idk about the US, but this just happened in Germany (and many other european nations). We have the Astrazeneca vaccine here, physically, and don't use it because seven people got a brain thrombosis out of the 1.6 million people that got it. It's not even clear as of now whether the complications were caused by the vaccine
The reason prescription meds have so many side effects is because, during trials, you have to record any symptom from the subject. So if even if the client gets a headache from dehydration or a stomach ache from eating too much candy, that has to be part of the study. So what ends up happening is that you get a list of side effects that may or may not actually be caused by the medication. I'm sure I'm oversimplifying it as there are ways to root out statistical outliers from studies. But I assume that these vaccine rollout are basically doing the same thing. If someone has a heart attack 30 mins after getting the vaccine ,they will count that.
While it sucks because it means holding up the rollout process, I can see why they do this. Because everything isn't immediately clear. You wouldn't want to keep going and then find out in a year that your vaccine did have some effect on blood clotting.
This is why you don't put all your eggs on a new vaccine technology during a crisis and it's why patents and development information needs to be public. Rather than having to depend on a single company's vaccine there could be a replacement right behind it ready to go.
On the other hand, even if the clotting is caused by the vaccine, it might still be a better idea to just continue with it.
We already have the doses and not using them would result in 500k fewer people getting the vaccine per week. Of those people, some will get covid, and more than average will die from it, because the people currently getting the vaccine are the populations that are most at risk.
Continuing despite the risks might be the option that saves more lives in the end
We're supposed to get 8 million doses of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine in April but yeah... Could have had all healthcare workers vaccinated by now if we could use the AstraZeneca vaccine.
For a single dose vaccine it's very effective and it's the only vaccine where we have concrete proof that it works against the South African Covid 19 variant, even in HIV/AIDS positive people (two factors very important in South Africa). But yeah Johnson and Johnson is a terrible company, even if they produced a good vaccine.
:amerikkka-clap:
idk about the US, but this just happened in Germany (and many other european nations). We have the Astrazeneca vaccine here, physically, and don't use it because seven people got a brain thrombosis out of the 1.6 million people that got it. It's not even clear as of now whether the complications were caused by the vaccine
The reason prescription meds have so many side effects is because, during trials, you have to record any symptom from the subject. So if even if the client gets a headache from dehydration or a stomach ache from eating too much candy, that has to be part of the study. So what ends up happening is that you get a list of side effects that may or may not actually be caused by the medication. I'm sure I'm oversimplifying it as there are ways to root out statistical outliers from studies. But I assume that these vaccine rollout are basically doing the same thing. If someone has a heart attack 30 mins after getting the vaccine ,they will count that.
While it sucks because it means holding up the rollout process, I can see why they do this. Because everything isn't immediately clear. You wouldn't want to keep going and then find out in a year that your vaccine did have some effect on blood clotting.
This is why you don't put all your eggs on a new vaccine technology during a crisis and it's why patents and development information needs to be public. Rather than having to depend on a single company's vaccine there could be a replacement right behind it ready to go.
On the other hand, even if the clotting is caused by the vaccine, it might still be a better idea to just continue with it.
We already have the doses and not using them would result in 500k fewer people getting the vaccine per week. Of those people, some will get covid, and more than average will die from it, because the people currently getting the vaccine are the populations that are most at risk.
Continuing despite the risks might be the option that saves more lives in the end
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
:germany-cool:
South Africa had to sell its one million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine because it was ineffective against the South African variant of Covid 19.
oof
We're supposed to get 8 million doses of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine in April but yeah... Could have had all healthcare workers vaccinated by now if we could use the AstraZeneca vaccine.
deleted by creator
For a single dose vaccine it's very effective and it's the only vaccine where we have concrete proof that it works against the South African Covid 19 variant, even in HIV/AIDS positive people (two factors very important in South Africa). But yeah Johnson and Johnson is a terrible company, even if they produced a good vaccine.
Stateless borderless society when?
:anarchy:
:marx-ok:
:billie-eilish-anarchist:
deleted by creator