×
top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]AutoModerator[M] [score hidden] stickied commentlocked comment (0 children)

This post appears to be about vaccines. We encourage you to read our helpful resources on the COVID-19 vaccines:

Vaccine FAQ Part I

Vaccine FAQ Part II

Vaccine appointment finder

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]Damaniel2Boosted! ✨💉✅ 845 points846 points  (69 children)

I think the issue here is the combination of blood clots and low platelets, leading to the standard first line treatment for clots (blood thinners) actually leading to serious injury or death.

If it was just 'normal' clots, they'd issue guidance to keep an eye out for them and follow standard treatment procedure if any patients get them - but in this case, doing the standard treatment is dangerous and doctors will need to know, if a patient presents with clotting, whether they've been vaccinated with J&J or AZ recently.

[–]MrNotSafe4Work 212 points213 points  (20 children)

If the german hypothesis is true, and it is an autoimmune reaction to the spike protein + platelet complex which causes cross-reaction autoantibodies that activate platelets gobally, you are right.

But they have already come with a guideline, both diagnostic wise and with regards to treatment that involves immonuglobulins to "supress" the autoantibodies effect.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33822348/

[–]NoahSmitty 64 points65 points  (19 children)

Why wouldc this autoimmune response occur for the adenovirus vaccines and not the mRNA vaccines?

[–]spitgriffin 51 points52 points  (16 children)

Adenovirus receptors on the platelet surface. This publication from 2006 goes into more detail: https://ashpublications.org/blood/article/109/7/2832/125650/Adenovirus-induced-thrombocytopenia-the-role-of

[–]glibsonoran 11 points12 points  (12 children)

That would make the German hypothesis wrong - at least as it's described in the post above - it would be the adenovirus vector that's inducing an antibody that affects platelets, not the coronavirus spike protein.

[–]4tran13I'm fully vaccinated! 💉💪🩹 22 points23 points  (11 children)

If it was the spike protein causing this problem, you'd expect more problems from the mRNA/traditional vaccines (like China)... but you don't.

Instead, JJ/AZ both have this problem, and both use adenovirus vector (not identical)... probably not a random coincidence.

[–]nadalofsoccer 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Just to say "probably" is not very scientific. I think we can be either scientific or casual. i found your post very informative and mean this in a positive way, last sentence is casual. I think people who can, should speak as scientifically as possible. Because the casual talking leads to casual people swaying opinions. Sounds like nitpicking, I know.

"Instead, JJ/AZ both have this problem, and both use adenovirus vector (not identical)... A possible link is worth considering/being studied

[–]4tran13I'm fully vaccinated! 💉💪🩹 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Indeed, when a scientist thinks "probably not a random coincidence", it usually means "possible link is worth considering/being studied".

Both my sentences were casual, since this is reddit.

[–]FilteredPeanuts 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Funny I'm a Pharmcy Tech and just got an email from my state board talking about heprin dosing and when/where to use it just to be safe lol

[–]etgohomeok 4852 points4853 points  (920 children)

I'm very pro-vaccines and I think this vaccine should be used, but I don't get this argument.

People aren't choosing between injecting themselves with the vaccine and injecting themselves with COVID. It's not an apples to apples comparison; you have to factor in both the risk of COVID causing a blood clot and the risk of getting COVID in the first place. In this case, the risk of catching COVID would have to be more than 1/8; from what I can tell the total infection rate in the USA is only about 1/10 and for someone who's taking precautions like masking and distancing, it's almost certainly even less.

Just accept that there's a slightly elevated risk of blood clots with the vaccine but in most people's cases, the overall benefits (both to personal health and to reaching herd immunity so that life can go back to normal) outweigh the risk, and anyone who's worried should have a conversation with their own doctor about their personal risk level.

[–]mmcnlI'm fully vaccinated! 💉💪🩹 1531 points1532 points  (499 children)

You also have to take into account the decision is not "get the vaccine or not", but it's more something like "not take the AZ vaccine and get Pfizer in 3 months with less chance of rare brain clots".

[–]hookyboysbBoosted! ✨💉✅ 716 points717 points  (286 children)

In the US, it's pretty much "not take the J&J vaccine and get Pfizer/Moderna within a few weeks". In some areas, you can get a same day appointment.

Only hang up is that J&J is one shot, so some people may still prefer that one or can only get that one right now (e.g. homeless populations).

[–]cafffaro 372 points373 points  (97 children)

In the US, it's pretty much "not take the J&J vaccine and get Pfizer/Moderna within a few weeks".

Yeah, but not in Europe, and that's where the controversy surrounding this vaccine is having the worst effects.

[–]RonKosova 315 points316 points  (33 children)

Whole world is AMERICA

[–]bob25bit 19 points20 points  (3 children)

Wenn ihr tanzet will ich fuhren

[–]Levophed 53 points54 points  (11 children)

Murica'

[–]fllr 41 points42 points  (5 children)

fuck yeeeah

[–]PeterDarker 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Isn’t that why he said “in the US”?

[–]mces97 109 points110 points  (147 children)

Didn't they study the mRNA shots and came to the conclusion even if you get 1 shot it offers about the same protection as J&J does? Plus, most people if anything have an immune response reaction after the second shot. Plus they really seem to have streamlined shots well. I've been to a few different sites taking family, friends and we all were in and out in 20 minutes. The waiting period was the longest part of the whole process.

[–][deleted] 104 points105 points  (118 children)

From what I read yes. The mRNA vaccines are simply the best by far.

