‘You are 1400 times more likely to die in a car crash than death from blood clotting attached to an AZ injection’
Welcome to the column where you provide the content. Sorry no longer seems to be the hardest word for Scott Morrison, who apologised for the nation’s behind-schedule vaccine program while urging young people to get some AstraZeneca vaccine into their arms so we can get out of lockdown. Won’t get fooled again, said Ben:
“What’s becoming clear is that the ATAGI recommendation on Pfizer for under 60s is based on what’s best for the individual. ATAGI openly acknowledge that their analysis completely ignores the benefits to society as a whole from vaccination. In a meaningful way their analysis and recommendations are therefore invalid. By definition vaccination is a team effort and the benefits to a society that’s vaccinated are way more significant.
“It’s the old adage in logic: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.’ We have 2 approved and available vaccines. I had my first dose of AZ 2 weeks ago when it was made available to under 40s with informed consent. You are slightly less likely to be struck by lightning than death from blood clotting arising from an AZ injection.
“You are 1400 times more likely to die in a car crash than death from blood clotting attached to an AZ injection. The numbers from the ABS and principles are self evident. Morrison is right; as many people as possible should be vaccinated with whatever is available as soon as possible. We all talked a big game about ‘Team Australia’ when Covid started; now it’s time to band together and finish this thing off.”
AlexanderR crunched the numbers:
“For the umpteenth time, the MSM should be encouraging their audience to consider the relative probabilities of death after inoculation by the AstraZenica vaccine and death after infection by the delta variant of Covid-19 – that is, if the assorted reporters actually know a relative probability analysis from a pile of beans.
“In case they don’t, the news is that the probability of the latter – death by Covid – is about two orders of magnitude greater than death by AZ. If I weren’t already inoculated by AZ, I would head off for it without hesitation.”
Robert VR was irate:
“I am truly appalled at the consequences now evident stemming from the collective failure of our medical expert ‘advisers’ to clearly articulate the relative risks of blood clots versus Covid vaccinations.
“Six deaths from six million Covid vaccinations, compared to many hundreds of deaths from blood clotting from other health problems that nobody seems to worry or care about.
Just compare this relatively nonsensical vaccine problem with the immeasurably greater losses our nation is now suffering from the broad consequences of the pandemic. Bankruptcies, suicides, family violence medical operations not carried out, clinical depression of adults, and especially children, from being locked up in small homes for months of adults with no fresh air or interaction with friends.
“And I will never forgive the medical advisers too – for cynically opposing pharmacies from administering vaccines not that different from the flu vaccines they’ve been doing safely and effectively for years, especially in rural areas where it’s always hard to see a doctor anyway.”
David Lind was fully loaded:
“I’m fully vaxxed and feeling dangerous. Get the AZ, get on with your life.”
Guy reasoned:
“Morrison’s aim is to get as many people vaccinated as possible. The aim of his critics seems to be to make him look bad by focusing on trivia such as the need to apologise for delays or whether ATAGI deserves criticism or not. None of this background noise is important in the greater scheme of things.”
Errol pointed the finger:
“The trouble is Mr Morrison’s (national) cabinet is not on his side or ours but busily undermining our country’s interests to benefit the Labor Party and their power agenda. Seems to be working so far.”
Be fair and share, said John:
“Given the need to vaccinate to open up in NSW and Victoria, why wouldn’t the federal government channel vaccines from WA and Qld to NSW and Victoria to get the percentage up in these states? I’m betting the selfish attitude of Anna and Mark will be on full display and they will jump up and down. But at the end of the day the federal government is not required to distribute evenly across the states they are responsible for getting the highest risk people where ever they are vaccinated first.”
David hit back:
“First you take our GST and now you want to take our vaccine allocation as well. The WA resources sector underpins the Australian economy. McGowan has managed Covid as well as anyone and importantly has kept Covid out of our mining sector. But the risk remains. Vaccinating WA vaccinates the Australian economy. Can’t risk it.”
Smart, Alec:
“If one checks the available data on the adverse affects of the four vaccines available today (AZ, Pfizer, Moderna and J &J) they are very similar. For some reason AZ vaccine has been demonised by some as being inferior. People should do their own research but I guess that a bit hard for the herd.”
LM wasn’t convinced:
“Morrison has lost the plot. On same day it was announced 2 more Australians in their 40s died from Astra Zeneca, and the experts at ATAGI reiterated their recommendation for over 60s get Astra Zeneca because of higher risk for younger people, he told young people the AstraZeneca jab is ‘available right now’. Has it even occurred to Mr Morrison that the Aussies that are dead, ignored the ATAGI advice and may have listened to him instead.”
