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

41–50 of 232 posts

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

#41

Post by alderz »

jonplackett wrote: post #17
joe_the_user wrote: post #3

Excellent news. The unfortunate thing is the level of ignorance today mistakes a very careful effort make sure the vaccine is safe with a wanton ignoring of some danger. Beyond talking about the fact that they determined this was safe, at some point educating people on danger in statistical terms is going to be necessary. But I'm not sure how that happens - addiction to headline-logic and single-heart-pulling-events…

I made a website recently to try and do what I think you're talking about. http://whatoneinamillionmeans.com The idea is to compare the risk of death from the AZ vaccine from blood clots (1 in a million so far) with the risks we take all the time without worrying. For there J+J vaccine, it's also a 1 in a million risk, but just of getting the clots, not dying. The point is to show the fallacy of comparing the risk of…

I am not sure why you got downvoted. The website makes the point well.

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

#42

Post by benchaney »

passivate wrote: post #15
Sebguer wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Hopefully if anything the pause has shown anti-vax folks that the safety of these vaccines is being taken seriously. The vast majority of skeptics will not be convinced by this, because their skepticism is not rooted in the science.

I think it should fall under basic common sense, not science. In reality, only a handful of people in the world understand in detail all the intricacies of the various ways our body interacts with drug substances. This group varies based on the drug in question. The rest of us are just parroting them. Yes you can try to be informed and read-up but at the end of the day they're still a layperson. I work in biotech (va…

> In reality, only a handful of people in the world understand in detail all the intricacies of the various ways our body interacts with drug substances.

That is not science, and it is not what is meant when people talk about trusting the science. Science is empiricism. The science that supports the efficacy of vaccination is the data from the trials that shows a reduction in cases. The science supporting safety is similar. This data is something anyone can understand with sufficient knowledge about probability and statistics. That level of knowledge is somewhat rare, but nowhere near as uncommon as the theoretical knowledge you are describing.

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

#43

Post by ghaff »

ForHackernews wrote: post #36
neither_color wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Domestically that's the case but if you have(had) to travel abroad often for work or family reasons that won't be the case. I regularly(used to) visit and have family ties to a country that allows vaccine records in lieu of negative tests for entry. I'd say that's reasonable. https://www.traveloffpath.com/countries-open-for-vaccinated-...

You mean you'll have to fulfil certain legal requirements in order to be permitted entry to a foreign country? Surely that's unprecedented!

Yellow Fever vaccinations in particular have been commonly required for a variety of countries, hence WHO yellow vaccination book.

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

#44

Post by Fomite »

mancerayder wrote: post #32

Pausing like that causes, not prevents, vaccine skepticism. In an era of declining public trust of institutions (across both political aisles, even if unequally), I argue this pause was poor politics. Science doesn't enter much into it, unfortunately.

Personally, I prefer drug safety protocols be based on science, not what people feel, or whether or not it's "good politics".

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

#45

Post by eloff »

jonplackett wrote: post #17
joe_the_user wrote: post #3

Excellent news. The unfortunate thing is the level of ignorance today mistakes a very careful effort make sure the vaccine is safe with a wanton ignoring of some danger. Beyond talking about the fact that they determined this was safe, at some point educating people on danger in statistical terms is going to be necessary. But I'm not sure how that happens - addiction to headline-logic and single-heart-pulling-events…

I made a website recently to try and do what I think you're talking about. http://whatoneinamillionmeans.com The idea is to compare the risk of death from the AZ vaccine from blood clots (1 in a million so far) with the risks we take all the time without worrying. For there J+J vaccine, it's also a 1 in a million risk, but just of getting the clots, not dying. The point is to show the fallacy of comparing the risk of…

I fully agree, and made this point many times to my vaccine skeptical parents. Thankfully they've come around and got the vaccine since.

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

#46

Post by neither_color »

void_mint wrote: post #31
neither_color wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Domestically that's the case but if you have(had) to travel abroad often for work or family reasons that won't be the case. I regularly(used to) visit and have family ties to a country that allows vaccine records in lieu of negative tests for entry. I'd say that's reasonable. https://www.traveloffpath.com/countries-open-for-vaccinated-...

Right, but are you seeing how allowing vaccine records in lieu of other documentation is not the same as requiring vaccination?

None of this has made sense for months I'm just going with the flow. We get x-ray scanned through our clothes every time we fly what's dignity? It's just another airport document as far as Im concerned.

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

#47

Post by LatteLazy »

I got confused as the same thing was reported in Oxford Astrozenica vaccine recipients. I wasn't sure if they're the same vaccine (they're not). So I read up a bit.

The same sort of clots occur in people who have been given heparin (a blood thinner). It's even called "heparin induced" in people using heparin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-vaccination_embolic_and_t...

People on either vaccine have been found to have an immune response to "platelet factor 4" (PF4). PF4s job is to moderate substances like heparin.

I wonder if PF4 is similar to spike protein somehow?

I wonder how long the immune response lasts?

I guess it's not super useful as it wouldn't make sense to give people a blood thickener (a coagulant?) prophylacticly. Maybe we need to consider whether this is appropriate for people on Heparin or similar medications? I'm no doctor so don't take this as discouragment, I'm just musing. I have Oxford AZ (1 dose so far) and it was fine.

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

#48

Post by passivate »

joshgachnang wrote: post #12
passivate wrote: post #9

This is great news! I'm holding out for the J&J shot myself :) I find it to be a better product than the others.

Can you explain why you think it's a better product? Genuinely curious as I haven't done much comparison myself.

Because of their confidence (and the FDAs confidence) in their single-dose immunogenicity data, and also the fact that they ran trials in regions (brazil, SA, US) at times when new variants were prevalent.

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

#49

Post by nickff »

mancerayder wrote: post #32

Pausing like that causes, not prevents, vaccine skepticism. In an era of declining public trust of institutions (across both political aisles, even if unequally), I argue this pause was poor politics. Science doesn't enter much into it, unfortunately.

There have been some studies which demonstrated that experts gain credibility when they express uncertainty. Amateurs on the other hand lose credibility when they express uncertainty. I don't have a citation handy, but I thought you might find the perspective useful.

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

#50

Post by void_mint »

neither_color wrote: post #46
void_mint wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but are you seeing how allowing vaccine records in lieu of other documentation is not the same as requiring vaccination?

None of this has made sense for months I'm just going with the flow. We get x-ray scanned through our clothes every time we fly what's dignity? It's just another airport document as far as Im concerned.

I'm sorry, I can't really tell how your comment is related to my comment? What does verifying that you took precaution to prevent the spread of covid have to do with dignity?
Post reply on HN