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

771–780 of 1001 posts

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

#771

Post by nawitus »

wincy wrote: post #768
js2 wrote: post #702

The risk of dying from a blood clot after receiving the J&J vaccine is six in 6,800,000 (6.8M). The world population is 7,900,000,000 (7.9B). If everyone on the planet got the J&J vaccine tomorrow, and if it is the cause of the clots, then 6,971 people would die from the vaccine. Yesterday, Covid19 killed 8,803 people (according to worldometers). We don't want anyone to die from vaccination, and we don't fully unders…

I went to the emergency room for earth shattering headaches (no history of headaches like this) after getting the J&J vaccine last week. I mentioned I’d got the vaccine and asked if it was possible the two were linked. The doctor did everything but actually roll his eyes and thought that the headache being caused by the vaccine was ridiculous. I bet if I went today he wouldn’t be so dismissive.

That's odd, as headache is a common symptom for many vaccines (or pretty much any medicine).

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

#772

Post by happycube »

dheera wrote: post #736
js2 wrote: post #702

The risk of dying from a blood clot after receiving the J&J vaccine is six in 6,800,000 (6.8M). The world population is 7,900,000,000 (7.9B). If everyone on the planet got the J&J vaccine tomorrow, and if it is the cause of the clots, then 6,971 people would die from the vaccine. Yesterday, Covid19 killed 8,803 people (according to worldometers). We don't want anyone to die from vaccination, and we don't fully unders…

Why is everyone worried about blood clots, and not that the J&J vaccine has a crap-tastic efficiency of 66.3%? Would you want the chef at your local takeout to be vaccinated to 66.3% efficiency? or 94%? Why was this vaccine even approved, instead of just having J&J produce the same vaccine Pfizer and Moderna are making, which would be in the best interest of the world? Is this some utterly idiotic capitalism bullshit…

If nothing else, the logistics of transporting J&J make it a lot better in a lot of cases. Pfizer in particular needs to be transported super-cold, and Moderna needs to be frozen as well. J&J can be handled much more like a flu shot.

That said, I'm smarting a bit (even though I understand why) that the fully vaccinated guidelines cover 2 weeks after J&J, while it's looking likely the mRNA vaccines give you better protection even 2 weeks after the first shot. (You really do want the second... the 6-month Moderna study shows you get about 10x the antibodies from the second one, which means the protection lasts much longer if nothing else.)

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

#773

Post by TrevorJ »

js2 wrote: post #702

The risk of dying from a blood clot after receiving the J&J vaccine is six in 6,800,000 (6.8M). The world population is 7,900,000,000 (7.9B). If everyone on the planet got the J&J vaccine tomorrow, and if it is the cause of the clots, then 6,971 people would die from the vaccine. Yesterday, Covid19 killed 8,803 people (according to worldometers). We don't want anyone to die from vaccination, and we don't fully unders…

>The risk of dying from a blood clot after receiving the J&J vaccine is six in 6,800,000 (6.8M)

that we know of.

I suspect the lack of understanding about what is happening, and what other knock-on effects there might be is what is behind this.

If a wing falls off of one airplane in a million, we still stop and try to figure out what happened because as far as we know, wings are not supposed to fall off any airplanes, so there's something about the system we need to learn more about.

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

#774

Post by rllearneratwork »

strikhedonia wrote: post #766
tacitusarc wrote: post #734

Earlier quoted context omitted.

6 obvious deaths that we're aware of. The risk of the vaccines is in their novelty and morbidity. An abundance of caution is required in this instance. It would be very bad to discover that there's a vanishingly small chance of blood clots within the first 3 months but a significant chance when paired with other events over the following decade.

It’s actually one obvious death we’re aware of—the other five are still alive. Though that doesn’t change the calculus much.

yeah, and how many got "non-severe" clots? Obviously, it isn't a binary situation like: you are 100% OK vs you are dead from clot.

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

#775

Post by TrevorJ »

titzer wrote: post #750
tacitusarc wrote: post #734

Earlier quoted context omitted.

