I don't know about Norway, but for Germany there have been preliminary results published, which indicate that the cerebral venous sinus thrombosis cases were indeed caused by immune reaction.
Not in the published, peer reviewed sense. But the group of doctors at Rikshospitalet, that treated some of these patients, is confident that the vaccine is the only plausible explanation.
Quoting from the somewhat poorly translated VG article:
>"We have the reason [for the blood clots]. And there is no other thing than the vaccine which can explain that we have this immune response, says Holme."
>"[...] we have no other history with these patients that could create such a severe immune response. I am confident that these antibodies is the reason, and I see no other reasons than it being the vaccine that triggers it"
Let's assume there is causality. So what? I have the impression people are just bow realizing that every drug comes with a piece of paper, that includes all known, and in a lot of cases potentially deadly, side effects. But nobody stops taking Asperin, paracetamol and other things.
All that was achieved by extensive media coverage of AZ was, that authorities and doctors are kind of obliged to announce every issue with it. And that these issues are just plain overblown. And again hyped by media.
That changes a lot of things. For one, this side effect was neither known nor documented, so people could not make an informed decision before getting the vaccine.
Then individuals have a quantifiable risk of dying from COVID vs. dying from the vaccine. Depending on age/sex/comorbidities/medication/etc. one of the other may be higher.
Also from a public health perspective, if these CVST cases are known to be mostly limited to a particular group (women under 50) and the vector vaccine, then this group could be vaccinated with other types like mRNA vaccines.
This is a few days old now so doesn't include the latest Norwegian cases, but that seemed to be the thinking (though the article feels a bit of a mix between certain and equivocal at different points).
