What's new

Health authorities reviewing AstraZeneca vaccine side effects after blood clot concerns

Germans have higher standards of quality!


Maybe they do, maybe they dont. But as a country they have the right to decide what they want. If they approve AZ again that is also their right
I cannot get why so many people are angry at how dare 22 countries suspend AZ to review the supposed blood clot issue
 
Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis is the concern in Europe about AstraZeneca vaccine. Most of this thrombosis are in young women under 50 years and many are on OCP’s. May be women taking contraceptives can delay it till more data is available.
 
Quite clearly its politicaly motivated - No doctor or scienctist has spoken out against it, there no are medical reports - all this is rubbish coming from ministers and politians in the europe.
 
Here is the list of countries that have suspended AZ :

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-clotting-concerns?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Let's just call this what it is - retaliation from the EU. Jealously that UK has managed to vaccinated a greater number the population while Macron awaits instructions from his Rothchilds masters.

This entire facade is design by Nazi EU to hurt the UK.

Not the EU. Their medical regulator says it is fine. Some individual governments have suspended its use.

Doesn’t hurt the UK. AZ is an American firm. Helps us actually. More AZ vaccines for the British.
 
I cannot get why so many people are angry at how dare 22 countries suspend AZ to review the supposed blood clot issue

Because they are killing their own people by not rolling out the vaccine.
 
If blood clot formation is the only problem then it can be fixed easily. All that the patient has to do is to take 500mg of Aspirin every week for a month or two, following the vaccination. Of course, this should be avoided if the patient has any internal bleeding or hemorrhage. [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION], what do you think?

There is not enough data to jump to any conclusions. The problem is that the anti-vaccine community will latch onto anything that gives them the opportunity to criticize the vaccine and exaggerate its side-effects.

I know consultants in the UK and they agree that the issue is overblown and there is no evidence whatsoever to establish the link. Moreover, even if there is, it is a more manageable situation than getting COVID.

This is going to happen in Pakistan as well as vaccinations are being rolled out now for the general public (65 and above). My grandmother (87) and my father (68) received their first shots yesterday.

As more and more elderly are vaccinated, some of them will die soon after getting the vaccine and you can bet that people will blame the vaccine.
 
Like I said before - lying intubated in an ICU bed with strangers around you - waiting to die seems a better idea for some than reducing chances of getting a severe infection.

To each their own but Darwin's theory of natural selection seems to be playing out well in that case.
 
UK clot review confirms safety of AstraZeneca vaccine

There is no evidence the AstraZeneca Covid vaccine causes blood clots, the UK's medicines regulator says after a "thorough and careful review".

The MHRA says people can have confidence in the vaccine's benefits and should get immunised when invited, despite some countries suspending use.

But anyone with a headache lasting more than four days after vaccination should seek medical advice, as a precaution.

The same advice applies if someone develops unusual bruising, it says.

That is because the MHRA has received a very small number of reports of an extremely rare form of blood clot occurring in the brain.

It is this type of clot that triggered some European countries to pause rollout of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.

The five UK cases of cerebral sinus vein thrombosis (CSVT), among 11 million people who have received the vaccine, occurred in men aged between 19 and 59. One of the cases was fatal.

CSVT can occur naturally and no link to the vaccine has been established. The patients also had low blood platelet counts - cells involved with clotting.

Dr June Raine, chief executive of the MHRA, said they would closely monitor the situation and people should have the vaccine when it is their turn.

She said: "We continually monitor safety during use of all vaccines to protect the public, and to ensure the benefits continue to outweigh the risks."

Prof Sir Munir Pirmohamed, chair of the Commission on Human Medicines, said the gains from getting vaccinated were clear.

"Given the extremely rare rate of occurrence of these events, the benefits of the AstraZeneca vaccine, with the latest data suggesting an 80% reduction in hospitalisation and death from Covid disease, far outweigh any possible risks of the vaccine in the risk groups currently targeted in the UK," he said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-56447367
 
U.S. plans to send 4 million doses of AstraZeneca vaccine to Mexico, Canada - official

The United States plans to send roughly 4 million doses of AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine that it is not using to Mexico and Canada in loan deals with the two countries, an administration official told Reuters on Thursday.

Mexico will receive 2.5 million does of the vaccine and Canada will receive 1.5 million doses, the official said.

"This virus has no borders," the official told Reuters on condition of anonymity. "We only put the virus behind us if we're helping our global partners."

The Biden administration has come under pressure from allies worldwide to share vaccine, particularly from AstraZeneca, which is authorized for use in other countries but not yet in the United States.

AstraZeneca has millions of doses made in a U.S. facility, and has said that it would have 30 million shots ready at the beginning of April.

The deal to share the vaccine, which is still being finalized, does not affect President Joe Biden's plans to have vaccine available for all adults in the United States by the end of May, the official said. The deal is likely to be announced publicly in the coming days.

Two officials said the vaccine would be delivered in "short order" once the deal was completed, but they declined to give a more specific timetable.

The "releasable" vaccines are ready to be used once they arrive. Under the deal, the United States will share doses with Mexico and Canada now with the understanding that they will pay the United States back with doses in return. The official said that would take place later this year.

https://www.reuters.com/world/ameri...astrazeneca-vaccine-mexico-canada-2021-03-18/
 
Following another review, European Medicines Agency has again confirmed that it is safe.

