[ad_1]
The Norwegian Institute of Public Health recommends that particularly frail patients with a short life expectancy be evaluated individually. In such cases, the question is whether the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks that they will not tolerate the potential side effects.
This final conclusion was made after a thorough investigation into the deaths of the wards from 23 of their foster homes. These people died shortly after the coronavirus vaccination. They were vaccinated with Pfizer.
“These cases have been investigated not only by the Norwegian authorities but also by the European Medicines Agency, and it has been answered that they are not related to vaccines. They were simply given to people who were nearing the end of their lives,” he said. Tume Beinort, a physician at Cambridge University Hospital and coordinator of the informal movement “Evidence-Based Medicine Group” in Delfi.
Laimonas Griškevičius, member of the Expert Advisory Council operating in Lithuania, professor at the Vilnius University Medical Faculty and doctor of hematology, drew attention to another important circumstance: after examining these cases, there were no changes in the description of the vaccine.
“Usually if there are safety issues with drugs or vaccines, the description changes. In such cases, a formal warning is issued or the drug or vaccine is not allowed at all. In this case, the conclusion was that these were unrelated matters. These people had many other diseases and died of age, ”said L. Griškevičius.
He explained the choice of Germany.
Last week there was other news about the AstraZeneca vaccine. The German Vaccination Commission has recommended that this vaccine be administered only to people under 65 years of age, as there is insufficient data on its effectiveness in the elderly.
“The studies of this vaccine were dominated by people young enough, there were only about 8-9 percent. Those over the age of seventy. There is not much data from that study. However, other indirect data suggests that (…) and older people develop sufficient levels of antibodies to protect against serious diseases.
The German decision is based on a lack of data. However, the lack of data does not mean that the vaccine is not effective, ”explained Beinort.
Prof. L. Griškevičius also drew attention to the fact that the UK Medicines Control Agency, and later the European Medicines Agency, registered this vaccine for people over the age of eighteen, without setting an upper vaccination limit.
“It means that you can dedicate as much to a person of fifty as to one of eighty. This is a formal recommendation. Why? Because they said that an evaluation of all the available data on this vaccine (which is not just the data that was submitted for registration, but also the data from the first clinical trials) found that this vaccine also elicited an antibody response in people older as the younger.
And over 65 years. sufficient levels of antibodies are detected in the blood of older people Therefore, the vaccine is very likely to work in the elderly. After evaluating the potential benefits and harms, it was decided that the vaccine should be used in patients older than 65 years. it is more beneficial to people than it can be harmful in theory, which is why it was registered without an upper age limit, ”explained L. Griškevičius.
The verdict of the medical verdict on the benefits of vaccination in old age is unequivocal
Both experts interviewed by Delfi unequivocally argued that it was worth vaccinating the coronavirus against the elderly.
“In the case of Norway, we are not talking about an honorable age, we are talking about situations where people were practically dying. People of respectable age really need to be vaccinated to protect themselves and their other loved ones or respectable friends with whom they interact.
Of course, there are exceptions where a person is too fragile, and using a vaccine in a situation where life expectancy is just a few days may not make much sense, ”Beinort said.
L. Griškevičius also advocated the need to protect the elderly with all possible means, since their mortality from COVID-19 is the highest: for people over eighty years it is twenty times higher than for a person over fifty .
“Everyone has to take care of their loved one, especially the elderly, and should endeavor to vaccinate the elderly. It is up to them and those around them to take care of it, because the risk of infection is hundreds or even thousands of times greater than the possible risk of side effects from the vaccine ”, explained the doctor.
At the same time, he noted that, as in the case of Norway, the medical council decides in individual cases. In Lithuania, for example, this is done when deciding whether to vaccinate a patient with blood cancer.
“We evaluate each time on an individual basis and ask whether the vaccination will benefit that particular person. Usually this is because you are receiving some specific treatment when the vaccine may not work.
Undoubtedly, as the Norwegians have said, doctors must assess cases when considering vaccinating people of a very respectable age who have many other diseases, and perhaps they are completely isolated and the staff around them are vaccinated. Then a bubble is created for that person, where the risk of transmitting the infection is minimal, ”said L. Griškevičius.
It is strictly forbidden to use the information published by DELFI on other websites, in the media or elsewhere, or to distribute our material in any way without consent, and if consent has been obtained, it is necessary to cite DELFI as the source.
[ad_2]
