You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

"An abundance of caution"

13

Comments

  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 7,958
    edited April 2021
    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:


    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    Other countries have an abundance of caution.

    That is clearly not enough-so...extreme caution. For when an abundance is not enough :)

    Meanwhile, on Planet BoJo...

    It is not clear why they have chosen to treat the under 30s differently, when some of the cases have occurred in older people, although none in the over 60s.
    All this means is this:-

    There was a 5-slide presentation.

    You have read/listened to slide 1. And have not understood it. Otherwise you would understand why, when certain conditions are met, it becomes possible that, in effect, "nothing works faster than Anadin" for under-30s. And that nothing does not, and likely never does, for over-30s.

    You have not looked at slides 2-4. Which set out why, when risks are higher, AZ is better than nothing for all age groups.

    You have not looked at the various assumptions that were made which were necessary to formulate the outcomes in slide 1. You will find 1 of these in the bottom right corner of slides 1-4, and the long list on slide 5.

    And you would then understand why people who would ordinarily be in Group 12 of 12 (18-29 yrs old) who have been bumped up to a priority group don't fit the perameters for slide 1. Because all of them have been bumped up because either

    (1) they have a far higher than typical risk of getting/transmitting Covid (such as Nurses); or
    (2) there is a far higher risk of serious illness or death because of pre-existing conditions.
    Surely the point is that The Government has ordered enough vaccine to inject all of the UK population 5 times over.
    Matt Hancock has clearly said there are plenty of the other vaccines in stock.
    Therefore why wouldnt you use the others, rather than cause any needless deaths?
    "Surely the point is that The Government has ordered enough vaccine to inject all of the UK population 5 times over."

    Only if you believe that the Government has secured US stock that it has ordered. When no other country has. When the EU hasn't got enough, even though it has ordered even more than us, and makes some of it there.

    "Matt Hancock has clearly said there are plenty of the other vaccines in stock."

    I'm sure he did. He is a senior member of a Government that you believe to be fronted by an habitual liar. If we had all this stuff lying about, should have been easy to keep all those appointments that have jusr been cancelled. Cos those appointments were not for an AZ vaccine. They were for a vaccine.

    "Therefore why wouldnt you use the others, rather than cause any needless deaths?"

    All depends as to how you define needless, and how you define deaths.

    There will be deaths caused by all the vaccines. There will be far more by delay. Pfizer has been associated with:-

    1 in 1000 incidence of Bell's Palsy. Not fatal, but a serious illness. And 1 in 1000-not 1 in roughly 200,000
    Initial studies showed an increased incidence of myocardial infarction. Very small numbers, ongoing investigation

    If you think it is really as simple as you wish, why didn't the Government's advisers compare risks between the 2 types of vaccine?
    Death is usually defined by people stopping breathing.
    Matt Hancock said that we had enough alternative vaccines to inject all the under 30s, in stock now.
    I saw this, and it reminded me of Question Time.
    Normally it is the Conservative politician, who states his argument-Points 1 and 2.
    Then the opposition politician tries to show why 1 and 2 may not be relevant, and to consider 3 & 4.
    Then the Tory ignores that, and just repeats the mantra of 1 & 2, ignoring everything else.
    And I hit the fast forward button.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 7,958
    A take on "an abundance of caution" that amuses me. I'm probably over-simplifying this, but:

    People tend to believe scientists. People tend to believe what they hear on telly.

    There are traditionally 5 key figures in times such as this. The Chief Scientific Adviser ( Vallance), the Chief Medical Officer (Whitty), his 2 Deputies (of which 1 is Van-Tam) and the Chief Nursing Officer (May).

    Now, a year ago I distinctly recall 4 of those 5 appearing regularly in briefings. All 4 are not appointed or dismissed by the Government-they are independent Civil Service Appointments.

    All I seem to see now is 2 of those 4. Now I do recall there being a bit of a hoo-ha about Vallance's possible conflict of interest with his large share option with GSK. And some allegations of tampering with numbers to support a particular point of view.

    I do recall May stating that she would refuse to give the Government's preferred answer concerning a certain Dominic Cummings, and whether or not he had breached the guidelines. I do recall her stating that she was summarily dropped from the Panel for that day, and I do not recall seeing her since. She is still the Chief Nursing Officer.

