no they didn’t, actually read their statementThe WHO said the vaccine did not cause blood clots. It does. What point are you making?
no they didn’t, actually read their statementThe WHO said the vaccine did not cause blood clots. It does. What point are you making?
The first paragraph.no they didn’t, actually read their statement
1000 participants seems low given their population size, to make any general statements doesn't it?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
India very close to herd immunity.
First of all what that says is their review found no increased risk, this is true, their review did find that but it doesn’t mean that they say it doesn’t cause clotting.The first paragraph.
"A review by the vaccine safety group from the World Health Organization (WHO) based on available data found no increased risk of blood clotting conditions in people who received the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine"
The available data do not suggest any overall increase in clotting conditions such as deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism following administration of COVID-19 vaccines. Reported rates of thromboembolic events after COVID-19 vaccines are in line with the expected number of diagnoses of these conditions. Both conditions occur naturally and are not uncommon. They also occur as a result of COVID-19. The observed rates have been fewer than expected for such events.
- 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. The European Medicines Agency’s Pharmacovigilance and Risk Assessment Committee has reviewed 18 cases of CVST out of a total of more than 20 million vaccinations with the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine in Europe. A causal relationship between these rare events has not been established at this time (1).
This is literally one report. In March it was absolutely common and reported as fake news - no example of "bollocks" at all, this is revisionism and just reeks of you gagging to put a point across where there really isn't one.First of all what that says is their review found no increased risk, this is true, their review did find that but it doesn’t mean that they say it doesn’t cause clotting.
It then elaborates below…
Key points in their being “available data” and “at this time”
The first part regarding DVT & pulmonary embolism turns out to be true
The second part is the relevant bit to the clots we are talking about, and they’ve said a causal relationship has not been established at this time, which again was true given the data set they had to work with. From there they even link via (1) to this EMA statement that says there may be a link
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/c...-risks-despite-possible-link-rare-blood-clots
So saying it was claimed as fake news and using the WHO as an example to back that is bollocks
Im not gagging to put a point across you’re just making things up and even still mentioning WHO when the above says otherwiseThis is literally one report. In March it was absolutely common and reported as fake news - no example of "bollocks" at all, this is revisionism and just reeks of you gagging to put a point across where there really isn't one.
The key point (which I made) was originally there was no link and now there is a rare link. If there was not enough data at the time then they should have said we cannot say there is no link due to lack of data. Lots of articles were wrote on it and everyone from Hancock to the WHO said there was no link - there is a rare one.
I think the lab leak theory is rational credible theory, but he definitely came off as bonkers in that appearance. Kind of like the last celebrity I expected to come off as a wack job on tv.Did anyone see Jon Stewart’s appearance on Colbert the other night peddling the lab leak theory? I think he’s lost his mind.
100% in favour of vaccine passports. That leaves the option for vaccination to remain a choice but one that will leave you very hard done by for taking that stance. But still a choice if you wish to sacrifice amenities/facilities for your moral outlook. Of course, like you say only once all vaccination offers have been sent out and accepted/refused.I was unsure about vaccine passports at first, but the more stuff I read from anti-vaxers, including those who pretend they're not anti-vaxers, the more I think passports are a good idea. There are just too many who refuse to be educated and won't change their minds however many bodies pile up.
I'd even go so far as to say that all public employees should have a passport, I don't see why the public should pay for staff who are likely to infect them, doesn't make sense.
edit: only when everyone has been offered the vaccine though.
The rubbish in that video that you were talking about earlier was to do with mRNA vaccines specifically. The only (very rare) clotting issues of any significance have been with the AZ vaccine, a very traditional.vaccine. I'd take a break from social media if I were you.Interesting graphic but this article does suggest the spike protein gets in the cells and is the reason for the risk of blood clot (which remember when it was first found was called fake news). Now they have a fix it has been accepted as a 'rare' risk.
https://www.ft.com/content/f76eb802-ec05-4461-9956-b250115d0577
Not when it comes to medicine regulation, no. That would be the various competent authorities in the countries where the vaccines were licensed. Many of whom paused the roll-out as soon as the first reports of these unusual clotting events came out.Would you not call WHO scientists?
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-per...-no-blood-clot-link-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine
Definitely, having said that though I don't believe its too far off truth. Anecdotally, I know a few extended family in India, and loads in Pakistan. And literally every single one, no exception, has had covid at some point there. Can't say that same about my fam in canada or here in UK.1000 participants seems low given their population size, to make any general statements doesn't it?
None of the regulators described it like that, nor did the haematologists who went onto high alert across the UK and the rest of Europe as they re-analysed hospital admissions for CVST and/or thrombocytopenia.This is literally one report. In March it was absolutely common and reported as fake news - no example of "bollocks" at all, this is revisionism and just reeks of you gagging to put a point across where there really isn't one.
The key point (which I made) was originally there was no link and now there is a rare link. If there was not enough data at the time then they should have said we cannot say there is no link due to lack of data. Lots of articles were wrote on it and everyone from Hancock to the WHO said there was no link - there is a rare one.