[–]mces97 184 points185 points  (84 children)

In terms of safety and efficacy, that does seem true. Honestly I've been saying the same. The ingredients in both the mRNA shots are some of the safest we've ever used. No preservatives, no metals, food grade lipids, salts, sugar and the mRNA instruction. When I heard they only had a few simple ingredients, just funny sounding chemical names that lamens may not understand I was super excited to get either mRNA shot. I got Moderna. And this Sunday I will be 100% fully vaccinated, 6 weeks out total from first shot. And I'd do it again if it meant never getting covid. Cause f getting covid. I don't want to take any chances. I already had a virus in 2019 that destroyed my right ear. I didn't die or wasn't hospitalized. So I take super offense to people who say it only has a 1% death rate. Try living with a 10khz sound wave in your ear 24/7. It's not fun.

[–][deleted] 108 points109 points  (12 children)

I totally feel you , I was very fortunate to get Pfizer back in December through my job, and after a year of treating Covid patients , wearing N95's everywhere it felt like a massive victory. People seem to never consider morbidity and only mortality. Look what polio did to the people it didn't kill. Thankfully all of my family qualified for vaccination and feb and most got moderna and some Pfizer. These mRNA vaccines have proven to be nothing but safe and EXTREMLY effective.

[–]bazilbt 5 points6 points  (3 children)

My grandfather never really recovered from Polio his entire life. He was lucky he wasn't permanently paralyzed but he lost something like half his lung function.

[–]itwasntthisTL 22 points23 points  (0 children)

I got covid back in November and I still have 0% use of smell and maybe 25% of my taste back. I was fairly lucky that those were the only symptoms besides severe fatigue, but if covid can do that to my taste and smell, imagine what other nerve damage/side affects are possible, especially long term. I decided to get the vaccine despite working from home because I don’t want someone else to die from covid. My family swears up and down that the vaccine will kill you and it’s experimental, but I just remind them that covid itself is more unknown than the vaccine.

[–]implicitumbrella 43 points44 points  (13 children)

if it helps at all I've had tinitus over 30 years now and it's no longer a major issue for me. It's just there in the background and I effectively don't notice it most of the time.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Only time I ever notice my tinnitus is when I’m going to sleep. Have to fall asleep with rain sounds or something similar playing. But I probably sleep better with that than complete silence anyway.

[–]taulover 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I randomly got tinnitus last fall, likely due to stuffy nose/allergies, and it's been with me ever since. I don't notice it much anymore, but also the place where I currently live has a lot of white noise from a heater nearby, and I'm worried that when I go back home the silence will make it bother me more.

[–]callmetellamas 13 points14 points  (1 child)

The ingredients in both the mRNA shots are some of the safest we've ever used. No preservatives, no metals, food grade lipids, salts, sugar and the mRNA instruction.

Well, there’s PEG-2000, which can cause allergic reactions, even anaphylaxis in some.

[–]BasedOnAir 9 points10 points  (25 children)

What kind of virus gives tinnitus?

[–][deleted] 23 points24 points  (12 children)

Pretty much all of them. Cold, flu, COVID. I contracted COVID around the holidays, and it caused a condition called labyrinthitis which caused me to experience an extreme case of vertigo that led to the loss of hearing out of my left ear. Labyrinthitis is caused by a viral infection inflicting severe inflammation on the auditory nerves and labyrinth membrane in the inner ear, which can cause permanent hearing loss/damage/tinnitus.

[–]Deeliciousness 18 points19 points  (0 children)

All kinds of inner ear damage can cause tinnitus.

[–]twir1s 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Agreed on all the above. I want to point out (because at one point in time someone else pointed out a common saying I was spelling wrong and saved me embarrassment from then forward and I mean this only to be helpful) that it’s layman’s terms (not lamen or laymen’s).

Edit: it seems there is mixed advice on whether laymen’s is appropriate. Layman’s is the rule though.

[–]ApizzaApizza 37 points38 points  (16 children)

J&j was tested after all the covid variants were a thing, the other vaccines were tested before. I was reading that they’re all likely equally effective.

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (3 children)

I believe Pfizer and Moderna ran studied with the British, SA and Brazilian variant and although there was a reduction in neutralizing antibodies, it was still more than enough for clinical efficacy. I'll try and find the papers I read for that.

[–]Papercurtain 4 points5 points  (8 children)

Yeah I heard that the Pfizer and Moderns tests were when infections were still ramping up, while AZ and J&J tested later, when there were a lot more cases overall. There's a good chance that skewed some of the results.

[–]jeopardy987987 2 points3 points  (6 children)

the amount of cases doesn't matter. the studies are designed to stop when they've tracked a certain number of cases for the control group.

So all higher or lower community infection rates do is change how long the trial takes to complete, but nothing else about it.

Now, J&J dealt with more variants, so THAT might have had an effect. But that's a different thing.

[–]CanYouPointMeToTacos 18 points19 points  (14 children)

In Pfizer’s clinical trial they showed 82% efficacy after 1 shot, but they were only able to obtain data during the 21 day period between doses. I haven’t seen a study examining efficacy of a single dose over longer periods of time, but its probably not far off J&J

[–]jeopardy987987 34 points35 points  (13 children)

The CDC's study showing 80% single-dose efficacy was tiny - about 4k participants (and they were young-ish healthcare workers). The UK and Israel ran much larger studies (24k in the UK one, and a huge 1.2M in the Israeli one.)

