A growing list of European countries have recently halted administration of the AstraZeneca vaccine over suspicions that it causes blood clotting, despite the European Medical Authority’s assertion that the causal link is flimsy.
Of 17 million people vaccinated in Europe, only 37 people, or 0.00022%, developed blood clot-related concerns.
For context, about one in 1000 American adults, or 0.1% of the population, suffer each year from deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, both conditions caused by blood clots in the veins and arteries. This incidence rate is 454 times higher than that detected in the sample vaccinated by AstraZeneca.
I understand why scientists and government officials would want to publicly exercise caution over the vaccine, especially given the suspicion and distrust surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine since it was first publicly distributed in December 2020.
However, when news of AstraZeneca’s purported blood clotting risk spread online, many women were left puzzled. Why was a 0.00022% blood clotting risk grounds for renewed scientific inquiry when their long-approved birth control pills presented a much higher risk?
The blood clotting risk of birth control is still relatively rare, with an estimated 0.04% to 0.16% of premenopausal women on hormonal birth control suffering from blood clot-related conditions each year.
This rate is comparable to the aforementioned 1% of Americans who suffer these conditions each year, but it’s important to note that it’s still 1.5 to seven times higher than normal for the young women who constitute the vast majority of birth control pill users.
An elevated risk of blood clotting is far outweighed by the benefits of oral contraceptives, which, beyond its contraceptive functions, can improve acne, make menstruation less painful and relieve symptoms of endometriosis. However, blood clotting is not the only risk presented by hormonal birth control — weight gain, mood changes, soreness and nausea are all also common.
Although these side effects are well-documented, there seems to be little interest among scientists and drug manufacturers to improve contraceptive medicine — even though male birth control trials have been discontinued for causing the exact same side effects that millions of women experience with birth control.
Conception requires both a sperm and an egg, yet women are expected to bear the brunt of contraceptive responsibility. It’s also women who will inevitably suffer most from an accidental pregnancy (as an aside, blood clotting risks are greatly elevated during pregnancy) and as such there is a prevailing sentiment that any pain or discomfort they may suffer from contraception is a small price to pay for sexual autonomy.
This false dichotomy — you either suffer the side effects or get pregnant — reflects the misogyny inherent in seeing women’s health, especially as it relates to contraception, as a privilege rather than a human right.
Ancient beliefs that tie a woman’s value to her child-bearing capabilities persist in modern labs and doctor’s offices, underlying the scientific biases that will halt vaccine trials for miniscule blood clotting risks but shrug off the much larger risks that come with birth control.
To be clear, I am thankful to live in an era when birth control is an accessible option. However, I am equally frustrated that women’s pain can be treated so flippantly by the same scientific community capable of an abundance of concern and empathy when men are affected.
Cécile Girard is a 21-year-old psychology junior from Lake Charles.
