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

611–620 of 1001 posts

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

#611

Post by tomjen3 »

throwawaysea wrote: post #476
jaegerpicker wrote: post #406

7 people out of 7 million dose's. That's why they stopped. My wife and I got the J&J shot on Saturday so I'm directly at risk and I'd take it everytime even if the risk was 10 times what it currently is. I've already seen a bunch of anit-vaxers referring to this in new articles this morning. So let's see, 1 in a million chance that the vaccine will make you sick (only 1 person has died so far, which is terrible but i…

I think that's not a very charitable take on "anti-vaxers". People are against injecting something new that has not stood the test of time. We have no idea what the actual frequency of this issue is (maybe more reports will come in), or if there are other lurking side effects waiting to be observed as a pattern, or if there are long-term effects. What if news of this spurs others to make the connection with the J&J v…

I am not concerned with impossible to predict future events, but all effective vacines[0] will cause cancer in that they prevent people from dying early and so make it more likely they get cancer.

[0] that don't target cancer

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

#612

Post by [deleted] »

hamadj wrote: post #490
jaegerpicker wrote: post #406

7 people out of 7 million dose's. That's why they stopped. My wife and I got the J&J shot on Saturday so I'm directly at risk and I'd take it everytime even if the risk was 10 times what it currently is. I've already seen a bunch of anit-vaxers referring to this in new articles this morning. So let's see, 1 in a million chance that the vaccine will make you sick (only 1 person has died so far, which is terrible but i…

I think it is a disservice to outright label people as anti-vaxers simply for questioning the risk-calculus of vaccines. The (1/7 million) is the current, unconditional and empirically observed adverse effect of the vaccine - this is a somewhat noisy measure of the true prevalence of this issue. It is okay to be cautious and there are legitimate concerns, and quite frankly, I trust the FDA have good reason to pause t…

[deleted]

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

#613

Post by cmrdporcupine »

rhino369 wrote: post #454
jaegerpicker wrote: post #406

7 people out of 7 million dose's. That's why they stopped. My wife and I got the J&J shot on Saturday so I'm directly at risk and I'd take it everytime even if the risk was 10 times what it currently is. I've already seen a bunch of anit-vaxers referring to this in new articles this morning. So let's see, 1 in a million chance that the vaccine will make you sick (only 1 person has died so far, which is terrible but i…

Nobody has investigated 7 million doses, so its at least 7, but probably more. The UK incidence rate (for the same issue in the AZ vax) was like 10X what was initially reported. And its probable that these incidents are concentrated in a small segment of the population (young & health maybe women). So your denominator is very inflated. If you can save 20-40 lives by just giving young women Pfizer and using J&J on 50+…

Yes this is the rationale Canadian authorities have used in making AZ 55+ only here. Some calculation based on risk of COVID mortality in that population vs the hypothetical AZ risk. At first I was skeptical of this but the more I read about it the more it seems like a reasonable approach.

Even more so because here in Canada we do not have much AZ yet anyways (and no J&J yet), mostly Pfizer and Moderna.

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

#614

Post by tharne »

heywherelogingo wrote: post #582
hamadj wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is a disservice to outright label people as anti-vaxers simply for questioning the risk-calculus of vaccines. The (1/7 million) is the current, unconditional and empirically observed adverse effect of the vaccine - this is a somewhat noisy measure of the true prevalence of this issue. It is okay to be cautious and there are legitimate concerns, and quite frankly, I trust the FDA have good reason to pause t…

Agreed, I've had all other vaccines, but this batch is rushed, experimental, and not necessary for me - labelling people such as myself "anti-vaxers" is just dishonest, bitter, childish, name calling. Very few people in my area of London have bothered with the so-called lockdown (too much was open to be called a lockdown), masks, etc - I expect I've had all variants, and apparently my immune system is on top of it, i…

The technology behind this vaccine has been actively worked on for over a decade. Yes, these vaccines have been sent to market faster than normal, but they certainly have not been "rushed".

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

#615

Post by Izkata »

base698 wrote: post #521
Izkata wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think people IN LOW RISK groups have been way too enthusiastic to sign up. About that... > In December, we asked, “What percentage of people who have been infected by the coronavirus needed to be hospitalized?” > The correct answer is not precisely known, but it is highly likely to be between 1% and 5% according to the best available estimates, and it is unlikely to be much higher or lower. We discuss the data an…

From what I can deduce using CDC data my chance of hospitalization is 0.5 to 2%. Assuming linear relationship of obesity in the population and assuming the same risk at the top of my cohort to the bottom.