This is an open-and-shut case.
 
Following another review, European Medicines Agency has again confirmed that it is safe.

This is an open-and-shut case.


Well the Europeans should really be ashamed of themselves for politicising the vaccine and causing massive doubts and confusion around the world of a safe vaccine in the general population ,its diabolical behaviour astrazenca should take them to court .
 
Well the Europeans should really be ashamed of themselves for politicising the vaccine and causing massive doubts and confusion around the world of a safe vaccine in the general population ,its diabolical behaviour astrazenca should take them to court .

You cannot force anyone to buy your product. Their money, their choice.

Also its highly doubtful that the EU countries will be putting the lives of their citizens at risk by wilfully rejecting a valid vaccine.

Lastly AZ is Anglo-Swedish and atleast Sweden is still a member of EU.
 
I mean you had to be a complete tool to even belive in there lies when science didnt back it up and was nonsense coming out of politians mouths.
 
Like I said before - lying intubated in an ICU bed with strangers around you - waiting to die seems a better idea for some than reducing chances of getting a severe infection.

To each their own but Darwin's theory of natural selection seems to be playing out well in that case.

I mean you had to be a complete tool to even belive in there lies when science didnt back it up and was nonsense coming out of politians mouths.

Pretty much spot on here.
 
U.S. plans to send 4 million doses of AstraZeneca vaccine to Mexico, Canada - official

The United States plans to send roughly 4 million doses of AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine that it is not using to Mexico and Canada in loan deals with the two countries, an administration official told Reuters on Thursday.

Mexico will receive 2.5 million does of the vaccine and Canada will receive 1.5 million doses, the official said.

"This virus has no borders," the official told Reuters on condition of anonymity. "We only put the virus behind us if we're helping our global partners."

The Biden administration has come under pressure from allies worldwide to share vaccine, particularly from AstraZeneca, which is authorized for use in other countries but not yet in the United States.

AstraZeneca has millions of doses made in a U.S. facility, and has said that it would have 30 million shots ready at the beginning of April.

The deal to share the vaccine, which is still being finalized, does not affect President Joe Biden's plans to have vaccine available for all adults in the United States by the end of May, the official said. The deal is likely to be announced publicly in the coming days.

Two officials said the vaccine would be delivered in "short order" once the deal was completed, but they declined to give a more specific timetable.

The "releasable" vaccines are ready to be used once they arrive. Under the deal, the United States will share doses with Mexico and Canada now with the understanding that they will pay the United States back with doses in return. The official said that would take place later this year.

https://www.reuters.com/world/ameri...astrazeneca-vaccine-mexico-canada-2021-03-18/

Great to see US allowing export.
 
---------------

Politics, Not Science, May Be Behind Suspensions Of AstraZeneca’s Covid Vaccine

The European Medicine Agency’s (EMA) safety committee cautions, however, that none of those deaths were actually linked to the vaccine. The committee further noted that several people who got blood clots were middle aged, when such clots are more common, and that blood clots aren’t particularly rare in the general population. AstraZeneca noted in a statement that the number of blood clots are actually “much lower than would be expected to occur naturally in a general population of this size.”

Davey Smith, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California San Diego, is baffled by governments’ decisions to suspend use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine. “I’ve seen no data to see why they are stopping,” he says, adding, “People are going to get blood clots, because they would have gotten them with or without the vaccine.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/leahro...f-astrazenecas-covid-vaccine/?sh=5224421d2236


--------------------------

If you are giving millions of people vaccines, many will get sick for all different reasons with or without vaccines. Politicians shouldn't be allowed to drive these decisions. It should be left to drug regulators.
 
Following another review, European Medicines Agency has again confirmed that it is safe.

This is an open-and-shut case.

Just craven decision making but some European states which will have resulted in the excess deaths of thousands of their citizens.

Irrational, stupid and irresponsible.
 
My parents took it couple of days back. My dad had a bypass surgery. They had flu like symptoms for few hours. After that they seems to be absolutely fine.
 
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Eeot1t5FL7I" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Its safe to say India is well placed to gain tremendous goodwill in front of the world and also make trillions in the coming years due to the Covaccine.
 
---------------

Politics, Not Science, May Be Behind Suspensions Of AstraZeneca’s Covid Vaccine

The European Medicine Agency’s (EMA) safety committee cautions, however, that none of those deaths were actually linked to the vaccine. The committee further noted that several people who got blood clots were middle aged, when such clots are more common, and that blood clots aren’t particularly rare in the general population. AstraZeneca noted in a statement that the number of blood clots are actually “much lower than would be expected to occur naturally in a general population of this size.”

Davey Smith, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California San Diego, is baffled by governments’ decisions to suspend use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine. “I’ve seen no data to see why they are stopping,” he says, adding, “People are going to get blood clots, because they would have gotten them with or without the vaccine.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/leahro...f-astrazenecas-covid-vaccine/?sh=5224421d2236


--------------------------

If you are giving millions of people vaccines, many will get sick for all different reasons with or without vaccines. Politicians shouldn't be allowed to drive these decisions. It should be left to drug regulators.

Oh no, our resident anti-vaxxers are not going to like this!
 