A new wave of infections is definitely under way in England, says Prof Adam Finn of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation
But epidemiologist Dr Mike Tildesley says he is "cautiously hopeful" hospital admissions will not be on the same scale as in January
Excellent post.None of the regulators described it like that, nor did the haematologists who went onto high alert across the UK and the rest of Europe as they re-analysed hospital admissions for CVST and/or thrombocytopenia.
In this thread we discussed it a lot, in particular the question of why hadn't the MHRA spotted it. Did that suggest a batch problem(s), an interaction with another medication or a problem more common in a particular age group (the demographic profile for AZ use in the UK was mostly older adults, the Norwegian cases were younger women). No dismissal of evidence, or cries of fake news, just people wondering what it meant.
Some countries paused the rollout because of it, some stopped using AZ as a result, others changed the target age group. If anything it was a demonstration of how fast the international regulatory structure responded to an alarm being raised.
It's also a demonstration of what typically happens in the case of vaccines provoking adverse reactions. It's a problem that's seen between 5 and 20 days after vaccination and it happens so rarely that the chance of a clinical trial (even one with tens of thousands of participants) seeing it is remote. Ten years of monitoring the health of those trialists really wouldn't help with that, but would leave a lot of people dead with covid.
I guess it’s kind of interesting. Nothing particularly startling or surprising. Unless I’m missing something?This is interesting
It looks like some information isn't shown though as the excess deaths by cause is well over 150,000 whilst the raw total excess death data is at just under 92,000 (697,002 minus 605,305).
Um yeah. This is worrying news. Feck’s sake.RUSSIA’S CAPITAL MOSCOW has reported a pandemic high for new coronavirus cases for the second consecutive day, as the city’s hospitals are flooded with new patients due to the Delta variant.
The city registered 9,120 new coronavirus infections in 24 hours, according to government figures, a second consecutive high topping the previous day’s total of 9,056 cases.
Those figures have ballooned from just 3,000 daily just two weeks ago, with Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin saying yesterday that the highly infectious Delta variant first identified in India represents nearly 90% of new cases.
The new wave of infections come as Russia’s second city of Saint Petersburg, the country’s worst Covid hotspot after Moscow, is slated to host seven Euro 2020 matches — including a quarter-final on 2 July — expected to draw thousands of European football fans.
What's worrying you?Um yeah. This is worrying news. Feck’s sake.
A shit load of travelling fans getting infected and seeding the rest of Europe when they get home.What's worrying you?
Ok. How many fans will be there, maybe 30-40k? Even if 5% get infected (highly unlikely) it won't really matter, there are thousands of cases in Europe already. Delta won't be a big problem in Europe. A problem sure, big problem, not really. Vaccinations are far enough that next wave will be much smaller than previous ones.A shit load of travelling fans getting infected and seeding the rest of Europe when they get home.
I'm not so sure that your optimism stands up to scrutiny, unfortunately. This could be a very big problem.Ok. How many fans will be there, maybe 30-40k? Even if 5% get infected (highly unlikely) it won't really matter, there are thousands of cases in Europe already. Delta won't be a big problem in Europe. A problem sure, big problem, not really. Vaccinations are far enough that next wave will be much smaller than previous ones.
I’m really curious about the delta variant ex-UK. It makes no sense for it to drive such a big surge in the Uk yet spare the rest of Europe. Either things are very finely balanced and a few super spreader events could create a lot of problems or the increased transmissibility is being over-stated. I obviously hope the latter but would rather not see that hypothesis tested!Ok. How many fans will be there, maybe 30-40k? Even if 5% get infected (highly unlikely) it won't really matter, there are thousands of cases in Europe already. Delta won't be a big problem in Europe. A problem sure, big problem, not really. Vaccinations are far enough that next wave will be much smaller than previous ones.
The Delta variant is at very low levels here in Italy, about 1% of cases. I'd love to think we'll keep it that way as our daily numbers are good now. I think the reintroduction of quarantine for UK visitors (which happened yesterday) will be a help.I’m really curious about the delta variant ex-UK. It makes no sense for it to drive such a big surge in the Uk yet spare the rest of Europe. Either things are very finely balanced and a few super spreader events could create a lot of problems or the increased transmissibility is being over-stated. I obviously hope the latter but would rather not see that hypothesis tested!
Even in UK the doubling time is like 2 weeks. Europe is 5-6 weeks behind UK in vaccinations. Europe will have less trouble from delta than UK. And UK won't have that big of a problem. Depending on one's definition of "big problem".I’m really curious about the delta variant ex-UK. It makes no sense for it to drive such a big surge in the Uk yet spare the rest of Europe. Either things are very finely balanced and a few super spreader events could create a lot of problems or the increased transmissibility is being over-stated. I obviously hope the latter but would rather not see that hypothesis tested!
It will only be a problem if it results in hospitalisations and that is looking unlikely as most cases are in younger folk and most older people are double jabbed. Very relaxed in the UK now.Even in UK the doubling time is like 2 weeks. Europe is 5-6 weeks behind UK in vaccinations. Europe will have less trouble from delta than UK. And UK won't have that big of a problem. Depending on one's definition of "big problem".
