from Hacker News

UK Covid: Under-30s offered alternative to AstraZeneca jab

by reddotX on 4/7/21, 2:24 PM with 23 comments

  • by kjakm on 4/7/21, 2:42 PM

    I think the interesting thing here is that the EMA were publicising their updated advice at the same time as the MHRA and while it seems the MHRA + EMA agree it is a very rare side effect the UK is changing course and the EU will continue to recommend it to everyone. I'm not saying one decision is right and the other wrong but it goes to show how difficult it must be to make these calls (I'm assuming no political influence given the regulators are supposed to be independent).

  • by cyberlab on 4/7/21, 2:48 PM

    I think it's great that we have a choice. Johnson&Johnson have a little history behind them that everyone should be made aware of though: https://www.asbestos.com/companies/johnson-johnson/

    > In 1994, Johnson & Johnson introduced baby powder made of crushed talc. The mineral can be found with asbestos in the earth, raising concern talc products are contaminated with toxic asbestos. In recent years, J&J has lost multimillion dollar lawsuits related to ovarian cancer caused by baby powder.

  • by unpopularopp on 4/7/21, 2:48 PM

    Well I'm under 30 and got my AZ last week. Now I wish I was waiting for Moderna or Pfizer instead...

  • by TechBro8615 on 4/7/21, 4:51 PM

    Call me selfish but as an under 30 who hardly leaves the house, I'm in no rush to get the vaccine and will happily leech off herd immunity as long as possible. I'm curious what the uptake will be from my fellow young people.

  • by akmarinov on 4/7/21, 3:15 PM

    The UK goes nilly willy doing vaccines of all sorts.

    First it was postponing Pfizer for 12 weeks, now it’s we’ll mix and match however we see fit, with no prior study on how that affects people.

  • by dustinmoris on 4/7/21, 2:51 PM

    I am a huge proponent of vaccines and I have had more vaccines than the average person will ever have, but this doesn't make sense.

    Why only under 30s?

    Many people, in fact the overwhelming majority of all age categories who already had COVID know that their risk of COVID is actually 0% since their body has already proven to deal with this virus without an issue. These people are past the point of danger and risk. To those people taking a vaccine which has side effects like blood clots just doesn’t make any sense, regardless how old they are.

    I can understand that a 70 year old who hasn't had COVID yet will have a higher benefit to risk ratio with the vaccine, but to "COVID survivors" that benefit-risk-ratio is negative.

    Besides that it also doesn’t make sense to wave all responsibilities of vaccine producers and then forcing an emergency approved vaccine with blood clot potential on a healthy population through vaccine passports.

    I am increasingly more disappointed with out government.

  • by toxik on 4/7/21, 2:47 PM

    Jab 'em all. Opening up society is much more important to the general well-being of the people than saving a handful of people from blood clots, which hasn't even been confirmed.