Yet another turnaround on vaccines: authorities and televirologists in jeopardy
The issue is not which age groups to advise against AstraZeneca, but whether it is appropriate today to administer any type of vaccine to young people. The same ideological approach that failed to counter the virus, trying to reset its circulation with lockdown shots, is repeated today with vaccines. The hateful blackmail of the green pass to push young people to get vaccinated. The risks are minimal, but it is not clear why, even if minimal, young and very young people in health must be subjected to them for whom the Covid risk is zero
The tragic death of 18-year-old Camilla Canepa, associated at least for the coincidence in time with the administration of the first AstraZeneca dose, triggered an unworthy blame game: political and health authorities, mainstream media and televirologists literally went into the ball, fallen from the clouds, some wondering how it is It was possible to organize AstraZeneca open days even though the vaccine was not recommended for younger people, in the pathetic attempt to unload on the Regions. And they are the same ones who a few weeks earlier had reassured about the Anglo-Swedish vaccine: second dose? No problem.
We had already reported in Atlantico Quotidiano the communication disaster – not only Italian but European – on AstraZeneca , the flip-flopping of the authorities: first the hasty suspension, then the resumption and reassurance; initially not recommended for over 60s, then for under 60s, then open days …. We had been easy prophets in predicting that many citizens would avoid AstraZeneca and soon accumulate excess stocks. Precisely this was one of the reasons that led the Regions, to dispose of them, to organize open days , also open to young and very young people, for whom this vaccine was theoretically not recommended.
It then emerged from the first investigations that the girl was suffering from autoimmune thrombocytopenia, a disease that by suppressing the production of platelets tends to promote bleeding. Which casts an even more sinister shadow on the story, raising disturbing questions about the superficiality with which vaccines are administered. Someone should have been vigilant, had an adequate medical history carried out, but instead he did not.
Yesterday afternoon the race for cover, a new "indication" from the CTS: the AstraZeneca vaccine is "strongly recommended" for the over 60s. But AstraZeneca had already been "recommended" for the over 60s by AIFA. Today the CTS adds a "strongly" and Minister Speranza undertakes to translate this "recommendation" into a "peremptory" provision. The question arises: why did the minister not consider making the AIFA recommendation "peremptory" at the time? We fear that the reason has little to do with health: other vaccines were in short supply and AZ doses, which despite delays and controversies were plentiful but were underused, could help speed up the vaccination campaign. After all, you will remember, the EMA had not advised against it for any age group.
If the EMA had concluded its review after the cases of rare thrombosis reiterating that the benefits outweigh the risks, the Aifa had "recommended" it for the over 60s. But this has not prevented many Regions from forging ahead and open the administration of AstraZeneca also to young people and the very young, that is precisely the categories for which it was advised against (but not yet “strongly”…). And these open days were held in the indifference of the Ministry of Health and Commissioner Figliuolo, despite the vaccination of 50, 60 and 70-year-olds, age groups that should have taken precedence, was not particularly advanced.
And now, who is under 60 and has already taken their first dose of AstraZeneca ? Do not worry, it will do the second with Pfizer or Moderna . Indeed, "heterologous" vaccination is even better, they assure. But there is a risk of another mess, given that the rare cases of thrombosis are almost all after the first dose of AZ, in Italy none after the second, while as we will see Pfizer and Moderna are coming under observation for some cases of myocarditis in young people after the second dose.
In short, everything was taken into account except for the health of citizens, the best choice for each on the basis of a risk-benefit analysis weighted on age and medical records. The alleged collective good of herd immunity prevailed over individual health care. The need, as mentioned, to dispose of the AstraZeneca doses accumulated after the suspension. The rush, with the approach of summer, to start vaccinating young people, fueled by the irrational phobia of summer nightlife. And then, the hateful blackmail of the green pass : the fear of suffering limitations (not being able to go to the disco or take a plane during the holidays) has led thousands of young and very young people to get vaccinated. A sneaky, creeping vaccination obligation.
Now, without ever forgetting that the anti- Covid vaccines we had available after only ten months – Pfizer-BionTech , Moderna , AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson – are miraculous, they are all safe and very effective, we must not forget that they are it comes to vaccines authorized in an emergency. It does not mean that they have not been tested, but that the procedure has been speeded up. A reasonable decision, in the dramatic scenario in which we found ourselves, but this should lead to administer them with some extra caution, not as if they were fresh water, especially towards people for whom the risk-benefit ratio is not so clear in favor of the seconds.
Furthermore, it is time to start bearing in mind that the problems do not only concern viral vector vaccines and traditional methodology, such as AstraZeneca , but also those with mRna , such as Pfizer and Moderna . Not only the potential long-term effects of this technology will not be known for years, but in recent days there have been studies on some cases of myocarditis, a cardiac inflammation, reported in Israel (180 per million) especially in young males and after second dose. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention USA (CDC) has called an urgent meeting for June 18 after 226 of these cases were reported in the United States.
We must always remember that both in the case of AstraZeneca and Pfizer we are talking about a few hundred cases compared to tens, hundreds of millions of doses administered. When we say "one chance in a million", we mean an extremely unlikely event, but never in history has such a large-scale vaccination campaign been carried out in a few months and the law of large numbers is fierce, it does not look into do anyone: if the millions become tens and hundreds, it is obvious that the unlikely cases tend to occur.
All this leads to the conclusion that the issue is not which age groups to advise against AstraZeneca . The issue is whether it is now appropriate, prudent, to administer any type of vaccine to the youngest, whether it is a viral vector or an mRna .
Germany, for example, which we followed all too hastily in the decision to suspend AstraZeneca three months ago, only to re-admit it, contradicting us two more times, has decided not to administer any vaccine to children under 18 for now , while until a week ago the health minister Speranza announced plans to vaccinate our children up to the age of 12, to "secure" the school. And again yesterday, at a press conference, the coordinator of the CTS Franco Locatelli insisted that "there are all the conditions for conducting a vaccination campaign even in children". No, these conditions do not exist in our opinion. Not yet, not at this level of virus circulation.
Scientific journals cited yesterday by La Verità , such as Lancet and British Medical Journal , by putting risks and benefits on the scales, have reached the same conclusions: better to leave the minors alone for the moment. Among other things, dismantling the argument that if not vaccinated they represent a danger for adults: "little evidence of secondary infection from children to others … in the case of Covid-19 the opposite should be true, with adults who must be vaccinated to protect The smallest". And again: vaccinating children "would bring minimal benefits to recipients, no benefit to the public and long-term risks to recipients".
The same ideological approach that has failed to fight the virus, trying to reset its circulation with lockdowns without being able to protect the most at risk, exhausting the economy, impoverishing millions of families and trampling the most elementary individual freedoms, is repeated today. in the vaccination that is claimed to be "blanket", no one escapes, under the threat of limitations, without any rational risk-benefit analysis aimed at each individual. Is it better for a 50-60 year old to face the minimum risk of the vaccine in the face of the very real risk of ending up in the hospital or underground for Covid ? Undoubtedly yes. It is convenient for a teenager or a twenty year old to undergo the risks – we repeat: minimal – of the vaccine, in the face of zero risk from Covid . Simply no. Simply common sense, caution.
Rather, they should focus on getting adults to get vaccinated, which, after the mess they've made, is an increasingly difficult task.
The post Yet another turnaround on vaccines: authorities and televirologists in jeopardy appeared first on Atlantico Quotidiano .
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Atlantico Quotidiano at the URL http://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/quotidiano/ennesima-giravolta-sui-vaccini-autorita-e-televirologi-allo-sbaraglio/ on Sat, 12 Jun 2021 03:59:00 +0000.