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

621–630 of 1001 posts

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

#621

Post by tharne »

doikor wrote: post #430
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…

The problem isn't 7 out of 7 million odds. It is that it is an unknown side effect that did not come up in the original studies. We have approved vaccines with worse side effects before. The difference is that we knew what those side effects were and weighed the risk vs reward and made the call to use it.

> It is that it is an unknown side effect that did not come up in the original studies.

It's not clear that this even has to do with the vaccine. If you gave 7 Million people a glass of water on the same day, I'm sure at least 7 of them would experience some sort of moderate to serious health outcome in the days that followed.

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

#622

Post by ryankemper »

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…

> All these anti-vaxers talking about living in fear of a virus that has 98% survival rate

Please cite a source here. Survival rate usually means IFR not CFR, and even the CDC's own number (the CDC is going to be incentivized to overstate risk) puts it at around a 99.4% general survival rate. Other estimates put it closer to 99.7% or even higher.

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

#623

Post by ironmagma »

thelean12 wrote: post #564
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…

> I think it is a disservice to outright label people as anti-vaxers simply for questioning the risk-calculus of vaccines. It's the same idea though, and should still be called out. It's people who have unqualified medical opinions, and who are then often spreading that opinion to others as if it's useful. Let the agencies figure it out, pay attention to the latest recommendations from them, and go with that. Anythin…

Careful to not play the appeal to authority. Anyone can understand anything, regardless of their so-called qualifications. Are they likely to? No, and that’s why someone’s qualifications are purely a heuristic, not a prerequisite.

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

#624

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#625

Post by sergiotapia »

sdenton4 wrote: post #592
sergiotapia wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question for you, if you like those odds, why get the vaccine at all? If you're not obese covid won't do anything to you except give you a lil flu. Curious about your answer.

1) Vaccination is also about stopping the overall spread of infections. Vaccination is for the greater good, not just your own good. 2) It's still very possible to have a Very Bad Time with covid if you're not obese.

>Vaccination is also about stopping the overall spread of infections.

Then why are people still asked to wear masks in stores even if they are vaccinated? I've heard from the media non-stop that even if you have the vaccination you need to wear a mask - it doesn't make sense.

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

#626

Post by primitivesuave »

jonplackett wrote: post #424
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 just made this website to show you how really, really small the risks are for the AstraZeneca vaccine which also has this ‘issue’. It compares the risks of dying from a blood clot after the AZ vaccine (about 1 in a million) to the risks we happily take every single day. http://whatoneinamillionmeans.com If you're not willing to take 1 in a million chances, it's gonna be pretty hard for you to get out of bed today

This is brilliant, I manage IT systems for hospitals and clinics and hear the front desk staff using analogies like this to put the risk into perspective. For something like this it shouldn't matter if you're even an order of magnitude off, the point is to help the non-mathematically-inclined general population understand how low the risks are in a context they understand (and anecdotally I'd say this strategy works well).

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

#627

Post by spion »

blitz_skull wrote: post #610
thelean12 wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sometimes those authorities get it wrong Yes. That's correct. That doesn't change what I said. Answer me this: why do you think unqualified individuals are better suited to get it right? Just because there are examples in the past of people who went against the recommendations who ended up being right, doesn't mean you should take everything else into your own hands. Unless, of course, it's literally your job.

It’s not a question of getting it right, really. I haven’t heard a single uneducated opinion say, “You should not get it because X”. I’ve seen several say, “I will not get it because X” It’s a subtle, but IMO important distinction. If people wanna rationalize not getting the shot based on their own misunderstanding of the science, that’s fine. That’s okay. We don’t need universal understanding here for the vaccine to…

That's a good method to not develop immunity and develop resistant strains.

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

#628

Post by argvargc »

doikor wrote: post #430
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…

The problem isn't 7 out of 7 million odds. It is that it is an unknown side effect that did not come up in the original studies. We have approved vaccines with worse side effects before. The difference is that we knew what those side effects were and weighed the risk vs reward and made the call to use it.

"Doctors For COVID Ethics" a (non anti-vax) group of 150+ medical professionals/university professors etc, warned in March about the likelihood of deaths resultant from exactly this issue. They went public with their previously private correspondence with the European Medicines Agency, as they were unsatisfied with EMA's responses. Who picked up their pleas? Conspiracy, fringe and some right-wing websites - that seems to be it.

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

#629

Post by thelean12 »

blitz_skull wrote: post #610
thelean12 wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sometimes those authorities get it wrong Yes. That's correct. That doesn't change what I said. Answer me this: why do you think unqualified individuals are better suited to get it right? Just because there are examples in the past of people who went against the recommendations who ended up being right, doesn't mean you should take everything else into your own hands. Unless, of course, it's literally your job.

It’s not a question of getting it right, really. I haven’t heard a single uneducated opinion say, “You should not get it because X”. I’ve seen several say, “I will not get it because X” It’s a subtle, but IMO important distinction. If people wanna rationalize not getting the shot based on their own misunderstanding of the science, that’s fine. That’s okay. We don’t need universal understanding here for the vaccine to…

> I haven’t heard a single uneducated opinion say, “You should not get it because X”.

It's not even 3 hours into my day and I've already received 3 texts from family saying something along those lines regarding J&J, even if it gets unpaused. It's a much more prevalent thing to say than you think.

> If people wanna rationalize not getting the shot based on their own misunderstanding of the science, that’s fine. That’s okay.

It's not okay. We need shots in arms. And you're doing your part by enabling those who are misunderstanding the science by making them feel like it's okay to not get the shot.

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

#630

Post by caddemon »

handmodel wrote: post #547
doikor wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't 7 out of 7 million odds. It is that it is an unknown side effect that did not come up in the original studies. We have approved vaccines with worse side effects before. The difference is that we knew what those side effects were and weighed the risk vs reward and made the call to use it.

While I understand this to a degree - this still pretends the long-term risks of covid are zero or less than the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. It is a two sided equation.

For young people (it seems especially young women) I think the answer could end up going in either direction honestly. I think it's completely reasonable to redirect them to mRNA vaccine until we know more.

Not sure why the J&J vaccine had to pause for older population where clearly the vaccine has a much better benefit/risk profile though. But at least in my area of the US the vaccination rate for senior citizens is quite high already.

Post reply on HN