---------------

Politics, Not Science, May Be Behind Suspensions Of AstraZeneca’s Covid Vaccine

The European Medicine Agency’s (EMA) safety committee cautions, however, that none of those deaths were actually linked to the vaccine. The committee further noted that several people who got blood clots were middle aged, when such clots are more common, and that blood clots aren’t particularly rare in the general population. AstraZeneca noted in a statement that the number of blood clots are actually “much lower than would be expected to occur naturally in a general population of this size.”

Davey Smith, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California San Diego, is baffled by governments’ decisions to suspend use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine. “I’ve seen no data to see why they are stopping,” he says, adding, “People are going to get blood clots, because they would have gotten them with or without the vaccine.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/leahro...f-astrazenecas-covid-vaccine/?sh=5224421d2236


--------------------------

If you are giving millions of people vaccines, many will get sick for all different reasons with or without vaccines. Politicians shouldn't be allowed to drive these decisions. It should be left to drug regulators.

It looks like the Nazis are back in europe
 
Norwegian experts say deadly blood clots were caused by the AstraZeneca covid vaccine
“Our theory that this is a powerful immune response most likely triggered by the vaccine, has been confirmed”, says professor and chief physician Pål Andre Holme. Three Norwegian health workers under the age of 50 have been hospitalized. One is dead.

“The reason for the condition of our patients has been found”, chief physician and professor Pål Andre Holme announced to Norwegian national newspaper VG today.

Holme led the work to find out why three health workers under the age of 50 were hospitalized with serious blood clots and low levels of blood platelets after having taken the AstraZeneca Covid vaccine. One of the health workers died on Monday.

The experts have worked on a theory that it was in fact the vaccine which triggered and unexpected and powerful immune response - a theory they now believe they have confirmed.

“Our theory that this is a powerful immune response which most likely was caused by the vaccine has been found. In collaboration with experts in the field from the University Hospital of North Norway HF, we have found specific antibodies against blood platelets that can cause these reactions, and which we know from other fields of medicine, but then with medical drugs as the cause of the reaction”, the chief physician explains to VG.

https://sciencenorway.no/covid19/no...used-by-the-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine/1830510

This is the conclusion from yesterdays report.

Norway has confirmed the Oxford vaccine caused blot clots.

The EU did not take their report into account.

Hope those pushing others to take this vaccine dont form clots in their brain after taking this vaccine. Its rare but its defo there.
 
I'm afraid you seem to have no credible response. You are right that several nations paused their vaccine roll out BUT you are yet to answer the fundamental question here: were the reasons given for pausing the roll out credible?

The reasons were purported high incidences of blood clots. As has now been said a million times in this thread alone, there isn't in fact a high incidence of blood clots. So the reasons given by these nations are not scientifically sound or credible.

Just because certain nations take certain actions, and others then jump on the bandwagon, doesn't make those nations right. So, instead of saying "all these nations have stopped the vaccine and therefore there is a problem with the vaccine", please enlighten us all as to what specifically is wrong with the vaccine.

You seem to be predicting without knowing the conclusions of the investigation. Norway has now confirmed blood clots were due to the vaccine. But people like yourself will prob remain in denail until CNN or BBC tell you otherwise.

https://sciencenorway.no/covid19/no...used-by-the-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine/1830510
[MENTION=151127]Manunited18[/MENTION] Read this before you decide.
 
You seem to be predicting without knowing the conclusions of the investigation. Norway has now confirmed blood clots were due to the vaccine. But people like yourself will prob remain in denail until CNN or BBC tell you otherwise.

https://sciencenorway.no/covid19/no...used-by-the-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine/1830510

[MENTION=151127]Manunited18[/MENTION] Read this before you decide.

Thanks for the information, Pfizer or Moderna for me, what about you? Are you declining all vaccines.
 
Thanks for the information, Pfizer or Moderna for me, what about you? Are you declining all vaccines.

If I was elderly, weak and not fit, Id consider but I dont even get a cold. My immune system is stong. NHS actually sent me an immunity test, I think im immune so need.
 
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-who-astrazeneca/keep-using-astrazeneca-vaccine-who-urges-world-idUSKBN2BB1UL

The World Health Organization (WHO) exhorted the world to keep administering AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 shots on Friday, adding its endorsement to that of European and British regulators after concerns over blood clotting.

“We urge countries to continue using this important COVID-19 vaccine,” WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told a news conference in Geneva.

He was speaking after the global health body’s vaccine safety panel said available data about the AstraZeneca shot did not point to any overall increase in clotting conditions.

European and British regulators also said this week that the benefits of AstraZeneca’s shot outweighed the risks, prompting various nations to lift their suspensions.

“The AstraZeneca vaccine is especially important because it accounts for more than 90% of the vaccines being distributed through COVAX,” Tedros added, referring to a WHO-led global vaccine-sharing scheme.

“There is no question. COVID-19 is a deadly disease, and the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine can prevent it. It’s also important to remember that COVID-19 itself can cause blood clots and low platelets.”

The WHO’s global advisory committee on vaccine safety said in a statement that the AstraZeneca vaccine had a “positive benefit-risk profile” and “tremendous potential” to prevent infections and reduce deaths.

The WHO panel of 12 independent experts, who met virtually on Tuesday and on Thursday, reviewed safety data from Europe, the United Kingdom, India, and WHO’s global database.

“While very rare and unique thromboembolic events in combination with thrombocytopenia, such as cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), have also been reported following vaccination with the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine in Europe, it is not certain that they have been caused by vaccination,” it said.
 
You seem to be predicting without knowing the conclusions of the investigation. Norway has now confirmed blood clots were due to the vaccine. But people like yourself will prob remain in denail until CNN or BBC tell you otherwise.

https://sciencenorway.no/covid19/no...used-by-the-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine/1830510

[MENTION=151127]Manunited18[/MENTION] Read this before you decide.

Maybe you should read the article in its entirety first? The Norwegian Medicine Agency said that they were waiting for the EMA report, and weren't taking what just this one hospital said. And guess what? The EMA said it the AZ vaccine is not linked to the overall risk of bloodclots. Once again, you fail to read the very article you post. Laughable.
 
If I was elderly, weak and not fit, Id consider but I dont even get a cold. My immune system is stong. NHS actually sent me an immunity test, I think im immune so need.

'My immune system is strong.'

That is just an assertion.

'I think im immune so need'

Assertion again.

This shows your selfishness. There are people who cannot have vaccines, such as immuno-compromised people, and you not having the vaccine is putting them at risk.
 
If I was elderly, weak and not fit, Id consider but I dont even get a cold. My immune system is stong. NHS actually sent me an immunity test, I think im immune so need.

Just out of curiosity.

How do you think you’ve become immune?
 
Maybe you should read the article in its entirety first? The Norwegian Medicine Agency said that they were waiting for the EMA report, and weren't taking what just this one hospital said. And guess what? The EMA said it the AZ vaccine is not linked to the overall risk of bloodclots. Once again, you fail to read the very article you post. Laughable.

You failed to do your own research into this. You'd get a grade D in college.

Norway passed the report onto the EMA and were expecting the EMA to look into it but they didnt. EMA released a report saying the Vaccine doesnt cause blood clots without looking into this research by Norway.

Its conclusive Oxford vaccine has caused blood clots.
 
You failed to do your own research into this. You'd get a grade D in college.

Norway passed the report onto the EMA and were expecting the EMA to look into it but they didnt. EMA released a report saying the Vaccine doesnt cause blood clots without looking into this research by Norway.

Its conclusive Oxford vaccine has caused blood clots.

Conclusive?
 
Norway Denmark Sweden Finland all the Nordic countries have still suspended the astrazeneca vaccine.

France on the other hand is making a complete comedy show over the vaccine , they have now said young people under 55 should not have the astrazeneca. Whilst a month prior they were saying its dangerous for the over 65s .
 
According to the Norway team, they cannot see any other reason, therefore in their view it's conclusive after their very careful investigation.

The issue is why the EMA didnt take their report into consideration.

Do you know the definition of conclusive?
 
You failed to do your own research into this. You'd get a grade D in college.

Norway passed the report onto the EMA and were expecting the EMA to look into it but they didnt. EMA released a report saying the Vaccine doesnt cause blood clots without looking into this research by Norway.

Its conclusive Oxford vaccine has caused blood clots.

According to the Norway team, they cannot see any other reason, therefore in their view it's conclusive after their very careful investigation.

The issue is why the EMA didnt take their report into consideration.

I'll repeat what the other poster said- conclusive? Did they demonstrate a statistically significant link between the vaccine and blood clots? You don't even know what a p-value is, don't talk to me about science. Again, you fail to show any credentials or competency in science.

And now you're saying it's a conspiracy, of course. You're just like the far right, any academic source which shows that you're wrong is a lie.

The EMA concluded that the vaccine isn't associated with an increased risk of clotting. They said that there could be very rare cases of clotting, but that covid also results in clotting, and that the benefits far outweigh the risks. Out of 20 million people, 7 have been reported to have blood clots in several vessels, and 18 have had other more serious clotting problems. Considering you are very much in the 'only x% of people die from covid', you must also use that logic for this. But the difference is, covid is contagious, and vaccine side effects aren't.

Once again the science has owned you, but you're not man enough to admit you're wrong. You also walked away with your tail between your legs when someone asked you about you supposed strong immune system. What a tough guy.
 
Oh, and to add to my post above, the EMA report even covered the issue which the Norwegian doctors mentioned. It was covered under the 7 and 18 out of 20 million figure in the EMA report. Once again, resident anti-science advocate [MENTION=43583]KingKhanWC[/MENTION] gets owned. He just doesn't learn. Also has not showed proof or a methodology to his 'strong immune system', more assertions without evidence. Such a champion of science denial!
 
Oh, and to add to my post above, the EMA report even covered the issue which the Norwegian doctors mentioned. It was covered under the 7 and 18 out of 20 million figure in the EMA report. Once again, resident anti-science advocate [MENTION=43583]KingKhanWC[/MENTION] gets owned. He just doesn't learn. Also has not showed proof or a methodology to his 'strong immune system', more assertions without evidence. Such a champion of science denial!

The Norway team has clearly said

"“We have the reason. Nothing but the vaccine can explain why these individuals had this immune response”, he states."

EMA did not take their report into consideration. It made its own conclusions.

You are so desperate to win an argument, you make yourself look rather silly. :))
 
The Norway team has clearly said

"“We have the reason. Nothing but the vaccine can explain why these individuals had this immune response”, he states."

EMA did not take their report into consideration. It made its own conclusions.

