Fuji_Abound wrote:
How do we know, out of interest?
Because that’s what they said, the medical experts dealing with the situation. Whether you die from an illness or some medicine, you still die. The interviewer also raised the question about similar reports from other countries. He answered he hadn’t heard anything about this from other countries.
You say in Norway the vaccine is given to these people. Do these people not have a choice to accept or refuse the vaccine if and when it is offered?
I will accept the vaccine if and when I am offered. I quite understand the pro and anti arguments of vaccines. But I am also old enough to remember the fear of polio, because we saw what it did to kids my age. Eg Club feet, twisted limbs. Some of these were kids I was at school with because they weren’t offered a vaccine, perhaps there wasn’t one.
I also looked at my vaccination cards from when I travelled for work. Going back to the 60’s one had to have a smallpox vaccination to enter the USA, then there was a cholera jab for many countries, and rabies, tetanus every ten years (still have now, due in April) yellow fever and several more. Many for countries which are now considered holiday destinations. Every year for several years I have been getting a flue jab.
I’m still here, so I welcome my opportunity to get a Covid19 vaccination and thank everyone involved in providing them.
But hey each to his own.
We can’t wait to get ours.
I have already posted what measles did to me when I was 12. Would not wish that on anyone, yet loads of anti vaxxers don’t do it.
LeSving wrote:
Not likely. The 13 reported deaths (from yesterday) were explicitly due to side effects from the vaccine. Just too old and frail to handle the additional rising fever and the general strain on the body. Who knows, they could have lived for another couple of months perhaps. As I said further up, they have changed the procedures now, so that old and frail are handled on an individual basis. They will not be given the vaccine if there are no obvious benefits. The reason in the first place to give it to everyone was to make each elderly care home “immune”, not to save each individual from covid.
Has this made it into any English language news reports? I’d have thought the media would be wetting themselves over something like this.
That’s actually serious stuff! 13 deaths out of about 33.000 vaccinations is far too many! (Yes, still better ratio than 500 fatalities to of the 60k Covid cases but not that much better….).
If this data holds true, EMA would be very likely issue a label restriction for people over e.g. 80 years – then we’ll have fun ….
Which vaccine is implicated?
Locally a lot of healthcare staff have now had the Pfizer vacine. Most people have just had a sore arm, but a few felt moderately unwell for a few days. Compareed to the ‘flu jab it’s been a pussycat.
I understand that the Pfizer vaccine may be more allergenic than average in terms of numbers of cases of anaphylaxis that it causes, but I would have hoped we would have noticed if it was causing that many deaths.
Malibuflyer wrote:
If this data holds true, EMA would be very likely issue a label restriction for people over e.g. 80 years – then we’ll have fun ….
I wouldn’t have thought so. Label restrictions tend to go out for stuff that’s a bit more random than that and stuff no administering physician could reasonably foresee.
You might get some guidance saying “ensure your patient is in good enough health to receive a vaccine” but that is bordering on the obvious. Even I, during my online training, have been told not to stick a needle in anyone who looks really frail and like they might keel over at any moment.
LeSving wrote:
They will not be given the vaccine if there are no obvious benefits. The reason in the first place to give it to everyone was to make each elderly care home “immune”, not to save each individual from covid.
How they decide on that? you can always prioritze based on risks & benefits but you still need +60% of of the lot to get "collective “immunity” and of course it’s bloody obvious that getting the vaccine is x100 less risky than getting the real thing…
The other way around it is how China plan to do it no vaccines for -18yo or +60yo which is more toward breaking the chain of transmission rather than protecting the fragile?
Ibra wrote:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202101/1212915.shtml
That’s quite an article and the anti-western sentiment is thinly-veiled, although I don’t think Pfizer/BioNTech or the EMA are terribly interested in Chinese opinions on the shortcomings of the solutions we have developed to the counter the virus they gave us.
I do agree with their vaccination strategy though (spreaders rather than vulnerable) and believe I mentioned as such back in Nov/Dec.
LeSving wrote:
Not likely. The 13 reported deaths (from yesterday) were explicitly due to side effects from the vaccine. Just too old and frail to handle the additional rising fever and the general strain on the body
Completely agree. As I wrote, there are TWO factors – factor (1) – random deaths, and factor (2) – additional deaths, but justified because the prevented deaths vastly outweigh the victims of vaccination. While that is little consolation for those involved in these deaths, this does not invalidate the vaccination, although it probably should lead to a review who should be vaccinated at the more frail end of the spectrum.
