Jump to content

Several European nations suspend use of Astra-Zeneca vaccine


myata

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

I would take AZ today if I could. The benefits far outweigh the risks for me. I do understand why governments are concerned by VIPIT, a potentially fatal condition that seems to be caused by the vaccine, and would want to protect healthy young people from it. Any time I get in a car I’m taking on risk. Life is full of such decisions but we don’t consider most of them. 

Yep, life is full of risks. You have to weigh these factors carefully, since the cure can also harm.

That is why I never get excited for example, when I hear about a disease that has 99.8% chance of survival.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

Yep, life is full of risks. You have to weigh these factors carefully, since the cure can also harm.

That is why I never get excited for example, when I hear about a disease that has 99.8% chance of survival.

That’s not Covid’s risk for me. Don’t forget morbidity either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

That’s not Covid’s risk for me. Don’t forget morbidity either. 

The lowest survival statistic I have seen by age is 95%. That is right on par with many other infectuous diseases, IE the flu.

As I have mentioned here before, the death rate among elderly for all causes combined, is 100%. Finally everyone must die. It's a tragedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canadians are being given Astrazenica against their will.

The Regina resident is waiting for surgery and required a vaccine for the procedure — one she's been waiting for since last October. She made an appointment online for vaccinations for her and her husband at the Evraz Place immunization site in Regina, which, based on previous Saskatchewan Health Authority information, she believed was offering the Pfizer-BioNTech shot. But just before she was set to receive the shot, the nurse informed Koskie she and her husband would be getting the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine instead.

Koskie says she ended up receiving the shot out of necessity, but the experience left her feeling let down by the government. "My concern is that it's been very underhanded," she said, adding the experience left her feeling appalled. "I was so upset with the disrespect."

Link

 

From the Canadian government website:

"The AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine showed an effectiveness of about 62% in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 disease beginning 2 weeks after the second dose."
Astrazenica Covid Vaccine: What you should know

 

Good enough for the Candians?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This brings out an important imv question, one of those that we may notice or just walk by. Where and to whom the responsibility of the public experts and officials is, and should be and should it be made clear without any possibility of confusion and misunderstanding?

Let's take the above example. It is not confirmed (big font) at this time but still a possibility that a certain combination of individual factors could increase the risk of adverse effects of the vaccine. Routinely we hear that "benefits outweigh risk" however we don't hear that that statement applies to the society as a whole and not on the individual level, for each and every individual.

So whose responsibility would it be to explain to the hypothetical individual above, otherwise healthy and with low risk of severe outcome that there could be a non-trivial risk of a serious adverse effect? Of course, this isn't really specific to Covid and everyone should do their homework but not everybody can do that well and given the time and pressure the issue can be real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

The lowest survival statistic I have seen by age is 95%. That is right on par with many other infectuous diseases, IE the flu.

As I have mentioned here before, the death rate among elderly for all causes combined, is 100%. Finally everyone must die. It's a tragedy.

You still think Covid is the same as the flu? 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Canadians are being given Astrazenica against their will.

The Regina resident is waiting for surgery and required a vaccine for the procedure — one she's been waiting for since last October. She made an appointment online for vaccinations for her and her husband at the Evraz Place immunization site in Regina, which, based on previous Saskatchewan Health Authority information, she believed was offering the Pfizer-BioNTech shot. But just before she was set to receive the shot, the nurse informed Koskie she and her husband would be getting the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine instead.

Koskie says she ended up receiving the shot out of necessity, but the experience left her feeling let down by the government. "My concern is that it's been very underhanded," she said, adding the experience left her feeling appalled. "I was so upset with the disrespect."

Link

 

From the Canadian government website:

"The AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine showed an effectiveness of about 62% in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 disease beginning 2 weeks after the second dose."
Astrazenica Covid Vaccine: What you should know

 

Good enough for the Candians?

Rising to 90% if doses given 2.5 to 3 months apart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Statistical survival rates are right on par with influenza, yes.

The flu kills between 2000 and 8000 a year in Canada with no precautions. In spite of all the precautions and restrictions, Covid has killed 23,000. If nothing else that should tell you Covid is one hell of a lot more infectious than the flu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Aristides said:

The flu kills between 2000 and 8000 a year in Canada with no precautions. In spite of all the precautions and restrictions, Covid has killed 23,000. If nothing else that should tell you Covid is one hell of a lot more infectious than the flu.

