AstraZeneca vaccine for over-65s

on the podcast Newscast, they had a guest who said that the reason why the AstraZeneca one wasn't trialed on many over 65s was because they didn't want them having to travel in lockdowns

France, Germany, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy and Poland have all taken the stance that the AstraZeneca vaccine is not recommendable for those over 65 due to lack of data on its efficacy. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency also agrees that because only two trial participants over the age of 65 were infected, it couldn't be said to be effective until more data has been collected. Despite this, millions over the age of 65 in the UK have been given at least one dose and people who have dared to challenge the vaccines have been publicly ridiculed. You can read more about what the BBC has to say in defence of the vaccine here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55919245
Anyone have any thoughts? For reference, I agree with the rollout of vaccines, I don't see any other route out of this pandemic but I'm starting to understand where those who are anti-vaccines are coming from more and more, especially considering that the AstraZeneca vaccine is said to be 30% ineffective against the original strain and said to offer 'minimal protection' according to Uni of Oxford :/

on the podcast Newscast, they had a guest who said that the reason why the AstraZeneca one wasn't trialed on many over 65s was because they didn't want them having to travel in lockdowns

There’s a rather large trial of over 65s going on at the moment. All seems to be going well with that one.

Plus, the AstraZeneca vaccine is not only not for profit.

France and Germany seem to be a little bit upset that their pharmaceutical companies, that in the case of France failed to develop a vaccine appear to be reducing demand rather than increasing supply.

European pharmaceutical companies who’s products are significantly more expensive than a British invented not for profit vaccine, want their ‘for profit’ vaccines used instead even though they can’t mass produce them.

Who’d have thunk it.

How can they inject a vaccine to millions over the age of 65 if they haven't completed sufficient trials? Unless you're referring to the citizens who are unknowingly being experimented on by receiving a vaccine that has been falsely deemed as efficient and safe?

There were only two people over 65 who got infected out of the whole trial... seems like a legitimate reason to me. In addition, the majority of countries in the list above have no legitimate ulterior motive for claiming that the vaccine is ineffective: not all have been officially working on developing a vaccine or are directly affiliated with major pharmaceutical companies

France, Germany, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy and Poland have all taken the stance that the AstraZeneca vaccine is not recommendable for those over 65 due to lack of data on its efficacy. Only two trial participants over the age of 65 were infected, it couldn't be said to be effective until more data has been collected. Despite this, millions over the age of 65 in the UK have been given at least one dose and people who have dared to challenge the vaccines have been publicly ridiculed. You can read more about what the BBC has to say in defence of the vaccine here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55919245
Anyone have any thoughts? For reference, I agree with the rollout of vaccines, I don't see any other route out of this pandemic but I'm starting to understand where those who are anti-vaccines are coming from more and more, especially considering that the AstraZeneca vaccine is said to be 30% ineffective against the original strain and said to offer 'minimal protection' according to Uni of Oxford :/

There were only two people over 65 who got infected out of the whole trial... seems like a legitimate reason to me.

I think its an insane decision by those countries, likely borne out of either completely inflexible thinking, or there are political reasons.

This is a global pandemic. Thousands of elderly are dying every day. As long as a treatment is safe (which is not in question) you don't need to be 100% certain it will work - 99% is easily enough! And that's pretty much where we're at for AZ - proven efficacy in those aged 50-65, proven inflammatory reaction in the over 65s, and no reason to think it wouldn't work.

Heck, 80% or even 50% would probably be enough - I think there's a significant argument that we should have started vaccinations on the over 80s in like August, as soon as it was proven safe!

Your alternative to cracking on despite the small amount of uncertainty, is of course to not use it and accept likely tens of thousands of extra deaths. Hmm. I know which option I'd pick.

So why haven't they? I have a lot of experience with medic and a lot of them have zero flexibility in thinking (i.e. its proven or its not proven, no grey at all, which is ridiculous in an emergency situation) and a lot are afraid of litigation too of course. So either that, or other political reasons, is my guess.


How many who got infected had heart failure? Shall we exclude all heart failure patients too? How many were Polynesian - lets exclude all them shall we? What about skateboarders - they (probably) haven't even recorded whether the participants were skateboarders or not! There is no evidence for skateboarders - exclude all skateboarders until it is proven for them!

Point being, if its not obvious - you need to have a reason to suspect it doesn't work in the over 65s to select out that group in the first place. All the pre-trial evidence was that it would work in the over 65s. Even selecting out that group, seems very dubious.

So they're just going to sit back and wait whilst tens of thousands die and everyone stays in lockdown I guess

This is more likely to be the main reason.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/30/president-macron-accused-managing-demand-cope-shortage-oxford/

Yes, that is among the 'political reasons' I refer to. Although it still makes no sense to me - they're still set to receive a few million soon aren't they? And with their other vaccine sources also being delayed and inadequate, I can only imagine there will be a significant cohort of over 65s left to wait.

Because lots and lots and lots of people are dieing.

Large trials have been conducted and a sizeable amount of over 65s were tested.

