My experience and that of everybody I’ve asked who’s had the second jab, is that even if there was a reaction at whatever level to their first jab, the reaction and/or discomfort from the second jab was less.
I had my second AZ jab last week. I had almost no side effects after the first jab, only slight joint pain which might have been my arthritis. After the second jab I felt extremely tired for the rest of the day and most of the next as well, but no other side effects.
That tiredness was more than likely relief of finally having the second jab coming out after (12) weeks of waiting for it.
Denmark will no longer give the AZ vaccine, anybody who has been given a first dose of the AZ will be offered an alternative for the 2nd dose, there have been no trials whether this will work, the UK has asked for volunteers to trial the mixing of vaccines.
Denmark will no longer give the AZ vaccine, anybody who has been given a first dose of the AZ will be offered an alternative for the 2nd dose, there have been no trials whether this will work, the UK has asked for volunteers to trial the mixing of vaccines.
So one in a million chance of a blood clot with Astra Z, 1 in 100,000 chance of a blood clot with the contraceptive pill. Why have they not banned the Pill ??
Not banned though is it. Just not distributed to everyone..The pill is not given to all females in The country. If it were 250 women would needlessly get blood clots.
Not banned though is it. Just not distributed to everyone..The pill is not given to all females in The country. If it were 250 women would needlessly get blood clots.
That’s convoluted thinking isn’t it ? The data shows that for every 100,000 prescriptions for the contraceptive pill, there is the expectation that there will be one associated blood clot.
Not banned though is it. Just not distributed to everyone..The pill is not given to all females in The country. If it were 250 women would needlessly get blood clots.
That’s convoluted thinking isn’t it ? The data shows that for every 100,000 prescriptions for the contraceptive pill, there is the expectation that there will be one associated blood clot.
I'm just trying to understand what is going on!
Doctors are usually reluctant to suggest that everybody takes a medicine or treatment because the outcome is statistically better although it may put a few individuals at needless risk.
For instance, lives could be extended and money saved if everybody in the country simply took Statins regardless of age or health. They are cheap, reduce cholesterol / heart problems and are "almost" harmless. It's not really worth checking whether they might help you - just take them!
But it doesn't work like that because doctors are unwilling to prescribe or suggest something which an individual may not personally benefit from.
Vaccines are a completely different thing of course. But I can understand how the same principles might apply especially when there are potential alternatives available.
I had my second AZ yesterday and I do swallow a statin pill every morning!
My old dear gets her 2nd jab on Saturday 2 weeks earlier than planned.
Quite the day, 2nd jab call in the morning, first day of no shielding and just got a call to say her cancer is back on her liver and chemo starts again soon.
Very sad news for you both, best wishes and hope she can beat it again
Thanks, without treatment we are told she'll be gone by Xmas.... now to join the queue for treatment.
Maybe because the other vaccines will also have side effects (I see the Johnson and Johnson one is being investigated in the US for the same). Maybe the mRNA vaccine side effects have not yet been noticed.
also the AZ and J&J vaccines have benefits the others do not. Cost in the case of AZ, single shot in the case of J&J.
Richer countries may choose to use mRNA vaccines over others if they have overcome volume restrictions but I doubt that AZ etc will be dropped everywhere.
Maybe because the other vaccines will also have side effects (I see the Johnson and Johnson one is being investigated in the US for the same). Maybe the mRNA vaccine side effects have not yet been noticed.
also the AZ and J&J vaccines have benefits the others do not. Cost in the case of AZ, single shot in the case of J&J.
Richer countries may choose to use mRNA vaccines over others if they have overcome volume restrictions but I doubt that AZ etc will be dropped everywhere.
The AZ and J&J are old tech (viral vector) whereas the Pfizer and Moderna are new tech (mRNA) - I will be amazed if it ultimately turns out that the mRNA vaccines are safer. That said, both vaccine types are (relatively) safe.
