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

51–60 of 344 posts

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#51

Post by drdec »

da_chicken wrote: post #33
refurb wrote: post #22

That’s seems like a bit draconian. There is no “safe drug”, “unsafe drug”. It’s a continuum and it’s balanced by the benefit. I find it hard to believe there isn’t a subgroup where the benefit of the vaccine doesn’t outweigh the risk.

There certainly is, but there's also other vaccines which don't exhibit this problem. Why should we administer AstraZenica or J&J when Moderna and Pfizer are available and don't have any correlated blood clot issues?

Because in the during the four week delay in vaccinations many more people will die from Covid-19 than would be affected by side effects from the AZ or JJ vaccines. The truly responsible thing to do is to continue to administer the AZ and JJ vaccines until the other vaccines are available.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#52

Post by refurb »

da_chicken wrote: post #33
refurb wrote: post #22

That’s seems like a bit draconian. There is no “safe drug”, “unsafe drug”. It’s a continuum and it’s balanced by the benefit. I find it hard to believe there isn’t a subgroup where the benefit of the vaccine doesn’t outweigh the risk.

There certainly is, but there's also other vaccines which don't exhibit this problem. Why should we administer AstraZenica or J&J when Moderna and Pfizer are available and don't have any correlated blood clot issues?

Supply. I would agree with you otherwise, but if we rely solely on Pfizer and Moderna it’s going to be well into 2022 before the Western countries get vaccinated. I read today Canada was supposed to take deliver of 10M AZ doses, which would vaccinate ~1/7th of their population. That’s not happening now.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#53

Post by londons_explore »

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?

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#54

Post by gmueckl »

hef19898 wrote: post #37
gms7777 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a real world example of a trolley problem. They're choosing to let a large group risk severe disease or death through inaction, rather than pulling the lever and have a small group be at risk due to their actions.

Slowely I'm getting the impression that a lot of decisions around AZ are politically driven. In Germany, the new recommendation is now to use Biontech for the second shot after AZ. In that recommendation, it is also stated that there are no studies nor data supporting that. Quite funny, because there is, to my understanding, a study taking place in the Uk for that. It is expected to be done by end of April. Someone h…

I guess that a decision needed to be made in a timely manner to provide guidelines for those who get their second dose before end of April?

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#55

Post by mustafa_pasi »

hef19898 wrote: post #37
gms7777 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a real world example of a trolley problem. They're choosing to let a large group risk severe disease or death through inaction, rather than pulling the lever and have a small group be at risk due to their actions.

Slowely I'm getting the impression that a lot of decisions around AZ are politically driven. In Germany, the new recommendation is now to use Biontech for the second shot after AZ. In that recommendation, it is also stated that there are no studies nor data supporting that. Quite funny, because there is, to my understanding, a study taking place in the Uk for that. It is expected to be done by end of April. Someone h…

Complete nonsense. Do you honestly think the Danish medical authority gives a shit about the squabbling between the UK and Germany over AZ? To the point where they would even condemn people to death and put their careers at risk? I do not find that plausible at all. What I found plausible is that you are too gullible and do not realize that your "impression" was fed to you by the media, who definitely have a political agenda, one way or the other.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#56

Post by s_dev »

0-_-0 wrote: post #13
mellosouls wrote: post #8

This seems like another overreaction that will be interpreted - rightly or wrongly - in the UK in political (Brexit) terms rather than medical or scientific (although they are clearly an important consideration). It's difficult to see how Denmark isn't failing its population with this decision.

The sad part is that AstraZeneca chose to sell the vaccine at cost, making no profit. This amount of negative publicity with no good reason will make them (and others) think twice about such a gesture.

^ This is misinformation.

AZ is a profit driven pharma manufacturing company. Oxford University developed the vaccine.

When Oxford licenced the vaccine to AZ -- it was at the institence of Bill Gates a major donor to Oxford and shareholder of AZ. The licence allows AZ to make a profit -- after the pandemic.

Before a certain 'letter to Oxford' from Gates, Oxford was planning on giving away the vaccine to anyone who wanted to manufacture it.

So I find it particularly disgusting that people are falling over themselves to associate AZ with altruism when the company isn't really even holding up it's bargain.

Rumours are that AZ is constantly trying to make a profit by shipping the vaccine produced in Europe outside Europe. It can make a profit this way because it only has to sell 'at cost' but the cost varies depending on the facility that produced it giving rise to a profit incentive.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#57

Post by solarkraft »

Alright! Who will they sell their remaining doses to?

The numbers (77% of vaccinations were with the BioNTech vaccine) suggest that they are doing just fine with the much more expensive but less controversial option.

Which is cool, but some countries are just looking for raw vaccine for now, no matter which one it is.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#58

Post by throwaway4good »

fighterpilot wrote: post #6
ceejayoz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article says it’s a four week pushback and that 70%+ are already getting Pfizer.

Why not allocate most of the Pfizer to the young and give the AZ exclusively to the older people?

They used to give AZ to mostly younger people as the side effects where seen to be stronger than for the PFE.

A fear could be that when they start to give the PFE to younger people, they will see the same stuff as with AZ as it triggers the same immune response.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#59

Post by Tenoke »

vinni2 wrote: post #42
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…

Denmark as low number of cases and down to 7 day average of 2 deaths. Assuming they have lockdown measures in place they aren’t risking much from dropping AstraZeneca.

Exrended lock down measures aren't without costs either.

Re: Denmark to permanently cease using AstraZeneca vaccine

#60

Post by croon »

da_chicken wrote: post #33
refurb wrote: post #22

That’s seems like a bit draconian. There is no “safe drug”, “unsafe drug”. It’s a continuum and it’s balanced by the benefit. I find it hard to believe there isn’t a subgroup where the benefit of the vaccine doesn’t outweigh the risk.

There certainly is, but there's also other vaccines which don't exhibit this problem. Why should we administer AstraZenica or J&J when Moderna and Pfizer are available and don't have any correlated blood clot issues?

Because people are waiting for vaccines and getting the disease instead?

There exists no other vaccines until they are in a person's arm. AZ shots are currently available in X quantity for people. The others are not.

Post reply on HN