Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: CV and mad panic behaviour (Read 438833 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 26 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2356 –
Quote from: LP on
How did the replication trials of the Sth African result go, nobody it seems has been able to come out and support the Sth African result so far and several countries are testing the strain!

The official position is this;
 
They scrapped it and its going to cost them money... They must have some serious doubts.
 

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2358 –
Quote from: PaulP on
https://theconversation.com/data-suggest-no-increased-risk-of-blood-clots-from-the-astrazeneca-vaccine-australia-shouldnt-pause-its-rollout-157137

Another article suggesting we should not pause the AZ rollout.
I guess the government signing a deal with CSL for 50 Million doses might also encourage Scott and crew to keep pushing it as safe. Looks like a few of his backbenchers don't agree and want it suspended..

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2359 –
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-why-are-countries-suspending-the-astrazeneca-vaccine

The whole article is well worth reading, but I found the following particularly interesting :

AstraZeneca riskier than Pfizer?
AstraZeneca said its safety results for blood clotting conditions were “similar across other licensed COVID-19 vaccines”.

Professor Stephen Evans from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine said the latest publicly available data showed there were 35 reported cases of thrombocytopenia (a low blood platelet disorder) out of 54,000 “yellow card” reports after nearly 10 million AstraZeneca vaccinations.

For the Pfizer vaccine there were 22 cases out of 33,000 reports and almost 11 million doses administered.

Prof Evans said: “It is clear that the proportion of reports for this bleeding disorder is not different in the two vaccines.”

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2360 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 on
They scrapped it and its going to cost them money... They must have some serious doubts.
It might not cost the people making the decision anything at all, in fact some may even be better off!

But Craig Kelly says no to AstraZeneca, front page of the same media rag that said he should be barred from politics, so the decision is made! ;)

On a far more serious note, this is what we should be really worried about, major outbreaks just off our northern borders;
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/right-on-our-doorstep-australia-to-send-medical-team-to-png-as-it-battles-covid-19-outbreak-20210315-p57aqf.html

Qld and the NT must be crapting themself, the big concern is they haven't yet ruled out ongoing zoonotic transmission!

Winter is coming!
The Force Awakens!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2361 –
17 million Astrazeneca jabs and what, 30 odd cases of varied forms of blood clots? As one in a thousand people suffer blood clots each year, it follows that the vaccine stops blood clots.  Or is that confusing causal with coincidental?

By the way, world COVID infection rates dropped for the first time in February.  Lockdowns, vaccinations, a combination of both, or coincidence?
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2362 –
You can say the same thing about the vast majority of covid deaths in aged care.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2363 –
Its funny.

From a neutral standpoint all I see is people having their confirmation bias confirmed (yep, even suspension of the vaccine might fall into that category) BUT, the one crucial difference, is just like we shut down society because we had a virus we didnt know fully about, we have anecdotal reports coming from overseas, that this vaccine is problematic, with one crucial difference.

The people saying the vaccine is fine and it correlation not causation, are the same ones happy with the lockdown approach because it will stop the spread and save lives.  This seems to be a juxtaposition to me from what I can see, because although the motivation is driven similarly the action is actually polls apart with one being a cautious approach, and the other being about haste and no regard for any potential safety concerns.

The only safe move is to proceed cautiously on both virus and vaccine and take a front row seat on how its working out elsewhere to determine the most APPROPRIATE course of action with the knowledge that we will be safe or safe enough either way.

I am most interested in seeing whether or not the vaccine actually does anything to stem the number of deaths, and positive tests in line with numbers being tested rather than anything else.

Quote from: DJC on
17 million Astrazeneca jabs and what, 30 odd cases of varied forms of blood clots? As one in a thousand people suffer blood clots each year, it follows that the vaccine stops blood clots.  Or is that confusing causal with coincidental?

By the way, world COVID infection rates dropped for the first time in February.  Lockdowns, vaccinations, a combination of both, or coincidence?
  Perhaps it simply is correlation with the end of winter in the northern hemisphere.  Lets not confuse correlation with causation shall we?


"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2364 –
If the AstraZ was the only vaccine I would take it just like I get the flu shot every year.  My problem is there is a better vaccine for important people and the budget one for the cattle class.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2365 –
Quote from: madbluboy on
If the AstraZ was the only vaccine I would take it just like I get the flu shot every year.  My problem is there is a better vaccine for important people and the budget one for the cattle class.
Arent there mulitple flu vaccines also (some better than others)?
2017-16th
2018-Wooden Spoon
2019-16th
2020-dare to dream? 11th is better than last I suppose
2021-Pi$$ or get off the pot
2022- Real Deal or more of the same? 0.6%
2023- "Raise the Standard" - M. Voss Another year wasted Bar Set
2024-Back to the drawing boardNo excuses, its time

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2366 –
Quote from: madbluboy on
If the AstraZ was the only vaccine I would take it just like I get the flu shot every year.  My problem is there is a better vaccine for important people and the budget one for the cattle class.

The science and the numbers don't appear to suggest that one is better than the other.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2367 –
Quote from: Gointocarlton on
Arent there mulitple flu vaccines also (some better than others)?

This page gives some good info. It seems as though there will be 4 different vaccines available. Last updated 22nd February 2021. You don't get to choose which vaccine you get.

https://www.health.gov.au/node/18777/australias-vaccine-agreements

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2368 –
Quote from: PaulP on
The science and the numbers don't appear to suggest that one is better than the other.
Not in terms of clotting, but in terms of effectiveness there were early numbers that suggested Pfizer was much more effective than AZ.

All that aside.... all yourself a simple question, why are the politicians getting something different to what the public are getting.
What possible reasons could there be behind it?
Come up with a list and tell me how many legitimate reasons that are not money and/or effectiveness related.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #2369 –
According to this :

https://www.prevention.com/health/a35118263/astrazeneca-vs-pfizer-vs-moderna-covid-19-vaccine/

The two mRNA vaccines have a slight edge in efficacy; both Pfizer and Moderna report being about 95% effective against COVID-19 after the second shot in clinical trials. (For comparison, the annual flu shot is usually between 40 and 60% effective, per the CDC.) They also reduce the risk of severe illness even if you do become infected with SARS-CoV-2.

The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was found to be 85% effective against severe forms of COVID-19, which prevents hospitalization and death, per the FDA. The company’s phase 3 trial also reported no COVID-19-related deaths and no COVID-19 cases requiring medical intervention after 28 days in vaccinated participants.

AstraZeneca’s own study found its vaccine is 76% effective against COVID-19 for up to three months after just one dose. It also appears that the vaccine becomes more effective with a longer wait between doses; infections were less likely among those who received their booster more than 12 weeks after their initial shot compared to those who received theirs less than six weeks after. More research is needed to confirm the significance of these findings, however.