Another blog post on this matter I liked
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeli...-going-on-with-the-astrazeneca-oxford-vaccine
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeli...-going-on-with-the-astrazeneca-oxford-vaccine
The vaccines | vaxxed boosted unvaxxed? New poll
- Thread starter Badunk
- Start date
I follow the evidence. If the evidence changes you adapt. You are starting with an opinon and trying to make the evidence fit.
This has been covered many many times in this thread.
Vaccines aren't drugs and side effects will generally reveal themselves very quickly after a vaccine is given. That is why the length of phase 3 trials are set how they are. The only side effects that don't always reveal themselves are ones that are so rare that they only reveal themselves when a widespread roll-out occurs. But still usually within a short period after the vaccine is delivered. This is normal for all vaccines and nothing different has been done for the covid vaccines. Without a rollout the side effect wouldn't be found as it is so rare. When this occasionally happens a vaccine can be permanently withdrawn but usually it results in us accepting the risk as the cost benefit is hugely in favor of vaccination or taking other mitigating measures such as not vaccinating groups who are higher risk of getting the side affect (e.g. prior recent incident of the side effect prior to vaccination).
Lockdowns work but work much better when only one of many measures. Even when those other responses are lacking lockdowns still prevent things from being even worse.
Covid passports: Excellent and essential heath measure that will allow people to travel again and allow the economy to recover as fast as possible.
Quarantine hotels: Where else are people going to be quarantined?
So he predicted various obvious, desirable (and mainly pre-exisiting) things would occur? He must be Nostrodamus.
Governments being a bit incompetent surprises you? Governments led by people like BoJo and Trump have been largely incompetence and it is not a sign that what little they did was too much.
Cherry picking an anecdote and using it out of context does no more for you argument than does CAPSLOCK. Pandemics need to be addressed primarily at the macro level because they are essentially macro level events which is why anecdotes and whataboutisms work even worse than usual in this context.
I really don't think you get how pandemics work. Countries that have and are able to lock-down properly, including closing borders e.g. Taiwan, Australia and NZ have virtually eliminated covid and their economies have overall fared far far better despite the short sharp shock of lockdowns for even very small clusters. There has been very little interruption of normal medial procedures and testing. Our excess deaths have actually reduced as flu deaths are down as a side effect. Mental health is a worry but suicides are down so it isn't all bad news on that front. Schools and childcare are open. Pubs and restaurants are open with some restrictions on numbers. You need a mask on public transport but they are optional everywhere else now. State borders are open and domestic tourism is up and running. Unemployment now only slightly elevated over pre-covid levels.
My first degree was in Business and Finance FYI so I think I'm ok on that front.
Borrowing with historically low interest rates is the only way to keep economies going in these circumstances. Even fairly far right governments like those in the UK or Australia have understood and accepted that. It goes against their instincts but they know it is the right thing to do. It has also shown how much social payments drive an economy because poor people spend everything through necessity which then multiplys through the economy. The massive reduction in the value of social payments in most countries over the last few decades has been depressing our economies and the only reason for it has been a political agenda that victimises the poor, unemployed and disabled - not to mention the huge numbers of working poor.
So borrow and fund recovery packages. Increase social payments to livable levels. Move to UBI. Everything else you mention is made worse by opening up too fast, not better.
Yes. Anyone who disagrees with you is a drone? Got it.
Last edited:
Vaccinations are already required in many countries for things like going to University, school or childcare. In many places there are tax penalties for not vaccinating your kids. Extending this to all sorts of things would be a huge advance in public health in my opinion and hopefully employers can insist that vaccination is a requirement to attend a workplace. I for one don’t want to risk working alongside unvaccinated people. Vaccination is just part of the social contract and will be for the foreseeable future and a damn good thing too.
No never heard of the flu.
Flu isn’t anywhere near as dangerous as covid because influenza has a lower fatalitybrate and isn't novel even though it mutates and evolves far faster than coronaviruses. The new variants of covid are due to the huge number of infections and not because coronaviruses mutate like influenza viruses.