You are so desperate to win an argument, you make yourself look rather silly. :))

You have 1 instance. One instance vs a meta-analysis. You don't even know anything about the hierarchy of evidence.

The EMA covered the issue that the Norwegian team were on about, and it was a 7 or 18 out of 20 million chance. Even your obvious cherry pick goes against you. You are so dense it's unbelievable. Why do you take the Norwegian doctors on face value but then say the EMA made their own conclusions? You are so disingenuous it's unbelievable. You will cling onto anything you can to confirm your bias and it's embarrassing haha. Again, you don't know what conclusive means, you don't know what statistical significance is, you don't know what a p-value is, and you don't even know how the vaccine works. So how you can go against the EMA is beyond me.
 
You have 1 instance. One instance vs a meta-analysis. You don't even know anything about the hierarchy of evidence.

The EMA covered the issue that the Norwegian team were on about, and it was a 7 or 18 out of 20 million chance. Even your obvious cherry pick goes against you. You are so dense it's unbelievable. Why do you take the Norwegian doctors on face value but then say the EMA made their own conclusions? You are so disingenuous it's unbelievable. You will cling onto anything you can to confirm your bias and it's embarrassing haha. Again, you don't know what conclusive means, you don't know what statistical significance is, you don't know what a p-value is, and you don't even know how the vaccine works. So how you can go against the EMA is beyond me.

You clearly dont understand a simple point. lol.

EMA did not read the report , they merely covered the issue from their own persepective. Either they ignored the report or failed to read it.

You can either accept EMA findings or the Norwegian teams findings. Ill go with the Norway team, you go with EMA. People are free to choose either but you on here totally rubbishing expert investigation is pathetic and lame to say the least.
 
You clearly dont understand a simple point. lol.

EMA did not read the report , they merely covered the issue from their own persepective. Either they ignored the report or failed to read it.

You can either accept EMA findings or the Norwegian teams findings. Ill go with the Norway team, you go with EMA. People are free to choose either but you on here totally rubbishing expert investigation is pathetic and lame to say the least.

And why do you accept the Norway report? Because it confirms your bias. Why do I accept that EMA is more representative? Because it was a meta-analysis of many cases worldwide (over 20 million vaccine recipients) rather than a few isolated case studies in Norway. However, I don't out-right reject the Norwegian findings (even though they're just conjecture, data wasn't analysed), I found that the EMA correlates with the Norway report. Once again, you are so ignorant, it's laughable. You simply reject the EMA, who had a far larger sample size, because you don't like the conclusion. That is not science, but I didn't expect science from you anyway.
 
And why do you accept the Norway report? Because it confirms your bias. Why do I accept that EMA is more representative? Because it was a meta-analysis of many cases worldwide (over 20 million vaccine recipients) rather than a few isolated case studies in Norway. However, I don't out-right reject the Norwegian findings (even though they're just conjecture, data wasn't analysed), I found that the EMA correlates with the Norway report. Once again, you are so ignorant, it's laughable. You simply reject the EMA, who had a far larger sample size, because you don't like the conclusion. That is not science, but I didn't expect science from you anyway.

You are funny, desperate to win some sort of argument. :))

You know nothing of science, leave it up to the experts. Its idiotic to think the Norway experts didnt take into accounty anything the EMA did, they also know how many have taken the vaccines worldwide. The simple point is, which even a child could undrerstand is EMA didnt read the full conclusion of the Norway investigation, they released their statement before this.

You're are boring me now, as you have nothing more to offer.
 
You are funny, desperate to win some sort of argument. :))

You know nothing of science, leave it up to the experts. Its idiotic to think the Norway experts didnt take into accounty anything the EMA did, they also know how many have taken the vaccines worldwide. The simple point is, which even a child could undrerstand is EMA didnt read the full conclusion of the Norway investigation, they released their statement before this.

You're are boring me now, as you have nothing more to offer.

You're telling me I know nothing of science, when you just cherry picked the opinion of a doctor in one hospital, who was talking about a few case studies, over a meta-analysis of over 20 million cases? Wow. Again, you said it was conclusive, show me how it was conclusive. You are cherrypicking because you think the Norway doctor supports your findings. If you'd read the EMA report, they even said that the side effects the Norway doctor mentioned are at a rate of around 7 and 18 out of 20,000,000 respectively. It was independently found, even without taking into account the Norway report, as it came out after the EMA one. But you won't acknowledge that, you'll ignore it.

Again, you have no proof that there is conclusive evidence, you have no proof that there is a statistical significant, or even a causal link, and you don't have the knowledge of experimental statistics to do so. Again, the EMA report says that the side effects which the Norway report found may happen, but are very, very rare. If you want to go down the improbability route, you'll have to be consistent with the claims you've made previously about covid killing x% of people. You have to bite the bullet and say that the vaccine outweighs the negatives significantly (which the EMA said), because the side effects of vaccines aren't contagious but covid is. You are being dishonest and you're way out of your depth.

Also, your weaseling out of the baseless assertion you made about your immune system says a lot.
 
I posted a view not to disclose my medical history. Keep begging for answers.

A view with no rationale?

No one is asking for your medical history.

A simple explanation of the mechanism that you’ve achieved immunity.

Shouldn’t be difficult.
 
