What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

deeperlearning

It's crazy to leave Cohort 4, who are medically most vulnerable, as well as the over 60s on AstraZeneca vaccines.

These are the cohorts who need good protections. Following an AZ with a Pfizer would have given these cohorts fantastic immunity.

deeperlearning

deeperlearning wrote: »

It's crazy to leave Cohort 4, who are medically most vulnerable, as well as the over 60s on AstraZeneca vaccines.

These are the cohorts who need good protections. Following an AZ with a Pfizer would have given these cohorts fantastic immunity.

Everyone who has had a second dose has fantastic immunity as seen be the case numbers in the older age groups.

12 months ago the talk was about getting vaccines as effective as the flu vaccine. The worst of the vaccines in use in Ireland is far more effective at preventing illness against the most challenging variant than any flu vaccine is against influenza. Not to mention the exceptional effectiveness against severe disease

volchitsa

astrofool wrote: »

a) that study is still not completed, it would be akin to rolling out vaccines while they were in the middle of phase 3 trials
b) there is no great concerns about a 2 dose AZ vaccine course against the variants right now
c) any boosters are highly likely to be mRNA or protein based vaccines which will have gone through the trials by the time they are given
d) given supply, every dose of Pfizer given to someone who got AZ is one less Pfizer vaccine for someone who hasn't been vaccinated yet who is unlikely to be able to use AZ, it won't be until July/August that there will be any flexibility to start mixing doses, hopefully based on a full set of results

Plus we're prohably all going to need boosters in 6 months to a year. I've had 2 doses of Astra Zeneca and am thoroughly grateful for that, and I'll probably ask for a different one as a booster. Not because I'm unhappy with AZ, but because it seems logical to me that getting a full dose of one vaccine (ie two jabs) and then mixing it up with a different vaccine when the time comes round for a booster is intuitively the best of all.

is_that_so

volchitsa wrote: »

Plus we're prohably all going to need boosters in 6 months to a year. I've had 2 doses of Astra Zeneca and am thoroughly grateful for that, and I'll probably ask for a different one as a booster. Not because I'm unhappy with AZ, but because it seems logical to me that getting a full dose of one vaccine (ie two jabs) and then mixing it up with a different vaccine when the time comes round for a booster is intuitively the best of all.

The need for boosters is open to debate, certain groups may anyway. For now it's just planning for them.

volchitsa

is_that_so wrote: »

The need for boosters is open to debate, certain groups may anyway. For now it's just planning for them.

Have there been any suggestions that boosters won't be necessary? I thought that was pretty much a given, especially with the way the virus seems to be mutating constantly.

Wompa1

Am I wrong in thinking the UK study from a couple of weeks ago stated that the level of protection from 2 doses of AstraZeneca was close in efficacy to 2 doses of Pfizer but a single dose was relatively low in efficacy which is what was behind the rush to get the 2nd doses administered.

Seems on here some reckon AZ is useless but that doesn't seem to be what was reported in the UK study.

CIARAN_BOYLE

volchitsa wrote: »

Have there been any suggestions that boosters won't be necessary? I thought that was pretty much a given, especially with the way the virus seems to be mutating constantly.

Most likely the boosters won't be the same as the original vaccine.

They are likely to be optimised for variants and possibly completely different vaccines.

What's the supply system looking like for second generation Vaccines?

The most optimistic suggestions for boosters have been that it will be necessary in 3-5 years for the majority but the vulnerable will receive a booster for prior to that.

Wompa1

Wompa1 wrote: »

Am I wrong in thinking the UK study from a couple of weeks ago stated that the level of protection from 2 doses of AstraZeneca was close in efficacy to 2 doses of Pfizer but a single dose was relatively low in efficacy which is what was behind the rush to get the 2nd doses administered.

Seems on here some reckon AZ is useless but that doesn't seem to be what was reported in the UK study.

Both Pfizer and astra on one dose were circa 33% overall on Delta
Then 88.9 and 60 respectively on two
The risky aspect being longer intervals between AJ doses
Aj seems to build more immunity over time

is_that_so

volchitsa wrote: »

Have there been any suggestions that boosters won't be necessary? I thought that was pretty much a given, especially with the way the virus seems to be mutating constantly.