China’s been going for a zero covid policy from day one. Which means that vaccine efficacy and variants are irrelevant. They don’t want any cases of covid at all. So jump straight to draconian lockdowns every time they have even a handful of cases.China shutting down again? I'll admit I haven't been paying as much attention lately, things are opening up in the US and I haven't heard about any hospitals filling up. I have noticed this thread is still full of variant data, and that the UK is still closed.
Is this related to the fact that China's vaccine is less effective? I would think everyone there has been vaccinated.
Wuhan shutting down is what got my attention in the first place. China doesn't seem to prefer a cautious shutdown approach like NZ, and I don't trust their publicly available infection numbers. So it seems this could be bad. But I believe China has done other shut downs, I was to say in Beijing, since opening up again, and they didn't lead to further shut downs. But that's Beijing where the govt is and perhaps they were being extra cautious for that reason.
I want to ask what the odds are that things are going to get worse again.
https://www.scmp.com/coronavirus/gr...ancelled-and-districts-locked-down-amid-fresh
Okay I didn't realize they were taking a NZ/AUS approach now. I never believed their claims of low numbers though after they switched their method early on. But I guess it's true. Just hard to believe they really got transmission to stop after having so many early cases.China’s been going for a zero covid policy from day one. Which means that vaccine efficacy and variants are irrelevant. They don’t want any cases of covid at all. So jump straight to draconian lockdowns every time they have even a handful of cases.
It means that their citizens have led a much more normal life than us over the last 18 months but they’re going to have to change tack at some point and let the virus spread throughout their country, hoping that the vaccines will keep the inevitable outbreaks fairly small, with few casualties. When to change this strategy is a tough call. And it’s going to be very unpopular with a lot of people that live there.
See also NZ/Australia
No, thank you. China is not a model. Not convinced by the quality of their data too...China’s been going for a zero covid policy from day one. Which means that vaccine efficacy and variants are irrelevant. They don’t want any cases of covid at all. So jump straight to draconian lockdowns every time they have even a handful of cases.
It means that their citizens have led a much more normal life than us over the last 18 months but they’re going to have to change tack at some point and let the virus spread throughout their country, hoping that the vaccines will keep the inevitable outbreaks fairly small, with few casualties. When to change this strategy is a tough call. And it’s going to be very unpopular with a lot of people that live there.
See also NZ/Australia
Grim thought but like the Kent variant (by definition) spread quickly and initially primarily here, could the UK benefit in a perverse way from early and rapid exposure to the Delta variant?
By early and rapid exposure they were able to target and get the variant under control . Isn’t the Kent variant still the dominant strain in much of Europe?How exactly did the UK benefit from its exposure to the Kent variant?
I'm not sure having more cases and more deaths over this last winter than anywhere else in Europe counts as a benefit.By early and rapid exposure they were able to target and get the variant under control . Isn’t the Kent variant still the dominant strain in much of Europe?
You don’t target variants. It’s the same approach for all variants. It’s just that this same approach can be less effective with some variants than others. There’s no upside to having a high % of those difficult to control variants within your borders. Only downsides.By early and rapid exposure they were able to target and get the variant under control . Isn’t the Kent variant still the dominant strain in much of Europe?
Our small (so far) outbreak in Sydney is the Delta variant and at least 2 of the 9 cases were transmitted by very fleeting contact. In one case patient zero walked past someone at an outside Cafe table and transmitted the virus.You don’t target variants. It’s the same approach for all variants. It’s just that this same approach can be less effective with some variants than others. There’s no upside to having a high % of those difficult to control variants within your borders. Only downsides.
I would call any increase on the numbers of cases that were being seen just 2 weeks ago. The vaccinations clearly had a positive impact but if cases start to rise above the plateau that had been reach has to be a worry. This thing increases exponentially and even if the majority are safe because of vaccinations the increased infectiousness means it will find those unvaccinated. A big problem in my view is increased hospitalisations and any increase in deaths. It already looks like a big problem to me. Infections have jumped ahead of the first wave in Britain and that was considered a big problem at that time.Even in UK the doubling time is like 2 weeks. Europe is 5-6 weeks behind UK in vaccinations. Europe will have less trouble from delta than UK. And UK won't have that big of a problem. Depending on one's definition of "big problem".
I think it is likely that it is only how long the Delta variant takes to dominate in each country and in turn how big a problem it is will be directly correlated to vaccination rates. We really need to hit HIT of at all possible. Vaccine hesitancy can feck us yet.Even in UK the doubling time is like 2 weeks. Europe is 5-6 weeks behind UK in vaccinations. Europe will have less trouble from delta than UK. And UK won't have that big of a problem. Depending on one's definition of "big problem".
Nope. Testing was pretty non-existant. And I do understand exponential growth.I would call any increase on the numbers of cases that were being seen just 2 weeks ago. The vaccinations clearly had a positive impact but if cases start to rise above the plateau that had been reach has to be a worry. This thing increases exponentially and even if the majority are safe because of vaccinations the increased infectiousness means it will find those unvaccinated. A big problem in my view is increased hospitalisations and any increase in deaths. It already looks like a big problem to me. Infections have jumped ahead of the first wave in Britain and that was considered a big problem at that time.