My point was more the last part:

> Many adults (35%) say that at least half of infected people need hospitalization.

This is why so many in low-risk groups have been so enthusiastic - misinformation that has them thinking it really is the Black Death.

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

#616

Post by skykooler »

bluGill wrote: post #443
santiagobasulto wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is it really a side effect? If 6 people vaccinated are hit by a car, is that included as a side effect? Are those side effects lists just a catch it all sort of exception where they throw anything there just in case? Honest question.

We will ask if the vaccine somehow cause those 6 people to be hit by a car, if we decide the vaccine caused that would be listed. (I don't see how a vaccine could cause people to be hit by a car, but I'm open to suggestions)

could cause some sort of mental change that causes one to be drawn towards fast-moving objects?

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

#617

Post by [deleted] »

fastball wrote: post #529
throwaway8581 wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Young people shouldn't be getting the vaccine period. There is no reason to give every single person who will have children in the future an experimental vaccine for a virus they are at no serious risk from. The long tail risk on that is absolutely insane.

Not exactly sure what procreation has to do with anything. Also pretty sure risk of death outweighs literally any possible long-tail risk, so still seems sensible for the young to get the vax. Also don't think the long-tail risk of an mRNA vaccine can be worse then COVID's long-tail risk.

[deleted]

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

#618

Post by caddemon »

kube-system wrote: post #524
lamontcg wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so it's fair to say that the risk will likely grow beyond that. not really. that's not how statistics work. it could grow, it could shrink.

In this case, the numerator lags the denominator. > All six cases were in women aged between 18 and 48, with symptoms appearing six to 13 days after vaccination. Presumably, some of the 7 million people who have gotten the vaccine did so in the prior 5-12 days. It is reasonable to expect to see more cases over the next 6-13 days from the moment we pause J&J vaccination.

Also, if the effected group is only young women, the denominator isn't really the same as the total number vaccinated. Not saying it isn't still very rare, but in young people COVID deaths are also very rare. We have alternative vaccines, it makes perfect sense to advise young women against J&J for the time being while this is sorted out.

And for anyone that thinks this is just normal incidence of blood clots being blamed on the vaccine - that's what was said about AstraZeneca originally, and if these clots are anything like those it is absolutely not the case. Those are serious clots that are very rare to see period, let alone in young people, and require different treatment than normal clots (they have surprisingly low platelet count).

I suspect US agencies had good reason to want to pause J&J given all of that - the AZ vaccine issues were also disproportionately affecting women interestingly.

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

#619

Post by JediWing »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #555
JediWing wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this were the case it would be odd that this is happening a.) in a consistent subset of women 18-38 b.) that it would emerge in a 1-shot regimen rather than a 2-shot regimen, because it would seem more likely that any one individual would experience this more frequently with 2 chances for human error rather than 1

The Pfizer & Moderna 2-shot vaccines use mRNA instead of an adenovirus vector. The AZ vaccine is 2 shot, but also uses a similar adenovirus vector - the bloodclot issue has also been seen in the AZ vaccine which has led to some countries in Europe not allowing it for women under 60.

I would assume the guidelines for aspirating would be the same across all of these vaccines, though? If so the original point still stands regardless of adenovirus vs. mRNA

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

#620

Post by lukifer »

kodah wrote: post #445
jaegerpicker wrote: post #406

7 people out of 7 million dose's. That's why they stopped. My wife and I got the J&J shot on Saturday so I'm directly at risk and I'd take it everytime even if the risk was 10 times what it currently is. I've already seen a bunch of anit-vaxers referring to this in new articles this morning. So let's see, 1 in a million chance that the vaccine will make you sick (only 1 person has died so far, which is terrible but i…

> a virus that has 98% survival rate You know, for all the continual fear mongering about coronavirus last year, the constant reminders of who was most at risk, the hyper importance put on masks and cleanliness, etc it is shocking to see things put this way now.

WWII killed roughly 75 million people, "only" 3% of the world's population at the time. Scale matters.
Post reply on HN