You're telling me I know nothing of science, when you just cherry picked the opinion of a doctor in one hospital, who was talking about a few case studies, over a meta-analysis of over 20 million cases? Wow. Again, you said it was conclusive, show me how it was conclusive. You are cherrypicking because you think the Norway doctor supports your findings. If you'd read the EMA report, they even said that the side effects the Norway doctor mentioned are at a rate of around 7 and 18 out of 20,000,000 respectively. It was independently found, even without taking into account the Norway report, as it came out after the EMA one. But you won't acknowledge that, you'll ignore it.

Again, you have no proof that there is conclusive evidence, you have no proof that there is a statistical significant, or even a causal link, and you don't have the knowledge of experimental statistics to do so. Again, the EMA report says that the side effects which the Norway report found may happen, but are very, very rare. If you want to go down the improbability route, you'll have to be consistent with the claims you've made previously about covid killing x% of people. You have to bite the bullet and say that the vaccine outweighs the negatives significantly (which the EMA said), because the side effects of vaccines aren't contagious but covid is. You are being dishonest and you're way out of your depth.

Also, your weaseling out of the baseless assertion you made about your immune system says a lot.

Its not one doctor from one hospital. Norway put together a team of experts. They concluded ""Nothing but the vaccine can explain why"". As far as they are concered its conclusive.

Take EMA or any other conclusion, your life is your life not important to me .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its not one doctor from one hospital. Norway put together a team of experts. They concluded ""Nothing but the vaccine can explain why"". As far as they are concered its conclusive.

Take EMA or any other conclusion, your life is your life not important to me .

A team of experts which didn't do a meta-analysis, and were referring to a few cases studies. If you can't see the generalisability issue there, then you're far too simple. Side effects happen, no one denies that, and the EMA report even mentioned the side effects of the Norway report being a possibility, which was independently verified. You are just too dumb to understand I'm afraid. 7 and 18 out of 20,000,000 is the number we're talking about here. And again, you made the claim that there is conclusive evidence but you haven't given any. You don't know what statistical significance is, nor do you know what a p-value is. You don't even know the first thing about statistical hypothesis testing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A team of experts which didn't do a meta-analysis, and were referring to a few cases studies. If you can't see the generalisability issue there, then you're far too simple. Side effects happen, no one denies that, and the EMA report even mentioned the side effects of the Norway report being a possibility, which was independently verified. You are just too dumb to understand I'm afraid. 7 and 18 out of 20,000,000 is the number we're talking about here. And again, you made the claim that there is conclusive evidence but you haven't given any. You don't know what statistical significance is, nor do you know what a p-value is. You don't even know the first thing about statistical hypothesis testing.

Now you realise it's more than one man :)) You've not read their report, so stop making up lies again. lol

According to the expert team, its conclusive as per their quotes. Yet you expect me to believe you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now you realise it's more than one man :)) You've not read their report, so stop making up lies again. lol

According to the expert team, its conclusive as per their quotes. Yet you expect me to believe you.

I did read it, I said 'doctor' instead of 'doctors', wow, debunked. You still have no evidence that there is a conclusive link between them. The doctors said 'it couldn't be anything else', but that was for the specific side effect that the EMA paper even said could be a side effect. That doesn't mean there's a causal link, it doesn't mean it's statistically significant, as you suggested.

Again, you can't determine a causal link, the EMA report (which you haven't read and don't understand) acknowledges those side effects as being a possibility, but then you cherry pick one case which seemingly agrees with you without looking at the meta-analysis of over 20 million cases?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quite pathetic that I must continue to educate this person, but it's good practice for when I'm a TA next year.

https://sciencenorway.no/covid19-va...vaccine-heres-what-theyre-looking-for/1829070

Here it states that it's merely a hypothesis, and that no causal link can be found.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/scient...ing-linked-to-astrazeneca-vaccine-11616169108

Here it says that very few people will develop the side effects which you are hoping, praying, begging to be widespread to win this argument, is very, very uncommon, which is again in-line with the EMA.

Again, the EMA itself even said the side effects are a possibility, but are very rare. The Norway doctors are saying they conjecture that they have a way to treat it. Your assertion of it being conclusive was wrong. It is not statistically significant and the Norway people haven't even ran any data analysis, so it can't be demonstrated to be statistically significant, so it can't be conclusive. You have lost, science denier, I suggest you don't reply to this anymore to save you from further embarrassment.
 
I did read it, I said 'doctor' instead of 'doctors', wow, debunked. You still have no evidence that there is a conclusive link between them. The doctors said 'it couldn't be anything else', but that was for the specific side effect that the EMA paper even said could be a side effect. That doesn't mean there's a causal link, it doesn't mean it's statistically significant, as you suggested.

Again, you can't determine a causal link, the EMA report (which you haven't read and don't understand) acknowledges those side effects as being a possibility, but then you cherry pick one case which seemingly agrees with you without looking at the meta-analysis of over 20 million cases?