And one major reason whey influenza mutates so much is the lack of vaccination. Make it compulsory and get uptake up well above HIT, with as many strains as possible and we could go a long way to breaking the annual flu stain merry go round. In Australia the uptake of flu vaccination has increased hugely over the last few years, more than doubling since 2017 and although I don’t have the doses by age breakdown it is safe to say that 17 million people our a population of 24 million means well over 80% of adults had the jab. Add covid restrictions and excess deaths have reduced by up to 400 people per month. Given that, barring feckwit crystal rubbers of Byron Bay, childhood immunisations are about 95% including remote indigenous communities.
Canada isn't bad at about 70% uptake of the flu vaccine but the US is terrible with only 45%.
The people of Australia thank you for this undertaking.
It isn’t authoritarian to protect idiots from themselves. You are forced to wear a seatbelt because not to do so is stupid. Not vaccinating is even less acceptable because it endangers others. IMO not giving your kid all the vaccinations is child abuse.
I dislike our government a great deal but they have done well with covid especially at the state level. Public support is overwhelming.
These are an additional 2.7 million death. Not either or.
Unnecessary other excess deaths due to things like other medical screening being postponed are unavoidable to a degree but are largely due to the wishy washy incompetent response of many governments. Countries that did respond appropriately have fared much better with far fewer interruptions to normal medical services.
The delays are because you haven’t dealt with covid properly not because you have taken in too seriously.
Pandemics aren’t fair. Why would you think they should be? Viruses don’t have a sense of fairness. However, your friends Mum is not getting her chemo largely because her government hasn’t acted boldly enough and much of that is because of people like you banging on about your freedom to be idiots about all things covid.
Why do old people and people with other health conditions not matter to you? People over 80 don’t deserve to die earlier than necessary even if you don’t care (and it seems like you don’t). And excess deaths will end up being far greater than the official 2.7 million reported covid deaths to date despite fewer flu deaths.
Elon Musk downplays covid due to bejng a covid nutcase and because he wanted to open his production line in defiance of a stay at home order being in place.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewal...covid-predictions-a-timeline/?sh=5e658c0e5b6d
Dr Rhonda Patrick is an odd one as the papers she publishes seem to be high quality science but when running her business https://www.foundmyfitness.com/ which sells genetic reports, she seems to go a bit new age quack. She doesn't exactly push quackery but there seems such a focus on Vitamin D and articles on Hydrxychloroquine that you get that vibe at least. Vitamin D has a very specific treatment role but so do many things and are not the solution that vaccination is. Although I don't think she is currently pushing hydroxychloroquine and has accepted that is is useless or actually harmful. She does a lot of Vitamin based stuff so maybe her pushing that so hard is merely because it is an interest of hers? She is actually very hard to read as her almost valley girl likes, kindas and other verbal ticks make it very hard to take her seriously as a scientist or understand her stance on things.
https://thisten.co/kzd78/XW9sHEhl2f9l6t96I5cFYebqFaxCN79APBOJoIr0
I assume you are talking about this case that wasn’t actually suicide and merely a conspiracy theory?
https://www.newsweek.com/conspiracy...ng-refugee-dad-prove-sons-covid-death-1564775
Do you have proof of that? Why would a doctor falsify a death certificate and risk getting struck off? There might have been some admin misreporting but that is far more likley to lead to overall massive under-reporting of deaths particularly in old people’s homes. Excess deaths will be far more than the 2.7 million reported deaths.
No? Why would you want to?
They range from little or nothing to a bad flu to drowning in your own fluids. Which one did you want to show me?
It is ridiculous how badly we have dealt with this especially the majority of countries who have let it run free resulting in unnecessary death and economic damage.
You are being selfish. Peak selfish.
Blackmailed into a vaccine? Get over yourself.
Poor little you have to wear a mask because these terrible people who dare to be old, ill or unlucky would rather not die.
Yes, selfish me thinking of others. Damn my selfishness.
Last edited:
Contesting something legally would take ages, something no one has the time to wait for. The reality is that the UK has implemented a Britain first policy which is fair enough. You can't blame the EU for doing the same though. The UK is constantly pushing the EU with the Tory party extending grace periods out of thin air etc. I think that the EU is getting annoyed being the push over especially since its the one holding most of the cards.
Last edited:
imagine how bad your argument is when you summarise by saying “I know that even @Schmeichel's Cartwheel is on my side” who is well known for being the literal most negative and insane poster on the United forum.