    There seems to be an abundance of caution in relation to any Science that does not suit the current Government's agenda. It's almost as if, unless Scientists can be seen to support the Government, they are effectively sidelined.

    But I am sure it is an abundance of caution. Because it surely couldn't be Govt self-interest...
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519

    I have to correct you there.

    Death is defined by the lack of electrical activity in the brain.

    People can and have stopped breathing for up to 40 minutes and recovered.

    And would be brain dead.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519
    Essexphil said:


    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    Other countries have an abundance of caution.

    That is clearly not enough-so...extreme caution. For when an abundance is not enough :)

    Meanwhile, on Planet BoJo...

    It is not clear why they have chosen to treat the under 30s differently, when some of the cases have occurred in older people, although none in the over 60s.
    All this means is this:-

    There was a 5-slide presentation.

    You have read/listened to slide 1. And have not understood it. Otherwise you would understand why, when certain conditions are met, it becomes possible that, in effect, "nothing works faster than Anadin" for under-30s. And that nothing does not, and likely never does, for over-30s.

    You have not looked at slides 2-4. Which set out why, when risks are higher, AZ is better than nothing for all age groups.

    You have not looked at the various assumptions that were made which were necessary to formulate the outcomes in slide 1. You will find 1 of these in the bottom right corner of slides 1-4, and the long list on slide 5.

    And you would then understand why people who would ordinarily be in Group 12 of 12 (18-29 yrs old) who have been bumped up to a priority group don't fit the perameters for slide 1. Because all of them have been bumped up because either

    (1) they have a far higher than typical risk of getting/transmitting Covid (such as Nurses); or
    (2) there is a far higher risk of serious illness or death because of pre-existing conditions.
    Surely the point is that The Government has ordered enough vaccine to inject all of the UK population 5 times over.
    Matt Hancock has clearly said there are plenty of the other vaccines in stock.
    Therefore why wouldnt you use the others, rather than cause any needless deaths?
    "Surely the point is that The Government has ordered enough vaccine to inject all of the UK population 5 times over."

    Only if you believe that the Government has secured US stock that it has ordered. When no other country has. When the EU hasn't got enough, even though it has ordered even more than us, and makes some of it there.

    "Matt Hancock has clearly said there are plenty of the other vaccines in stock."

    I'm sure he did. He is a senior member of a Government that you believe to be fronted by an habitual liar. If we had all this stuff lying about, should have been easy to keep all those appointments that have jusr been cancelled. Cos those appointments were not for an AZ vaccine. They were for a vaccine.

    "Therefore why wouldnt you use the others, rather than cause any needless deaths?"

    All depends as to how you define needless, and how you define deaths.

    There will be deaths caused by all the vaccines. There will be far more by delay. Pfizer has been associated with:-

    1 in 1000 incidence of Bell's Palsy. Not fatal, but a serious illness. And 1 in 1000-not 1 in roughly 200,000
    Initial studies showed an increased incidence of myocardial infarction. Very small numbers, ongoing investigation

    If you think it is really as simple as you wish, why didn't the Government's advisers compare risks between the 2 types of vaccine?
    A&E departments swamped with patients with AstraZeneca vaccine side-effects




    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/e-departments-swamped-patients-astrazeneca-154115360.html
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519
    Essexphil said:

    A take on "an abundance of caution" that amuses me. I'm probably over-simplifying this, but:

    People tend to believe scientists. People tend to believe what they hear on telly.

    There are traditionally 5 key figures in times such as this. The Chief Scientific Adviser ( Vallance), the Chief Medical Officer (Whitty), his 2 Deputies (of which 1 is Van-Tam) and the Chief Nursing Officer (May).

    Now, a year ago I distinctly recall 4 of those 5 appearing regularly in briefings. All 4 are not appointed or dismissed by the Government-they are independent Civil Service Appointments.

    All I seem to see now is 2 of those 4. Now I do recall there being a bit of a hoo-ha about Vallance's possible conflict of interest with his large share option with GSK. And some allegations of tampering with numbers to support a particular point of view.

    I do recall May stating that she would refuse to give the Government's preferred answer concerning a certain Dominic Cummings, and whether or not he had breached the guidelines. I do recall her stating that she was summarily dropped from the Panel for that day, and I do not recall seeing her since. She is still the Chief Nursing Officer.