I don't get what you're trying to say. The report you quoted says there is less chance of getting a blood clot if you have the AZ vaccine (or another vaccine) than there is if you catch covid. So if you have the vaccine there is less chance of getting covid which means, in turn, there is less chance of getting a blood clot. Or am I reading the story incorrectly?
I don't get what you're trying to say. The report you quoted says there is less chance of getting a blood clot if you have the AZ vaccine (or another vaccine) than there is if you catch covid. So if you have the vaccine there is less chance of getting covid which means, in turn, there is less chance of getting a blood clot. Or am I reading the story incorrectly?
Just giving both sides of the argument really.
The study is interesting to look at but it is released by Oxford so they would have a bit of a vested interest in this line. More data i'm sure will be released in the months ahead.
I wonder if the reason the AZ vaccine has a higher risk of blood clotting is due to the make-up of the vaccine itself and how it uses the adenovirus using Corona genetic material. Would explain why the clotting risk is higher than Pfizer.
"The numbers in the study were too low to look specifically at the sub-group of people suffering a brain clot in combination with low platelets. That's the unusual feature that has led to several countries suspending use of the AstraZeneca vaccine in younger people."
Just had my second jab at St Thomas'. All done within ten minutes of arriving. Anybody that criticises the NHS needs to have a rethink.
It's fantastic that your experience of getting a jab is, just like everyone else, a positive one. Hat's off to them for doing such a bloody good job. But that doesn't mean that we can not or should not be critical in areas where the service given is less than desirable. The NHS does some things very well and some things very badly. The things it does well are testimony to the dedication, hard work and professionalism of those that work within it. The things it does badly are for the most part down to lack of adequate support and funding from successive governments. We need to be honest about its shortcomings though, if we are to make the best job of lobbying our politicians to support it adequately. I love the NHS, but that doesn't mean that I can't wish it was even better.
Comments
Doctors are usually reluctant to suggest that everybody takes a medicine or treatment because the outcome is statistically better although it may put a few individuals at needless risk.
For instance, lives could be extended and money saved if everybody in the country simply took Statins regardless of age or health. They are cheap, reduce cholesterol / heart problems and are "almost" harmless. It's not really worth checking whether they might help you - just take them!
But it doesn't work like that because doctors are unwilling to prescribe or suggest something which an individual may not personally benefit from.
Vaccines are a completely different thing of course. But I can understand how the same principles might apply especially when there are potential alternatives available.
I had my second AZ yesterday and I do swallow a statin pill every morning!
When there's less harmful alternatives, why would we still push forward and give this jab?
https://news.sky.com/story/risk-of-blood-clot-after-covid-is-eight-times-higher-than-after-astrazeneca-jab-study-12276088
also the AZ and J&J vaccines have benefits the others do not. Cost in the case of AZ, single shot in the case of J&J.
Richer countries may choose to use mRNA vaccines over others if they have overcome volume restrictions but I doubt that AZ etc will be dropped everywhere.
The report you quoted says there is less chance of getting a blood clot if you have the AZ vaccine (or another vaccine) than there is if you catch covid.
So if you have the vaccine there is less chance of getting covid which means, in turn, there is less chance of getting a blood clot.
Or am I reading the story incorrectly?
The study is interesting to look at but it is released by Oxford so they would have a bit of a vested interest in this line. More data i'm sure will be released in the months ahead.
I wonder if the reason the AZ vaccine has a higher risk of blood clotting is due to the make-up of the vaccine itself and how it uses the adenovirus using Corona genetic material. Would explain why the clotting risk is higher than Pfizer.
"The numbers in the study were too low to look specifically at the sub-group of people suffering a brain clot in combination with low platelets. That's the unusual feature that has led to several countries suspending use of the AstraZeneca vaccine in younger people."
Anybody that criticises the NHS needs to have a rethink.
( Meant the Tesco "jab" ....)
Did they tell you when the needle was just in?