It was discussed many times in this thread back in January, have a search through the thread. The contract that the EU have with AZ's agreement has the delivery down as 'best efforts' which is why the timeframes of delivery can't be litigated, and why VdL is having to use article 122 to invoke some form of control/power over AZ. If the legal agreement with AZ was watertight, then we wouldn't have seen anything public on this, it would have just gone straight to a court
Italy have already blocked an export of AZ vaccines to Australia, so yes the banning of exports is happening already.
Take heed of your own advice please. "Won't end well." Have a word with yourself. Do you struggle to debate?
The EU haven't done the same in their contract with AZ, which is the issue and point here. Their whole contract with AZ has so many holes within it that essentially it reads more like an EU directive, than a contract on procurement. The EU contract aims for something similar on domestic production like the UK contract has but is less specific and precise about manufacturing capacity. This is purely why we're seeing VdL having to look at invoking article 122 of the treaty. Contract is here for reference - https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_302
Your point on grace periods, although linked because of the parties in the discussion, are nothing to do with vaccine distribution and the contracts surrounding it, it's probably best to keep that to the Brexit thread as the rabbit hole has been well and truly opened in there. This isn't a EU vs UK point of discussion here might I add, it's EU vs AZ. I'm firmly on the side of AZ here, that they're in a hugely difficult position of supplying a market where supply is limited, and demand is sky high, combined with providing something at cost (which is a rarity for such a developed territory), and they are performing to the terms of the contract that has been agreed, I struggle to see why VdL has any complaints. Here is an interesting opinion piece, on Germany specifically, which broadly covers my view/position on the situation.
Ugly rhetoric from VDL. Trying to drum up nationalistic sentiments where there are none to cover for her own gross failings. It looks like summer could be cancelled in many EU countries with another year of economic disaster is on the horizon. She's scrambling as she knows the blame will be landing at her door from many quarters whilst EU citizens will rightly grumble if the UK is open.
Last edited:
That tweet is a gross over-simplification (which she wrote based on newspaper reports
). Here’s a good article on the finer details behind the decision. Yes, it is “safe” overall but there might be some people in whom the risk outweighs the benefit. This pause is about not giving this particular vaccine (while others are available) to any more of those people while we make absolutely sure that isn’t the case.
Last edited:
As said. The UK put natio interest first by putting it in contact. The EU will do the same by activating article 122. What is wrong with that? No one is breaking international law here. Actually the UK is through extending grace periods to NI because of some empty shelfs
What's wrong? EU using treaties as a fall back for negotiation negligence in a supply contract. I don't get why people think it's necessary personally, when they can actually work with the manufacturer, like how a normal supplier relationship works.
My father is 70 years old. He suffered from a stroke few years ago and he's got a list of comorbidities as long as an arm. He hasn't been vaccinated yet.
So tell me as an EU citizen why I should be happy that a vaccine produced in the EU would go to a British instead when it's not happened viceversa. If my dad dies Will moral high ground and contract loopholes bring my dad back from the dead? Its not as if the UK or AZ cares about fairness, us EU citizens and international law. They made that quite obvious
What pisses me off is that the EU hasn't activated article 122 earlier. Once that happens then AZ can negotiate with the EU to its hard content. But put EU citizens first. That's what the UK is doing
You're right in general terms. The statistics for most of Europe suggest that with the current case rate postponing vaccines even by a few days, will lead to more deaths than the possible deaths observed due to adverse reactions.
But ethically and morally, when you give vaccines to healthy people, especially those who have a low personal risk from the disease, you have to set your standards higher. The ones who die from an adverse reaction are not necessarily people who were going to die from covid.
The holds arise from small numbers of unusual cases appearing in a short period. With incidents being monitored more carefully than normal, odd coincidences can happen. Equally though, something real may be happening.
If it turns out that a production batch, or the distribution and dispensing system was faulty in some way, then the lessons could be important globally. If we can find out more about the people affected, then we might discover something that allows us to predict adverse reactions and steer some people to a different vaccine or no vaccine.
Lots of people are vulnerable to blood clots and to platelet damage, and it clearly doesn't affect all of them - else the UK would have seen it. If it turns out that the effect gets magnified if you're low on vitamin B12, take the contraceptive pill and gets migraines, or something equally random, then it becomes the starting point for discovering a whole lot more about the vaccines and beyond.
