A ? about the new J&J vaccine

[Deleted]

With 72% efficacy I'm thinking that near enough isn't good enough. You won't know you're one of the unlucky other 28% until you're already sick.

[justme]

Better than 0%

[thyme4change]

Rukh O'Rorke - here is someone saying that getting a vaccine that is less effective may not be worth it.

[pulmonarymd]

Jan 29, 2021 11:22:09 GMT -5 @missrigby said:

With 72% efficacy I'm thinking that near enough isn't good enough. You won't know you're one of the unlucky other 28% until you're already sick.

Do you get a yearly flu vaccine?
Do you know how effective the flu vaccine is?
How about the pneumonia vaccine? Same 2 questions.

Not picking on you. Just curious to see if you know how this compares

[Deleted]

Jan 29, 2021 12:49:48 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Jan 29, 2021 11:22:09 GMT -5 @missrigby said:

With 72% efficacy I'm thinking that near enough isn't good enough. You won't know you're one of the unlucky other 28% until you're already sick.

Do you get a yearly flu vaccine?
Do you know how effective the flu vaccine is?
How about the pneumonia vaccine? Same 2 questions.

Not picking on you. Just curious to see if you know how this compares

Well, well, well. I had no idea so I asked Dr. Google. It looks to me like the J&J is at least as effective as the pneumonia vaccine and more effective than this season's flu vaccine.

In any case, when Kaiser finally gets around to me, I'm not going to quibble about what kind I get.

I'm old and know stuff, but this wasn't any of the stuff I knew. I need to get older

[pulmonarymd]

Jan 29, 2021 12:58:24 GMT -5 @missrigby said:

Jan 29, 2021 12:49:48 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Do you get a yearly flu vaccine?
Do you know how effective the flu vaccine is?
How about the pneumonia vaccine? Same 2 questions.

Not picking on you. Just curious to see if you know how this compares

Well, well, well. I had no idea so I asked Dr. Google. It looks to me like the J&J is at least as effective as the pneumonia vaccine and more effective than this season's flu vaccine.

In any case, when Kaiser finally gets around to me, I'm not going to quibble about what kind I get.

I'm old and know stuff, but this wasn't any of the stuff I knew. I need to get older

Yes, that was my point. The pandemic ends when enough of us is immune. Since we need over 200 million people vaccinated, something is better than nothing. And the coronavirus vaccine was better at preventing severe disease than at preventing infections. Perfect is not the goal, better is. We get out of this incrementally

[djAdvocate]

Jan 29, 2021 11:25:47 GMT -5 justme said:

Better than 0%

right, which is precisely how effective the alternative is.

I really don't get why people would not get a vaccine that was anything less than 90% effective. let me put it another way:

if you knew that there was a 100% chance of you dying tomorrow if you did not wear your seatbelt, and only a 28% chance of you dying if you did, would you choose to NOT wear your seatbelt?

what kind of a person does that?

[kadee79]

J&J has another shot?...a one & done shot?


www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/johnson-and-johnsons-single-shot-vaccine-could-be-the-answer-to-these-at-risk-groups/ar-BB1ddGFG?li=BBnb7Kz

[justme]

Jan 29, 2021 18:55:22 GMT -5 kadee79 said:

J&J has another shot?...a one & done shot?


www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/johnson-and-johnsons-single-shot-vaccine-could-be-the-answer-to-these-at-risk-groups/ar-BB1ddGFG?li=BBnb7Kz

Not sure what you mean by another? That's the one OP is talking about. 

[Spellbound454]

72% efficacy is fine .... like has been said, much higher than usual vaccine.

Are we getting so picky, that we can afford to say (in the middle of a pandemic where people are dropping like flies)........... that we have a choice?

It will save lives and go a long way towards herd immunity.

If you get a vaccine in your arm .... thank God that you have been given a chance...... and are not part of the horrific death statistic that we are all facing.

[Ryan]

Jan 29, 2021 15:32:19 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jan 29, 2021 11:25:47 GMT -5 justme said:

Better than 0%

right, which is precisely how effective the alternative is.

I really don't get why people would not get a vaccine that was anything less than 90% effective. let me put it another way:

if you knew that there was a 100% chance of you dying tomorrow if you did not wear your seatbelt, and only a 28% chance of you dying if you did, would you choose to NOT wear your seatbelt?

what kind of a person does that?

I don't think people that would get the J&J vaccine would consider no vaccine to be the alternative.  They would seek out Moderna or Pfizer.  Why get 72% when you could have 95%?

[justme]

Jan 29, 2021 23:38:07 GMT -5 Ryan said:

Jan 29, 2021 15:32:19 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

right, which is precisely how effective the alternative is.

