This is how crazy the pause of J&J vaccine due to blood clots is

This makes sense. Also, CVST is occurring in association with the AstraZeneca vaccine mostly only in those recipients who are younger than 50. If community transmission in Australia is very low, then it makes sense to hold back, in terms of the balance between risks and benefits. But what I'm saying in this thread applies to the J&J vaccine which causes this issue much more rarely, and was being used in a country that has extremely high community transmission (the USA). If over there in Australia this decision does make sense, over here in America it doesn't. Thanks for adding the Australian standpoint, it's always appreciated.

 

I hope nothing I wrote has ever made you feel berated. That is NEVER my intention (toward anyone).

I appreciate your contributions here and all the others that contribute their expertise to this subject.

I just wanted to point out how all of the information from a gazillion sources can be confusing and overwhelming to those of us not in the medical field.

My apologies if I did not convey this well.

 

Agreed, the US response to J&J issues really can't be justified by any kind of risk-benefit assessment. Something else is going on.

 

No apologies necessary. I wasn't talking about you when I said some posters have berated me. And I'm a grown boy, I can take it, haha.

 

I’m the guy who berates @CenterField for linking to journalist’s interpretation of studies. Only because journalists often get some things wrong. But they do have their place.

I really appreciate Centerfield’s ability to communicate hard science using unfamiliar (to most) terminology because it’s concise and allows more efficient transfer of information. However, Centerfield is an excellent teacher as well—with great ability to explain complexities in ways everyone can understand.

Just ask and he’ll give you an easily understood explanation non PF members would have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for.

 

I agree that @CenterField has been generous with his time and knowledge. I appreciate all these discussions as I wade through these topics. I even learn something from the posters that don't always agree. Thank you for your part in keeping the discussions going.

 

Not really, I didn't have you in mind when I said that, because your "berating" is always on target and keeps me honest. And I've also made the point several times of faulty interpretation by lay journalists. When you berate me it is often when I'm indeed cutting corners regardless of the source I'm quoting.

 

https://www.bitchute.com/video/RDTJ6K2OD5EU/
41:36

I hope he's not right.

 

For some reason I can't play your video. But whatever he is saying, chances are that he's not right. Sure, there's been some side effects, some of them serious and even fatal, but in a very tiny minority of people, which compares very favorably to the dangers of the virus itself, so that clearly the benefits outweigh the risks. Are there risks? Absolutely. No medicine known to men is 100% risk-free. But if you get a risk of blood clots of 0.00001% with the vaccines, and of 21% with Covid-19, it's a no-brainer. And the interesting part is that the worst side effects were seen with the adenovirus-vector vaccines, not the mRNA vaccines this guy seems to be berating (although the difference between them is more subtle than people think).

Although I was unable to get this one to play, usually this kind of alarmist video is absolutely non-scientific, despite some of them featuring some publicity-seeking person who does hold an MD. I think they are quacks and conspiracy theorists. I've seen other videos by MDs, full of nonsense.

 

Repeating here from my thread State of the Vaccines, since this does belong to that thread's theme, and also to this specific one:

The CDC panel met today to consider the J&J vaccine. If the CDC director abides by their recommendation, we are to resume J&J shots, with a fact sheet and warning about blood clots and how to treat them.

15 cases of blood clots were found, a dozen of which were CVST, and 3 of which died. All 15 were in women aged 18 to 50. No cases were found among men. No cases were found in people over the age of 50. The 15 cases were found out of nearly 8 million recipients.

If the director of the CDC signs off on this recommendation, J&J shots will resume in America in a matter or hours to days.

It remains to be seen how the public will react to this. Of course, men have nothing to fear. Women over the age of 50 have nothing to fear. But women aged 18 to 50 might want to prefer Moderna or Pfizer, despite the risk being statistically very small and much smaller than the risk of blood clots brought about by Covid-19 itself.

Given the less than 0.0002% risk of blood clots for the vaccine versus 16% to 21% for the virus itself, I sustain that it's a no-brainer that the vaccine's benefits far outweigh its risks, but since we do have the alternatives of the Pfizer and the Moderna vaccines, I'm fine with the idea that women aged 18 to 50 should prefer one of the other two vaccines, and that's what I intend to tell my patients.

 

The reaction of EMA was even more stupid: they also advised to suspend the J&J, even though the number of cases reported was even lower than for the AstraZeneca vaccine, which, after having been suspended for a few days, was released again, only for people aged 55 or 60 and older. Looks like a refresher course in simple arithmetics is overdue.

 

What's the source for this?

 

Scientific paper. The Lancet. Meta-analysis of 42 studies.

"Of 425 studies identified, 42 studies enrolling 8271 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall venous TE rate was 21% (95% CI:17–26%)"

TE stands for thromboembolism.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30383-7/fulltext

Now, look at this. While the incidence in some studies is lower than that, it jumps to 32% when you do screen the patients using compression ultrasound.

So if you look for the thrombosis, you find it.

https://thrombosisjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12959-020-00248-5

 

Blood clotting related to changes in menstrual cycles appearing months later shows the shots to be very dangerous indeed.

The public as lab rats are starting to show the effects of an experimental drug as time passes.