There is a lot of talk, most of it from pharma but the alarm over variants has governments planning as well. In truth nobody really knows but it's still best to talk about them anyway.

deeperlearning

The UK are planning on giving boosters tailored to the South African variant in the Autumn:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ministers-in-talks-to-buy-astrazeneca-jab-for-covid-variants-xv8599z8j

astrofool

deeperlearning wrote: »

The UK are planning on giving boosters tailored to the South African variant in the Autumn:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ministers-in-talks-to-buy-astrazeneca-jab-for-covid-variants-xv8599z8j

They are planning in case they are needed, there is no data forthcoming that boosters will be needed yet, even for the Beta (SA) variant.

Call me Al

Has there been any data released on what proportion of the UK vaccine programme is comprised of AstraZeneca?
I think they've about 66% or 70% of adults with first vaccine and they're doing under 30s in England at the moment who afaik are to be offered an MRNA alternative. But have they been hanging on to their MRNA supply to vaccinate this younger population?

robinph

Call me Al wrote: »

Has there been any data released on what proportion of the UK vaccine programme is comprised of AstraZeneca?
I think they've about 66% or 70% of adults with first vaccine and they're doing under 30s in England at the moment who afaik are to be offered an MRNA alternative. But have they been hanging on to their MRNA supply to vaccinate this younger population?

The latest numbers I saw was with 60% of people on Astra Zeneca, and that number reducing as more are now being given Pfizer.

Call me Al

robinph wrote: »

The latest numbers I saw was with 60% of people on Astra Zeneca, and that number reducing as more are now being given Pfizer.

Thank you
Any idea where data like this us recorded?
Last I saw they weren't giving this breakdown.

BillyBiggs

robinph wrote: »

The latest numbers I saw was with 60% of people on Astra Zeneca, and that number reducing as more are now being given Pfizer.

Is Covid-19 an obsession for you?:-)

brendanwalsh

Hopefully they offer everyone who got the first AZ an option for Pfizer or Moderna as their second jab especially anyone young.

ddarcy

astrofool wrote: »

They are planning in case they are needed, there is no data forthcoming that boosters will be needed yet, even for the Beta (SA) variant.

Actually the 6 month results from the American trials are due imminently. Pfizer/Moderna released them within a week. So in theory we should know something really soon (really within the next week) on its continuing results.

Furze99

brendanwalsh wrote: »

Hopefully they offer everyone who got the first AZ an option for Pfizer or Moderna as their second jab especially anyone young.

Well I got AZ as first dose 5 weeks ago. Weighing things up, I'm not inclined to take a second AZ dose. Not interested in being a vaccination statistic for the HSE so they can tick their boxes and use up supplies. Would fully expect a campaign from HSE in a few more months to effect - 'we know you got the AZ vaccine and this saved you from serious illness but... it's not as effective as other vaccines and therefore please attend xyz for vaccine abc now'.

Bottom line, I don't like being messed around with in these matters. Not that gone on medicines and vaccines but happy to take a vaccine for communal and societal reasons. However if I do take one, I want a vaccine that gives maximum protection and least possible side effects - both short and long term.

astrofool

There is no indication that AZ offers less protection in the long term, and may end up having a more long lasting immune response (given that it builds immune response week on week), those on Pfizer could well be offered a booster, while those on AZ may not need one, results from Scotland had AZ ahead of Pfizer in effectiveness in real world cases.

Important to note that the spike protein used to generate antibodies will be the same across all vaccines, the difference in efficacy will be down to how the vaccine causes your body to react to that spike protein, but all do the essential job of getting your immune system exposed to the main weapon of SARS-COV2 so your body can start to generate antibodies and t-cells. It also means that variants are going to be an issue or not for all vaccines equally and we have yet to see any immune escape, so you can be confident whether you got a full course of AZ, J&J, Pfizer or Moderna.

robinph

Call me Al wrote: »

Thank you
Any idea where data like this us recorded?
Last I saw they weren't giving this breakdown.

Someone on Reddit puts together a guesstimate of the numbers based on Scottish numbers which apparently get released weekly and give the breakdown between the different supplies they get. The supply ratio to each country in the UK is equal, and it's known how many doses each is giving each day. Not completely accurate, but won't be very far off unless one of the countries is lying about actually having vaccinated people.

The Welsh government also release data on how many doses are wasted, so they can get an estimate for the UK as a whole from that number also.