I really don't get why people would not get a vaccine that was anything less than 90% effective. let me put it another way:

if you knew that there was a 100% chance of you dying tomorrow if you did not wear your seatbelt, and only a 28% chance of you dying if you did, would you choose to NOT wear your seatbelt?

what kind of a person does that?

I don't think people that would get the J&J vaccine would consider no vaccine to be the alternative.  They would seek out Moderna or Pfizer.  Why get 72% when you could have 95%?

There's plenty of people that would rather have one shot. There's also plenty who want a shot with the old technology and don't trust the new one. There's plenty who live in an area where it's difficult to impossible to have the equipment needed to keep the other vaccines cold enough. There's plenty who when are told "it's either this or you're going to have to wait 6 months for the other one" will take the this - and yes for a while it will be "you take what you get" when it comes to vaccines. 

[djAdvocate]

Jan 29, 2021 23:38:07 GMT -5 Ryan said:

Jan 29, 2021 15:32:19 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

right, which is precisely how effective the alternative is.

I really don't get why people would not get a vaccine that was anything less than 90% effective. let me put it another way:

if you knew that there was a 100% chance of you dying tomorrow if you did not wear your seatbelt, and only a 28% chance of you dying if you did, would you choose to NOT wear your seatbelt?

what kind of a person does that?

I don't think people that would get the J&J vaccine would consider no vaccine to be the alternative.  They would seek out Moderna or Pfizer.  Why get 72% when you could have 95%?

there are four reasons I have heard:

1) cost- it is cheaper

2) single shot.  for those who are terrified of needles, that is attractive.

3) availability.  if you can't get the others, why would you reject J&J

4) ease of transport- this one doesn't spoil easily.

but I was not actually comparing it to the other vaccines.

I was just asking why you would pass over it, if you had no alternative.

[busymom]

I'd take the J & J shot.  On the news they were saying it's the only vaccine out there where no one has ended up in the hospital due to a reaction.  

[djAdvocate]

I just heard that too.

[alabamagal]

If it was the first one, the efficacy wouldn’t be an issue. It should meet the criteria for approval. It is just that we have others that are 90%+ effective.

There is a huge supply issue with vaccines. J&J is manufacturing vaccines and can add to supply. The more people that get immunity the better we all are.

[pulmonarymd]

This vaccine prevented 100% of severe cases in the US. That is all you need to know. If you take it and get sick you get a cold. Wait, get infected, and you could get severely ill. We do not understand the problem.

In addition, the more people vaccinated, the sooner it ends. We need supply. This helps. It needs to be good enough, and it is

[Miss Tequila]

Jan 30, 2021 7:56:13 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

This vaccine prevented 100% of severe cases in the US. That is all you need to know. If you take it and get sick you get a cold. Wait, get infected, and you could get severely ill. We do not understand the problem.

In addition, the more people vaccinated, the sooner it ends. We need supply. This helps. It needs to be good enough, and it is

The problem I have with that logic is that there are many reports of long term complications to organs, even in people that had a very mild case of Covid.

I get the flu shot every year and I know the efficacy is a lot lower. I also know that I’m very unlikely to suffer long term health issues if I do get the flu (I’ve had it 3 times in my life). Covid is another story. My daughter had a very mild case and I do worry what’s lurking in her body

Would I get J&J if there was no alternative? Absolutely! But I would choose Moderna or Pfizer if I had the option

[pulmonarymd]

Jan 30, 2021 8:38:51 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Jan 30, 2021 7:56:13 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

This vaccine prevented 100% of severe cases in the US. That is all you need to know. If you take it and get sick you get a cold. Wait, get infected, and you could get severely ill. We do not understand the problem.

In addition, the more people vaccinated, the sooner it ends. We need supply. This helps. It needs to be good enough, and it is

The problem I have with that logic is that there are many reports of long term complications to organs, even in people that had a very mild case of Covid.

I get the flu shot every year and I know the efficacy is a lot lower. I also know that I’m very unlikely to suffer long term health issues if I do get the flu (I’ve had it 3 times in my life). Covid is another story. My daughter had a very mild case and I do worry what’s lurking in her body

Would I get J&J if there was no alternative? Absolutely! But I would choose Moderna or Pfizer if I had the option

In a situation where time and other logistics are not a factor, I agree 100%. This is not our current situation.