    There seems to be an abundance of caution in relation to any Science that does not suit the current Government's agenda. It's almost as if, unless Scientists can be seen to support the Government, they are effectively sidelined.

    But I am sure it is an abundance of caution. Because it surely couldn't be Govt self-interest...

    We have got so many vaccines, we are now exporting them, although not to the EU.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 7,958
    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:


    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    Other countries have an abundance of caution.

    That is clearly not enough-so...extreme caution. For when an abundance is not enough :)

    Meanwhile, on Planet BoJo...

    It is not clear why they have chosen to treat the under 30s differently, when some of the cases have occurred in older people, although none in the over 60s.
    All this means is this:-

    There was a 5-slide presentation.

    You have read/listened to slide 1. And have not understood it. Otherwise you would understand why, when certain conditions are met, it becomes possible that, in effect, "nothing works faster than Anadin" for under-30s. And that nothing does not, and likely never does, for over-30s.

    You have not looked at slides 2-4. Which set out why, when risks are higher, AZ is better than nothing for all age groups.

    You have not looked at the various assumptions that were made which were necessary to formulate the outcomes in slide 1. You will find 1 of these in the bottom right corner of slides 1-4, and the long list on slide 5.

    And you would then understand why people who would ordinarily be in Group 12 of 12 (18-29 yrs old) who have been bumped up to a priority group don't fit the perameters for slide 1. Because all of them have been bumped up because either

    (1) they have a far higher than typical risk of getting/transmitting Covid (such as Nurses); or
    (2) there is a far higher risk of serious illness or death because of pre-existing conditions.
    Surely the point is that The Government has ordered enough vaccine to inject all of the UK population 5 times over.
    Matt Hancock has clearly said there are plenty of the other vaccines in stock.
    Therefore why wouldnt you use the others, rather than cause any needless deaths?
    "Surely the point is that The Government has ordered enough vaccine to inject all of the UK population 5 times over."

    Only if you believe that the Government has secured US stock that it has ordered. When no other country has. When the EU hasn't got enough, even though it has ordered even more than us, and makes some of it there.

    "Matt Hancock has clearly said there are plenty of the other vaccines in stock."

    I'm sure he did. He is a senior member of a Government that you believe to be fronted by an habitual liar. If we had all this stuff lying about, should have been easy to keep all those appointments that have jusr been cancelled. Cos those appointments were not for an AZ vaccine. They were for a vaccine.

    "Therefore why wouldnt you use the others, rather than cause any needless deaths?"

    All depends as to how you define needless, and how you define deaths.

    There will be deaths caused by all the vaccines. There will be far more by delay. Pfizer has been associated with:-

    1 in 1000 incidence of Bell's Palsy. Not fatal, but a serious illness. And 1 in 1000-not 1 in roughly 200,000
    Initial studies showed an increased incidence of myocardial infarction. Very small numbers, ongoing investigation

    If you think it is really as simple as you wish, why didn't the Government's advisers compare risks between the 2 types of vaccine?
    A&E departments swamped with patients with AstraZeneca vaccine side-effects




    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/e-departments-swamped-patients-astrazeneca-154115360.html
    This Headline is an absolute disgrace. And you should be thoroughly ashamed for reproducing it. Try reading the article. It can be summed up thus:-

    1. Headline designed to mislead you into thinking AZ causing problems
    2. Main body of article. This goes into detail as to what is actually happening. People are going to seek medical advice. Because, although they have the mild symptoms more than 1 in 10 get, they all believe the scare stories about the 1 in a million, rather than the 1 in 10. And so GPs advise this is in all probability nothing, but if they insist they should go to A & E (cos a GP cannot accurately promise that it is nothing). So ill people get pushed down the pecking order, in favour of (to quote your article)

    "Colleagues across England are reporting this. All A&E departments are seeing an increase in the number of people reporting concerns after having the AstraZeneca vaccine."

    “We are seeing people with mild headaches and persistent headaches but who are otherwise alright.”

    So-why is A& E getting swamped? Because of people scared by scare stories. And, just when you think this article cannot be more stupid:-

    3. It finishes by repeating some scare stories.

    There is a proven, far higher clot risk from taking the pill. Or long-distance flying.
    There is a proven, higher incidence of serious injury from men putting on trousers. Skirts are safer. But men and women still put trousers on. Fly.