The UK found 72% efficacy three weeks after the first dose; Israel found 66%.

For one week post second dose, the UK found 86% and Israel found 94% efficacy.

UK study: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3790399

Israeli study: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2101765

[–]Diegobyte 5 points6 points  (1 child)

More places in the USA it’s way easier the get the mrna

[–]VOZ1 4 points5 points  (2 children)

The real damage from the J&J vaccine being shelved is that it is one shot, which means it is extremely valuable in reaching herd immunity by allowing public health officials to vaccinate people on the spot: they can go door-to-door, set up mobile vaccination sites, etc. NYC was looking to use the J&J vaccine this way, to allow underserved, impoverished, and otherwise difficult-to-vaccinate populations vaccinated.

[–]Scizmz 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Doesn't this mean that by that logic you're more likely to get a blood clot if you were infected with covid which would be an eventuality?

[–]waltzingperegrine 3 points4 points  (0 children)

My coworker was scheduled to get the J&J on Wednesday and the provider canceled her appointment. Her new Pfizer appointment is now on Saturday. Some states aren't that efficient on the turn around.

[–]BGYeti 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have yet to find J&J available anywhere in my state prior to the pause even if I wanted it which I didnt, finding Moderna and Pfizer is much easier even though appointments most likely will be a few days out

[–]goatfuckersupreme 2 points3 points  (1 child)

in my corner of the US, it's more "why the hell are there never any open appointments"

[–][deleted] 131 points132 points  (45 children)

Surprised to see the top comments about a pro-vaccine article having some nuance here on reddit. 1/8th less of a chance than getting clots from COVID isnt super reassuring for me to get my parents the AZ shot, especially when they arent going outside much and can wait for Pfizer or Moderna.

[–]danweber 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The clots seem to appear less in old people, for whom the risk of COVID is greater.

My parents are already vaccinated, but I would chew glass to get them the J&J or AZ vaccine if that would get it to them.

[–]FondantFick 57 points58 points  (11 children)

Please don't forget that getting clots from covid is super rare as well.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (1 child)

Why are people pretending that blood clots are the only bad thing a covid infection can lead to?

[–]jaldihaldi 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Partly because governments and medical communities are not educating people correctly about the relative benefits.

Blood clots are serious - the hysteria out there today is causing anxiety among the public - you cannot fault the people alone for over reacting when the appropriate authorities appear negligent.

Also most people cannot see the damage the virus does - so the mind tends to go for the easiest thing.

[–]swierdo 9 points10 points  (4 children)

Overall chances of [E: getting serious blood clots from] either are still super low [E: but there's many other much more common ways in which covid can kill you. The risk of dangerous side effects from the vaccine is] comparable to the risk of dying from some non-natural cause next week (table for comparison), or riding a motor cycle to work. Or simply living your life for a week. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if just being stressed about potential side effects of the vaccine is more deadly.

There will always be some risk. Yes, you should avoid high risk situations [E: such as going to crowded places during a pandemic], but you can't live your life avoiding all risk. This vaccine is very low risk, and the reward is getting your (and everyone else's) freedom back.

Edit: I did not intend to downplay the dangers of covid, it's a serious illness that has killed many people in many different ways. What I meant to say was that taking the vaccine is not very dangerous. I hope I clarified my comment enough with my edits (the [E: ...] parts).

TLDR; get vaccinated

[–]saltycandycat 47 points48 points  (17 children)

I’m not sure saying no to AZ and then getting Pfizer in a few months is an option in the U.K. Only women under 30 are given any choice in what vaccine to take; I really don’t know what would happen if someone else said they’d only take an mRNA one.

ETA: I’ve been informed elsewhere that men under 30 are being offered a choice as well.

[–]mmcnlI'm fully vaccinated! 💉💪🩹 19 points20 points  (12 children)

Sure, but for example in Denmark it is. Probably in the US too (with J&J). That's why they stopped with AZ all together.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's not a choice I'm Denmark they have stopped using it altogether.

Not a choice in Sweden either if yoy are under 65

[–]thinkingdoing 10 points11 points  (0 children)

If you have the choice to take the AZ vaccine now but you want to wait for the Pfizer vaccine, you're gambling that you won't contract Covid during that time, which carries a much higher risk of killing you and causing long lasting health problems.

[–]tammybyrd63 207 points208 points  (28 children)

My husband had a stroke from what doctors believe was covid. He felt I'll in April of last year. But his stroke was on July 1st. He has a Protein S deficiency. Which alone is extremely rare. He was a healthy male before this.

[–]ValuableCross 31 points32 points  (2 children)

I am sorry and I’m hoping he is recovering. I hope you both consider seeing a counselor that is good with PTSD / trauma.

Source: Perfectly healthy male who had a stroke (caused by some unknown virus) 7 years ago. I tried to power through/grit my teeth and be a tough guy through it all. You can suppress crap for a while but eventually it comes back.

If he wants someone to chat with let me know.

[–]tammybyrd63 19 points20 points  (1 child)

Thank you. He wants to go back to work but hes permanently retired. He is 66, but has had a job since he was 8 yrs old (milking cows at a dairy).

[–]Gigatron_0 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Salt of the earth he is

[–]Charbarzz 40 points41 points  (0 children)

I hope he makes a full recovery. Strokes are terrifying.

[–]W0666007Boosted! ✨💉✅ 34 points35 points  (20 children)

Why do they think it was COVID and not his protein S deficiency?

