Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: Human ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 07:42AM

Why Canada is suspending use of AstraZeneca vaccine in people under 55:

“Canada's vaccine advisory committee is recommending immediately suspending the use of the AstraZeneca-Oxford COVID-19 vaccine in Canadians under 55 following reports of rare but potentially fatal blood clots in Europe that appear to be connected to the shot.

“The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) updated its guidelines to provinces and territories against the use of the vaccine for younger Canadians on Monday over safety concerns.”

...

"This vaccine has had all the ups and downs — it looks like a roller coaster," said Dr. Caroline Quach, chair of NACI and a pediatric infectious diseases expert. "The problem is because data are evolving, we are also evolving our recommendations."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/canada-suspends-astrazeneca-vaccine-covid-19-1.5968657


I applaud the caution. The data on this and the other vaccines will continue to evolve. We’ll see.

Meanwhile, as we head into Spring And Easter Breaks and a third or fourth wave, self isolate. If that’s not possible, limit going out as much as you can, wear a mask, practice social distancing, etc. This is a marathon, not a sprint.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: anonyXmo ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 08:03AM

What? What about the people who've already had it? We were guaranteed the vaccines were safe. Why is the Canadian government turning anti-vaxxer? what might go wrong w/the other vaccines as time goes on?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Human ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 09:02AM

anonyXmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What? What about the people who've already had it?
> We were guaranteed the vaccines were safe.

I guess, if you got it and you didn’t experience blood clots you’re good to go? That is, until...you’re not?

> what might go wrong w/the other vaccines as time goes on?

I dunno. If anything, we’ll see.


The claims that the current vaccines are effective against the variants are being tested now or will be shortly enough. The CBC is reporting that “new variants of concern now account for 67 per cent of all SARS-CoV-2 infections in Ontario.” (Alberta is roughly 25%):

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-covid-19-ontario-1.5968720

The variants today and the possible ones to come were nary a twinkle in the eye of the corporations that created the first vaccines for the original Covid infection (with a strict 2 shot, precise time delay regiment, by the way, which many jurisdictions ignored.)

Some data on the variants isn’t very encouraging:

“Variants of the virus behind COVID-19 double the risk of someone being admitted to intensive care — and increase the risk of death by roughly 60 per cent — according to a new analysis of recent Ontario data from the province's science advisory table, multiple sources tell CBC News.”

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/covid-variants-death-analysis-ontario-1.5964296

There’s talk of yearly booster shots to combat this going forward. Again, we’ll see. As it is, I’m sceptical.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Nightingale ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 01:23PM

Human Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The claims that the current vaccines are effective
> against the variants are being tested now or will
> be shortly enough.

I have heard since the first variants became evident that the experts in various fields pertaining to COVID-19 have stated they do not know if the current vaccines are effective against them. That is a major reason why, as I understand it, we are being told to maintain the preventive measures (masking, distancing, washing) even after being vaccinated until more is known. The first variant I recall hearing about is the UK one. I have heard repeatedly that experts are very concerned about it. It's one reason we are being encouraged to get a vaccine asap in the hopes that we may have at least some immunity to the variants that are emerging but that is not stated as being certain.


> The variants today and the possible ones to come
> were nary a twinkle in the eye of the corporations
> that created the first vaccines for the original
> Covid infection

As far as I understand, the potential for variants was always known. It is the way viruses work. Experts in the field of virology have explained this biological fact.



> There’s talk of yearly booster shots to combat
> this going forward. Again, we’ll see. As it is,
> I’m sceptical.


I've heard this for a while now too. It's been explained as being similar to the need for annual flu shots. In my limited grasp of the biology of it all, I understand that it's due to the fact that the virus keeps mutating.

I don't think there's anything nefarious about medics recommending a need for annual doses against some diseases.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/30/2021 01:23PM by Nightingale.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Human ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 05:32PM

Nightingale Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> As far as I understand, the potential for variants
> was always known. It is the way viruses work.
> Experts in the field of virology have explained
> this biological fact.

Of course. What I meant is that the corporations that developed the vaccines could not know precisely how Covid would vary and so could not know if their vaccines would be effective against today’s or tomorrow’s variants.


> I don't think there's anything nefarious about
> medics recommending a need for annual doses
> against some diseases.

I do not think I implied anything like this.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Nightingale ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 07:38PM

OK, thanks for clarifications.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: anonyXmo ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 06:53PM

Human Wrote:
--------------------------------------------
>
> I guess, if you got it and you didn’t experience
> blood clots you’re good to go? That is,
> until...you’re not?

