SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
I’m thinking that the wee donkey will have had little to do with your relenting...as they tend to be stubborn as a mule...?
Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?
- Thread starter drdel
- Start date
PJ87
Journeyman Pro
Doesn't help the press doing the usual of negative press on side affects etc
I know you need to report stuff so people know right if I get these I need to speak to a Dr but they love to take it to the extreme and put people into panic mode.
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
No, it was the jab. Honest Guv.
williamalex1
Money List Winner
Wife got her 2nd jab today, fingers crossed it goes better 2nd round. 1st jab knocked her for 6 for a wee while.
I might need to double up with a right hook this time.
I might need to double up with a right hook this time.
Rooter
Money List Winner
Good to hear she ok now, mine almost went down to my elbow, through my shoulder and down my back a bit. Now I must stress, it was a bit uncomfortable for 24hrs, nothing more. I didn't require any painkillers etc! Feeling much better today after a decent nights sleep last night!
I genuinely thought, given we are now over 12 months into the pandemic, that organisations would have got their heads round when large groups need to self isolate.
My eldest is at college and I have to say that the Covid measures are excellent - masks compulsory in all indoor areas, strict seating plans and tables set well apart in large classrooms. So far, so good.
He has received a text today from the college, not NHS Track and Trace, advising him that he needs to self isolate “in accordance with government guidance” because someone in his faculty (not necessarily his own class) has returned a positive test. The problem I have with this is that this doesn’t actually adhere to “government guidance” regarding who is a contact for self isolation purposes.
That guidance is very, very explicit. My lad sits with his four immediate college friends, none of whom are the positive case, and has no contact with anyone else within the college environment which constitutes contact in line with government rules - no face to face, not within 2 metres for 15 minutes, and so on. He is in 2 days a week - into class, work, off campus for lunch etc. He doesn’t mix in common rooms and so on.
Given we now have the additional benefit of easy access to rapid tests, am I alone in thinking his college are being lazy in simply sending his entire faculty, in excess of 150 students, home and advising them to self isolate “in accordance with government guidance” when many of them won’t actually be classed as a contacts in accordance with that guidance in the first place? There are other local schools which are allowing students into lessons, even if a classmate has returned a positive test, providing they test negative at the start of each day.
I really would have thought after all this time that schools and colleges would have worked this out, but to me the approach adopted by my lad’s college is just a lazy cop out.
My eldest is at college and I have to say that the Covid measures are excellent - masks compulsory in all indoor areas, strict seating plans and tables set well apart in large classrooms. So far, so good.
He has received a text today from the college, not NHS Track and Trace, advising him that he needs to self isolate “in accordance with government guidance” because someone in his faculty (not necessarily his own class) has returned a positive test. The problem I have with this is that this doesn’t actually adhere to “government guidance” regarding who is a contact for self isolation purposes.
That guidance is very, very explicit. My lad sits with his four immediate college friends, none of whom are the positive case, and has no contact with anyone else within the college environment which constitutes contact in line with government rules - no face to face, not within 2 metres for 15 minutes, and so on. He is in 2 days a week - into class, work, off campus for lunch etc. He doesn’t mix in common rooms and so on.
Given we now have the additional benefit of easy access to rapid tests, am I alone in thinking his college are being lazy in simply sending his entire faculty, in excess of 150 students, home and advising them to self isolate “in accordance with government guidance” when many of them won’t actually be classed as a contacts in accordance with that guidance in the first place? There are other local schools which are allowing students into lessons, even if a classmate has returned a positive test, providing they test negative at the start of each day.
I really would have thought after all this time that schools and colleges would have worked this out, but to me the approach adopted by my lad’s college is just a lazy cop out.
Last edited:
Ethan
Money List Winner
The AZ clot story is interesting. As of today, the MHRA notes there have been 209 cases and 41 deaths in 22 million vaccinated.
When this story first broke, I posted here that my concern, based on my drug safety experience, was that reporting rates were always low and delayed, and we had no idea on the "true" number or risk. On March 18th (around 6 weeks ago), the MHRA reported 5 cases and 1 death in 11 million people vaccinated with AZ then, so the rate then was less than 1 in a million. Now it is over 1 in 100,000, a more than 10-fold increase. It is still a rare event, but in my opinion, and that of a number of haematologists and public health experts, it was not taken seriously enough soon enough, and we can't know if we have seen the final total, although it will still almost certainly be a rare event.
But if you got on a plane this summer and the pilot announced that all the aircraft safety features were down due, but the risk of he plane crashing was only 1 in 100,000, I think even the most relaxed passenger might take a pause and think about it. Especially if there was a different type of plane with fully functioning safety due to depart later.
When this story first broke, I posted here that my concern, based on my drug safety experience, was that reporting rates were always low and delayed, and we had no idea on the "true" number or risk. On March 18th (around 6 weeks ago), the MHRA reported 5 cases and 1 death in 11 million people vaccinated with AZ then, so the rate then was less than 1 in a million. Now it is over 1 in 100,000, a more than 10-fold increase. It is still a rare event, but in my opinion, and that of a number of haematologists and public health experts, it was not taken seriously enough soon enough, and we can't know if we have seen the final total, although it will still almost certainly be a rare event.