I don't accept the data at face value because:

- We have never counted and tested people for the flu as we've done now. It's extremely likely we were always under-counting.

- We hear that at least 50% of people who test positive have no symptoms. They represent a whole new paradigm for counting people with infections. They never would have been counted before covid.
"It's extremely likely we were always under-counting."

- Many eldery who died in nursing homes before were never given autopsies to see if they died from a virus.
"It's extremely likely we were always under-counting."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Aristides said:

The recommended time between doses for AstraZeneca is now 12 weeks in the UK.

Canada is at 16 weeks, and we know why that is. In Germany it is 3-4 weeks. What matters is science, not political gambling because we screwed up and don't have enough sauce.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Canada is at 16 weeks, and we know why that is. In Germany it is 3-4 weeks. What matters is science, not political gambling because we screwed up and don't have enough sauce.

It is science.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2021-03-11/covid-19-vaccines-astrazeneca-doses-efficacy-rate/13202050

 

it also gives some credence to Canada's decision to go 16 weeks between shots but that could change as new data arrives.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

It is science.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2021-03-11/covid-19-vaccines-astrazeneca-doses-efficacy-rate/13202050

 

it also gives some credence to Canada's decision to go 16 weeks between shots but that could change as new data arrives.

Youll have to take that up with the government of Canada if you have issues about their guidelines. Send them a note complaining that the efficacy rate on their web site is too low.

Let me know when they get back on that. I will go and edit my post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Youll have to take that up with the government of Canada if you have issues about their guidelines. Send them a note complaining that the efficacy rate on their web site is too low.

Let me know when they get back on that. I will go and edit my post.

Did the government of Canada do studies? Have they done any clinical studies of these vaccines on their own? I don't know of any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The deficit of openness and honesty is not conductive to genuine and reasonable efforts. If one wouldn't want to think that it was intended for some weird and obscure reason, by the method of exclusion there remains only one conclusion: that bureaucracy simply forgot, have neither skills nor intent to speak to the society in a clear; open; and honest manner. And it's not a good start for neither: achieving the stated goals of the bureaucracy (though it can still reward itself with $20K monthly salaries); for the interests and well-being of the society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine showed an effectiveness of about 62% in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 disease beginning 2 weeks after the second dose. Health Canada

UK just completed vaccination of priority groups (50+ and vulnerable) with the first dose. Minus two weeks it was less. Could it have had such a dramatic effect? In summer 2020 cases went down to single digits in a matter of a month. Good if you know. But it'll need more to prove than a single coincidence.

 

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, myata said:

The AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine showed an effectiveness of about 62% in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 disease beginning 2 weeks after the second dose. Health Canada

UK just completed vaccination of priority groups (50+ and vulnerable) with the first dose. Minus two weeks it was less. Could it have had such a dramatic effect? In summer 2020 cases went down to single digits in a matter of a month. Good if you know. But it'll need more to prove than a single coincidence.

 

32 million Brits have had at least one dose. Why are our numbers going up and theirs going down at the same time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Aristides said:

32 million Brits have had at least one dose. Why are our numbers going up and theirs going down at the same time?

As of today, and vaccine comes into full effect two weeks after the second dose. There may not be a simple and obvious explanation to a complex phenomenon; a cycle can move up and down according to its internal, possibly complex, dynamics; the cycle there may have started at different moment and have different parameters; there isn't enough data for a confident conclusion; a coincidence does not mean cause. It is possible that it could be an early result of vaccination. Or it could be a coincidence, like last summer's sharp drop in cases clearly having nothing to do with the bumbled policy response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the vaccines have shown they have at least 80% of their effectiveness two weeks after the first dose. What is in question is how long it lasts without a second dose.

when you vaccinate over 50% of your population and get a dramatic drop in infections, hospitalizations and deaths, that is not a coincidence.