Word to the Wise:
“The chances of death by AZ are 1 in 1,200,000 and veryone is whining about that. Yet the bourgeoisie go out every single week secretly believing that they’ll win lotto! At best a 1 in 8,000,000 chance. The TGA now needs to put context around these deaths.”
PoisonPen wrote:
“The demonisation of AZ was always political. Statistically one in one million die because of thrombosis. Shame on those who viewed this crisis as an excuse to gain political capital.
The reason we are not where we should be is the politics, and the media who are always too quick to give voice to such people without laying out all the facts. Please everyone if you haven’t had your first jab then make the effort to get it. It has never been so important.”
Andrew was angry:
“The reason we have this situation is not due to the level or rate of vaccination. It is because the porous hotel quarantine system is not fit for purpose and the ad hoc systems devised to keep potentially infected airline staff separate from unprotected Australians have both failed, catastrophically and repeatedly.
“And they will keep doing so whilst there is no urgency in rectifying the quarantine. Why has Morrison and his government so staunchly resisted new, effective quarantine facilities at our international airports and RAAF bases? That is what he should apologise for, and act urgently to rectify.
“Cutting the numbers arriving from overseas will not stop Covid from escaping again and again from hotel quarantine, because the fatal flaws are in its design, not the numbers passing through it! The glib platitudes about ‘risks being tiny’ will not help the individual young people who will needlessly suffer from clotting complications resulting from being given the AZ vaccine – small numbers will die, but those surviving will have varying neurological damage, as well as possibly other vascular injuries to gut and kidney.
“That is why ATAGI is not bowing to the media pressure from the government. Also, creating the illusion that young people are being brave by choosing to be vaccinated with AZ so that they can reach an imaginary threshold which will enable them to again holiday overseas and ‘regain freedom’ is cynical manipulation, not based on reality.
“If billions remain unvaccinated worldwide and fresh waves of new strains of Covid-19 are washing around the globe, effective quarantine will be essential for years, and travel will remain limited.”
–
Janet Albrechtsen offered up her list of the five big issues that we need to be free to discuss, and which are currently being ring-fenced, stifled and pushed from platforms. John M’s rejoinder:
“Janet, you are the voice of reason and accurate in your analysis. It’s a pity our politicians don’t address each of your issues with 5 public debates involving scientific and medical facts and an outcome that results in the development of an action plan to fix each issue. For example, if they find climate change is real and man-made, the action plan would show us the target, the costs, the dates of each milestone and how we achieve the desired outcome. The media should report on each debate and the outcomes. They could then report on the progress of each action plan and the actual costs against projected costs. Only then will the public be accurately informed and the hysteria should die down.”
John was moved:
“Your article brought me to tears – rational, logical, succinct, pragmatic … What is it going to take to get a paradigm shift and change in Australia?”
CJ said:
“You could add immigration to the list of topics that need public debate. How many, how quickly and where from, are relevant questions for the Australian community to discuss.
At the moment any attempt to challenge the ‘diversity is next to godliness’ and the ‘immigration solves all our problems lobbies is simply dismissed as racist.”
Tallulah was less impressed:
“This is what modern conservatism has become: a whinge-fest with no answers. Cry-baby conservatism is the reason why so many feel perennially aggrieved about seemingly everything. And it is so easy to feed – just find some low hanging fruit … and engage in another round of pearl clutching.
“The conservative government in Australia has wholeheartedly embraced Keynes (ditto in the UK); government spending is through the roof; debt is tracking towards $1.8 trillion, and climate change is now treated as a genuine issue by the Liberal Party. Rather than engage in debate about the issues, we see commentator after commentator write articles that embrace of populism. It is an abdication of the playing field. Meanwhile the world moves on.”
Birdwood’s lament:
“I can’t help but think that in the last few years we passed a point where a switch was flipped from ‘I carry responsibility in my community and for my actions’ to ‘I have the right not to carry responsibility and to never suffer offence’. Eventually, to never be exposed to the slightest amount of risk no matter what the cost to the community is. The peak of the individual state. The bureaucrats’ creed has changed to placing the comfort of a minority above all else.”
JackTheSixth said:
“Janet speaks for rationalists, not just conservatives. More thinking and less feeling would, perhaps paradoxically, make for a better world.”
Terry approved:
“The best and most clear article I have read for a very long time. In relatively few words you sum up what, I imagine, is the hope for most quiet Australians. It is so frustrating that we even have a need to have an article to discuss these issues. Disappointedly it is so and any political body which promotes the open discussion and hopeful return to common sense will get my vote. Thank you so much for highlighting how disabling this woke cultural cringe has affected our world negatively. At the very least we should be able to talk openly about these subjects without being shouted down.”