This vaccine does have some advantages now, and also in less urgent times. One dose of J and J offers better protection than one dose of the others. So you are better protected for the 4-6 weeks it takes to be fully vaccinated with the others. Logistically, the storage requirements are a major advantage. I can give the J and J one in my office. I do not kave the storage capability for the others. Scheduling becomes easier, ramp up of vaccination is easier, which leads to faster attainment of herd immunity if we ramp up its supply. The same number of doses of j and j allows us to vaccinate twice as many people, and we don’t have to save any for a second dose, delay a second dose, or worry about people coming back for a second dose. You could also decide to reserve the Pfizer and moderna vaccines for the high risk individuals, and open up vaccination to everyone with j and j at physician offices and pharmacies. This gives all kinds of options to get to herd immunity faster.

Given all the variables, when this is all over, it would be a fascinating case study for a game theory class or paper as to which vaccination strategy is most successful.

[irishpad]

If a person got the J & J because that was what was available for them, could they later get Pfizer or Moderna and if so, would there be a wait period (medically) before they could receive the other vaccine?

[justme]

Jan 30, 2021 10:41:19 GMT -5 irishpad said:

If a person got the J & J because that was what was available for them, could they later get Pfizer or Moderna and if so, would there be a wait period (medically) before they could receive the other vaccine?

I would assume, once supply has gotten to a point that everyone that wants one got one - getting extras would come down to whether your insurance covers it. Sorta similar to how there's a few different flu shots. But it depends on how long these shots last on when the supply issue stops becoming dire. I'd guess you wouldn't have the option to get a second one until next year at the earliest. 

[pulmonarymd]

Jan 30, 2021 10:41:19 GMT -5 irishpad said:

If a person got the J & J because that was what was available for them, could they later get Pfizer or Moderna and if so, would there be a wait period (medically) before they could receive the other vaccine?

Good question. Answer is unknown. But, given our knowledge of immunology, it is likely something that could be done. Again, given the supply constraints, we won’t know for some time

[haapai]

Jan 30, 2021 10:41:19 GMT -5 irishpad said:

If a person got the J & J because that was what was available for them, could they later get Pfizer or Moderna and if so, would there be a wait period (medically) before they could receive the other vaccine?

A very good question, especially since Pfizer and Moderna are probably going to the first to manufacture shots or booster shots that can handle the variants better. 

[thyme4change]

😁

[Miss Tequila]

Jan 30, 2021 12:59:43 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

😁

Hahaha!!! This is definitely how I see the vaccines!

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

When they started making these vaccines, anything greater than 50% was going to be considered a win.  We have 2 vaccines that are 2 doses, are very labile and 95%.  We now have another that protects at 72%, needs one dose and is not labile.  I also read it has an 85% chance of preventing severe disease. 

These are good numbers, guys.  One dose you get more effective immunity than one dose of either Pfizer or Moderna.  Who knows how much this number might change if you got a second dose of it.

It very well might become an age related issue as well.  I have not seen anything how well it works in older people, but they could possibly direct this vaccine to younger people to stop this scourge.  Any port in a storm, and we need ALL the ports.  We don’t have the luxury to be picky.

Hell, I’m 61.  If I was offered this, I’d take it in a heartbeat.  At this point, I’m at risk due to age and comorbidities, but I’ll be lucky if I can get ANYTHING by this summer.  

[djAdvocate]

Jan 30, 2021 13:20:10 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Jan 30, 2021 12:59:43 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

😁

Hahaha!!! This is definitely how I see the vaccines!

not me.  I think the J&J is Jolt Cola.

[thyme4change]

Us phase 2 people ("the rest") - I suspect we will be given the choice to get the J&J now or wait for one of the other two. Which do I want - 70% now, or 95% in 6 weeks?

Hmmmmm......

[Miss Tequila]

Jan 30, 2021 20:11:50 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Us phase 2 people ("the rest") - I suspect we will be given the choice to get the J&J now or wait for one of the other two. Which do I want - 70% now, or 95% in 6 weeks?

Hmmmmm......

Is your state limited by supply or logistics? In my state, it was logistics (we still have only given 44% of our on hand vaccines out). Would introducing a third vaccine change the timeline? From what I’ve been reading, it’s having the proper staff available to give the vaccines that is the issue in a lot of places.

[thyme4change]

Jan 30, 2021 20:24:19 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Jan 30, 2021 20:11:50 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Us phase 2 people ("the rest") - I suspect we will be given the choice to get the J&J now or wait for one of the other two. Which do I want - 70% now, or 95% in 6 weeks?

Hmmmmm......

Is your state limited by supply or logistics? In my state, it was logistics (we still have only given 44% of our on hand vaccines out). Would introducing a third vaccine change the timeline? From what I’ve been reading, it’s having the proper staff available to give the vaccines that is the issue in a lot of places.

No clue. It is just my guess at what will happen. Not sure what chain of events happens to get to that choice.