I think you're in college. Dont try to wriggle out of it now, you clearly wrote ONE doctor from one hospital. A 10 year old could understand it was a team of experts of the highest experience. The team submitted their extensive report and concluded its the vaccine which caused blood clots and one person to die. Once again(have to repeat myself again lol) the teams report wasnt taken into consideration by the EMA, something which you didnt think of. lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you're in college. Dont try to wriggle out of it now, you clearly wrote ONE doctor from one hospital. A 10 year old could understand it was a team of experts of the highest experience. The team submitted their extensive report and concluded its the vaccine which caused blood clots and one person to die. Once again(have to repeat myself again lol) the teams report wasnt taken into consideration by the EMA, something which you didnt think of. lol

I already told you that the EMA already said that the side effects which the Norway report mentioned are possible. They verified it independently, I think it's you that can't read. And that one doctor comment was about the quote that the one doctor made. I wasn't aware that's what you were referring to. Besides, thee semantic argument aside, I posted some links which defeat your argument. The very same articles say there is no conclusive evidence, or a causal relation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I already told you that the EMA already said that the side effects which the Norway report mentioned are possible. They verified it independently, I think it's you that can't read. And that one doctor comment was about the quote that the one doctor made. I wasn't aware that's what you were referring to. Besides, thee semantic argument aside, I posted some links which defeat your argument. The very same articles say there is no conclusive evidence, or a causal relation.

Again, the EMA did not read the report before coming to their conclusion. The Norway teams report is extensive and shows plenty of evidence to conclude it was the vaccine which caused death due to blood clots. You still dont understand this simple point lol.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, the EMA did not read the report before coming to their conclusion. The Norway teams report is extensive and shows plenty of evidence to conclude it was the vaccine which caused death due to blood clots. You still dont understand this simple point lol.

I said the EMA, independent of the Norway report, mentioned side effects which are consistent with the Norway report, and said that the chances were 7 and 18 in 20,000,000 respectively. You haven't read the Norway report, you're only quote mining what one of the doctors said. You haven't mentioned the links I sent above which say that there is no causal link, and that the chance is very, very low.

So in all, you were wrong about the evidence being conclusive, you were wrong about the EMA, and you cherry picked. Anything else to add? :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cool it down, guys. Don't get personal.

Aight chief, will do. Someone has a bad habit of mentioning my (lack of) religious views and family in every post I make, so perhaps that should be highlighted.
 
Took the AZ on Wednesday night. Headache and a bit of fatigue for a couple of days as my immune system geared up, but I feel right as rain now and considerably more confident.
 
So it seems you are far more likely to get hit by lightning than develop blood clots due to the vaccine. Why such a big deal about this? Nearly all vaccines have extremely rare side effects.
 
Denmark reports two cases of serious illness, including one death, after AstraZeneca shot

Denmark said on Saturday that one person had died and another fell seriously ill with blood clots and cerebral haemorrhage after receiving the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccination.

The two, both hospital staff members, had both received the AstraZeneca vaccine less than 14 days before getting ill, the authority that runs public hospitals in Copenhagen said.

The Danish Medicines Agency confirmed it had received two "serious reports", without giving further details. There were no details of when the hospital staff got ill.

Denmark, which halted using the AstraZeneca vaccine on March 11, was among more than a dozen countries that temporarily paused use of the vaccine after reports of cases of rare brain blood clots sent scientists and governments scrambling to determine any link.

Some countries including Germany and France this week reversed their decision to suspend use of the vaccine following an investigation into the reports of blood clots by the European Union's drug watchdog, which said on Thursday it is still convinced the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks.

Denmark - along with Sweden and Norway - said on Friday they needed more time to decide whether to use the vaccine.

"We prioritize reports of suspected serious side effects such as these and examine them thoroughly to assess whether there is a possible link to the vaccine," Tanja Erichsen, acting director of Pharmacovigilance at the Danish Medicines Agency, said in a tweet on Saturday.

"We are in the process of dealing with the two specific cases."

European Medicines Agency (EMA) director Emer Cooke said on Thursday the watchdog could not definitively rule out a link between blood clot incidents and the vaccine in its investigation into 30 cases of a rare blood clotting condition.

But she said the "clear" conclusion of the review was that the benefits in protecting people from the risk of death or hospitalisation outweighs the possible risks. The issue deserves further analysis, the EMA said.

AstraZeneca, which developed the shot with Oxford University, has said a review covering more than 17 million people who had received its shots in the EU and Britain had found no evidence of an increased risk of blood clots.

The company on Saturday declined to comment on the new cases in Denmark, but referred to a statement published on Thursday, in which its chief medical officer, Ann Taylor, said:

"Vaccine safety is paramount and we welcome the regulators' decisions which affirm the overwhelming benefit of our vaccine in stopping the pandemic. We trust that, after the regulators' careful decisions, vaccinations can once again resume across Europe."

https://www.reuters.com/business/he...blood-clots-after-astrazeneca-shot-2021-03-20
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I’ve just had my first AstraZeneca vaccine.<br><br>Get your jab when you’re asked to do so. It’s good for you, it’s good for your family and it’s a great thing for the whole country. <a href="https://t.co/pc5tnY9PGK">pic.twitter.com/pc5tnY9PGK</a></p>— Boris Johnson (@BorisJohnson) <a href="https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1372999248854315015?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 19, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

And this was covered in the EMA report, in rates of 18 out of 20,000,000. Side effects were never an issue, it was the issue of statistical significance, which you don't understand. It has been concluded that the benefits far outweigh the risks.

Is this the best you have? The article even says it's just conjecture for now, as the results haven't been reviewed yet. Whereas the EMA results have. Even if these results do get reviewed, the thrombosis mentioned was acknowledged as a potential side effect by the EMA. And it is easily overcome with certain medication, too. This is the best anti-vaxxers have... :))
 
So it seems you are far more likely to get hit by lightning than develop blood clots due to the vaccine. Why such a big deal about this? Nearly all vaccines have extremely rare side effects.