    Want to know why? Because people normally have a sense of proportion.

    Because that is what the correct amount of caution is.
  • chillingchilling Member Posts: 3,774
    You do realise that you have been debating propaganda stories for weeks now?
    I really don’t think you do🤣
    Ta Ta.
  • TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,075
    HAYSIE said:

    I have to correct you there.

    Death is defined by the lack of electrical activity in the brain.

    People can and have stopped breathing for up to 40 minutes and recovered.

    And would be brain dead.
    Watch LAST BREATH on Netflix, and there have been other instances of full recovery after long periods without breathing.

    Yes I agree it's usually due to really cold temperatures or immersion in freezing cold water, bringing about some form of suspended animation but it happens.

    So no not necessarily brain dead
  • TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,075
    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:


    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    Other countries have an abundance of caution.

    That is clearly not enough-so...extreme caution. For when an abundance is not enough :)

    Meanwhile, on Planet BoJo...

    It is not clear why they have chosen to treat the under 30s differently, when some of the cases have occurred in older people, although none in the over 60s.
    All this means is this:-

    There was a 5-slide presentation.

    You have read/listened to slide 1. And have not understood it. Otherwise you would understand why, when certain conditions are met, it becomes possible that, in effect, "nothing works faster than Anadin" for under-30s. And that nothing does not, and likely never does, for over-30s.

    You have not looked at slides 2-4. Which set out why, when risks are higher, AZ is better than nothing for all age groups.

    You have not looked at the various assumptions that were made which were necessary to formulate the outcomes in slide 1. You will find 1 of these in the bottom right corner of slides 1-4, and the long list on slide 5.

    And you would then understand why people who would ordinarily be in Group 12 of 12 (18-29 yrs old) who have been bumped up to a priority group don't fit the perameters for slide 1. Because all of them have been bumped up because either

    (1) they have a far higher than typical risk of getting/transmitting Covid (such as Nurses); or
    (2) there is a far higher risk of serious illness or death because of pre-existing conditions.
    Surely the point is that The Government has ordered enough vaccine to inject all of the UK population 5 times over.
    Matt Hancock has clearly said there are plenty of the other vaccines in stock.
    Therefore why wouldnt you use the others, rather than cause any needless deaths?
    "Surely the point is that The Government has ordered enough vaccine to inject all of the UK population 5 times over."

    Only if you believe that the Government has secured US stock that it has ordered. When no other country has. When the EU hasn't got enough, even though it has ordered even more than us, and makes some of it there.

    "Matt Hancock has clearly said there are plenty of the other vaccines in stock."

    I'm sure he did. He is a senior member of a Government that you believe to be fronted by an habitual liar. If we had all this stuff lying about, should have been easy to keep all those appointments that have jusr been cancelled. Cos those appointments were not for an AZ vaccine. They were for a vaccine.

    "Therefore why wouldnt you use the others, rather than cause any needless deaths?"

    All depends as to how you define needless, and how you define deaths.

    There will be deaths caused by all the vaccines. There will be far more by delay. Pfizer has been associated with:-

    1 in 1000 incidence of Bell's Palsy. Not fatal, but a serious illness. And 1 in 1000-not 1 in roughly 200,000
    Initial studies showed an increased incidence of myocardial infarction. Very small numbers, ongoing investigation

    If you think it is really as simple as you wish, why didn't the Government's advisers compare risks between the 2 types of vaccine?
    A&E departments swamped with patients with AstraZeneca vaccine side-effects




    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/e-departments-swamped-patients-astrazeneca-154115360.html
    This Headline is an absolute disgrace. And you should be thoroughly ashamed for reproducing it. Try reading the article. It can be summed up thus:-

    1. Headline designed to mislead you into thinking AZ causing problems
    2. Main body of article. This goes into detail as to what is actually happening. People are going to seek medical advice. Because, although they have the mild symptoms more than 1 in 10 get, they all believe the scare stories about the 1 in a million, rather than the 1 in 10. And so GPs advise this is in all probability nothing, but if they insist they should go to A & E (cos a GP cannot accurately promise that it is nothing). So ill people get pushed down the pecking order, in favour of (to quote your article)

    "Colleagues across England are reporting this. All A&E departments are seeing an increase in the number of people reporting concerns after having the AstraZeneca vaccine."