Last spring our cases didn’t peak until May, the UK’s started a steep decline in February while ours are still going up. The UK decline had nothing to do with summer coming.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By myata
      I have to commend the public health offices of Ontario for a decent job on Covid-19 information. The level of detail is sufficient for understanding of the situation, and an effort was made to track the causes. Take a look for yourself: Ontario Covid-19 statistics
      So are there any essential conclusions that can be made from these numbers? Let's take a look. First I'm looking at the chart "Percentage of tests that were positive, by age group", with a clear spike around mid January, shortly before the second lockdown. Digging further into the numbers, we see, for the percentage of positive of all tests by age group:
      Under 13: 17.7%
      14 - 17: 15.1%
      18 - 24: 9.7%
      Above 25: 6.7% and below
      From these numbers it can be deduced with certain probability (but not proven because the coverage of tests has been in the range of 0.005 of the population, not enough for a confident statement - why btw?) that the incidence of the infection in the age groups involved in on-site education, schools or colleges, at the peak was 2 to 3 times higher than in the rest of the population. And after on-site classes were suspended, voila: one gets almost 50% reduction in new cases over two weeks of the lockdown (total new cases daily graph).
      So what conclusions can be made from these numbers? And are they the same as heard time and again from the news and experts?
      I recall an expert commenting that there was no evidence that on-site education setting was contributing to the spread. Is it not the evidence though possibly, not yet the proof?
      Can we expect, and trust experts to state their best understanding and knowledge of the situation, or only the truth of the day coming from the top? In some countries schools never closed and it did not result in an explosive development of the epidemics. Why?
      Are we using intelligent, science-based approach to control the epidemics at the sources of most likely spread with intelligent, effective and targeted policies? Or a shotgun approach?
       
