Live data from Hacker News

US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine

bbc.co.uk

121–130 of 1001 posts

Re: US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine

#121

I think this is an example of where government transparency would greatly aid the discourse and build trust. Where is the math that suggests that pausing the J&J vaccine is prudent? Inputs being risk of getting covid, risk of getting a blood clot, risk of injury/death from covid, risk of a new covid variant appearing, etc. Without that transparency we’re all just guessing.

And not just for the vaccines, but the choices made in Covid policies and mandates.

Re: US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine

#122
From the article:

“I think this is a very low risk issue, even if causally linked to the vaccine: 6 cases with about 7 million doses (lower than the risk of clots with oral contraceptives) is not something to panic about,” Dr. Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease expert at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in Baltimore, said in an email.

Re: US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine

#123
I'm trying to understand why this isn't ridiculous, and I'm not sure what that reason could be.

The disease left to its own accord has the potential to kill millions (someone please correct me on this). Why would we pause a vaccine because 6 people in 7 million got blood clots? Why would we do that and risk fueling anti-vaccine viewpoints?

I'm baffled, but perhaps I'm a fool.

Re: US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine

#124
so, let me get this straight. you have vaccines that use a new tech (mrna) that are awesome and vaccines that use “old tech” and at least 2 of then produce blood clots?

something is weird here. i’m not saying this is due to mass hysteria generated by people that don’t want the vaccine but this does sure look like a case where we don’t understand relative risk.

i may be ignorant and not understand all the factors but I don’t see the data that allows me to understand if suspending this vaccine is a good thing or nkt.

Re: US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine

#126

I think this is an example of where government transparency would greatly aid the discourse and build trust. Where is the math that suggests that pausing the J&J vaccine is prudent? Inputs being risk of getting covid, risk of getting a blood clot, risk of injury/death from covid, risk of a new covid variant appearing, etc. Without that transparency we’re all just guessing.

An analysis of the relative risks is obviously the objectively correct answer from a rational perspective, but most people aren't making decisions based on that kind of statistical reasoning (though we'd doubtless have better outcomes if they did). There's a serious risk that problems like this can spark a backlash against all COVID vaccines if not handled conservatively--there are plenty of people just waiting to have their anti-vaccine confirmation biases triggered. How to handle these events is as much a question of social behavior and public relations as it is of science.

Re: US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine

#127

I think this is an example of where government transparency would greatly aid the discourse and build trust. Where is the math that suggests that pausing the J&J vaccine is prudent? Inputs being risk of getting covid, risk of getting a blood clot, risk of injury/death from covid, risk of a new covid variant appearing, etc. Without that transparency we’re all just guessing.

I'll guess that you might be aware this is the reason, but just in case, I'm pretty sure the reason is that nobody who makes these decisions is actually doing any cost-benefit analysis (aside from the costs and benefits to them personally and their organization, maybe).

Re: US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine

#129
Makes sense.

Given there are some organizations that are forcing you to get a vaccination. 1 in a million chance of dying from something you were forced to do is different than 1 in a million chance of a pseudo-random event. Makes no sense to continue with J&J given the other two don't have this issue at the moment.

Of course, the utilitarian approach is to simply continue vaccinating with J&J since surely more people are helped than harmed. I'm sure they'll reverse this decision soon enough.

Post reply on HN