[–]AuditoryCreampie 59 points60 points  (5 children)

They probably think covid caused the protein S deficiency. Covid has caused some health problems for people that led to other issues. Like the broadway performer that lost his leg and eventually died after covid

[–]Kanotari 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You're thinking of Nick Cordero, RIP. I feel so bad for his wife.

[–]W0666007Boosted! ✨💉✅ 15 points16 points  (3 children)

Well COVID can definitively lead to strokes/clotting, there's no doubt about it. But protein S deficiency can also be a genetic condition, which I assumed is what OP was referring to since she described it as "very rare".

[–]frame_of_mind 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Just because it is genetic doesn’t mean there aren’t environmental factors involved. Genetic factors can lie dormant until something from the environment triggers them, like COVID. This is the the current train of thought about what causes autism.

[–]crazyreddit929Boosted! ✨💉✅ 158 points159 points  (54 children)

I had made this same statement a while back complaining that the math is much more complicated. Someone had replied that someone else had already done the math for me. Here is the link on the total risk of getting Covid and having severe disease compared to getting the rare HIT like clotting issue from vaccines.

https://wintoncentre.maths.cam.ac.uk/news/communicating-potential-benefits-and-harms-astra-zeneca-covid-19-vaccine/

The charts halfway down show risk comparison based on age and current Covid cases in your area.

[–]shoeless001 27 points28 points  (2 children)

This is one of the most helpful things I have seen on AZ and maybe the thing on Reddit that will most impact my life. I am likely to be eligible for AZ soon and in a low to medium risk area (4 per 10k but rising). I am going to sign up rather than wait two months for Pfizer or Moderna. Thanks.

[–]saltycandycat 59 points60 points  (40 children)

This doesn’t seem to look at the gender dimension, though, does it? Have there been many male blood clot cases? I think looking at women only, the risk from clots might be close to double. As a woman in my 30s who can work from home indefinitely, I’m not very excited about getting AZ. But since I’m in the U.K. I don’t think I’ll get a choice.

[–]armitage_shank 34 points35 points  (20 children)

The higher numbers in women are probably due to more young women working in healthcare / social care than young men.

[–]saltycandycat 8 points9 points  (4 children)

Oh, good point. It’d be nice to see the gender data broken down to see the %s.

[–]ulchachan 26 points27 points  (2 children)

The MHRA (UK regulator) said that from the UK at the moment there isn't a clear gender discrepancy. More women than men in the UK had the side effect but more women than men had the AZ vaccine and when they corrected for that, there's currently no effect.

Edit: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/mhra-issues-new-advice-concluding-a-possible-link-between-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-and-extremely-rare-unlikely-to-occur-blood-clots

This is a source on the demographics, including where they note this.

[–]saltycandycat 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That’s really reassuring, thanks!

[–]Kyrond 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Are there even percentages? In J&J it is about 6 cases no?
Then if there are roughly 6x fewer young men vaccinated, we have nothing to go off of.

Similarly in EU there is no vaccine for young people and UK is fairly small in terms of population.

It would be great to see if there is anything, but it is entirely possible not enough young people have been vaccinated.

[–]Actuaryba 56 points57 points  (20 children)

I agree with what you are saying, it’s not apples to apples. You need to consider your chances of getting infected like you said. However you also need to consider all the other complications of COVID, not just blood clots. Considering that, it made the decision to get the shot pretty easy for me.

[–]mmcnlI'm fully vaccinated! 💉💪🩹 13 points14 points  (3 children)

You also need to consider alternative options, such as getting a different vaccine.

[–]Actuaryba 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Sure I agree with that if you have that option.

[–]usachin 25 points26 points  (14 children)

I understand and I agree but I also find it funny how all those British papers comes up with excuses for using their vaccine when there is another choice which has not been linked to causing blood cloths. If someone is concerned they can always get the other one, AZ and JJ needs to find out which subset of people are having issues with their vaccine. Given the choice between on that gives me a small chance of complication and another that does not, I want the one that doesn’t.

[–]currygull 14 points15 points  (1 child)

I think saying the papers are just making up excuses for using their vaccines is a massive oversimplification. There are multiple things at play here, but let's split it into two chunks:

  1. What is the harm/benefit trade-off for the AZ vaccine across particular groups of the population?
  2. Should an individual who has had the AZ vaccine be worried?

The first brings into play the risk of serious harm from covid vs the risk of harm from the vaccine when viewed in the aggregate across millions of people. In a number of countries it has been concluded that this analysis means there are different alternatives which may be better suited for these groups.

On the other hand, the second question is about the absolute risk of an individual to suffer serious harm from the vaccine, eg one of these blood clots. In this case, you may want to compare this risk to other potentially fatal risks that you experience (and probably ignore) in everyday life to give perspective on the chance of this happening to you.

Both of these are valid analysis, and they are not at all mutually exclusive: a person under 30 (or wherever you want to draw the line) might be better off getting a different jab, but at the same, they probably shouldn't be overly anxious about developing this rare type of blood clot if they get a dose of AZ.

[–]psychobserver 37 points38 points  (4 children)

What confuses me is that most people never cared about clots probabilities of much more common drugs used everyday almost like candy, diets and bad unhealthy habits orders of magnitude more likely to give you clots plus a multitude of other problems. How many people avoid planes because of clots? How many people avoid anti-inflammatory drugs because of clots? A very big percentage of the population still don't care and will ignore the issue because "it's their life choice". For some reason this doesn't apply for covid-19 vaccines, which are actually much more useful and will contribute to save your life and the people around you. In my region we only had Astrazeneca available and many people denied vaccination because they were scared. I'm not sure they realize this directly caused the death by covid of some of them. 400+ deaths everyday here.