    “We are seeing people with mild headaches and persistent headaches but who are otherwise alright.”

    So-why is A& E getting swamped? Because of people scared by scare stories. And, just when you think this article cannot be more stupid:-

    3. It finishes by repeating some scare stories.

    There is a proven, far higher clot risk from taking the pill. Or long-distance flying.
    There is a proven, higher incidence of serious injury from men putting on trousers. Skirts are safer. But men and women still put trousers on. Fly.

    Want to know why? Because people normally have a sense of proportion.

    Because that is what the correct amount of caution is.
    Phil, you can't argue reason with those infected by the disease of rank stupidity.

    Better to just pat them on the head and let them get on with it.

    My own sister is an anti vaxxer also believing that vapour trails contain mind conditioning drugs, virus' can be transmitted via radio and mobile signals and that the Government is using the programme to moniter people.

    She will though, fly abroad when its ok to do so, communicating with home via the mobile and the internet, probably standing near a cell tower for better coverage.

    It's hard to think she is a well educated woman with a good career. Sorry Sis but you're an ar5e.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519

    HAYSIE said:

    I have to correct you there.

    Death is defined by the lack of electrical activity in the brain.

    People can and have stopped breathing for up to 40 minutes and recovered.

    And would be brain dead.
    Watch LAST BREATH on Netflix, and there have been other instances of full recovery after long periods without breathing.

    Yes I agree it's usually due to really cold temperatures or immersion in freezing cold water, bringing about some form of suspended animation but it happens.

    So no not necessarily brain dead
    They would surely be rare exceptions, rather than the norm.
    Usually someone whose brain has been deprived of oxygen for a matter of minutes, does not fully recover.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519
    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    Other countries have an abundance of caution.

    That is clearly not enough-so...extreme caution. For when an abundance is not enough :)

    Meanwhile, on Planet BoJo...

    It is not clear why they have chosen to treat the under 30s differently, when some of the cases have occurred in older people, although none in the over 60s.
    Ireland are now apparently just using the AZ for over 60s.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 7,958
    There's that phrase "an abundance of caution" again.

    Johnson & Johnson (or Janssen in the EU). In news that apparently caught the CEO of J&J unawares, the vaccine made of almost identical stuff to AZ has the same minute risk. The risk I predicted some days ago. When it is blindingly obvious that he knows way more than me.

    Result? Temporarily stop production. Will it affect the UK? Barely, if at all. Will delay cause a considerable amount of additional deaths in the EU? Undoubtedly. Many times than the possible risk in protecting people who need it urgently.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519
    Britons with first dose of Covid vaccine ‘have become infected with variants’




    Britons who have received their first vaccine dose have subsequently become infected by variants of Covid-19, NHS Track and Trace’s chief medical adviser has said.

    Dr Susan Hopkins told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show that both the South African and Kent variant have been identified in people “who have had their first dose of vaccine”.

    “You can see that they’re not as good against the South African variant as they are against our own B117 at preventing infection and transmission.”

    “When your immune system is exposed to a variation of the same virus it responds faster and more adequately to protect you against severe disease,” she said.

    A “significant” cluster of the South African variant identified in south London meant that additional Covid-19 testing facilities were recently set up in Lambeth, Wandsworth and Southwark.

    The Kent variant, or B117, which emerged in the UK last year has, meanwhile, been found to be more transmissible than the virus in its original form.

    Scientists are also concerned by a new variant that was first identified in India. More than 70 cases of the B.1.617 variant have been confirmed in the UK.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/medical/britons-with-first-dose-of-covid-vaccine-have-become-infected-with-variants/ar-BB1fMsYr?ocid=msedgntp
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519
  • VespaPXVespaPX Member Posts: 12,013
    HAYSIE said:


    Yet again too little too late
  • goldongoldon Member Posts: 8,426
    Me Finks you " Dead" when bones appear ....... or can you revive. ?