But if you got on a plane this summer and the pilot announced that all the aircraft safety features were down due, but the risk of he plane crashing was only 1 in 100,000, I think even the most relaxed passenger might take a pause and think about it. Especially if there was a different type of plane with fully functioning safety due to depart later.
D-S
Well-known member
Following your analogy my choice of taking the first available plane or the possibilities of a later one would depend heavily on the reason for the journey, going on holiday? I’ll just wait for the later one, fleeing a war zone? I’ll take the first plane please.
Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
Or being safe from a virus which at my age would likely kill me.
Anyway, is not a 1 in a 100 000 chance of the plane crashing not bad odds compared with getting the virus when the AZ became available first?
Now, with many having been vaccinated and protected, the chances of getting the virus make the delay to get the other vaccine more attractive, but , still, 1 in 100000 isn't bad odds on anything a bit iffy!
Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
But are those figures including those who would have died ( statistically ) anyway from such clots had there not been any vaccinations?
Or, are all the cases and deaths known to have been caused by the vaccine?
Ethan
Money List Winner
It is not clear, but remember that much of the stuff you read about, e.g. risk from the contraceptive pill, covers exposure for repeat use over years. The AZ Vax has only been around for a few months, so much shorter exposure and correspondingly much fewer background events in the time window. One would expect the number of younger people to die or experience these specific clots with low platelets elsewhere as being rather low.
My point, though, was that much of the initial dismissal of the issue failed to take into account the obvious unreliability of the numbers obtained from adverse event reporting, and so inevitably the number has risen sharply. I don't know if it will rise further, or whether there is an additional reservoir of heart attacks and strokes caused by similar mechanisms. It illustrates the need for caution and prudence rather than unknowing reassurance. The MHRA was slow to respond to this. You and I may have different explanations for why that happened.
Ethan
Money List Winner
Getting the virus is not the right comparator. Having a bad outcome from the virus is, and that probability varies across the population.
PJ87
Journeyman Pro
Once the initial population is done with the jab do you reckon they gov will use phizer more for booster jabs etc?
RichA
Well-known member
Is there a figure for how many thousands of lives the AZ vaccine might have saved in the last 4 months to compare to the 41 deaths it may have caused?
Ethan
Money List Winner
Yes, they announced a deal for more Pfizer earlier this week. Novavax has also been lined up as a booster vax and the UK has a huge order in for that.
The answer to that will vary according to the risk level for different age groups. If the prevalence of adverse events as reported is accurate and complete, and I rather doubt that it is, then the benefit-risk for people under 30 or 40 is questionable, but for older people it is favourable, and more so at older age groups.
But the proper comparison is not AZ vs Covid, it is the marginal benefit-risk of AZ vs alternative vax, and in my opinion, even assuming the baseline efficacy of AZ and Pfizer are the same (and I am not saying I think that), there is a very small risk involved in younger people maybe waiting a week or two longer for an alternative when the background risk of Covid is very low.
SaintHacker
Journeyman Pro
Sky News: https://news.sky.com/story/covid-ne...on-figures-to-be-released-12287305?inApp=true
Things finally starting to look a lot more positive, especially if the media are reporting it
Things finally starting to look a lot more positive, especially if the media are reporting it
williamalex1
Money List Winner
Ethan , re the people who had a blood clot due to the AZ vaccine ?
Would they have possibly been more prone to getting a blood clot if they had actually caught Covid-19 ?
Ethan
Money List Winner
Not by the same mechanism. They have a background risk, as we all do, which is influenced by age, other risk factors and so on. But the vaccine-related clotting problem occurs due to an antibody forming against the adenovirus vector that holds the genetic code for the spike protein in Covid. Those antibodies then cross-react with platelets so the platelets become sticky and start to form clumps. Those clumps start clot formation. It also has the paradoxical effect of reducing platelets elsewhere as the platelets are all sucked up in these clots, so you can get clots problems in one place and inability to clot problems elsewhere. A similar effect has been described against heparin, ironically used to treat clotting problems.
In order to estimate the risk of Covid-related clots, you would need to start with the risk of infection in the first place, then factor in the risk of complications, which vary by age etc. Of course, the benefits of vaccination go far beyond preventing clot-related events. The Covid-related clots are probably more driven by direct effects on blood vessels, with a heightened inflammatory state increasing coagulibility, as well as immobility in people who are sick.
There is no question that these adverse events are very rare, but I was uncomfortable with the speed to which many leapt to dismissing the risk at a time when it was clearly not even close to being properly estimated.
Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
Yes, true. I was looking at it from my personal viewpoint' and those of my age group.Someone of 30 yrs would rightly think they had an excellent chance of "riding out "the virus.
Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
Ref the first sentence, last paragraph, isn't it not quite accurate? At the time the vaccines were first available, some time ago, a person didn't have the choice of vaccine, nor did one seem to be on the horizon.
Could one afford to wait, given the figures for infection then.?
Now it is a little different, and , yes, if you were 40 you might be inclined to wait for the later alternative. Mind you, the really latest vaccines coming on stream may in the fullness of time present similar worries as the AZ?!!!
Who knows?