Shadowminister,

The “Estimated risk of TTS per 100,000 AstraZeneca vaccine doses (first dose) <50 years 3.1” so crudely a 1 in 30,000 chance.

http://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/is-it-true/is-it-true-does-the-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-cause-blood-clots

The pill has a risk factor of 1 in 1000.

However the fatality rate for type of clotting presented by the pill is far lower than that of the vaccine.

So yes there is a legitimate concern over this particular vaccine. Why on earth are you dismissing it? Because it shows your leader in a bad light? Well sure does.

SR,

From your link:

"There has been a link established between the AstraZeneca vaccine and a very rare but serious side effect called thrombosis in combination with thrombocytopenia. There is a very low chance of this side effect, which may occur in around 4-6 people in every million after being vaccinated." and of those that do die nearly everyone has comorbidity.

shadowminister,

The preface to the table talks about the "revised" risk.

"From early April to 16 June 2021, 60 cases of confirmed or probable TTS have been reported in Australia. This includes an additional seven cases reported in the past week in people between 50-59 years, increasing the rate in this age group from 1.9 to 2.7 per 100,000 AstraZeneca vaccine doses. The revised estimates of risk associated with first doses of COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca are listed in the table below."

http://www.health.gov.au/news/atagi-statement-on-revised-recommendations-on-the-use-of-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-17-june-2021

My guess is they haven't updated the lead statement.

Hey SteeleRedux,
I'm going to repeat for yours and mhazes benefit that which I wrote on another forum thread:

"If SteeleRedux thinks that after the jab his immune system will be strengthened and make him more protected against catching the virus, and that if he does catch the virus his symptoms will be less severe;

- Then he should be able to get his jab without criticism from those who are not having it.

Likewise if mhaze thinks that the vaccine won't make any difference in protecting him from covid, and that the risks associated with the vacinne are greater than the risks associated with covid, or whatever he believes;
If he doesn't want the jab, then he too should be free to not get the jab without criticism from those who are having it.

Now, this would be great in a perfect world, but
Unfortunately we live in the real world, where no-ones free from criticism and everybody criticises everything;

So what of it?

What's the actual danger to those who do get the jab by those who don't have it?
- How are the vaccinated put at risk of harm by the unvaccinated?

And conversely
What's the actual danger to those who don't get the jab by those who do have it?
- How are the unvaccinated put at risk of harm by the vaccinated?

- I've actually heard arguments on both sides too -

Obviously the vaccinated people think we need some kind of herd immunity.
I'm not sure how they assume this really works, since these 'vaccines' don't make you immune.

On the other side I've heard that unvaccinated pregnant women who are exposed to vaccinated people can spontaneously abort, etc.
- Sounds fairly serious if true.

I haven't been keeping up on the facts.
I don't know whats true and what isn't.
- Does anyone? -

[Cont.]
"And I defend you right to make deeply ill-informed decisions."
- Thanks, I appreciate that.

"As long as you and others like you do not impede us achieving herd immunity I am happy to accept free-loaders like yourself profiting from the short term risk myself and others face in getting vaccinated. When the border restrictions do finally come down I think you might be singing a different tune."

No, that's not going to happen.
I want you to know that I don't want you to take that risk for my benefit.
Personally, I'd be quite happy if everyone said no.
To unsafe and untested vaccines.

If the stuff I've heard about spontaneous abortions and disrupted menstrual cycles are true, than the vaccinated present just as much a risk if not more to the unvaccinated.

You're worried about protecting yourself against the virus, you're older and your immune system is not as resilient as younger people,
I understand and appreciate your position.

But what if you getting vaccinated causes some other person to spontaneously abort and lose a life still in the womb?

Ultimately I just want you to understand other peoples arguments and positions.

My girlfriend watches the pressers religiously.
She's not planning on getting it either, as she has concerns in regards to her allergies.
She thinks it's all going to end up in a battle between the vaccinated V's the unvaccinated.

Given your sentiments about achieving herd immunity and what might happen if people with vaccine hesitancy make the nation fall short of the 80% target, she might be right.
I guess well find out soon.

Dear Armchair Critic,

You wrote: "Personally, I'd be quite happy if everyone said no.
To unsafe and untested vaccines."

Untested? Are you serious?

So many countries have gone before Australia resulting in millions upon millions of people being our test subjects. This has exposed issues like a small risk of blood clotting.

There have been numerous vaccines that have been shelved along the way as well as a huge number of people to test efficacy because of countries which have had the virus run rampant through them.

In terms of the sheer number of 'test' subjects I would venture that very few vaccines would have had validations the prime 4 Covid ones have had.

Now you might not have asked for other to have a vaccine on your behalf but you sure as hell stand to be the beneficiary of it, so a little gratitude regardless wouldn't go astray.