Posted by alexandra_k on April 4, 2021, at 17:52:43
In reply to Re: Why Did ASTRA ZENECA change name to Vaxzevria? » alexandra_k, posted by Phillipa on April 3, 2021, at 20:37:31
> Do you feel that this vaccine should be taken off the market then and switch to Pfizer?
How would you want them to make a good decision on whether they should take it off the market, or not?
One way of thinking about it... Is to go... How many people would have got these blood clots if the never received a vaccine? And the answer to that is that we don't really know. That's the base incidence.
Then you go... How many MORE got these clots because they took the vaccine? I mean... Are we talking 1 in 100 or 1 in 10,000 or one in 1,000,000 or...
And then we go... How treatable are these clots, anyway, now that we know about taking it seriously if people present with difficulty after taking the vaccine...
And then we go... How many people will die of Covid if we withhold these vaccines?
And then we go... And how much money will all that cost?
And then I go: Gee. It seems pretty darned complicated. It even seems to be a case where rational people could disagree... So... Why not let people make up their own mind? That is to say uphold their human right to choose to have (or to choose not to have) medical treatment.
Would I not take the Astra Zeneca over this?
Mmm. I tempted early on by Moderna... But then I came to my senses a bit about letting the young'uns get there and have a go first (right behind you!!) and then I thought that Johnson most probably. I would probably choose that one.
> I think Pfizer now is the better one. My reasoning is why would the company be doing trials on infants from 6 months to age 11?
I think all of them would want to vaccinate kids, eventually. Nobody likes much to be the first to be experimenting on children (can't give consent) or pregnant women... There are special protections around protecting the interests of kids so their parents don't sell them to be experimental research subjects...
> Or could it be that the viral vector this vaccine uses isn't the right one. Which animal is it from again? Phillipahttps://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/health/oxford-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine.html
I think one needs to be a bit careful about politics. The Olympics was cancelled this year (it is largely about drug technology these days, unfortunately, because of how good we have gotten with training protocols particularly with popular mens sports)... So we got the health system Olympics instead...
There is an element of... Nationalism... Whereby the Americans are going to hate on the Oxford vaccine, you know they are...
But also where they are going to take them to task a bit.
For their use of animals in research. It has been shown to be unnecessary. Other companies managed to do without using Chimpanzee... You don't need to keep animals in apppalling conditions and sacrifice their lives to advance Medicine. You don't. People just *enjoy* it and aren't that bright to conceive of alternatives. There is a will to believe that. It turns out to be true.
Some people are very invested in otherwise because it's the stories they tell themselves to justify their crimes...
Another problem with the Oxford one was the dosing. Finding that giving 1/2 the initial dose they recommended (by *accident* -- which is not plausible) conferred higher immunity. Giving the dose they rolled out in the first major clinical trial they were getting around 70 per cent immunity. Which was what they aimed or hoped (what everyone aimed or hoped) the vaccines would have. So they met their target... But apparently by some unfathomable accient (yeah right) someone gave 1/2 dose and discovered more like over 90 per cent immunity.
So... Why over-dose?
$$$$$
It has been an accusation of countries bitching and moaning and complaining about the cost of medicine that the drug companies recommend doses that are in excess of what it theraputic for the profits. Teh drugs are expensive so saying people need more of them or higher doses is profit driven. Then nations like NZ try and say they aren't being cheap in giving people half doses of expensive medications -- they say they are getting theraputic results...
It seems that something like that may have been behind the Oxford dosing. The aim was as MUCH of the expensive component as they could do... But it turned out less was more when it came to immune response.
I don't know. SOmething dodgey seems to have gone on there.
I remember I was worried about that...
It is like...
What do people die of? I mean... People get a virus... So what? But people die from having the virus. But why? What does the virus do to kill them, exactly? People were drowning in respiratory secretions. They weren't able to respirate across the surface of their lungs... They werent' getting enough oxygen. So the virus was doing something to the respiratory surface of the lungs. Clogging it. Or creating... An immune response and that immune response was clogging it.
In Covid... They were saying it was the immune response that was potentially the lethal element. The harms that were resulting in death were the body's immune response or immune reaction to the virus.
So I did worry that if that was the case... Then vaccination... You would want to be careful not to induce deaths by the same mechanism that Covid did. Not giving people Covid... But having them die by teh same mechanism given that the immune response to Covid was the problem.
I would have thought.
But what do I know. I can't even get a Masters from a NZ University ahahahhahaha.
Something about whistle-blowing.
Because people don't actually want to do genuine research often enough or help people often enough...
I am glad we are not getting the Astra Zeneca one in NZ. I think there will be lessons learned of some kind in England and Australia. It's for their health systems to develop...
SO they will perform better next health system olympics...
poster:alexandra_k
thread:1114360
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20210120/msgs/1114418.html