Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 232 posts

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#161

Post by ipaddr »

ggm wrote: post #103
nostromo wrote: post #66

Now maybe the US can finally approve the AstraZeneca vaccine and put our 20 million (!) doses on hand to good use. Or not! But if we’re not going to use them, we should send them to another country like Canada or Mexico or Australia or the UK or EU, all of which have approved it and administered millions of doses. Sitting on 10s of millions of vaccines during a pandemic is inexcusable.

Africa or India or south America need them more than G8 economies

India produces their own version locally. South Africa has unapproved J&J and AstrV. Central America could use some. Brazil doesn't have a lacking issue, the big issue is they can't get people to take the second dose.

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#162

Post by chillacy »

ibejoeb wrote: post #85
chillacy wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does one balance that with the counter desire to not want to go to a wedding, concert, football game, or plane with unvaccinated people?

That's a strange desire because what does it matter? If you were worried, you would have gotten vaccinated, and unless you don't believe the vaccine works, you would be protected. It's also something that is impossible to know because you don't have the right to inspect someone's medical records.

Vaccines aren't 100% effective, otherwise it would be no problem if, say, parents decided not to vaccinate their children for schools.

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#163

Post by scrollaway »

jbd28 wrote: post #147
lolinder wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

6 cases of reinfection out of millions of cases of covid still has contracting covid granting much better immunity than the vaccine.

6? lol. The number is 70 with 36,000+ suspected. https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/08/covid-19-reinfection-t... Vaccine-based immunity allows for a greater variance in neutralizing antibodies to form relative to the spike protein, compared to natural immunity attacking less critical vectors. Get the vaccine even if you had covid

Infection is possible with all vaccines as well. Resulting viral load will be what matters: How strong their immune response is, how infectious the re-infected patient is, and how severe their symptoms are.

It's not a binary "You have COVID" vs "You don't have COVID". Not for vaccines, nor for re-infections.

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#164

Post by ziml77 »

nostromo wrote: post #66

Now maybe the US can finally approve the AstraZeneca vaccine and put our 20 million (!) doses on hand to good use. Or not! But if we’re not going to use them, we should send them to another country like Canada or Mexico or Australia or the UK or EU, all of which have approved it and administered millions of doses. Sitting on 10s of millions of vaccines during a pandemic is inexcusable.

Is supply a problem at this point? It seems like appointments are available quite easily now.

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#165

Post by mikem170 »

barbazoo wrote: post #8
sjm wrote: post #5

Just makes sense. The benefits far outweigh the risks at six cases of blood clots out of over 6.8 million doses, especially when there's a high risk of blood clots following COVID-19 hospitalization. Not to mention rates of blood clots caused by the pill are more like 1 in 3000. Hopefully if anything the pause has shown anti-vax folks that the safety of these vaccines is being taken seriously.

I agree with you that the risk of getting Covid-19 far outweigh the risk of blood clots associated with some vaccines, however, I've read this comparison with birth control related blood clots many times and it just doesn't seem to be comparable. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-comparing-blood-clot-r... > Indeed, government health officials are investigating a type of blood clot called a cerebral venous sinus t…

Correct! I've been pointing this out, also. I found this article [0], referencing the J&J FDA trails where they saw a 50% increase in blood clots in the vaccinated group, which was not considered statistically significant at the time (20k people, 15 blood clots in vaccinated group versus 10 in the placebo group). These were not the exceptionally dangerous cerebral venous sinus thrombosis blood clots.

I don't know if we'll get better numbers on other types of J&J blood clots from the CDC at some point, but I've noticed the same as you that people are comparing J&J cerebral blood clot deaths to birth control clots of any type and that doesn't look like a fair comparison to me, either.

[0] https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/13/health/johnson-vaccine-blood-...

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#166

Post by unanswered »

gojomo wrote: post #149
nostromo wrote: post #66

Now maybe the US can finally approve the AstraZeneca vaccine and put our 20 million (!) doses on hand to good use. Or not! But if we’re not going to use them, we should send them to another country like Canada or Mexico or Australia or the UK or EU, all of which have approved it and administered millions of doses. Sitting on 10s of millions of vaccines during a pandemic is inexcusable.

Alas, a lot of that supposed AZ stockpile traces back to the troubled Emergent Biosolutions facility. I don't think it had FDA certification when it produced them. Exactly zero of the J&J doses from that facility have been given to Americans. 15M J&J doses were discarded because they were contaminated with AZ ingredients. Tens of millions more are currently in quarantine awaiting other evaluations & may never be used…

I think the consensus among the general public is all those doses you mentioned should be given anyways because the vaccine is 100% safe.

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#167

Post by ipaddr »

ggm wrote: post #145
sgc wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's obviously not well tested enough to not get pulled out of use despite the pandemic, so more testing as we move forward seems appropriate. OP has a point, although the form of testing will probably be one less likely to cause people to avoid the vaccine. Also, what are the odds of a 1 in 10k concern not being picked up as such in a 40k sample size? It would look like background noise if it was only one case in th…

Its not 1 in 10k. You're overstating the risk. It's because its not 1 in 10k it was only picked up after mass vaccination began. See? you're inflating risk and misunderstanding consequences. How many people die, if nobody is vaccinated compared to a 1 in 100,000 risk of clotting? A lot more than 1 in 100,000 die from covid.

The risk of other non-fatal clotting increased 50% during the trials. The risk of this one specific type is 1 in 200,000+ which can result in death.

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#168

Post by refurb »

nostromo wrote: post #66

Now maybe the US can finally approve the AstraZeneca vaccine and put our 20 million (!) doses on hand to good use. Or not! But if we’re not going to use them, we should send them to another country like Canada or Mexico or Australia or the UK or EU, all of which have approved it and administered millions of doses. Sitting on 10s of millions of vaccines during a pandemic is inexcusable.

10M doses or enough to vaccinate 2.8% of the US population doesn’t seem like a lot to be sitting on?

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#169

Post by refurb »

lukeboi wrote: post #116
sxcurry wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a reminder that AstraZeneca has not applied yet to the FDA for emergency use authorization.

Companies generally don’t apply for FDA authorization unless they’re confident they’ll pass. From my limited experience in the bio/med industry companies are usually in contact with the FDA and it’s a really bad look if you get a rejection.

The US trial of AZ was supposed to read out this month and was pivotal to US approval.

Re: CDC panel recommends resuming use of Johnson and Johnson vaccine

#170

Post by ipaddr »

pdog wrote: post #152
adrianmonk wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For one thing, the CDC recommends it in their FAQ. From https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html : > If I have already had COVID-19 and recovered, do I still need to get vaccinated with a COVID-19 vaccine? > Yes, you should be vaccinated regardless of whether you already had COVID-19. That’s because experts do not yet know how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COV…

> That’s because experts do not yet know how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19. Since when has not knowing something been justification for intervention? Given that people have been getting sick from COVID-19 for at least as long as vaccines have been available for testing, shouldn't experts have a reasonable understanding of whether previously infected people are as protec…

I've seen doctors say they can detect antibodies at the very least at the 4 month mark. A yearly shot might be necessary
Post reply on HN