    • By Zeitgeist
      After three months of distance learning that saw low student participation and put parents in the impossible position of teaching their kids while trying to work from home, the Province of Ontario is now proposing three options for September: return of all students to daily school with careful health hygiene, 100% distance learning, or a hybrid that divides all students into two cohorts that attend on alternate days/weeks.  While it looks like 100% distance learning is off the table unless there's a big surge of Covid-19 cases or a local outbreak, the hybrid model seems to be the one being promoted by the Province.  I believe this would be disastrous for both education and the economy.
      There's no way to get workplaces up and running on a full-time basis if parents cannot do their work without having to take care of their children at the same time.  A part-time return to school would put working parents, including educators, in a very compromising position, having to either watch their children for half of the work week while trying to do their jobs or scramble to find daycare at the same time as thousands of other parents.  Such a plan would not be safer than full-time school for students, as many of these children would be in daycares with students from multiple schools, presenting a greater health risk than having students attend one facility with the same children all week.
      The poorest families with the most precarious employment would be hardest hit by a part-time school schedule, having to pay for daycare or make the choice of risking losing their jobs in order to take care of their kids.  We know that a learning model that is exclusively distance-learning from home is bad for student engagement, socialization, and education outcomes.  We also know that having everyone return to school in a safe way than includes the necessary social distancing is a challenge without reducing class sizes and ensuring there is additional classroom space in schools.  However, this can be done without substantial new hiring or budgetary increases.
      We need to accept a few conditions in order to make daily return to school possible.  I propose, for staffing reasons, that non-classroom teachers (librarians, planning time teachers, French as a second language teachers, and a proportion of special education teaching staff) become regular classroom teachers throughout the remainder of the pandemic, so that class sizes can be reduced.  While this may reduce the number of special education teachers available to provide segregated classes for special needs students, we were moving to a more inclusive special education model and classroom teachers will be better positioned to support special needs students with smaller class sizes. 
      In order to have this kind of schedule, certain curriculum will have to be provided online, such as FSL.  However, it would protect on-site learning for the core curricula of literacy, numeracy, science, and even geography and history (Social Studies).  Phys. Ed would be taught within the classroom or outside where possible.  This schedule requires that teachers take their planning time at home, as teachers would not be getting their own planning time coverage from non-classroom planning time teachers during the school day.  The planning time and FSL teachers would teach regular classes.
      This schedule would shorten the school day, not only because of the planning time teachers would be taking at home, but also because this shorter school day eliminates the need for an afternoon recess, and for safety reasons, the lunch hour should be shortened, probably to 30 or 40 minutes.  Unstructured periods like recess provide too much opportunity for breaking social distancing guidelines.  Reducing recess time doesn’t impact instructional time.  Shorter recesses could be taken in the regular classroom.  Teachers could take their classes outside as long as classes don’t combine.
      Another sticking point for having all students in elementary schools at the same time is lack of space for social distancing, especially if class sizes are capped at an arbitrary number of, say, 15.  If non-classroom teachers’ rooms are freed up (libraries, gyms, conference rooms, etc.), there will be additional spaces available for classes.  There should not be an arbitrary class size cap, but rather a formula of students to square footage, so that social distancing is maintained no matter the class size.  For example, a class of 28 students could easily be accommodated in a library or gym.  Most elementary schools would be able to safely social distance all of their students if all of their available school spaces were used and non-classroom teachers took regular classes.  In exceptional circumstances, some classes would have to be relocated to other schools, board-owned facilities, or leased facilities (adult-learning centres, high schools, banquet halls or sports facilities that cannot open until the final phase of reopening, etc.).
      School boards are able to implement such measures if they are given some basic criteria to follow, and they can do this without increasing budgets, as long as there is flexibility in allocations.  If parents were shown such a plan and assured that social distancing and the necessary cleaning and safety measures will be taken, most students would return to school on a full-time basis, albeit with a shorter school day. 
      It's also advisable for staffing purposes to get a short-term commitment from parents as to whether or not they intend to send their children to school, for a time frame of say 2-3 months at a time.  That way schools will have a firm basis upon which to divide students and staff classes.  It’s only fair to ask this commitment from parents for budgeting purposes.
      Such a plan would be sustainable if the pandemic continued for many months or even years.  It could be flexible and adjusted for periods of distance learning if there are surges or local outbreaks of Covid-19.  It's important to have a clear process for return to school that maximizes safety while returning as many students to school on a daily basis as possible, so that students are not robbed of opportunities and families are not put under unnecessary additional stress, financial or otherwise.
      Thoughts?
    • By Hussain
      All over Ontario, people have been quarantined for weeks in order to flatten the curve and save lives, for the majority of places it has been working. Health officials are now saying that some places in Ontario have reached their peak and the daily number of cases are slowly starting to decline. However, long-term care homes are still at high risk and are being closely monitored to prevent a wide-scale outbreak.
      READ MORE AT
      https://www.youthinpolitics.net/post/leading-death-of-covid-19
    • By Hussain
      All publicly-funded schools in Ontario will remain closed until at least May 31 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Education Minister Stephen Lecce has announced.
      Ontario schools were initially closed for two weeks following March Break in an effort to limit the spread of COVID-19. The government then extended the closure through at least May 4, though Premier Doug Ford later said that it was unrealistic to think that children would be able to return to classes by that point.
      Speaking at Queen’s Park on Sunday afternoon, Lecce said that the decision to extend the closure through the end of May was based on “expert advice” from public health officials.
      He said that “if there is a way to save some of the school year at the back end,” his government would consider it but not at the expense of safety.
      “The extension will provide the province more time, sufficient time to review the data and the modelling so that we can make the best decision based on the best medical advice and ensure that ultimately students remain safe and staff remain safe should they return to school at some point his year or at any point beyond,” he said.
      While a number of other provinces have announced the cancellation of in-person classes for the rest of the year, Ontario has so far refused to do the same though it has worked to ramp up its online learning program and has promised that students will receive final grades, regardless of whether schools reopen.
      On Sunday, Lecce said that he “appreciates full well” that parents, educators and students al want a “greater degree of certainty” and hopes to provide a “final update” with respect to this school year before May 31.
      He said that in the meantime the province will also provide “some greater” context with regards to the benchmarks that need to be hit to reopen schools when it releases its economic recovery plan sometime this week.
      “I think currently the advice from the chief medical officer of health is that we are not there today. We need more time we need to see a reduced risk to young people and we have accepted that advice as we always have and given ourselves another month of time,” he said.
      All remaining PA days cancelled
      Since ordering the closuring the closure of all schools last month, the province has worked to ramp up its online learning program and recently struck a deal with Apple to distribute thousands of iPads to students from low-income families.
      Lecce said that at this point there are no plans to extend the school year, as officials are confident that adequate instruction is being delivered through the online learning program.
      He did, however, say that all remaining professional activity (PA) days and examination days will be cancelled to maximize instruction time.
      The province is also working to introduce a more robust summer learning program to help interested students “mitigate from learning loss,” Lecce said.
      As for the eventual resumption of classes, whenever that may be, Lecce said that his government will take an open-mided approach to ensuring safety.
      “If students return at some point later this year my commitment is to come back here and communicate to you how I will ensure every parent in this province that we can ensure the safety of your child. If it involves changing how classrooms are structured or designed we will look at that. We have a duty and responsibility to be open to every idea to achieve safety,” he said.
      WATCH MY YOUTUBE VIDEO
       
       
    • By Hussain
      Canadians won’t be able to return to life as they knew it before the novel coronavirus pandemic until a vaccine is available, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Thursday.
      “Normality as it was before will not come back full-on until we get a vaccine for this… That will be a very long way off,” the prime minister said during his daily news conference on Canada’s response to the COVID-19 outbreak.
       
       
  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...