[–]probablyJamesCaan 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Vaccines are weird in that they are given to perfectly healthy people, in theory. Don’t underestimate unvaccinated folks blind faith in positive future outcomes. Other medicine is presumably taken to counter an already-existing problem.

[–]aedes 126 points127 points  (33 children)

The chance of catching covid is more than 1/10. It would be better to describe it as about 10% per year so far, given that COVID still exists and continues to infect new people.

This differs than any risk associated with the vaccine which is a one-time risk, rather than an ongoing risk like getting COVID.

As a result the magnitude of risk with covid is higher than what your back of the napkin math is suggesting.

It may be something closer to like a 30-40% lifetime risk of infection depending how the pandemic plays out and how old you are.

[–]Yanmarka 23 points24 points  (1 child)

It would be better to describe it as about 10% per year so far

But will it be more than a year between AstraZeneca and mRNA availability for an individual? For someone living in a developed country, probably not

[–]knud 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In Denmark we are talking 2-4 weeks extra to get either Pfizer or Moderna. We have around 500 daily cases of covid-19 out of 5.8 mio, so it's highly unlikely to even catch covid-19 because of the delay.

[–]mydaycake 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I would think maybe more? That’s taking into account people still taking precautions like masks and social distancing activities. Once a big amount of the population is vaccinated (even if not full herd immunity yet) people are going to not follow precautions anymore, so the unvaccinated population and part of the vaccinated population will have very high probability of get infected as covid and its new variants are more contagious than the flu. So lifetime probability would be high specially if the natural immunity doesn’t last a lifetime

[–]selfstartr 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Great answer! Not seen it put like this before.

[–]etgohomeok 28 points29 points  (2 children)

Depends on how much longer COVID continues to be prevalent in the community, what kind of precautions an individual is taking against it, what local case rates are in one's specific community, etc. All just things that go to show that it's not apples-to-apples and everyone's situation is different.

But yes if for whatever reason someone is unable to speak to a doctor about their own personal situation, my opinion is still that the prevailing advice should be to get vaccinated. Certainly the countries that are much more dependent on non-mRNA vaccines than the USA should not be turning their noses at it.

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (3 children)

America is currently undergoing a massive vaccination campaign that will see us reach herd immunity by late late June or July. If a person has managed to avoid Covid this long with how bad Covid is in the country, they should be fine waiting for a pfizer or moderna for 1-2 months

[–]shartifartblastI'm fully vaccinated! 💉💪🩹 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is based upon the current average human's behavior. One can effectively lower their risk of COVID infection to 0. Full stop.

So the choice isn't some nonzero chance of coivd infection vs vaccine risk with AZ or J&J. Those are two of a myriad of options available including an effectively 0 chance of covid via hard personal lockdown for a period of time until there is an opportunity to get one of the mRNA vaccines.

Not all options are available or feasible for everyone to be sure but the options aren't limited to riskier vaccine vs. escalating risk of COVID for everyone either.

[–]sarcazm 10 points11 points  (6 children)

the vaccine which is a one-time risk

I don't know about that. It's looking more like the covid vaccine will become an annual or bi-annual vaccine (like the flu shot).

Now, we could also say that if you've had the vaccine before and did not present side effects, than your risk of presenting side effects with future vaccinations is very small.

However, you could possibly say the same with covid. Are your symptoms/risks with covid the same every time you get it?

So, here's what I would say. Get the vaccination because A. the risks are smaller, but also B. It's in a controlled environment where scientists can continue to improve the formula.

Covid is unpredictable because of variants in the wild.

[–]discopistachios 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That’s true, but early reports are looking like if you don’t develop VIPIT with your first dose of a viral vector vaccine, you’re probably in the clear.

Taken with a grain of salt though because pretty data on pretty much all of this stuff is too early to tell.

[–]Spacey_G 2 points3 points  (4 children)

It's looking more like the covid vaccine will become an annual or bi-annual vaccine (like the flu shot).

What data are coming out to suggest that?

[–]Meatslinger 28 points29 points  (6 children)

I think the thing that makes this all a non-issue for me is that the rate of occurrence is statistically insignificant, and I mean that in a very direct interpretation of the term. The last figure I saw/heard was that six individuals had been identified with blood clots that could be attributed to the vaccine, out of about 7 million people vaccinated with it. That puts the rate of incidence at about 0.00009%. Honestly, I think I took on about as much risk, if not more, when I crossed the street this morning to get to work from my car. I get the whole “minimizing risk” argument, but this one is in the category of things that are lower-risk than activities the average person already chooses to do voluntarily with the assumption of relative safety, like crossing the street, or driving to work, or even just spending an afternoon out in the sun (12.7 cases of melanoma per 100,000 people, or a 0.0127% chance; 141 times more likely than a vaccine-related blood clot).

Yes, there’s a “chance”. But it’s about as good as your odds of winning the lottery; maybe even less (depending which one you play). Anybody reading this on the toilet is probably at higher risk to their health due to sitting and having bad posture than they would be of getting a clot after vaccination.

[–]rematar 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It's beyond ridiculous. Thousands a day are dying. If nothing else, ship it to India and other countries which might struggle with getting frozen vaccines to rural areas.