Negligence? Naivety maybe, in thinking that helping other countries would be reciprocated. The EU has always maintained the line that the world needed to get out of this together and has been happy for vaccine manufacturers to export millions of doses. Now they are in a supply crunch of their own and seeing those same countries are not willing to help in return. I'm not sure it's the EU who come out of all that in a bad light...
The problem with that is the UK paid a premium to have preferential domestic supply, while the EU didn’t. The priorities and guarantees were embedded into the contract; the EU wanted cost price, the UK wanted preferential supply, and the cost of the agreement was designed around those priorities.
Activating article 122 at this stage is trying to have the best of both worlds; the cheapest price and preferential supply. And they are not doing that by renegotiating their contract with AZ, but by manipulating an international agreement. The direct consequence of which would be to harm the other member of that international agreement, despite that member having played no part in this predicament. Naturally the party that loses out in that scenario would see that as a bit of a problem.
Still what does that has anything to do with me or my father? If the EU has the means to divert more vaccines to us then it should. The UK is ready to break international law because of a couple of empty shelfs. We are talking about thousands of European dying here
Ps Activating article 122 is not breaking international law
There was a perfectly good agreement sat there prior to the EU 'negotiating' as a bloc, I use negotiating lightly as the contract originally to the one signed in late August had no significant variations according to AZ. So they could of had a contract done in May/June time but lost 2 months, to me that's negligence especially with the lives currently being lost. If speed really was of the essence, then their actions didn't match the ambition.
What it has to do with you and your father is that the contract your country signed up to, in the interests of EU solidarity, is the only reason you are in this predicament. If the EU had put less of a priority on getting the cheapest deal, and instead prioritised getting a deal that guarantees the quickest supply of doses to their members first, then you and your father wouldn’t be in this position. The UK is evidence of that.
The UK moved more quickly, paid more to boost domestic supply, and took more risk, that’s why they have gotten more doses. Not because of a political priority but because of a very specific choice about vaccine priorities enshrined in a legal agreement. If the vaccines they paid for earlier and more for turned out not to work, they would have suffered for it.
Why should the UK be punished for the EU’s misplaced priorities? If the agreements between countries and vaccine providers count for so little, then we’re better off asking why anyone in Europe should get the doses before those in Sub-Saharan Africa? The answer is because the European countries paid for it, and put it in a contract. The morality of it isn’t on the side of any of the rich countries, the legality is. You can’t just pick and choose when they apply.
Again why should the EU care about third country interests especially when concerning countries who put their own interest first ahead of international law? We are talking here of thousands of Europeans at risk of dying not some empty shells.
Vdl should be fired for this mess but the priority is to save European lives first. The EU should focus on that not moral high grounds or to look good with some company. A bloc who doesn't put her people's interest first and foremost shouldn't exist
Why bother, he’s set in his ways
Excellent post. Was on Twitter again yesterday for the first time in a while and genuinely shocked at how many (invariably British) physicians seemed absolutely determined to ignore the subtleties of this decision.
Obviously Twitter brings out the worst in people but this pandemic seems to be amplifying that effect, even amongst the most educated and rational. No wonder the more gullible are falling into some sort of mass insanity.
Pfizer is an American company with a plant in the EU as is J&J. These are international contracts that the EU was slow on. India is a manufacturing base just like the EU. India shouldn't be seizing vaccines they're contracted to make.
Israel got in first, paid up and got a lot of Pfizer vaccines before anyone. These vaccines aren't being supplied to the world out of some good nature, it's a manufacturing base for American firms.
The EU should really be making these with EU companies and locking down deals before anyone, the pfizer vaccine was developed in Germany but is in US hands now. J&J is an American firm using a Belgium designed vaccine.
EU invested in EU based plants to supply them the AZ vaccine but these have fallen short.
Israel got in first, paid up and got a lot of Pfizer vaccines before anyone. These vaccines aren't being supplied to the world out of some good nature, it's a manufacturing base for American firms.
The EU should really be making these with EU companies and locking down deals before anyone, the pfizer vaccine was developed in Germany but is in US hands now. J&J is an American firm using a Belgium designed vaccine.
EU invested in EU based plants to supply them the AZ vaccine but these have fallen short.
