3 ms·

You can't compare the 91% vs 76% numbers because the 91% test was performed in the late summer last year between virus waves and in a location with an less-cont

by itake 6y ago

You can't compare the 91% vs 76% numbers because the 91% test was performed in the late summer last year between virus waves and in a location with an less-contagious form of the virus. Whereas the JJ virus was tested during the fall 2nd-wave in South Africa when there was a lot of cases and more cases of a higher infection strain. The only fair comparison would be if all of the testing was done at the same time in the same geographic location. source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3odScka55A&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3odScka55A&feature=youtu.be

boc 6y ago
There was a new, recent study that showed that the mRNA vaccines were still 90% effective among healthcare workers during the big surge in December/January period when the variants were certainly present.[1] This doesn't mean the J&J vaccine is bad by any means, but it does show how incredible the new mRNA vaccines have performed. [1] https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/29/real-world-study-by-cdc-shows-pfizer-and-moderna-vaccines-were-90-effective/ https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/29/real-world-study-by-cdc-...
- ehsankia 6y ago
  From that same study: > The study suggested that even the first dose of vaccine was 80% effective at preventing infection Which is within the error bar of J&J's one dose result in the US (75%). We will have to see the results of the 2-dose J&J trial coming out soon, but I expect that to be around 90% too. It's also worth noting that some places in the world (UK, Canada), have been using 1-dose pfizer regimen to get the most out of their short supply, with possible 2nd shot 3-4 months down the line. Similarly, we could see a delayed J&J booster being given to increase immunity to matching 90%.
bluGill 6y ago
No, the 91% from Pfizer is just announced and covers roughtly 6 months, including up until at least the middle of march, at which time the variants were circulating. Notably this covers the entire time of the J&J trials. Of course they used somewhat different geographical regions so you can't compare them, but still the 91% does include variants.

by itake 6y ago

boc 6y ago

There was a new, recent study that showed that the mRNA vaccines were still 90% effective among healthcare workers during the big surge in December/January period when the variants were certainly present.[1] This doesn't mean the J&J vaccine is bad by any means, but it does show how incredible the new mRNA vaccines have performed. [1] https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/29/real-world-study-by-cdc-shows-pfizer-and-moderna-vaccines-were-90-effective/ https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/29/real-world-study-by-cdc-...

ehsankia 6y ago
From that same study: > The study suggested that even the first dose of vaccine was 80% effective at preventing infection Which is within the error bar of J&J's one dose result in the US (75%). We will have to see the results of the 2-dose J&J trial coming out soon, but I expect that to be around 90% too. It's also worth noting that some places in the world (UK, Canada), have been using 1-dose pfizer regimen to get the most out of their short supply, with possible 2nd shot 3-4 months down the line. Similarly, we could see a delayed J&J booster being given to increase immunity to matching 90%.

bluGill 6y ago

No, the 91% from Pfizer is just announced and covers roughtly 6 months, including up until at least the middle of march, at which time the variants were circulating. Notably this covers the entire time of the J&J trials. Of course they used somewhat different geographical regions so you can't compare them, but still the 91% does include variants.