4 ms·
The efficacy rates are not comparable. My understanding is that, compared to the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, J&J was tested on a more diverse population with r
by geophile 6y ago
The efficacy rates are not comparable. My understanding is that, compared to the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, J&J was tested on a more diverse population with respect to age and location, and also tested later, so that it faced more variants of the virus.
Get whatever vaccine you can.
(Disclaimer: I got the J&J vaccine two weeks ago.)
- 19g 6y agoI saw this video, which illustrates what you pretty much stated: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3odScka55A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3odScka55A I actually wish I got the JnJ vaccine (I got the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine last week).
- pardner 6y agoBest general explanation I've seen so far, thanks for posting the link. Unfortunately, it still completely sidesteps any discussion of the relative risk of a vaccinated person (who is protected from a severe infection themselves) still a) getting infected and b) causing a severe case in someone else who is not yet vaccinated. So while "efficacy" may not be relevant on one dimension (MY chances of severe infection) it still seems important in another dimension (the chances of ME nonetheless getting infected then giving a severe case to someone else).