I'd feel safer getting that vaccine than hopping on a plane, and I understand that planes are safe.

[–]DualityDrn 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Feels like a none issue that the media outlets are pushing to make headlines.

[–]GhostRiders 24 points25 points  (6 children)

It's not so much what risk does covid-19 to yourself and more what risk is there from you catching covid-19 and then spreading to others who might be more vulnerable.

The way to stop a Pandemic is to limit the virus's ability to spread.

That is why just vaccinating those who are vulnerable isn't anywhere near enough.

The other point that I found during this Pandemic is that many people are obsessed with risk of death, there is much more to consider.

Yes the risk of death might be so small that its not a consideration but what are the long term effects of having covid-19?

We know that many people have and area still suffering from long covid-19, we know that covid-19 can cause organ damage even in fit and healthy people.

So it's not just as simple as will covid-19 kill me.

[–]Viewfromthe31stfloorBoosted! ✨💉✅ 6 points7 points  (5 children)

I agree. I’m not sure how we came down to death as the sole factor.

[–]rottentomati 17 points18 points  (5 children)

Not to mention, for most people, the alternative is to just get one of the “safer” vaccines like Pfizer’s.

[–]caseyjownz84 11 points12 points  (4 children)

I agree with everything except your comparison argument. COVID is not only dangerous because of blood clots. So the real comparison is % Risks of blood clots of Vaccine vs % ALL significant health risks of COVID.

[–]Dubbeldoktor 21 points22 points  (10 children)

You also have to consider the ethical circumstances. There's a difference in knowingly subjecting a healthy person compared to a hypothetical risk if catching a disease.

[–]veysel24 12 points13 points  (0 children)

People should be allowed to choose that is all

[–]captainhaddockI'm fully vaccinated! 💉💪🩹 13 points14 points  (2 children)

you have to factor in both the risk of COVID causing a blood clot and the risk of getting COVID in the first place.

You also have to factor in every other person down the line who could catch covid-19 from you or from someone who caught it from you. By not getting infected yourself, you might save a thousand other people from getting infected.

You also have to factor in all the effects of long covid you could suffer from.

It might be a situation where there is little personal benefit, but great public benefit, for people to get the AZ vaccine if that's all that is available to them.

[–]Al-Khwarizmi 548 points549 points  (69 children)

On what age group? It's very clear that if you take the population as a whole, the benefits of AstraZeneca outweights the risks, as the virus is really deadly for old and at-risk patients. No one but anti-vaxxers can doubt that.

The real question is wether, say, a 20-year-old female (or even a 35-year-old male in a low-incidence country) should be offered it.

[–]MrKelraen 130 points131 points  (12 children)

‘The Covid-19 risk is higher than seen with the current vaccines, even for those under 30,’ says study co-author

[–]throuuavvayBoosted! ✨💉✅ 102 points103 points  (8 children)

Is that assuming they catch it in the first place, or is that probability already factored in?

[–]rjmsci 31 points32 points  (1 child)

This is based on E-health records, so as I understand it, is just based on people with COVID. This is why each country must make it's own decision based on the scale of the pandemic within their borders. In Brazil, for example, it's much more likely that you will catch COVID and then be subject to this higher risk than in Denmark, which is why the latter has suspended the AZ vaccine for now.

[–]throuuavvayBoosted! ✨💉✅ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I see, thanks, that makes sense.

[–]MrKelraen 44 points45 points  (5 children)

That does seem to be assuming you get covid.

They still drew the conclusion that “There’s no doubt that Covid is a much greater risk of this [condition] than any of the vaccines,” said Professor Paul Harrison, a co-author of the study » and there are no actual numbers in the article, so it’s hard to check for ourselves

[–]throuuavvayBoosted! ✨💉✅ 27 points28 points  (3 children)

Right, then as the other poster says, it is up to the authorities of different regions to consider the likelihood of infection and availability of alternative vaccines and compute that risk assessment. For most countries currently suffering under the pandemic, they should just take any jab they can get.

[–]crowleytoo 11 points12 points  (0 children)

yeah but if we already have pfizer and moderna, is covid more dangerous in the week or two more it'll take to source one of those than it is to take AZ now?

[–]No_more_hidingBoosted! ✨💉✅ 14 points15 points  (0 children)

This study quotes two previously healthy young men who died from these rare clots from Covid. It's clear there should be a cost/ benefit analysis but also it does appear to affect young people. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214751921000037

[–]afkzaman 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Here's some rough translations of data from Germany as published in Paul-Ehrlich-Institut vaccine safety reports . Unfortunately there's no data of CVST cases from the covid infected groups, only from the vaccinated group.

According to the Robert Koch Institute, 14,381,068 vaccinations had been performed by April 2, 2021, including 10,722,876 vaccinations with Comirnaty, 713,067 vaccinations with Moderna, and 2,945,125 vaccinations with Vaxzevria.

As of 04/02/2021, 42 cases of central venous/sinus vein thrombosis have been reported following vaccination with Vaxzevria. Thrombocytopenia was also reported in 23 cases.

All but seven of the other cases involved women aged 20 to 63 years. The men were aged 24 to 58 years. Eight patients (5 women, 3 men) died.

The Paul Ehrlich Institute has numerically more case reports of sinus vein thrombosis after vaccination with Vaxzevria in women (83.3% vs. 16.7%), with young women being particularly frequently affected. However, women were also vaccinated more frequently than men, according to the Robert Koch Institute.

