3 ms·

Here, risk management should be a personal decision. In this case, the right set of actions might be to grant people freedom, and let market forces rule. I thi

Here, risk management should be a personal decision. In this case, the right set of actions might be to grant people freedom, and let market forces rule. I think some people would choose the J&J vaccine if it meant getting vaccinated faster. Some people would choose Moderna / Pfizer, later. It really depends on things like whether or not you can work from home, how depressing it is not interacting with people, or how concerned you are about the risk of long COVID19. That's not something we can answer for anyone centrally. From a public health perspective, vaccinating people now with Johnson is an obvious win.

13415 6y ago
> risk management should be a personal decision I think this is unrealistic for medical application, not only for vaccinations but in general for anything related to side effects of drugs. First of all, most people don't have the data and in this case part of the risk management is to get more data or consolidate and evaluate existing data more thoroughly. Second, while you might be an exception, the vast majority of people do not have the knowledge and skills to properly assess risks or perform multiattribute cost-benefit analyses. Layman cannot even compare small probabilities correctly and frequently mix up risks that differ from each other by multiple orders of magnitude. Even people with fairly good knowledge of probability theory will have a hard time judging small risks without extensive comparison data and maybe some didactic tools like "micromort" comparisons.
- woofie11 6y ago
  People do make errors and have biases. So do public health professionals. The passive death and disability from COVID19 is weighed far less than the active death of side-effects. Providing J&J to everyone in the US would obviously reduce spread and reduce the thousand-or-so deaths we're continuing to see in the US every day by far more than blood clots. In general, doctors leave medical decision making to patients, is central to medical ethics. This even applies to patients with incomplete capacity.

13415 6y ago

> risk management should be a personal decision I think this is unrealistic for medical application, not only for vaccinations but in general for anything related to side effects of drugs. First of all, most people don't have the data and in this case part of the risk management is to get more data or consolidate and evaluate existing data more thoroughly. Second, while you might be an exception, the vast majority of people do not have the knowledge and skills to properly assess risks or perform multiattribute cost-benefit analyses. Layman cannot even compare small probabilities correctly and frequently mix up risks that differ from each other by multiple orders of magnitude. Even people with fairly good knowledge of probability theory will have a hard time judging small risks without extensive comparison data and maybe some didactic tools like "micromort" comparisons.

woofie11 6y ago
People do make errors and have biases. So do public health professionals. The passive death and disability from COVID19 is weighed far less than the active death of side-effects. Providing J&J to everyone in the US would obviously reduce spread and reduce the thousand-or-so deaths we're continuing to see in the US every day by far more than blood clots. In general, doctors leave medical decision making to patients, is central to medical ethics. This even applies to patients with incomplete capacity.