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

US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 1001 posts

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

#251

Post by ceejayoz »

endisneigh wrote: post #221
ceejayoz wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What matters is the outcome compared to the thing birth controls prevent - pregnancy. Same with the vaccine. > Do you get more blood clots from being pregnant or from being on the pill? Again, same with the vaccine. COVID itself causes clots, in a very substantial percentage of hospitalized patients. "The benefits of this medical intervention are worthwhile, despite the risks, given the alternative" is precisely th…

> Same with the vaccine. No, because there are other vaccines that don't give you blood clots at all. Your entire point is moot. Pausing temporarily to investigate is hardly controversial. The comparison with birth control is nonsensical. A vaccination for COVID is not the same as getting birth control. Even if it was, why would you get J&J if you could get Pfizer that doesn't have the same issue? If all vaccinations…

> No, because there are other vaccines that don't give you blood clots at all.

Not enough to go around. Pfizer's goal is 2B doses (1B people) this year. Moderna's is even smaller. 8B people in the world.

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

#252

Post by StavrosK »

HillRat wrote: post #201
johnnyapol wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 incr…

And we know adenoviruses interfere with the coagulation cascade through FX binding, so it’s well worth taking a pause and taking a closer look into what’s going on. With two well-tolerated and safe mRNA vaccines in the market, we can afford — to a degree! — to put Ad-based vaccines through additional scrutiny, especially since they’re likely to be the primary vaccine type on a global level.

> With two well-tolerated and safe mRNA vaccines in the market, we can afford — to a degree! — to put Ad-based vaccines through additional scrutiny

This assumes that we have enough safe vaccines, which we wildly don't.

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

#253

Post by krooj »

somedude895 wrote: post #27
Eduard wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is kneejerk statistics 101 reaction. * Hormonal birth control - years of research. Years of evidence and practice. Knowing what to do when this and that happens. Recommendations for women with known conditions not to take this and that hormonal birth control. * Novel vaccination - barely month of research. Weeks of evidence and practice. We don't have best practices yet. I'm fine with anyone to make a decision o…

Factor V Leiden gang represent. Afaik AZ clotting is caused through a different mechanism though. Have there been any official recommendations for us thick-blooded folk?

Same fam. Skipping AZ/JJ till I can get mRNA. 3 years since my last ride on the DVT rollercoaster. 0/10 - would not recommend.

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

#254

Post by bilbo0s »

xiphias2 wrote: post #213

Why didn't they stop the vaccinations in women under age of 60/65? I'm a 40 year old man, if I were a woman I wouldn't take J&J or AstraZeneca, but as I'm a man, I think it's worth to take the risk of the side effects of the vaccination.

Now you have the logistical challenges of shipping 2 vaccines to some small town. One for the men, another for the women. Additionally, that town needs the not insubstantial refrigeration capabilities anyway.

So what’s the point if you’re a public health admin? Just get the moderna or Pfizer and save yourself and your staff a lot of headache.

The logistical benefits of J&J mean that it’s only logistically beneficial if it can be used for everyone.

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

#255

Post by InTheArena »

I see a lot of arguments that are basically "people are too stupid to understand risk". That, in turn, comes from the fact that the FDA/CDC/NIH has not covered itself in Glory the last many years. Covid just uncovered the rot, while Trump danced around it, and poured gasoline on the fire.

The best thing to get people to understand risk is to actually follow the process in the EUA. Pause, evaluate the outcomes, change the labels and dosing. Which this does.

At the same time, the FDA/CDC need to start taking other countries data into account. At this point, there is no excuse not to be using a UK style "first dose first" strategy, especially if mRNA is all we have for a while.

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

#257

Post by endisneigh »

ceejayoz wrote: post #251
endisneigh wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Same with the vaccine. No, because there are other vaccines that don't give you blood clots at all. Your entire point is moot. Pausing temporarily to investigate is hardly controversial. The comparison with birth control is nonsensical. A vaccination for COVID is not the same as getting birth control. Even if it was, why would you get J&J if you could get Pfizer that doesn't have the same issue? If all vaccinations…

> No, because there are other vaccines that don't give you blood clots at all. Not enough to go around. Pfizer's goal is 2B doses (1B people) this year. Moderna's is even smaller. 8B people in the world.

Sure, but J&J isn't being permanently discontinued. Why are you against simply pausing vaccinations to investigate this? If the USA was this prudent with COVID in its beginning we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Your argument would be reasonable if it was being permanently suspended.

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

#258

Post by dahfizz »

conistonwater wrote: post #187
symlinkk wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Can't you still spread covid if you are vaccinated? Don't you still have to wear a mask and social distance? That doesn't add up with what we are being told.

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

#259

Post by jdminhbg »

bosie wrote: post #232
jdminhbg wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is kneejerk statistics 101 reaction. Sometimes the answer is easy. > Hormonal birth control - years of research This is kneejerk status quo bias. > I'm fine with anyone to make a decision on them own to take these vaccinations. Great, but the FDA is not. That's the issue here.

>> Hormonal birth control - years of research > This is kneejerk status quo bias. mind expanding why years of research is a 'bias'?

Citing "years of research" that nevertheless demonstrate a product has side effects as bad or worse as a reason something should be allowed is status quo bias.

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

#260

Post by endisneigh »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #247
endisneigh wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no "high standard" to begin with. J&J is paused because there are alternatives that don't have clotting to the same degree. A comparison with birth control makes no sense. Is there some magical birth control that's used orders of magnitude more (Pfizer) and orders of magnitude safer with respect to blood clotting and also prevents pregnancy? No? Then the comparison is stupid.

The primary concern people have here isn't the review, it's the immediate withdrawal. People who had appointments to get the J&J vaccine will now go vaccine-less until they can be rescheduled, even if they would have been happy to take it knowing about the blood clots.

Sure, but my point is that a comparison with birth control is stupid at best, harmful at worst.

J&J isn't being permanently suspended - I bet you within the coming days this ban will be reversed and people can get J&J if they'd like.

Post reply on HN