Jump to content

Astrazeneca covid vaccine clotting anomaly


Recommended Posts

Quote

 

there had been 15 events of deep vein thrombosis and 22 events of pulmonary embolism reported among those vaccinated.

“This is much lower than would be expected to occur naturally in a general population of this size and is similar across other licensed COVID-19 vaccines,” AstraZeneca said.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/16/astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-doctors-react-as-eu-countries-suspend-shot.html

This is out of 17 million people

DVT is normally about 1 in 1000 per year

https://www.stoptheclot.org/the_basics/how_common_dvt/

Seems like this is likely the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, swansont said:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/16/astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-doctors-react-as-eu-countries-suspend-shot.html

This is out of 17 million people

DVT is normally about 1 in 1000 per year

https://www.stoptheclot.org/the_basics/how_common_dvt/

Seems like this is likely the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy

Yeah, that was what I've read, but surely the countries experts that are advising suspending it are aware of this as well... or is it more likely higher-ups in government over-riding their experts advice? More of a political thing based on fear without substantive statistical evidence, say. This feels a bit like the vaccine-causes-autism fiasco.

Edited by StringJunky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Danijel Gorupec said:

Does the coincidence happen with pfizer too?

Apparently

33 minutes ago, swansont said:

This is much lower than would be expected to occur naturally in a general population of this size and is similar across other licensed COVID-19 vaccines,”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Danijel Gorupec said:

Does the coincidence happen with pfizer too?

The coincidence of people taking the vaccine having a LOWER rate of blood clots than in the general population, you mean?

x-posted with John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dimreepr said:

I think it's more political than factual, although I'm struggling to find a reason.

I’ve heard it suggested that it’s payback for Brexit, but that struck me as conspiratorial 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reaching the sufficient number of vaccinated may be a difficult ask so it is important to not alienate those who are hesitant to take the vaccine for any real or imagined reason at all.

These people have to be accommodated as much as possible (I appreciate some lives may be lost as a result but that is hopefully short term) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Danijel Gorupec said:

I don't think it is a payback for Brexit :)... I don't think Europeans even know from where AstraZeneca is... I guess it might more likely be because Merkel refused AstraZeneca vaccine.

Why has she refused it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, geordief said:

Reaching the sufficient number of vaccinated may be a difficult ask so it is important to not alienate those who are hesitant to take the vaccine for any real or imagined reason at all.

These people have to be accommodated as much as possible (I appreciate some lives may be lost as a result but that is hopefully short term) 

It's only a difficult ask because some people think they're freedom to kill other's, is an inalienable right...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Why has she refused it?

Who knows (But If you love conspiracy theories, here is a pet of mine :) -> AstraZeneca promised vaccine shots to Germany, and Merkel promised this to German people... then AstraZeneca sold vaccines elsewhere... Merkel waited to slap them back and the opportunity came quickly .)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I think it's more political than factual, although I'm struggling to find a reason.

Politics is perception. If people think the vaccine caused it, an emotional response, a whole lot of them won’t be swayed by statistics and statements. So halting the rollout looks like protecting people. 

And as gordief notes, you don’t want people to have an excuse to not get vaccinated. A delay to “assess” things might be the assurance some people need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, swansont said:

Politics is perception. If people think the vaccine caused it, an emotional response, a whole lot of them won’t be swayed by statistics and statements. So halting the rollout looks like protecting people. 

And as gordief notes, you don’t want people to have an excuse to not get vaccinated. A delay to “assess” things might be the assurance some people need.

Indeed, but some people think they're freedom to kill other's, is an inalienable right; Antivaxers may as well have a gun in their hand, while they say "sorry, it just went off, but don't take my gun"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed, but some people think they're freedom to kill other's, is an inalienable right; Antivaxers may as well have a gun in their hand, while they say "sorry, it just went off, but don't take my gun"...

But you’re not reaching them in any event. This would be about reassuring people who are undecided on whether to get vaccinated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, swansont said:

But you’re not reaching them in any event. This would be about reassuring people who are undecided on whether to get vaccinated

Good point, but the counter arguement is, it dissuades other's; at some point the balance favours the brave politician...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This BBC article is relevant: AstraZeneca vaccine: EU regulator 'firmly convinced' benefits outweigh risks

The article notes that "The EU's medicines regulator has said it remains "firmly convinced" that the benefits of the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid-19 jab outweigh the risks.

It reiterated that there was "no indication" the vaccine causes blood clots, after several leading EU states paused their rollouts.

European Medicines Agency (EMA) head Emer Cooke said the body stood by its decision to approve the vaccine."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

One good point to be discussed here is how long have other significantly successful vaccines taken to be  "developed"  before being rolled out onto the public  ??  ??

No. The relevant point is, in terms of subjects tested and protcols followed, do the Covid vaccines compare favourably with other successful vaccines. I am unaware of any other vaccine development that benefited from the intensity of manpower, money and effort. Do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Area54 said:

No. The relevant point is, in terms of subjects tested and protcols followed, do the Covid vaccines compare favourably with other successful vaccines. I am unaware of any other vaccine development that benefited from the intensity of manpower, money and effort. Do you?

You are belittling all the huge amounts of the intensity of manpower, money and effort that had been put into producing other VERY important vaccines.  

 

I still believe it is worth it comparing other vaccine developments' time-taking and this one's. It  tells  us  things  , , ... , , , . ,  ., . , ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

I still believe it is worth it comparing other vaccine developments' time-taking and this one's. It  tells  us  things  , , ... , , , . ,  ., . , ..

Tells us what things???>>??__>%%^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

You are belittling all the huge amounts of the intensity of manpower, money and effort that had been put into producing other VERY important vaccines.  

No I am not. I suspect, based upon what I have read about Covid vaccine development and vaccine development in general, that the total number of man hours, the total number of test subjects and the total amount of money spent is similar for both. What differs is the the shorter time frame into which that effort was compressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Area54 said:

No I am not. I suspect, based upon what I have read about Covid vaccine development and vaccine development in general, that the total number of man hours, the total number of test subjects and the total amount of money spent is similar for both. What differs is the the shorter time frame into which that effort was compressed.

"The most effort in the shortest time IN HISTORY!!!" ...as Mr Trump might say.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.