Wolf359f

Call me Al wrote: »

Thank you
Any idea where data like this us recorded?
Last I saw they weren't giving this breakdown.

robinph wrote: »

Someone on Reddit puts together a guesstimate of the numbers based on Scottish numbers which apparently get released weekly and give the breakdown between the different supplies they get. The supply ratio to each country in the UK is equal, and it's known how many doses each is giving each day. Not completely accurate, but won't be very far off unless one of the countries is lying about actually having vaccinated people.

The Welsh government also release data on how many doses are wasted, so they can get an estimate for the UK as a whole from that number also.

MHRA yellow card reporting gives good breakdowns.

As of 2 June, an estimated 14.7 million first doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and 24.5 million first doses of the COVID-19 vaccine AstraZeneca had been administered, and around 10.7 million and 15.7 million second doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, respectively. An approximate 0.46 million first doses of the COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna have also now been administered.

Ficheall

ddarcy wrote: »

They said yesterday that they would start from the people at 12 weeks and gradually being it down.

I saw a brief mention of this somewhere, but little detail.. Have they elaborated anywhere?

If Ann was vaccinated on week 1 and is waiting the full twelve weeks, her second vax is week 13.
Barry, who was vaccinated on week 2, only has to wait 11 weeks because they're speeding things up. Thus he gets his second vax in week 13.
Clyde got his first vax in week 3, and only has to wait a mere 10 weeks - so he gets his second vax in week 13.

Grossly oversimplified, obviously, but.. have they (released) a plan?

Wolf359f

Ficheall wrote: »

I saw a brief mention of this somewhere, but little detail.. Have they elaborated anywhere?

If Ann was vaccinated on week 1 and is waiting the full twelve weeks, her second vax is week 13.
Barry, who was vaccinated on week 2, only has to wait 11 weeks because they're speeding things up. Thus he gets his second vax in week 13.
Clyde got his first vax in week 3, and only has to wait a mere 10 weeks - so he gets his second vax in week 13.

Grossly oversimplified, obviously, but.. have they (released) a plan?

I think the idea is (supply dependent) the people who received AZ in week 1, will be given their second jab as soon as there's supply. If there's excess supply that week, people who got theirs in week 2, will get it and so on and so forth. It's all down to supply. They planned for a dosing gap of 12 (16 in some situations) so we're back to being supply limited trying to get it down to 8 weeks.

PMBC

I got my AZ seven weeks ago and yesterday got an appointment for next Friday for 2nd shot - so eight weeks and a day. I'm assuming it will be AZ and i'm happy.

rm212

I’m 25 and just got my second dose of AZ 10 minutes ago. It was given 12 weeks to the day, with 24 hours notice of the appointment. No alternative option offered obviously, otherwise I would have taken it… but hopefully the AZ serves me well in terms of protection.

Marcusm

Furze99 wrote: »

Well I got AZ as first dose 5 weeks ago. Weighing things up, I'm not inclined to take a second AZ dose. Not interested in being a vaccination statistic for the HSE so they can tick their boxes and use up supplies. Would fully expect a campaign from HSE in a few more months to effect - 'we know you got the AZ vaccine and this saved you from serious illness but... it's not as effective as other vaccines and therefore please attend xyz for vaccine abc now'.

Bottom line, I don't like being messed around with in these matters. Not that gone on medicines and vaccines but happy to take a vaccine for communal and societal reasons. However if I do take one, I want a vaccine that gives maximum protection and least possible side effects - both short and long term.

The best real world experience is the U.K. which has rolled both out to millions. The reports from there is that there is little real world difference in efficacy. Long term effects can only be determined in the long term! Side effects are rare with each vaccine, rare clotting disorders from AZ have achieved more press than myocarditis in the mRNA vaccines but that can change over time. Having had one shot, it would not be to your benefit to avoid the second. Frustration with authorities isn’t really a reason to avoid protecting yourself.

Furze99

Furze99 wrote: »

Well I got AZ as first dose 5 weeks ago. Weighing things up, I'm not inclined to take a second AZ dose. Not interested in being a vaccination statistic for the HSE so they can tick their boxes and use up supplies. Would fully expect a campaign from HSE in a few more months to effect - 'we know you got the AZ vaccine and this saved you from serious illness but... it's not as effective as other vaccines and therefore please attend xyz for vaccine abc now'.

Bottom line, I don't like being messed around with in these matters. Not that gone on medicines and vaccines but happy to take a vaccine for communal and societal reasons. However if I do take one, I want a vaccine that gives maximum protection and least possible side effects - both short and long term.

