Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Mar 13^th, 2021 at 5:51pm:



lee wrote on Mar 13^th, 2021 at 5:09pm:



You mean that one?  Actually I went to the EMA website.

"As of 9 March 2021, 22 cases of thromboembolic events had been reported among the 3 million people vaccinated with COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca in the European Economic Area."

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-prac-preliminary-...

That would suggest it is more safe to get the COVID vaccine than a general vaccination. Yoohoo - we're all saved.

Also -

"There is currently no indication that vaccination has caused these conditions, which are not listed as side effects with this vaccine."

lee wrote on Mar 13^th, 2021 at 5:55pm:




So  we3 are agreed its safe. Whats your issue again?

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Mar 13^th, 2021 at 8:30pm:



I don't see how an injection can lower the clotting risk, especially by that much.

Down from 1 in 1000 or 0.1% to 22 / 3,000,000 = 0.0000073333 %

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Mar 13^th, 2021 at 9:05pm:



That may well be true. But a larger sample size would be better. Or your posted study was wrong.

Up to 1 in 100 or 1% in the very old. That still doesn't explain the huge difference.

This really depends on the case of that 60 year old lady.  For example, does she have a genetic predisposition?  Does she have any other risk factors: e.g. smoker, hormone replacement treatment, phx of clotting disorder, cancer, recent long distance travel and surgery, leg injuries, period of immobility etc. 

So far we dont have any information on that, probably for privacy reasons.

That said, the atrozeneca vaccine uses a technique of using adenovirus as a carrier to deliver viral information into our cells.   The first one of its kind was an experimental vaccine for ebola. 

These are of course all tested on animal studies including primates and considered to be safe in human trials.  But this is the first time they had been used on population wide basis. 

These are also being used by Biotech companies to show off their modern techniques.  But because they are new, they suffer from data limitations. 

There are of course, vaccines that uses old techniques - which are more crude, but tested, and used widely before, e.g. using inactivated corona virus fragments.  These are the basis of the sinovac from China.   However, as they are older techniques, these suffers from efficacy problems similar to atrozeneca vaccine. 

lee wrote on Mar 13^th, 2021 at 12:24pm:


No as usual you have twisted and distorted the stats. Your stats have absolutely nothing to do with the mortality rate  You really aren't very clever are you.
If you catch the virus you have approximately 0.26% to 0.65% chance of dying
If you get the vaccine you have approximately 0.0000073333 % chance of dying

As i said, the vaccine is much safer than the virus

lee wrote on Mar 14^th, 2021 at 1:19pm:


Except that my quote was before you started talking about blood clots.

i said that getting the vaccine was much safer than getting the virus, you response was to make some completely irrelevant calculation on infection rates.

lee wrote on Mar 13^th, 2021 at 12:24pm:


I'm convinced that you are just a troll posting whatever crap comes into your mind so that you can "stick it up those pesky leftists" because none of your posts make sense. And when you are called out you just post more nonsense