The EU, and notice that it’s only the EU kicking this off has totally messed up it’s vaccination programme. It was heavily reliant an expensive American/German vaccine and French vaccines. The French vaccine programme has one that’s failed and one that will finish testing if they’re lucky Q4 this year meaning that it’s not really going to get rolled out until the start of 2022.

Astra Zeneca vaccine uses proven technology.

If you’re scared of having an injection, just say you’re scared of having an injection. Please don’t try to justify your fear with pseudo science.

The AstraZeneca vaccine has been fully tested and passed for approval by the MHRA, one of the most experienced and professional Approval bodies in the world.

It’s been approved for use by WHO and throughout the world.

Sadly, as with most things in life, there’s politics to play. Remember prior to the brexit referendum that they said if there was a global pandemic, the EU wouldn’t be able to go it alone?

We now have this happening. I like the attached BBC news report

https://order-order.com/2021/02/02/watch-eus-vaccine-mismanagement-obliterated-on-tv/

I think its an insane decision by those countries, likely borne out of either completely inflexible thinking, or there are political reasons.

This is a global pandemic. Thousands of elderly are dying every day. As long as a treatment is safe (which is not in question) you don't need to be 100% certain it will work - 99% is easily enough! And that's pretty much where we're at for AZ - proven efficacy in those aged 50-65, proven inflammatory reaction in the over 65s, and no reason to think it wouldn't work.

Heck, 80% or even 50% would probably be enough - I think there's a significant argument that we should have started vaccinations on the over 80s in like August, as soon as it was proven safe!

Your alternative to cracking on despite the small amount of uncertainty, is of course to not use it and accept likely tens of thousands of extra deaths. Hmm. I know which option I'd pick.

So why haven't they? I have a lot of experience with medic and a lot of them have zero flexibility in thinking (i.e. its proven or its not proven, no grey at all, which is ridiculous in an emergency situation) and a lot are afraid of litigation too of course. So either that, or other political reasons, is my guess.


How many who got infected had heart failure? Shall we exclude all heart failure patients too? How many were Polynesian - lets exclude all them shall we? What about skateboarders - they (probably) haven't even recorded whether the participants were skateboarders or not! There is no evidence for skateboarders - exclude all skateboarders until it is proven for them!

Point being, if its not obvious - you need to have a reason to suspect it doesn't work in the over 65s to select out that group in the first place. All the pre-trial evidence was that it would work in the over 65s. Even selecting out that group, seems very dubious.

So they're just going to sit back and wait whilst tens of thousands die and everyone stays in lockdown I guess

Firstly, it's not just countries in the EU that are kicking off. Most of the countries in the list in my original post were in the EU but there are many other countries around the world who are also rejecting the vaccine for the same reason. Due to the sheer number I wasn't going to list them all, just the ones in the continent. The concept of a vaccine itself I do not object. As I said in my original post, I don't see any other way out of the pandemic. It just angers me that they hadn't even trialled it properly. You'd think that if the elderly were their target demographic for the vaccine they would want to see evidence of it's efficacy from more than two people, right?? As you said, their reason for not including more elderly people in the trial was due to not wanting them to travel but that's a truly outrageous reason considering what's at stake. It's so important that a vaccine is rigorously tested for its efficacy as if it doesn't offer adequate protection while recipients have a false sense of security believing that they're now safe, lives could be lost.

Which other countries outside of the EU.

the AstraZeneca vaccine is not only the cheapest vaccine out there, it’s being made not for profit.

so you’re concern is that there is now a vaccine that has been tested, passed off by one of the most stringent medicine approval boards in the world, being mass produced in India as part of the UNs global vaccination push. It’s been approved by numerous countries. Is about to be approved by even more. Even the European Medical agency hasn’t said it shouldn’t be used by people over 65.

why are you so against this particular vaccine? Are you upset about brexit and are trying to defend the EUs mishandling of its Covid vaccination programme?

Or are you cut from the same cloth as this delightful person.

https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine_uk_5ea067f2c5b6b2e5b83ba372

Well 1/2 of the over 65s that had the vaccine caught Covid-19. https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/commentisfree/2021/feb/06/behind-the-numbers-efficacy-of-oxford-vaccine
I'm against this one in particular because the other vaccines have more evidence to prove their efficacy and aren't being ruled out by what seems to be half of the world. In addition, while this vaccine was said to be only slightly less effective against the SA strain just a few days ago, they've now changed their mind to say it's ineffective. This seems very strange to me considering that some of the AstraZeneca trials that deemed that it was safe/effective was carried out in SA. Finally, not only did they carelessly give patients the wrong dose during the trials, they didn't tell them they'd made a mistake with the dosage.

I wonder if Alexander Flemming went through this when he invented penicillin.

Baring in mind over 65s are the initial target demographic for the virus and are obviously more susceptible to health complications, it's slightly concerning that they based the efficacy of a vaccine for a cohort of millions on the trial results of two individuals from this cohort

Well 1/2 of the over 65s that had the vaccine caught Covid-19. https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/commentisfree/2021/feb/06/behind-the-numbers-efficacy-of-oxford-vaccine

I wonder if Alexander Flemming went through this when he invented penicillin.