12% of the worlds population has one dose of any vaccine.

You say your not that gone on vaccines, but want to mix and match them like a child in a sweet shop.

I got AZ and agree that we'll probably be boosted with Pfzier before the end of the year after everyone gets two doses of AZ first. We might be the best protected by years end. Best of both worlds.

AZ in all likilhood will stop you getting very sick from covid.

Think positive and be grateful you have received a proven vaccine that protects you from covid. The whole danger from covid is that its a novel virus for people that are getting on in years. Covid is no longer novel to your body. Think positively. Youd swear it was poison you were injected with and not life saving vaccine.

Everyone in time, in my opinion will be offered boosters.

Its a process, not the final outcome.

With regards to side effects they all have them.

The younger you are the more likely you are to have them.

With regards to long term protection nobody knows that for sure, but AZ does produce better t cell immunity than pfzier.

At a guess it is more likely that AZ has longer term immunity as antibodies wane over time, but t cells can stick around for years.

deeperlearning

Marcusm wrote: »

The best real world experience is the U.K. which has rolled both out to millions. The reports from there is that there is little real world difference in efficacy. Long term effects can only be determined in the long term! Side effects are rare with each vaccine, rare clotting disorders from AZ have achieved more press than myocarditis in the mRNA vaccines but that can change over time. Having had one shot, it would not be to your benefit to avoid the second. Frustration with authorities isn’t really a reason to avoid protecting yourself.

What you state here is disingenuous.

In the initial part of the rollout in the UK, Pfizer was administered to healthcare workers. The UK data is not reliable as the exposure to the virus is not the same.

robinph

deeperlearning wrote: »

What you state here is disingenuous.

In the initial part of the rollout in the UK, Pfizer was administered to healthcare workers. The UK data is not reliable as the exposure to the virus is not the same.

What's not reliable?

Since the end of January both vaccines were being dished out in massive numbers to everyone with no significant difference in who got what until later in the program. At the end of January there were around 5 million people who had had Pfizer, by early March it was around 10 million each for both Pfizer and Astra Zeneca and there was plenty of cases of covid in the community still at that time. Pfizer had a bit of a headstart, but the UK data has to be one of the best to look at for comparison between the vaccines.

By the way,the public health England Survey's were done during lockdown
Its really only from now on that proper real world testing of vaccines in the UK has begun

blackcard

PMBC wrote: »

I got my AZ seven weeks ago and yesterday got an appointment for next Friday for 2nd shot - so eight weeks and a day. I'm assuming it will be AZ and i'm happy.

Do you mind if I ask what cohort you are in and what part of the country you are from?I got my AZ jab 5 weeks ago in Kilkenny

Furze99

Woody79 wrote: »

You say your not that gone on vaccines, but want to mix and match them like a child in a sweet shop

No - I'd rather not take any vaccines and certainly don't want to mix & match like sweets!!

All 'vaccine hesistant' (not antivax) people like me want in these circumstances is to be able to take the bare minimum of a vaccine that has the strongest protection and least side effects.

I'm not convinced about the take it or leave it strategy of the HSE and state here as regards people in their 60s.

Furze99

Furze99 wrote: »

No - I'd rather not take any vaccines and certainly don't want to mix & match like sweets!!

All 'vaccine hesistant' (not antivax) people like me want in these circumstances is to be able to take the bare minimum of a vaccine that has the strongest protection and least side effects.

I'm not convinced about the take it or leave it strategy of the HSE and state here as regards people in their 60s.

Its not as black and white as that
I would NOT like to be heading into an advancing Delta variant without Vaccines
Vaccines are essential
We probably will need boosters untill the whole world is reached

Furze99

Furze99 wrote: »

No - I'd rather not take any vaccines and certainly don't want to mix & match like sweets!!

All 'vaccine hesistant' (not antivax) people like me want in these circumstances is to be able to take the bare minimum of a vaccine that has the strongest protection and least side effects.

I'm not convinced about the take it or leave it strategy of the HSE and state here as regards people in their 60s.

I wouldnt class you as vaccine hesitant.

Your looking to take two different vaccines with very limited trial data.

Your actually the opposite of vaccine hesitant.

We are all in the same boat with vaccines.

I'm unsure of what the future holds, but your best course of action is probably just follow hse guidelines.

Stressing yourself out is not going to help or allow you to get option.

I will receive second dose of AZ in just over a week.

