The EU’s medicines agency has responded to concerns over the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid vaccine, saying there is “no indication” that the vaccine is the cause of reported blood clots. Sky News has the story.
The European Union’s medicines agency has said there is “no indication” that AstraZeneca’s coronavirus vaccine is the cause of reported blood clots.
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has been carrying out a case-by-case evaluation of incidents and was expected to complete a review on Thursday, said Executive Director Emer Cooke.
The regulator said it was “firmly convinced” the vaccine’s benefits outweighed the risk of side effects.
The WHO has urged countries to continue using the jab as global medical experts meet to discuss reports of blood clots.
UK leaders and medical professionals have joined in their defence of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine after some European countries – including Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, France and Sweden – paused its use due to concerns over possible adverse side effects. …
Now, France has said it expects inoculations there to resume after the agency meets and issues its recommendations. …
The EMA has said “many thousands of people” develop blood clots every year in the EU and “the number of thromboembolic events overall in vaccinated people seems not to be higher than that seen in the general population”. …
Dr Soumya Swaminathan, WHO’s Chief Scientist, [also] told a media briefing “we do not want people to panic”, as she said no association has been found so far between blood clots and Covid vaccines.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It seems there is a huge amount of (reasonable) disagreement within the medical community on the safety (and efficacy) of the vaccines. Given my risk of covid is negligible – I might wait until at least some sort of consensus emerges. Of course others will do their own personal risk assessments – but as a 50 year old, 1 year into a ‘pandemic’ I know enough about the virus and as little about the vaccine that I’m happy to have the virus (and probably did anyway before they were testing).
Additionally, the idea that having the virus is some sort of ‘poor relation’ to being vaccinated – given how little testing we have done of the vaccines – I find risible.
Totally agree. I’m more than happy to wait until the clinical trials are completed, and even then, I think my own immune system will manage just fine.
I’m certainly not ‘happy to have the virus’, given my health issues (although I think my underlying immunity remains quite good).
However, for me, taking the vaccine would be supporting the current witchcraft rather than real science. A betrayal.
This is not because I believe that the vaccine is definitely unsafe, but simply that safety cannot be established within this timeframe, and going along with the panicdemic scenario is a betrayal of basic protocols involving serious testing of drugs. The risk profile just doesn’t warrant it; if this was about Ebola, it might.
Despite the advertising puffery, the vaccines aren’t much of an achievement, with an absolute risk reduction (the real-life kicker) of less than 1%. (Note how little the AR figures are mentioned) And, it seems, truth told, the government doesn’t believe the puffery about limiting transmission, either, with the local thug force still beating up old ladies to enforce their bollocks NPIs. What a shit-shower!
Meanwhile, Ivermectin has a promising profile of prophylactic effectiveness – rather better than for vaccines – but is a minority pursuit.
So we have more and more witchcraft and less and less science.
We’ve tested the vaccine on 20 million people. How many more do you need?
I just hope you are one of the lucky ones who gets mild Covid.
I’ve probably already had it. It was so mild I didn’t know it but everyone else in my family did. Even if I didn’t, its statistically likely to be mild for my age/health cohort – but life’s a risk
I think it’s long terms effects I would be interested in wrt vaccines – the high selection pressure for a mutation that avoids the vaccine (but maybe not so much my generalist response). I’m not an expert, but for a known very mild virus, I’ll take my chances with it rather than a vaccine with such a short amount of testing.
I’m not worried either about the virus or the vaccine – both are probably fine. I just don’t care that much, there’s more to life than shitting yourself about either a sniffle or some anti-sniffle potion straight out of the lab
Ok EMA.
Show us the detailed data supporting your claim.
I won’t bother waiting.
The EMA along with MHRA and CDC are poachers turned gamekeepers, Big Pharma regulates itself.
The very notion of a vaccine for the general public for something with an IFR of 0.23% is nuts. To have it forced onto the public under emergency use is potentially criminal.
The ‘blood clot’ concern is not limited to the AZ vaccine it applies to Pfiezer and Moderna. It seems that a major contributor to deaths ‘with’ covid was the pneumonia combined with blood clotting caused by the wild virus. As all three vaccines in effect produce virus spike manufacturing cells all over the body including the brain, its not unwarranted to ask the question if its been tested and found safe regarding this issue.
The sort of ‘anecdotal’ evidence dismissed when evaluating Ivermectin of HCQ now apparently being used in defence of the vaccines by the regulators , just won’t wash.
“The very notion of a vaccine for the general public for something with an IFR of 0.23% is nuts. “
Like the flu vaccine then.
Healthy people are under no pressure to get flu vaccines
The only clots are in the European Commission