Wow I feel so much better doctor house


> I dunno. If anything, we’ll see.

Lol, you been cribbing off Biden's notes


> There’s talk of yearly booster shots to combat
> this going forward.

I'm sure everyone will love that

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Nightingale ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 01:14PM

anonyXmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why is the Canadian government turning anti-vaxxer?

They're not.

Expressing caution about one vaccine when questions arise about it, while continuing to use other vaccines that have not been shown to have the side effect in question, is scarcely being anti vaccines in general.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Brother Of Jerry ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 01:50PM

anonyXmo's post has a penchant for hyperbole, a polite way of saying the post ought to trigger your BS Detector.

BTW, the reason for the age 55 restriction is that the review board deems the disease so dangerous for people over 55 that it is worth the risk for them to take the vaccine anyway. There is a very small risk of blood clots, compared to a fairly large risk of complications up to and including death, from the disease itself.

The under 55 crowd is much less likely to experience these complications. There are also other vaccines available for the younger people. Older people should take whatever vaccine that is available. Waiting for an alternative vaccine is more dangerous for them than taking AstraZeneca right now if it is available.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Human ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 05:00PM

Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> BTW, the reason for the age 55 restriction is that
> the review board deems the disease so dangerous
> for people over 55 that it is worth the risk for
> them to take the vaccine anyway.

Just a month ago the CBC reported this:

“The National Advisory Committee on Immunizations (NACI) has recommended against using the AstraZenec-Oxford vaccine in people aged 65 and older, although Health Canada has authorized it to be used in adults of all ages.”

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/astra-zeneca-vaccine-naci-age-1.5932347

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Brother Of Jerry ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 10:48PM

And your point is what? That when circumstances change, they change their mind?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Human ( )
Date: March 31, 2021 08:03AM

My point was to correct your false statement, which I quoted.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: G. Salviati ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 01:45PM

I am glad to see that Canada has a government entity composed of experts (like our CDC) that people can trust and follow, without second guessing their expertise and motivations; even in the face of a barrage of isolated vocal criticisms, ad hoc models of preference; and related contrarian advice. Presumably, the NACI has earned this respect.

No doubt that there remain in Canada, as in the US, a few renegades that insist they have better information, better expertise, or can just figure out for themselves what is best for themselves and everyone else. I just hope that no such persons become Prime Minister.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Human ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 05:39PM

G. Salviati Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> without second guessing their expertise and motivations;

When billions of dollars are at stake, it’s wise to *always* second guess expertise and motivations.

This goes doubly when one’s health and the health of those around one are in question.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: G. Salviati ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 06:49PM

Spoken like a true-blue Libertarian. (Whether you identify with that label or not!)

Yes, it is wise for the entire population to doubt designated governmental experts; and embrace whoever they can find that sows enough doubt to preserve their status quo lifestyle. In the meantime, people die, and the vaccines become less socially effective as a result of irrational resistance.

"This goes doubly when one’s health and the health of those around one are in question."

Exactly, the health of the nation and its people are better served if everyone doubts and second-guesses the designated, credentialed, experts who have (1) the most cumulative expertise; (2) access to the best and most recent data; and (3) the most sophisticated modeling tools; and who are trying to establish a social policy to solve a difficult problem.

Let's all just do our own research, and then do what we want.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Human ( )
Date: March 31, 2021 08:10AM

Youkre descending into gibberish, Salvati. Pity.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: G. Salviati ( )
Date: March 31, 2021 10:04AM

Yes. "Gibberish" indeed! (Which by definition is "unintelligible or meaningless speech or writing.")

My apologies! The next time I foolishly attempt to challenge you I will first consult the Tao. Maybe then I will be able to just "see" that you are right, and I am wrong.

In the meantime I will work on the logic of my presentation. :)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: anonyXmo ( )
Date: March 30, 2021 06:55PM

G. Salviati Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am glad to see that Canada has a government
> entity composed of experts (like our CDC) that
> people can trust and follow, without second
> guessing their expertise and motivations; even in
> the face of a barrage of isolated vocal
> criticisms, ad hoc models of preference; and
> related contrarian advice.

"When our leaders have spoken, the thinking has been done"

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
       **  ********   **      **  **      **  **       
       **  **     **  **  **  **  **  **  **  **       
       **  **     **  **  **  **  **  **  **  **       
       **  **     **  **  **  **  **  **  **  **       
 **    **  **     **  **  **  **  **  **  **  **       
 **    **  **     **  **  **  **  **  **  **  **       
  ******   ********    ***  ***    ***  ***   ********