  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519
    edited April 2021
    Pfizer finds more than 80 FAKE doses of its COVID-19 vaccine in Mexico and Poland - including one batch that contained an anti-wrinkle treatment



    In Mexico, about 80 people received fraudulent Pfizer vaccine doses at one clinic in Nuevo León while in Poland, the liquid inside the vials was found to be an anti-wrinkle treatment.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9497337/Pfizer-finds-80-fake-doses-COVID-19-vaccine-Mexico-Poland.html




    Mother's legs erupt in agonising blood-filled blisters 'after getting AstraZeneca's Covid vaccine' - as 34-year-old reveals rare reaction left her wheelchair-bound and fearing she'd need her limbs amputated



    Sarah Beuckmann, 34, from Glasgow, said the blisters erupted on her legs a week after she got her first dose. British skin experts said it appeared the mother had suffered a reaction to the jab


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9496075/Mothers-legs-erupt-horrifying-rash-blisters-getting-AstraZenecas-Covid-vaccine.html
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519
    Risk of suffering serious blood clot after AstraZeneca jab doubles in fortnight



    New data from the Medical Healthcare products and Regulatory Agency (MHRA) show cases have risen from 79 to 168 since April 8, and deaths from 19 to 32.

    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/risk-suffering-serious-blood-clot-174954336.html
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 7,958
    HAYSIE said:

    Risk of suffering serious blood clot after AstraZeneca jab doubles in fortnight



    New data from the Medical Healthcare products and Regulatory Agency (MHRA) show cases have risen from 79 to 168 since April 8, and deaths from 19 to 32.

    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/risk-suffering-serious-blood-clot-174954336.html

    Let's look at what I said on 2nd April in this thread.

    "An abundance of caution" in action, right there.

    30 million vaccinated. Of 18.1 million checked, 30 reported problems-under 2 per million. Some of which will not have died. So a small fraction of the Germany's worst case scenario of the 4 deaths per million outlined above.

    While in France- 4 times fewer people vaccinated. Scare stories running wild. 50-60,000 new cases per day. Hospitalisation at record levels. Country shutting down.

    Those risk/reward figures must be a real toss-up.

    If you are blinkered, or have no concept of maths.


    So-the latest scare story you have quoted proclaims the risk has "doubled". Or halved, depending how you look at it. Because our predicted death rate has gone up from 1 per million to 2 per million. But still only half of the 4 per million in the German study.

    Let's keep using France as the benchmark. If the 50 million or so unvaccinated French adults were all vaccinated, there might be nearly 100 deaths. Some of them would undoubtedly have pre-existing conditions.

    Last month nearly 10,000 French people died. Bringing the total past 100,000. The French (unlike the UK) say how many people currently have Covid. 1.3 million. Which will logically mean an additional 10,000 deaths. And new infections running at 25-30,000 per day. Which will logically mean an additional 250 deaths. Every single day.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 31,519
    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Risk of suffering serious blood clot after AstraZeneca jab doubles in fortnight



    New data from the Medical Healthcare products and Regulatory Agency (MHRA) show cases have risen from 79 to 168 since April 8, and deaths from 19 to 32.

    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/risk-suffering-serious-blood-clot-174954336.html

    Let's look at what I said on 2nd April in this thread.

    "An abundance of caution" in action, right there.

    30 million vaccinated. Of 18.1 million checked, 30 reported problems-under 2 per million. Some of which will not have died. So a small fraction of the Germany's worst case scenario of the 4 deaths per million outlined above.

    While in France- 4 times fewer people vaccinated. Scare stories running wild. 50-60,000 new cases per day. Hospitalisation at record levels. Country shutting down.

    Those risk/reward figures must be a real toss-up.

    If you are blinkered, or have no concept of maths.


    So-the latest scare story you have quoted proclaims the risk has "doubled". Or halved, depending how you look at it. Because our predicted death rate has gone up from 1 per million to 2 per million. But still only half of the 4 per million in the German study.

    Let's keep using France as the benchmark. If the 50 million or so unvaccinated French adults were all vaccinated, there might be nearly 100 deaths. Some of them would undoubtedly have pre-existing conditions.

    Last month nearly 10,000 French people died. Bringing the total past 100,000. The French (unlike the UK) say how many people currently have Covid. 1.3 million. Which will logically mean an additional 10,000 deaths. And new infections running at 25-30,000 per day. Which will logically mean an additional 250 deaths. Every single day.
    I was merely pointing out that the number of blood clotting cases has increased substantially in what has seemed a short space of time.
    You consistently base your argument on either using AZ, or not vaccinating.
    There are a number of vaccines available, that dont have this side effect.
    Therefore if you based your argument on using AZ, or an alternative vaccine, it would be much more difficult to stand up.
Sign In or Register to comment.