US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine • Hacker News Board

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

#181

Post by _ea1k » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:50 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #143

_ea1k wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but the risk is death and there are alternatives that do not appear to have this risk. Why not pause until it is more well understood? In the US, the other vaccines are starting to become really readily available.

Because the rate of vaccination is still supply-limited at the moment. If everyone who would have received the J&J vaccine could get a safer alternative in the same time frame this might make sense. But they can't, so it doesn't. Do the math. It is all but certain that more people will die as a result of this pause than without it, even if you assume a worst-case clotting risk scenario under the current data.

I only know my corner of the globe well. In this area, vaccine appointments are pretty easy to get and everyone 16+ is eligible. It certainly looks like any delay caused by this would be minimal.

Maybe other parts of the country are different.

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

#182

Post by dylan604 » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:50 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #150

I love how people are complaining about this decision without addressing the fact that there are two other vaccines that don't have this issue that have been used orders of magnitude more. Why wouldn't you pause J&J? It's just a drop in the bucket in total vaccinations anyway and the other two don't have this issue.

Isn't this why Europe pushed pause on Astra Zeneca's vaccine?

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

#183

Post by danielbln » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:50 PM UTC

ChadHomenim wrote: post #138

Hormonal birth control boasts clot rates of 1 per 10k, yet we hand that out like candy to little girls. Yet this is considered "too dangerous..." Edit: mods locked my account for this, lol. Some of the idiots replying are purposely conflating progestogen stats with non-progestogen stats, which is dishonest at best and willfully evil at worst. 2/3 of the market causing clots is fine? What a braindead take. I expected…

At least a third of the market of hormonal birth control is progestogen-only pills, and those do not raise the risk of blood clots. At best your comment is reductive, at worst misleading and the tone is uncalled for.

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

#184

Post by Trasmatta » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:50 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #58

baldfat wrote: post #3

[flagged]

Agreed, anti-vaxxers are already using this for their propaganda efforts. The core problem is that statistics isn't something that's well taught in schools, and so people can't understand effects of scale. 330M people means that (assuming an 1:1M incidence and a 80% vaxx rate) there will be 264 people dying from thrombosis. Which is bad, but nowhere near as bad as the millions that would die from an actual covid19 ca…

Your math is off, there was only one death after around 7 million shots. And this has only been seen with the J&J, which will only be a fraction of the total shots given.

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

#185

Post by bitcurious » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:51 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #165

bitcurious wrote: post #120

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.

The comment by Barleyman on the Ars Technica article on this [1] has a graphic from someplace called the Winston Centre for Risk Analysis that shows the benefits in COVID reduction vs the harms from the AZ vaccine by age group. According to that graphic, if you are in a time of medium COVID infection rates (60 per 100k per day), the risk from COVID outweighs the vaccine risks in that age group. If you in a time of lo…

That’s excellent, thank you for sharing! The comment you linked to suggests that the gender disparity can be attributed to women being over-represented in getting the vaccine, but I’m not sure the logic holds. Medical professionals were mostly done being vaccinated prior to J&J being approved.

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

#186

Post by _ea1k » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:51 PM UTC

thomasfromcdnjs wrote: post #169

ars wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not "too dangerous", rather it's "we did not warn people about the known risks". If you warn people about the small risk of blood clots from the vaccine, then you can let them decide if to receive it. That's what informed consent is all about.

Honest question, what is your take on vaccine passports?

Not the OP, but my take is that the name is terrible. The concept is probably needed in some places, though. It'd be fairly shocking if there aren't some strict entry requirements on crowded venues for a while, though maybe a recent test can substitute for a vaccine.

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

#187

Post by conistonwater » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:52 PM UTC

symlinkk wrote: post #118

ceejayoz wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then doctors went through the records and now there are 200+ sick, 25 people dead from CVST alone (clotting that causes bleeding in the brain) with incidence in Norway 5 out of 130000 vaccinated. Per https://vaccinetracker.ecdc.europa.eu/public/extensions/COVI... , that's 30M AZ doses. You're still talking about one in a million chance of death here. > And if you compare that to CFR from COVID for person Add a few…

The point he’s trying to make is that if you’re in a low risk group (let’s say under 30 for example) maybe it’s a better idea to just skip the vaccine.

Wait, that doesn't sound quite right: the benefit of taking the vaccine goes not only to you, it's also to the people you would have otherwise infected by spreading the virus yourself.

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

#188

Post by ChadHomenim » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:52 PM UTC

theli0nheart wrote: post #172

ChadHomenim wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Citation needed" is a lazy way to throw FUD at an argument; if someone who didn't even leave the comment you are responding to can spend 30 seconds to find the citation on Google to answer your question, you could have done so yourself instead of demanding other people cite every single thing they say lest they aren't believed.

The burden of proof falls on the accuser.

Not my fault you cant read CDC stats.

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

#189

Post by JohnWhigham » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:52 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #179

space_fountain wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What organizations are forcing you to get vaccinated. I’ve heard a lot of speculation and honestly there should be more forceful, but I’m not aware of any. Plenty of jobs force you to drive which is absurdly risky

https://www.npr.org/2021/04/11/984787779/should-colleges-req... There are also jobs. I don't disagree with the forced vaccinations, but it is what it is.

[dead]

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

#190

Post by johnnyapol » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 2:52 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #2

Six cases in seven million administered doses. One death. Meanwhile, hormonal birth control causes clots in 1/1,000 women. No one blinks an eye. The vaccine hesitancy this engenders is likely gonna kill more than that one person. https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1381936112311148548 > Public health bureaucrats have some weird habits in how they reason under uncertainty and how they communicate to the public. I…

I'm not saying your calculus is wrong but this does make an assumption that all clots are created equal and I don't believe that is the case.

The specific issue being observed is "cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST)" in combination with "low levels of blood platelets (thrombocytopenia)" per the Joint CDC and FDA statement (1).

Low blood platelets means anti-clotting treatments can pose a substantial bleeding increase, making this already dangerous condition difficult to treat.

(1) https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/joint-cd...