [1], another thing that the note points out is if they start the vaccine program up with the AZ vaccine again, it may delay it in the older population even more as they think many people would say no to it.

[0]: https://www.sst.dk/-/media/Udgivelser/2021/Corona/Vaccinatio...

[1]: 1/40000 chance of serious complication with a around 20-40% chance of death, source: [0].

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#212

Post by sofixa »

incrudible wrote: post #208
sofixa wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That it doesn't work. Sweden had to go back on it, and in many countries trying to do (1) ended up with hospitals full - like France. Everything was done to avoid a third lockdown this spring, but hospitals are at 150% capacity and here we are again. Are you aware of some magic trick that negates that?

The secret to not having hospitals overwhelmed is to have enough capacity in the first place, but also to avoid superspreader events. Sweden did ban some gatherings and they did close down schools briefly. Most other lockdown measures are questionable at best, including mandatory mask usage. They are clearly symbolic tools for the political class to signal that something is being done, but the data to support them is…

> The secret to not having hospitals overwhelmed is to have enough capacity in the first place

Enough for what? Hospital capacity was wildly sufficient for regular times, but the pandemic turned that around. Even Germany, which has multiple times the capacity per capita than France, is struggling in that regard. What is "enough"?

> but also to avoid superspreader events

Lol. Events with more than 2000 people outside ( at the best of times, usually it has been flat out forbidden), and 6-100 inside have been forbidden in France since last year. That obviously didn't help.

> Most other lockdown measures are questionable at best, including mandatory mask usage. They are clearly symbolic tools for the political class to signal that something is being done, but the data to support them is not very strong considering that there is not much of a control group.

There is, check the US and Brazil.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#213

Post by [deleted] »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #153
marvin wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Norway has ~10 deaths from Covid in the But only a small minority of the So it's a pretty safe assumption at this point that AZ is a bad option for younger age groups in countries with similar numbers, assuming that other vaccines will soon be available (they will)

Sure, but at the same time 3 is too small a number to have any confidence in that expectation. Looking at the rates from other countries where AZ has been deployed more heavily, it seems like Norway mostly had bad luck, and the rate is fairly small. Though as you say for the younger population the risks with covid are also small and the choice ultimately depends on the infection rate in the country. An interesting qu…

[deleted]

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#214

Post by tomjen3 »

alkonaut wrote: post #3

Not giving it to 65+ people seems overly cautious. There are zero cases in that group and even just a small delay will mean many dead. This is trading a potential unlikely side effect for a large number of severe Covid cases in high risk groups. Edit: yes I'm aware they have only a dozen or so dead per week but that also translates to hundreds of severe cases, missed elective surgeries, etc. For what would most likel…

Not really. We have already vacinated most of the high risk groups and our hospitals are not at risk of capacity.

It just means that people like me who are at the end of the queue will lose six months more of our lives waiting for a vaccine (they have also paused J&J, I am assuming that one is gone too).

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#215

Post by sofixa »

timr wrote: post #189
sofixa wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That it doesn't work. Sweden had to go back on it, and in many countries trying to do (1) ended up with hospitals full - like France. Everything was done to avoid a third lockdown this spring, but hospitals are at 150% capacity and here we are again. Are you aware of some magic trick that negates that?

Sweden did not "go back on it". They remain with significantly lighter restrictions than ~all of continental Europe: https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/the-public-health-agency... As far as I can tell, their most stringent restrictions are limits on group gatherings to 8, and closing bars at 8pm: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-30/swedish-h... Contrast to France, Italy, the UK, Belgium, etc., where p…

And Sweden has the worst infection and death rates per capita compared to all of Scandinavia:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1113834/cumulative-coron...

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/14034948209802...

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/sweden

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#216

Post by marvin »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #153
marvin wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Norway has ~10 deaths from Covid in the But only a small minority of the So it's a pretty safe assumption at this point that AZ is a bad option for younger age groups in countries with similar numbers, assuming that other vaccines will soon be available (they will)

Sure, but at the same time 3 is too small a number to have any confidence in that expectation. Looking at the rates from other countries where AZ has been deployed more heavily, it seems like Norway mostly had bad luck, and the rate is fairly small. Though as you say for the younger population the risks with covid are also small and the choice ultimately depends on the infection rate in the country. An interesting qu…

Northern Europe's greater observed incidence of this side effect is obviously one of the deciding factors of Denmark's decision. It could be a statistical anomaly, but concluding is premature at this point, especially when comparing with globally-reported AstraZeneca-related blood clots.