So the EU should have made a contract with AZ to get all the first vaccines and if they didn't then sue AZ and stop the UK from getting theirs, right OK. Silly EU.
The problem is that they do not have a problem with Pfizer and are getting their deliveries.
Are you the self-appointed spokesman of AZ , maybe you can tell why there are delays.
The last deliveries to the UK , not just the last one, of AZ seem to have come from India and the UK government announced there would be delays whereas AZ and Pfizer have both said there are no delays to the supply to the UK but Jenrick said there will be delays because of India.
The Italy delay to Australia was already covered by others and Australia has nothing to do with article 122 - not an EU or ex-EU country.
My advice to you is not to use condescending terms like.. to make it simple for you...
So for the seventh or eight time of asking, what is this political decision made by 5 or 6 states of the EU and 5 or 6 other states throughout the world.
Each nation had it's own vaccination plan, I don't know what the others, in the EU, or elsewhere, are but in France it was to get all the most vulnerable people vaccinated first and all the care homes vaccinated, in my department 99.8% have been vaccinated, in the neighbouring department 100%. Most of the vaccines have been from Pfizer.
The next stage which started a couple of weeks ago or so was to supply the various vaccination centres. Locally it was announced that our local town, we live in a very rural area, will be supplied with Pfizer and the next town about 30km away will be supplied with AZ. Hence probably why you think there is stockpiling, They started delivering these vaccines to the centres and it seems that there will be a shortfall of AZ
Timewise the French PM announced on 14th, four days ago that he was not delaying the AZ rollout, on the 15th it was delayed with an announcement expected today as to whether the pause will be stopped.
Last edited:
I know I’m the master of pointless arguments but is anyone else finding the bickering about EU vs UK procurement strategies unbelievably tedious ? Maybe a separate thread would be best for that? I think one was started a while back?
Then we can keep this thread for discussing the actual vaccines?
Then we can keep this thread for discussing the actual vaccines?
Breaking news from Norway(news only in Norwegian, so no point in posting): the AZ vaccine was the cause for the 3 nurses who were hospitalised(one of them, a healthy woman in her 40's, died).
Good news for Canada and Mexico is they might be getting some of the US AZ stockpile. US have around 30-40 million AZ vaccines with 50 million by April unused as AZ have not been approved, it's still going through US trials so AZ haven't applied yet.
It's a shame the EU couldn't have secured these, could do with them right now.
It's a shame the EU couldn't have secured these, could do with them right now.
Post it anyway. Google translate is pretty smart these days.
You're right. It would be better separated.
In Denmark they're theorizing sometimes the vaccine could be injected wrongly, supposed to be skin spread out but often it's just pinched between finger and thumb and can go wrong very rarely. You would think other vaccines would show this possibly though but perhaps with AZ used for younger people it could be harder to see the vessels.
Dansk professor har teori: Forkert vaccineteknik kan udløse blodpropper | BT Samfund - www.bt.dk
Dansk professor har teori: Forkert vaccineteknik kan udløse blodpropper | BT Samfund - www.bt.dk
Interesting. Thanks. This is the key section (in English)
The only proviso I would add is that the “strong immune response” might be undiagnosed covid.
Can you translate from English into medical dummy English?
Please god yes. They go on and on with some absolutely terrible points being made, I would very much enjoy not having to see it.
Wouldn't the doctors have checked if these patients were covid positive? Genuine question, did they overlook this?
Looks like Norway will drop AZ.
All these patients had low platelets, which are involved in blood clotting. They’ve found antibodies against platelets in all of them. So they concluded that they got sick because of a vigorous immune response against things other than the virus. And the vaccine is the most likely cause of that vigorous immune response.
Would have thought so, yes.
So the next step is to understand why those patients had that response? And whether they would have had it to the actual virus too?
Though i suppose neither of those things help the vaccine's case much.
This is not good.
Would other vaccines (anti bodies from vaccines) not also attack these platelets? Is this a stop to all vaccines until further studies?Could help explain why it was younger people. Could this not also be a potential issue with other vaccines if it’s linked to antibody production? Or do the vaccines produce different antibodies? Now we know about it I wonder what we can do to mitigate the risk of that strong immune response. Certain signs to look for etc.