What is the death threshold in your mind to postpone an experimental vaccine?
This vaccine is not available in the US.
Any adverse reactions (including deaths) during clinical trials halt the clinical trial until a full investigation is completed and a determination can be made about the risk to others and the overall likelihood of success for the medicine in the trial. The AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine clinical trials were halted twice for adverse reactions. Later it became known that there were problems in the clinical trial protocols used by AstraZeneca and Oxford University. Because of all this, they haven’t even asked the FDA for authorization and it’s unlikely they’ll get it since we have more proven, safer, more effective vaccines already available.
To answer your question as-stated: one death is enough to postpone clinical trials. And that’s exactly what happens today. To answer the question you wanted to ask - but chose leading wording to ask - about what threshold should postpone a medicine authorized for use by the FDA under an EUA? Again, one. If a single death is causally linked to a vaccine, it should be fully investigated to determine why that individual had such a severe reaction. If the factor linking the two can be determined, a black box label should be attached so no one else with the same set of deadly medical circumstances takes that medicine.
And that’s exactly how it works today. That’s the whole purpose of black box labels. Several kinds of combination birth control pills carry a black box label due to cardiovascular risks associated with them. Because nobody (not the doctor, not the pharmacist, not the medicine producer, not the FDA regulators, and certainly not the patient) want to expose a patient to a medicine that could seriously injure or kill them.
Jan_Sobieski wrote: “What is the death threshold in your mind to postpone an experimental vaccine?”
How many deaths would it take to convince you to take the vaccine?
No confirmed deaths from the vaccine.
The virus has killed over 500,000.
Shouldn’t it be greater than the number of such events that would have happened in a population without the vaccine?
If the you expected, say, ten deaths of bleeds, low platelet counts, and clots in the population in that time period, then three is a great number.
If you expected ten such deaths in such a unvaccinated population and 100 occurred in the same size vaccinated population, the you have a problem.
If you expected ten and got ten, do you have a problem?