Seems to be a freedom / rights issue.

To me, it’s a civic responsibility issue.
 
Seems to be a freedom / rights issue.

To me, it’s a civic responsibility issue.

In that case, if people don't want the AZ vaccine then let them have another one (assuming they want to take a vaccine at all). No need to ban the vaccine.

In any case, glad that the ban was short lived.
 
And this was covered in the EMA report, in rates of 18 out of 20,000,000. Side effects were never an issue, it was the issue of statistical significance, which you don't understand. It has been concluded that the benefits far outweigh the risks.

Is this the best you have? The article even says it's just conjecture for now, as the results haven't been reviewed yet. Whereas the EMA results have. Even if these results do get reviewed, the thrombosis mentioned was acknowledged as a potential side effect by the EMA. And it is easily overcome with certain medication, too. This is the best anti-vaxxers have... :))

LOL. You are no expert, just some chap in college.

Im posting information , people have their own brain to determine if its useful or not.
 
Took the AZ on Wednesday night. Headache and a bit of fatigue for a couple of days as my immune system geared up, but I feel right as rain now and considerably more confident.

Get the 2nd dose in a few weeks, then you can walk around like a boss.

Like Matt Damon in Contagion. It'll be like 2019 all over again.
 
Get the 2nd dose in a few weeks, then you can walk around like a boss.

Like Matt Damon in Contagion. It'll be like 2019 all over again.

Well, I can still catch it and pass it on, but will have antibodies to take it out quickly so will be infective for a shorter period and most unlikely to require hospitalisation.

We will never be rid of this thing, but some semblance of normalcy will return by late English summer. It will become like a more dangerous version of the flu in public health terms. Oldies and vulnerable will get jabs every year and life will go on. We may have to show vaccine passports to travel internationally, get into big shows and sports events, and visit retirement homes.
 
My wife had her first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine yesterday morning. She is young, but clinically vulnerable, so the NHS invited her to a local GP surgery for the jab.

No side effects yesterday apart from a dull ache in her arm. Then she woke up at midnight feeling sick — she had a glass of water and the nausea went away. She also had a headache this morning, so she took some ibuprofen and that soon disappeared as well.

Very mild side effects so far on the whole, then. Thankfully her head is yet to explode. :)
 
LOL. You are no expert, just some chap in college.

Im posting information , people have their own brain to determine if its useful or not.

Of course I'm no expert, I'm saying what the experts are saying. You are posting examples of n < 10, whereas the EMA report is n >= 20,000,000. I also love how insecure me being a PhD student makes you. While I am not a scientist yet, merely a scientist-in-training, that is far closer than you will be to anything resembling a scientist.

And you, who has no idea what the scientific method is, what a hypothesis is, what causation is, or what conclusive means, said that people have to use their 'own brain to determine if its [sic] useful or not', when you just claimed I'm no expert (which is correct, I've only ever been saying what the experts who conducted the largest scale review of the issue have been saying), but now people can use their own brains even if they aren't experts? Interesting, cherry picking as usual.
 
My wife had her first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine yesterday morning. She is young, but clinically vulnerable, so the NHS invited her to a local GP surgery for the jab.

No side effects yesterday apart from a dull ache in her arm. Then she woke up at midnight feeling sick — she had a glass of water and the nausea went away. She also had a headache this morning, so she took some ibuprofen and that soon disappeared as well.

Very mild side effects so far on the whole, then. Thankfully her head is yet to explode. :)

She may feel fatigued for a day or 2.
 
My wife had her first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine yesterday morning. She is young, but clinically vulnerable, so the NHS invited her to a local GP surgery for the jab.

No side effects yesterday apart from a dull ache in her arm. Then she woke up at midnight feeling sick — she had a glass of water and the nausea went away. She also had a headache this morning, so she took some ibuprofen and that soon disappeared as well.

Very mild side effects so far on the whole, then. Thankfully her head is yet to explode. :)

Glad she seems to be doing well. I am also under the 'vulnerable' umbrella, even though it is very much a precaution. I should be getting my jab soon- no idea if it's Pfizer or AstraZeneca, though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-indonesia/astrazeneca-counters-indonesian-muslim-concerns-over-covid-19-vaccine-idUSKBN2BD02X

AstraZeneca said on Sunday its COVID-19 vaccine contains no pork-derived ingredients, countering an assertion in Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim nation, that the drug violates Islamic law.

Indonesia’s highest Muslim clerical council, the Indonesia Ulema Council, said on its website Friday that the vaccine is “haram” because the manufacturing process uses “trypsin from the pork pancreas.”

Still, the council approved the AstraZeneca vaccine for use given the pandemic emergency.

But AstraZeneca Indonesia director Rizman Abudaeri said in a statement: “At all stages of the production process, this virus vector vaccine does not use nor come in contact with pork-derived products or other animal products.”

The council and the country’s food and drug agency did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Indonesian authorities on Friday approved the use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine after reviewing reports that it had caused blood clots among some recipients in Europe.

Indonesia is grappling with one of the worst coronavirus outbreaks in Asia – with 1,455,788 cases and 39,447 deaths as of Saturday.
 
Back
Top