–
Peta Credlin questioned the Treasury doctrine that high levels of immigration were necessary to power the economy, writing that the official orthodoxy, that high immigration boosts growth without depressing wages “looks like being exposed as bunkum”. Graham agreed:
“It is a ‘lazy way’ for governments to claim they have grown the economy. Treasury will always be attracted by the short term opportunity to increase taxpayer numbers and tax revenue. There are many businesses attracted to an alternative, cheaper labour supply – which can be fair enough where Australian wages are already too high by ‘world competitive’ standards? We can’t live isolated – maybe we need to keep reminding ourselves that we don’t have an automatic right to higher wages in a ‘globalised’ world where things are now made in lower cost developing countries (and not here), and disinflationary forces exist from lower ‘costs’ of labour elsewhere.
“Luckily we have resources exports for now! We need bright people to ‘join the dots’ into smart policy, framed around productivity, as well as maintaining a lifestyle. It sounds like the answer is somewhere in the middle?”
Jon F said:
“My preference is for a small Australia. There are some tempting aspects to the big Australia argument, but overall, big Australia comes at a very high cost. It’s the quality of life that sufferers the most.”
From Cedric:
“We need to spend our tax money on improving the lives of existing Australians … not waste it on subsidising new immigrants who may take years to get a job and become productive. Look at Switzerland: a wealthy country with very little natural assets. Limited immigration, skilled local workers, high tourism, using its natural assets like mountains and snow to produce tourist revenue which is spent on infrastructure and welfare. An expensive country with virtually no poverty and limited immigration.
“Japan – limited immigration, but a population that is very well off. Hard working, skilled work force, not much in natural assets. Why not Australia? We used to manufacture our own tools and other goods … now all imported. We used to train most of our own doctors … now largely imported, usually from countries that need their doctors far more than we do. We used to have reasonably priced private schools and universities, and scholarships those who needed them and had some skill. Now they are far out of reach for most Australians.
“Cut back hard on immigration and look after those who are already here. Use and enhance the skills that we already have here. Promote local research and manufacture … and boost training for our own children to fill the jobs thus created.
“Large scale immigration swamps available infrastructure and undermines training and apprenticeships here in Australia. Look after Australia’s residents. Be compassionate to would be immigrants, but not flagrantly generous. Keep immigration low, and focus on the applicants who really need our help.”
Angela’s answer:
“The politicians are well aware that immigration is an unpopular policy that benefits the few at the expense of the majority however they will continue to ignore public opinion for as long as they can get away with it. It is obvious to everyone that the government is preparing to ramp-up the immigration program to its pre-Covid levels and reinstate the foreign fee paying student trade at the earliest opportunity.
“We must ensure that immigration becomes a top order election issue in the lead-up to the election. A debate must take place before the election and not after and we need to extract a promise from both sides that immigration will be slashed to the bone. Election campaigns have become slick, highly stage managed affairs right down to the last detail where minders shield politicians from the difficult questions and politicians are more comfortable cuddling babies than talking about issues that really matter to people.
“The people must not allow the politicians to get away with ducking and weaving and using talking-points to avoid any dialogue about contentious issues such as the size and sustainability of our immigration program. I would recommend an intake of zero-net or not more than 70,000 new migrants a year inclusive of all categories such as refugees and temporary migrants seeking to change their status.”
Gavin was worried:
“We have a negative birth rate and an ageing population. If we don’t accept immigrants then we will end up with a declining workforce that is paying for the upkeep of many retirees.”
Last word to Jeffrey:
“Politicians strongly support a high immigration intake simply because it keeps the economy in good health. Australia was not caught up in the recent GFC mainly because of huge immigration numbers. The Australian building industry never faulted simply because of the demand for houses and apartments. This in turn, fed demand for furniture, white goods and other products required to furnish a home.
“Infrastructure, on the other hand, becomes overloaded but politicians know that it will before later leaders to sort out, and now that time has arrived. Our gridlocked roads lead to roadrage and the lack of migrant scrutiny has lead to a significant undisciplined society who do not respect the law or our pathetic judicial system.
“Australia’s annual migrant intake should be slowed to pre Howard days, at least until our infrastructure catches up with the demands of the current population numbers.”
–
Each Friday the cream of your views on the news rises and we honour the voices that made the debate great. To boost your chances of being featured, please be pertinent, pithy and preferably make a point. Solid arguments, original ideas, sparkling prose, rapier wit and rhetorical flourishes may count in your favour. Civility is essential. Comments may be edited for length.