I look to the positives:

1. Nobody in all the trials for AZ was hospitalised or died three weeks after first dose.
2. Plenty of good trial data for two dose AZ.
3. Most people in Spain when offered either AZ of Pfzier for second shot (AZ 1st) still opted for AZ.
4. We'll probably get boosters in time, but let others trial it before us (dont be in a trial yourself mixing vaccines). Too many scenarios to know whats best at moment. AZ could turn it to better as time goes on but Pfzier could wane. Nobody knows but knee jerk decision could be a mistake in time.

ddarcy

Top EMA official advises against AstraZeneca’s jab

The EMA’s head of vaccine strategy has recommended the EU avoid AstraZeneca’s vaccine in situations in which an alternative is available, The Brussels Times reported Monday. He also recommended the J&J jab only be used in patients above the age of 60.

Marco Cavaleri made the comments to the Italian newspaper La Stampa over the weekend. Italy restricted the use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine in patients under the age of 60 because of the fear of rare but dangerous blood clots.

When asked if it was better to halt using AstraZeneca altogether for all age groups, Cavaleri agreed, and said that it’s an option many countries are taking into consideration as the supply of mRNA vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer becomes more readily available.

[url] https://endpts.com/covid-19-roundup-germany-puts-j-top-ema-official-suggests-forgoing-astrazeneca-shot/[/url]

[url] https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/belgium-all-news/173797/top-ema-executive-recommends-scrapping-astrazeneca-vaccine/[/url]

So more bad news for AstraZenica. Shock horror, no Irish media reporting.

Level 42

ddarcy wrote: »

[url] https://endpts.com/covid-19-roundup-germany-puts-j-top-ema-official-suggests-forgoing-astrazeneca-shot/[/url]

[url] https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/belgium-all-news/173797/top-ema-executive-recommends-scrapping-astrazeneca-vaccine/[/url]

So more bad news for AstraZenica. Shock horror, no Irish media reporting.

What are ya looking for thumbs up is it ?

ddarcy

Level 42 wrote: »

What are ya looking for thumbs up is it ?

No I expect the HSE, media etc to give everyone all the ongoing information so that people can make an informed choice. If there is no issue with the vaccine, then no reason to bury the news.

Hodger

ddarcy wrote: »

No I expect the HSE, media etc to give everyone all the ongoing information so that people can make an informed choice. If there is no issue with the vaccine, then no reason to bury the news.

Last week it was reported by the Irish times one in six will only take a vaccine if its a vaccine of their choice.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/one-in-six-people-will-only-take-vaccine-if-offered-preference-research-indicates-1.4586072

I fit into this category Im only gonna take a vaccine if I get to choose pfizer vaccine.

Under no circumstances will I be accepting AstraZeneca or J & J .

You are correct in your analysis there is no reason to bury the news any and all news relating to vaccine safety should be reported on properly by the media so people can make an informed choice if they are offered AstraZeneca.

astrofool

ddarcy wrote: »

[url] https://endpts.com/covid-19-roundup-germany-puts-j-top-ema-official-suggests-forgoing-astrazeneca-shot/[/url]

[url] https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/belgium-all-news/173797/top-ema-executive-recommends-scrapping-astrazeneca-vaccine/[/url]

So more bad news for AstraZenica. Shock horror, no Irish media reporting.

There's not much news there, no data driving it and just giving an opinion that was related to the rare chance of CVST and said absolutely nothing about the effectiveness of the vaccine, the EMA guidance has not changed around the use of AstraZeneca and J&J vaccines.

Hodger wrote: »

Last week it was reported by the Irish times one in six will only take a vaccine if its a vaccine of their choice.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/one-in-six-people-will-only-take-vaccine-if-offered-preference-research-indicates-1.4586072

I fit into this category Im only gonna take a vaccine if I get to choose pfizer vaccine.

This is fine, you just have to be OK waiting and keep practicing social distancing measures and hoping that there isn't too many people ahead of you in the queue for choosing a vaccine.

ddarcy

astrofool wrote: »

There's not much news there, no data driving it and just giving an opinion that was related to the rare chance of CVST and said absolutely nothing about the effectiveness of the vaccine, the EMA guidance has not changed around the use of AstraZeneca and J&J vaccines.



This is fine, you just have to be OK waiting and keep practicing social distancing measures and hoping that there isn't too many people ahead of you in the queue for choosing a vaccine.

When the opinion is coming from the Head of Anti-Infectives and Vaccines at the EMA, then sorry totally disagree. It’s like the CEO of Starbucks saying Insomnia is better.

robinph

ddarcy wrote: »

When the opinion is coming from the Head of Anti-Infectives and Vaccines at the EMA, then sorry totally disagree. It’s like the CEO of Starbucks saying Insomnia is better.

No. It's like the CEO of Starbucks saying that coffee contains caffeine and you shouldn't give it to small children...and everyone wondering why they are trying to make a story out of something we already all knew.

ddarcy

robinph wrote: »

No. It's like the CEO of Starbucks saying that coffee contains caffeine and you shouldn't give it to small children...and everyone wondering why they are trying to make a story out of something we already all knew.

You may have missed where he said AstraZenica should be halted for all age groups. Someone in his position has to be very careful in saying/inferring that.

robinph

ddarcy wrote: »

You may have missed where he said AstraZenica should be halted for all age groups.

You may have missed where they said just to use something else if you have it.

The position is still that Astra Zeneca is significantly better than no vaccine, it's better in someone's arm than in the bin or being stored in a fridge.

Lyle

ddarcy wrote: »

[url] https://endpts.com/covid-19-roundup-germany-puts-j-top-ema-official-suggests-forgoing-astrazeneca-shot/[/url]

[url] https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/belgium-all-news/173797/top-ema-executive-recommends-scrapping-astrazeneca-vaccine/[/url]

So more bad news for AstraZenica. Shock horror, no Irish media reporting.

This is bollocks.

From the EMA:

https://mobile.twitter.com/EMA_News/status/1404072431766151172

From Cavaleri himself:

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-shots-should-be-halted-over-60s-too-ema-official-2021-06-13/

"Unfortunately my words have not been interpreted correctly in a recent interview with La Stampa," Cavaleri said in a statement to Reuters. The AstraZeneca shot "maintains a favourable benefit risk profile in all ages but particularly in the elderly above 60," he said.

ddarcy

ddarcy wrote: »

You may have missed where he said AstraZenica should be halted for all age groups. Someone in his position has to be very careful in saying/inferring that.

Except that's not what they said, at all

Hodger

astrofool wrote: »

There's not much news there, no data driving it and just giving an opinion that was related to the rare chance of CVST and said absolutely nothing about the effectiveness of the vaccine, the EMA guidance has not changed around the use of AstraZeneca and J&J vaccines.



This is fine, you just have to be OK waiting and keep practicing social distancing measures and hoping that there isn't too many people ahead of you in the queue for choosing a vaccine.

I am much more ok waiting for the right vaccine then accepting AstraZeneca ( If offered ) with all the various cases of people dying from blood clots linked to that particular vaccine and with the news another country is reported to now restrict the use of AstraZeneca to those over 60.

https://www.euronews.com/2021/06/11/us-health-coronavirus-italy-astrazeneca

https://mobile.twitter.com/sailorrooscout

This guy thinks there may be little difference between AZ and Pfzier other than pfzier is a few weeks quicker to reach optimal protection than AZ.

Loving the data today from UK.

In fairness to Philip Nolan he said as much a few months back.

astrofool

Lyle wrote: »

This is bollocks.

From the EMA:

https://mobile.twitter.com/EMA_News/status/1404072431766151172

From Cavaleri himself:

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-shots-should-be-halted-over-60s-too-ema-official-2021-06-13/

To be fair to the poor EMA guy, reading his initial statement, I would understand what he meant, however, in the age of the internet and clickbait, he should have been more careful as these words spiral out of control very quickly.

astrofool

Hodger wrote: »

I am much more ok waiting for the right vaccine then accepting AstraZeneca ( If offered ) with all the various cases of people dying from blood clots linked to that particular vaccine and with the news another country is reported to now restrict the use of AstraZeneca to those over 60.

https://www.euronews.com/2021/06/11/us-health-coronavirus-italy-astrazeneca

Just to be crystal clear, the EMA person mis-spoke and has clarified his remarks and is not calling for AZ usage to be stopped.

robinph

astrofool wrote: »

To be fair to the poor EMA guy, reading his initial statement, I would understand what he meant, however, in the age of the internet and clickbait, he should have been more careful as these words spiral out of control very quickly.

You have to allow for English not being the first language, or any statement having been run back and forth through Google translate a couple of times. Even if English was the first language you should check the context of what they were actually answering most of the time also.