For women aged 20-59 years, significantly more cases were observed (n=33) than would have been expected based on the background incidence.

Seven cases of sinus vein thrombosis were reported after vaccination with Comirnaty. No cases reported thrombocytopenia. Three women aged 34 to 81 years and four men aged 81 to 86 years were affected. The number of reported cases, taking into considering the doses inoculated compared with the expected Number of sinus thromboses not increased.

(Standardised Morbidity Ratio, SMR, 23.57; 95% CI: 16.22-33.10). The same was true for men aged 20-59 years (SMR 27.20; 95% CI: 10,94-56,04).

[–]stichtom 22 points23 points  (2 children)

Also why would anyone under 30 take AZ If offered a mRNA alternative? It's not just about safety but efficacy is also slightly better.

Not saying AZ is bad or not valid, not at all but this data looks a bit sketchy without seeing hard numbers. Also it might wildly change depending on what's the probability of catching covid-19 in the first place.

[–]izumiiii 32 points33 points  (1 child)

Any country heavily using AZ now doesn't have much stock in other mrna vaccines. It may lead to months+ waiting for this leaving you at higher risk of covid.

[–]ninjahampster105 75 points76 points  (5 children)

Why the fuck is everything breaking news

[–]nocomment3030 18 points19 points  (1 child)

It's just the thumbnail for every article from the independent

[–]scoonts89 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Just like everything is “next fucking level”

[–]Tafinho 103 points104 points  (12 children)

I don’t know whether this is just bad reporting or someone trying to push a narrative.

The study’s title is

Cerebral venous thrombosis: a retrospective cohort study of 513,284 confirmed COVID-19 cases and a comparison with 489,871 people receiving a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine

And studies the rate of CVT on mRNA recipients.

It doesn’t nor attempts to study the rate on Ad vector vaccines.

[–]e_hota 21 points22 points  (7 children)

So when they calculate these “8x’s more likely” numbers are they including estimated asymptomatic cases or just symptomatic, positive tested COVID cases?

[–]bond0815 254 points255 points  (42 children)

Some people here seem miss the point:

Nobody would voluntarily infect themselves with Covid. Any available vaccine is ofc much better than a Covid infection. Nodody has ever claimed otherwise.

But depending on where you live and what you do, yor risk of getting a covid infection in, say, the next 6 month might be rather low.

Now, if AZ would be the only Vaccine there is, and since you would get Covid sooner or later, ofc you should get the AZ vaccine asap.

But what if you could get another vaccine, like Pfizer/Biontech, say 1-2 months later? Would you still take AZ right away? Depending on your age and risk of infection it might actually be better if you didt.

The question of using AZ is not a non-question or hysteria, as some here claim it to be. Its a matter of risk assessment. In most circumstances the asseseemnt will recommned taking AZ. But not in all.

[–]this_place_stinks 39 points40 points  (8 children)

To me there’s a real question that gets into ethics around whether AZ and J&J should still be surged into developing countries with outbreaks (see: Brazil).

Feels elitist, but those countries probably around getting huge doses of Pfizer/Moderna anytime soon

Would seem to be a huge net save of lives

[–]bond0815 42 points43 points  (3 children)

That is a very fair point.

I dont even think its "elitists".

In a country with a high infection rate and no available alternatives, any working vaccine is a huge benefit. In a country with a low infection rate / available alternatives it might look different.

[–]SketchySeaBeast 67 points68 points  (7 children)

The question of using AZ is not a non-question or hysteria, as some here claim it to be. Its a matter of risk assessment.

Which people are hilariously bad at.

[–]Anjz 16 points17 points  (3 children)

Fact of the matter is, a big proportion of the population is terrible at risk management. They don't understand the magnitude of probability, so if a lot of people are doing assessments they're doing so erronously.

[–]longgamma 6 points7 points  (0 children)

On e they figure out who is susceptible to clots with Oxford and JnJ, just give them the Pfizer or moderna vaccine. Anyone with no chance of blood clots can easily take the AstraZeneca vaccine. Let’s give the scientists and researchers a little more time. They have done amazing work so far and they can even address this issue. I am very hopeful of a positive outcome.

[–]qwertyNopesir 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It’s the gosh darn trolley problem isn’t it?

[–]birdboix 38 points39 points  (3 children)

well that settles it officials should definitely ban Covid too

[–]sangotenrs 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Daring take, but i agree

[–]alex613 20 points21 points  (5 children)

I love how this has devolved into a pissing match about what is more deadly: the vaccine or the virus. What a gongshow.

[–]leandersieben 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Yes yes and that's good and all, don't get me wrong, I am 100% pro vax, but wouldn't you feel better getting something that does not cause clots at all? I don't get that argument, just because getting the AZ vaccine is still a better choice than getting nothing, it is absoulutely reasonable for people to prefer other vaccines over it.

[–]Poop_On_A_Loop 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Why are you guys going against what science and the doctors are currently telling us?

This sub is just anti science now

[–]SaintMurray 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Why are all news on this sub from the Independent?

[–]Phelixx 24 points25 points  (3 children)

What people don’t seem to get is that if you are low risk and not personally worried about Covid, when given the choice, you are more likely to choose a better vaccine.

Pfizer/Moderna are both higher effectiveness and come with no bad press. Can anyone actually say if they had a choice between AZ and one of the above they are choosing AZ? It offers no advantages.