6 obvious deaths that we're aware of. The risk of the vaccines is in their novelty and morbidity. An abundance of caution is required in this instance. It would be very bad to discover that there's a vanishingly small chance of blood clots within the first 3 months but a significant chance when paired with other events over the following decade.

I wish people applied this much caution to the virus. Who knows what cancers it causes 10 years down the road.

Do any corona-family viruses cause cancers that we know of?

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

#776

Post by [deleted] »

kazinator wrote: post #757
savanu wrote: post #755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The different efficacy rates of the vaccines do not directly imply anything about spreading covid. A vaccinated person can have no symptoms of covid and still be spreading (This may or may not be true). Folks are still studying how effective the vaccines are at preventing spread.

Keep in mind that a door handle is completely immune to Covid and can be spreading it.

[deleted]

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

#777

Post by TrevorJ »

e9 wrote: post #745
dheera wrote: post #736

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is everyone worried about blood clots, and not that the J&J vaccine has a crap-tastic efficiency of 66.3%? Would you want the chef at your local takeout to be vaccinated to 66.3% efficiency? or 94%? Why was this vaccine even approved, instead of just having J&J produce the same vaccine Pfizer and Moderna are making, which would be in the best interest of the world? Is this some utterly idiotic capitalism bullshit…

This is not full story. 65% efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 but 100% efficacy against death and hospitalization due to COVID-19. So there is real benefit to it.

This is a leaky vaccine, which is actually a big health risk. You remove selection pressure for lack of virulence, so more fatal strains can spread more easily. Definitely not a good thing.

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

#778

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

js2 wrote: post #702

The risk of dying from a blood clot after receiving the J&J vaccine is six in 6,800,000 (6.8M). The world population is 7,900,000,000 (7.9B). If everyone on the planet got the J&J vaccine tomorrow, and if it is the cause of the clots, then 6,971 people would die from the vaccine. Yesterday, Covid19 killed 8,803 people (according to worldometers). We don't want anyone to die from vaccination, and we don't fully unders…

Nit pick sorry:

> Now, your risk of dying either from vaccination or Covid19 depends on various demographic factors

Your risk of dying, or other health injury, depends on your personal health factors specifically.

Demographic is the statistical data of a population.

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

#779

Post by M_bara »

dheera wrote: post #746
e9 wrote: post #745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not full story. 65% efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 but 100% efficacy against death and hospitalization due to COVID-19. So there is real benefit to it.

Yes, but 65% efficacy still means that 1/3 of the vaccinated people will continue to be spreaders, which doesn't sound great, especially if that allows the virus to spread and evolve into a harsher variety.

Not necessarily. Efficacy measures are about protection from hospitalisation or death if you contract COVID. It doesn’t imply loss of viral shedding. There’s a vox video on YouTube that explains this...

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

#780

Post by JoshuaDavid »

jonplackett wrote: post #717
JoshuaDavid wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure where you're getting your stats, but so far I've gotten > That's about 10 times less risky than walking down the stairs and > That’s the same risk as driving for 5 hours Which implies that walking down some stairs is equivalently risky to driving for 50 hours. That seems... unlikely. There are about 150 deaths per 10 billion passenger-miles in the US [1]. That means that a micromort (a 1 in a million cha…

Hey thanks for this. I have the sources next to each. Just click the link in the bottom left corner. Let me know if you don't think they're accurate after having a look. I took the driving risk as being 250 miles of driving with an average 50mph speed (The risk of dying must be higher at high speed so wanted to take a high average to be fair).

The source on the "10x less risky than going down a flight of stairs" is https://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2.... That shows that in the UK in 2010, 655 people died from falling down stairs. That translates to a 1 in 100,000 annualized risk from falling down stairs -- the relevant comparison is "10x less risky than using stairs a typical amount for an entire year".

Interestingly, running the numbers for the UK shows that the annualized per-capita risk of dying on stairs in the UK is more than twice as high as it is in the US.

Post reply on HN