Even at half the incidence of deaths reported in Norway, which would be on the order of 1:100,000, it puts the risk of a 25-year old dying from the vaccine at ~5 times the risk of dying of a Covid infection. At one tenth incidence, it's an even bet. That seems unlikely.

This seems like a pretty obvious decision to me, when looking at the Covid incidence in these countries. Given that alternative vaccines are available. I'm surprised at the level of controversy, honestly. Given the presumed science-based background for the topic. Just use one of the others.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#217

Post by frafra »

hef19898 wrote: post #200
frafra wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Best effort" has a specific meaning in a contract, which is different from everyday use; this is why AZ could still be found in violation of the contract. This does not change the fact they have been unable to deliver by a huge margin and informed the UE with a short notice. A company that just avoid commenting on issues your product could have or misinformation regarding it does not seem a company that cares about…

I wrote drafts and analyzed procurement contracts for smaller volumes and less critical parts before. Of course with legal support. And all these contracts included initial delivery schedules (as an annex), delivery SLAs and penalties. And they were all considerably longer than the AZ contractthat was published. Fun fact, they didn't sacrifice 5 pages to talk about the order form. The AZ contract has none of that. Ul…

Good :) So you know what the contract and "best effort" mean and the kind of forces driving both parties. "customer is already ruined": that is why they would probably EU will not go to a court but it just ordered 50 M vaccines from Pfizer, while rumours of the EU not renewing the contract with AZ are getting stronger (some EU/EEA countries have plans to move forward without it).

I just see a bad behaviour and PR from AZ. That and having a CEO that says that UK got it first because of the "best effort" clause when both UK and EU contracts have does not seem very professional to me IMHO. I am not sure why that happened.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#218

Post by hvac »

timr wrote: post #189
sofixa wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That it doesn't work. Sweden had to go back on it, and in many countries trying to do (1) ended up with hospitals full - like France. Everything was done to avoid a third lockdown this spring, but hospitals are at 150% capacity and here we are again. Are you aware of some magic trick that negates that?

Sweden did not "go back on it". They remain with significantly lighter restrictions than ~all of continental Europe: https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/the-public-health-agency... As far as I can tell, their most stringent restrictions are limits on group gatherings to 8, and closing bars at 8pm: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-30/swedish-h... Contrast to France, Italy, the UK, Belgium, etc., where p…

My understanding is that these restrictions were only imposed in December of last year (and are in force until at least 30 June), so I would tend to agree with the parent that they definitely changed directions.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#219

Post by notatoad »

alkonaut wrote: post #3

Not giving it to 65+ people seems overly cautious. There are zero cases in that group and even just a small delay will mean many dead. This is trading a potential unlikely side effect for a large number of severe Covid cases in high risk groups. Edit: yes I'm aware they have only a dozen or so dead per week but that also translates to hundreds of severe cases, missed elective surgeries, etc. For what would most likel…

Here in Canada the AZ vaccine was never approved for use in people 65+, and it had nothing to do with the blood clotting issues. The blood clots only seem to affect under-50 people, but it seems like there might be other reasons to avoid giving it to the elderly

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#220

Post by internetslave »

schattschneider wrote: post #73
londons_explore wrote: post #53

This decision seems illogical to many commenters here, but I assume the decision was made by professionals with all the data in front of them. Which then raises the question, why did these professionals make a decision so different than the "obvious" opinion here?

People on this platform, I assume, are familiar with the scientific consensus on these topics and generally side with the science. But one has to understand, that these decisions are not made directly by scientists but by politicians who have scientific advisors. And as politicians, they will factor in a lot more than just the hard science on a topic, which can result in seemingly unscientific decisions that go again…

The “Science” is used as a religion these days.
Post reply on HN