I am pro-vaccine. People also need to understand that wanting to get the best vaccine is not that crazy a concept.

[–]wilerman 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Exactly. I’m a low risk person in a low risk area, why would I choose the AZ vaccine with an added risk over the “safer” vaccines. I understand the odds of a blood clot are minuscule and I’ll take it if it’s my only option, but rushing for the AZ vaccine isn’t something I necessarily want to do.

[–]Independent_Newt_298[🍰] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It depends what you mean by best, real world data suggests AZ is actually better at stimulating T cell amounts in the body than Pfizer so might be offering a longer lasting protection. So AZ might actually be offering some advantages.

[–]buJ98 3 points4 points  (1 child)

This sub lost all credibility to perform a cost-benefit analysis on human lives when it failed to do so correctly during the early months of the pandemic.

Funny how that worked out.

[–]Kadiogo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This sub lost all credibility to perform a cost-benefit analysis on human lives when it failed to do so correctly during the early months of the pandemic.

Lol why would anyone put any credibility on a public subreddit to do that in the first place?

[–]escherbach 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Meanwhile, the UK becoming covid free from mostly 1-dose of AZ...

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

(This despite all schools opening early March)

Is nobody noticing that US is still struggling to suppress cases and death numbers despite a massive rollout of Pfizer vaccine?

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[–]sevenproxies07 18 points19 points  (17 children)

As someone with a hereditary clotting disorder I am so fucking glad I got a different vaccine

people annoyed with the attention the clotting is getting should realize this stuff matters to lots of people, it’s literally life and death

[–]Pessimist2020[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The risk of developing a rare brain clot from Covid-19 is about eight times greater than vaccination with the AstraZeneca - Oxford jab, according to a new study. This condition, where a patient presents abnormally low levels of platelets, has been detected alongside CVT in the cases of concern reported to date. However, Prof Harrison, a professor of psychiatry and head of the Translational Neurobiology Group at Oxford University, said the research highlight “two important conclusions”.

[–]Hold_Downtown 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The media 200 times more likely to cause needless concern and chaos than if they just included how many lives are saved vs killed if they take the vaccine. Let's start publishing the positive side of the news instead of trying to raise panic so you get more readers and viewers at the cost of mental health of humans. Douche canoes...

[–]cosmicucumber 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You're more likely to die from covid than from the vaccine? Fuck me dead why didn't I realise that earlier

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (18 children)

In over 480,000 people receiving a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer or Moderna), CVT occurred in 4 in a million. CVT has been reported to occur in about 5 in a million people after first dose of the AZ-Oxford COVID-19 vaccine.

Massive CI but is this saying the mRNA vaccines may be having the exact same problem?

[–]throuuavvayBoosted! ✨💉✅ 35 points36 points  (8 children)

Not the same problem (these are CVTs from all causes, and not their combination with low platelets) and that number just matches the background rate for the general population. At the moment there is nothing to suggest that the mRNA vaccines are causing the same problems as AZ and apparently J&J.

[–]occamrazor 6 points7 points  (1 child)

4 in a million for half a million subjects means 2 cases. I would not rely too much on these results.

[–]NotAnotherEmpire 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Not the same condition, CDC discussed this yesterday.

[–]n9077911 19 points20 points  (5 children)

Yes, According to the CBS article.

5 in 1million for AZ

4 in 1million for pfizer

And a whopping 39 in 1million from covid itself.

These are all the rare brain blood clot.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccine-blood-clots-study-pfizer-astrazeneca-moderna-oxford/

I'll try reserve opinion till more analysis comes out. But even if this is correct and mrna has an issue it's still massively better to take the vaccine.

[–]rjmsci 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Preprint is here: https://osf.io/a9jdq/

[–]lorenzo_6991 71 points72 points  (42 children)

This confirms how damaging the level of mass hysteria we’re experiencing over vaccines in Europe is.

[–]MagnesusBoosted! ✨💉✅ 54 points55 points  (0 children)

In Poland it is literally killing people right now. 680 deaths today and problems with filling vaccination slots.

[–]Twilight_Republic 9 points10 points  (11 children)

then why is everybody pulling the AZ and J&J vaccines?

seems like there must be more to this story than they're telling us...

[–]Legalise_Gay_Weed 10 points11 points  (1 child)

I used to believe that when governments do something, they must have sound reasoning, but I've found that it's mostly a bunch of people, with below average IQs, making poorly informed decisions and hoping for the best. I mean, if this pandemic hasn't made that clear, I don't know what will.

[–]Glass_Cleaner 8 points9 points  (0 children)

History in general.

[–]Jaggedmallard26 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Do you seriously still think the Governments are taking the most scientifically sound response after the past year and a half of governments taking the worst possible course of action at almost every point?

[–]chrisbenoitsbowflex 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I still don’t like those odds...

[–]CattyOhio74 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Facts: exist

Conservatives and hicks: screeching

[–]LA_Commuter 7 points8 points  (1 child)

The research, which has yet to be peer-reviewed, drew comparisons between more than 500,000 Covid-19 patients in the US and 34 million people in Europe who have received the AstraZeneca vaccine, as well as the background level of CVT in the general population.

Nothing can really be drawn from this until peer review is done.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (2 children)

So I have 8 times more likelihood to get a clot from COVID. The prerequisite here is to catch COVID, which if proper social distancing and masking is done is very low, and then hit a very unlikely side effect. Vs AstraZeneca the prerequisite is taking the vaccine.