Australia to continue review of COVID vaccinations

By Lidia Kelly

Australia will continue its review of coronavirus vaccines after a 48-year-old woman's death was likely linked to the inoculation, Health Minister Greg Hunt said on Saturday. On Friday, Australia reported its first fatality from blood clots in a recipient of AstraZeneca's (AZN.L) COVID-19 shot. It was the third case of the rare blood clots appearing in people who have been administered the vaccine in the country.

"The government will ask ATAGI (Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation) to ensure continuous review of all of the vaccines in terms of their safety and their efficacy," Hunt said at a televised briefing.

He said there will be no immediate change to further limit the use of the AstraZeneca vaccine and reiterated that the Pfizer vaccine remains the preferred option for people under the age of 50.

There had been at least 885,000 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccines administered in Australia so far, equating to a frequency of instance of blood clot in every 295,000 cases, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) said earlier this week.

Hunt also said that a decision on whether to prioritise athletes and support staff in the COVID-19 vaccine rollout with the Tokyo Olympics fast approaching will be taken in the coming week.

"We shall want to see our olympians get to the Olympics and we want to see that they are safe," he said.

© Thomson Reuters 2021.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Once someone is using Mercola as a if it were a good reference it kinda lost the argument.

Most of the arguments contained have already been demonstrated false or are completely irrelevant.

Animal experiments for COVID were done, they did not give problems, so why mention other coronaviruses? and more importantly why don't mention successful experiments done for vaccine candidates on other coronaviruses?

Companies are liable about many kinds of responsabilities, the article makes it seem as if lawsuits from particulars were the only kind, that is false.

The myth of antibody dependent enhancement makes no sense, this would be something terribly easy to detect in the phase III, but more importantly in the natural infections, obviously it has not been found, so why mention it as if it was a real possibility.

I mean, openly lying about the people being vaccinated being part of ongoing clinical trials should be a huge hint that something is not right with this list.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

An opinion piece written by a mom-medical professional must be a great source of accurate information. Let’s check:

Claim # 1

The only industry in the world that bears no liability for injuries or deaths resulting from their products, are vaccine makers.

Refutation of claim #1:

"Most people don’t realize, the only industry in America, billion-dollar industry, that can’t be sued, exempt from being sued, are gun manufacturers,” Biden continued.

. . .

the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a 2005 law that largely shields firearm manufacturers and dealers from lawsuits when people use their products illegally, such as by shooting someone.

Claim #2(a):

Never brought a vaccine to market before covid (Moderna and Johnson & Johnson).

Partial refutation of Claim #2(a):


Johnson & Johnson has two vaccines on the market for five diseases in scope, one of the smallest portfolios of the companies evaluated. Its portfolio is made up of a single hepatitis B vaccine (Hepavax®) and a diphtheria, tetanus, whole-cell pertussis, hepatitis B and Hib combination vaccine (Quinvaxem®).

Claim 2(b):

For what it’s worth, J&J’s vaccine also contains tissues from aborted fetal cells, perhaps a topic for another discussion)

Refutation of Claim 2(b):

Johnson & Johnson uses fetal cell lines in the production of its vaccine, whereas Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna do not.

. . .

“Fetal cell lines are cells that are in fact grown in a laboratory setting,” Banerji said.,-and-why-are-they-not-fetal-tissue?

I could keep going, but this should be sufficient for rational adults to understand the linked article le provided by cla68 lacks credibility.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

What I always laugh about is that when people are skeptical about vaccines, and yet they're not skeptical about their anti-vaccine sources. It's like a double-standard, and logical reasoning flies out the window

Don't get me wrong - I actually support skepticism. Everyone trained in the sciences are trained to be skeptical. They're trained to follow where the evidence goes, and only when the facts and evidence goes to support the original assertion, then ya gotta accept it no matter what ya feel about it

So gotta apply the same skepticism on both vaccine and anti-vaccine sources, and follow where the facts and evidence goes. Yet when it comes to anti-vaccine sources, they easily accept them with no skepticism at all. That's just weird that they don't use logical reasoning on all sides

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites