10 ms·

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

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.

Exmoor 6y ago
You'd have to compare that to the chances of the long term effects of COVID causing issues down the line, which I'm willing to heavily bet is much more likely given what we've seen so far.
MikeCapone 6y ago
There's already been large scale phase 3 trials, and we've deal with vaccines for decades, they're not entirely novel and unknown each time.
- ttesttom 6y ago
  The phase 3 trial for JnJ/Janseen had only ~44k participants whereas here we are talking on the order of ~1 per million (that are reported as of today)
- SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
  > we've deal with vaccines for decades I don’t think that’s accurate in this case. The type of vaccine that J&J released had up until months ago only ever been deployed in animals. IIRC pigs had a problem with corona viruses that we solved” The J&J is not a heap of dead virus like the common ones we have had forever. But a live harmless (we think) virus dolled up to look like Rona Corona.
  - adgjlsfhk1 6y ago
    Live harmless vaccines aren't anything new. Some of the TB vaccines from the 60s are of that variety. Live virus vaccines have safely been used for at least the past 5 decades. Stop spreading bullshit.
    - SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
      Ok. Well, perhaps you aren’t actually aware of what the J&J is. I enjoyed the part about spreading bullshit though, good one. No, there have been no previous live viruses that have been genetically modified to look like other viruses (embedding Covid spike proteins) injected in humans before three months ago in any scale. We have treated animals with exactly this however, including pigs against piggy rona. I recommend reading the whole post next time, not just stopping at “live virus”.
titzer 6y ago
I wish people applied this much caution to the virus. Who knows what cancers it causes 10 years down the road.
- TrevorJ 6y ago
  Do any corona-family viruses cause cancers that we know of?
  - titzer 6y ago
    I don't know. But HPV and Herpes definitely can. Here's some more: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/infectious-agents/infections-that-can-lead-to-cancer/viruses.html https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/infectious-agent... It takes quite a long time to prove the link between a viral infection and a cancer that develops decades later, so it'll be a while before we know for sure.
    - TrevorJ 6y ago
      I think that given the fact that we've been getting sick from corona-family viruses for years with no suspected link to cancers, this should be of relatively low concern, barring any specific information. There are other potential longer term side effects that at least seem to have some emerging data to back them up, which seem more concerning to me.
      - makomk 6y ago
        How would we even know? In order to tell if coronaviruses caused cancer, we'd need to be keeping track of which people had ever been infected with one of them and how many of them ended up with cancer, and we're not. It'd just fall into the background level of cancer incidence otherwise. Hell, we haven't even figured out if they're the main cause of Kawasaki disease yet, and that's a fairly spectacular and dangerous condition affecting children. There's some evidence that some common viruses in the family might be really deadly to elderly people, but that doesn't seem to have been researched much either. There's a lot we just don't know.
strikhedonia 6y ago
It’s actually one obvious death we’re aware of—the other five are still alive. Though that doesn’t change the calculus much.
- rllearneratwork 6y ago
  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.
newaccount7 6y ago
So I created a new account for this to avoid linking personal information... I had blood clots in my lungs last week a few days after getting the J&J vaccine. I'm an otherwise totally healthy man in my 30s, no preconditions. The hospital reported it to the vaccine reporting agency, which I assume is reviewing all this information. I'm not sure if they considered my case when making this decision. My clots were different type than what these women experienced (pulmonary, not cerebral). Of course vaccinating the public is extremely important right now. If the risks of clotting really are 1 in a million, it makes sense to re-instate it. I also think that's an obvious conclusion and the people working on this are well aware of the public health trade-off. I suspect they are working with more information than what's in the press release, and its prudent to give them some time to work through it.
- chrisco255 6y ago
  These are not vaccines. They are gene therapy marketed as vaccines. No one has any clue as to their long term side effects. The under 30 odds of death for Covid-19 are statistically zero percent. The rush to inject a brand new medication into the entire world pop without regards for individual risk profile is ridiculous, reckless, madness.
  - lucasmullens 6y ago
    > No one has any clue as to their long term side effects. The under 30 odds of death for Covid-19 are statistically zero percent. Can't you flip that around? No one has any clue as to the long term side effects of Covid-19. The under 30 odds of death for getting the vaccine are statistically zero percent.
  - titzer 6y ago
    110+ million vaccinations in the US and holy goddamn, no major issues. 31 million infections and 550,000+ dead, in a year. Millions of long haul COVID cases. Debilitating lung conditions, brain fog, lasting consequences already from the virus, and you wanna crow about long term consequences of the vaccine. What in the actual roasting hell. I've noticed you, specifically, posting pro-virus misinformation since the very beginning. Half a million people died, man. I wish you would just spare us your trolling, damn it!
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
amelius 6y ago
Some experts have said that it's probably an immune reaction to the adenovirus which is used as the delivery mechanism in the vaccine. Wouldn't the side effects therefore be limited to the first weeks after the injection only?
dragontamer 6y ago
> 6 obvious deaths that we're aware of. 1 death. The other cases are severe blood clotting but still alive by my understanding. That's literally one-in-6-million chance of death with regards to this blood-clotting issue. A vanishingly smaller chance than the 1-in-40,000 (or 150-in-6-million) a healthy young person has of dying of COVID19. So 1 death, 5 severe reactions related to blood clotting. Definitely a cause of concern, but lets not overplay the stats here. This just another "Trolley problem": 150-people (even youngsters) would die from COVID19 vs the 1-person who died from the J&J vaccine. If we include the general population (instead of focusing on the youngest and healthiest of us): COVID19 mortality rate is 1%ish, or 60,000-people-per-6-million.
- bscphil 6y ago
  Three quick points: You have to multiply the IFR by the odds that the person gets COVID to begin with. In countries where there's no community transmission (Australia) or in countries where it's possible to kill the virus just by vaccinating the at-risk population combined with shut-downs, the multiplier should be pretty small. Even in countries that have handled it badly, it still might be only a 1/3 or 1/2 chance of catching it. So as a young healthy person my chances of dying from COVID are probably less than 1/100000. I bring this up because I think it misses the actual point. Even if the vaccine had a 1/100000 chance of death or major complications, I would still take it. Because my life is not the only one that matters. Killing the virus is likely (in this country) to require most people who are physically capable (including the young) of taking the vaccine. My taking on a 1/100k risk with the vaccine vs a 1/100k risk without the vaccine is worth it, because for most other adults, the risk is much greater than 1/100k if the population doesn't get vaccinated. Fortunately, I don't think pausing J&J is necessarily the wrong decision, even given the argument I just made. AFAIK it's the least common of the three vaccines, and so there should not be many "missing" vaccinations that result from the pause. The fact that taking a risk is justified does not mean that pointless risk is justified.
- kelnos 6y ago
  It's not clear to me that the J&J vaccine's supply is large or critical enough that it's going to make that much of a difference (yet). If the supplies of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are such that most people with J&J appointments can just get one of the others instead, that's really not that big a deal. Walk-ins might be affected, though, but I'm not sure what percentage of the total daily vaccinations are walk-ins vs. appointments. And as a sibling mentions, the general risk of dying from COVID-19 is not 150 in 6M, because the probability of getting (symptomatic) COVID-19 needs to be factored into that figure. I would not be surprised that if that probability drops to under 1 in 6M after accounting for that, though of course the symptomatic infection risk differs based on demographics. One thing that I am worried about, though, is that this might make people trust all the vaccines less in general. My girlfriend and I had J&J appointments for this Friday; fortunately we were able to get a walk-in Moderna shot today, but the issues with the J&J vaccine did give her a little anxiety even about the Moderna vaccine. I think that (and worse) might be pretty common, and isn't unreasonable.
stjohnswarts 6y ago
I agree but only because about 5% of the vaccines currently distributed are J&J in the USA. The others will more than make up for it I'm sure. I think when we hit the wall and the supply outstrips the demand in the next few weeks as we approach 60-65% vaccinated and qanon and hippy antivaxxers are unwilling, I bet in month there will be so many open spots that they'll start cutting back manufacturing unless Biden convinces Moderna and Pfizer to keep going full speed ahead and we say distribute to Mexico/Central America/South American countries (like we ought to do).
rsuelzer 6y ago
6 deaths? I thought it was 1 death and 5 serious injuries?
mantap 6y ago
This is what worries me. I have had the AZ vaccine. Will I be at risk of this syndrome every time I am exposed to coronavirus? In other words, is the risk cumulative?

Exmoor 6y ago

You'd have to compare that to the chances of the long term effects of COVID causing issues down the line, which I'm willing to heavily bet is much more likely given what we've seen so far.

MikeCapone 6y ago

There's already been large scale phase 3 trials, and we've deal with vaccines for decades, they're not entirely novel and unknown each time.

ttesttom 6y ago
The phase 3 trial for JnJ/Janseen had only ~44k participants whereas here we are talking on the order of ~1 per million (that are reported as of today)
SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
> we've deal with vaccines for decades I don’t think that’s accurate in this case. The type of vaccine that J&J released had up until months ago only ever been deployed in animals. IIRC pigs had a problem with corona viruses that we solved” The J&J is not a heap of dead virus like the common ones we have had forever. But a live harmless (we think) virus dolled up to look like Rona Corona.
- adgjlsfhk1 6y ago
  Live harmless vaccines aren't anything new. Some of the TB vaccines from the 60s are of that variety. Live virus vaccines have safely been used for at least the past 5 decades. Stop spreading bullshit.
  - SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
    Ok. Well, perhaps you aren’t actually aware of what the J&J is. I enjoyed the part about spreading bullshit though, good one. No, there have been no previous live viruses that have been genetically modified to look like other viruses (embedding Covid spike proteins) injected in humans before three months ago in any scale. We have treated animals with exactly this however, including pigs against piggy rona. I recommend reading the whole post next time, not just stopping at “live virus”.

titzer 6y ago

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

TrevorJ 6y ago
Do any corona-family viruses cause cancers that we know of?
- titzer 6y ago
  I don't know. But HPV and Herpes definitely can. Here's some more: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/infectious-agents/infections-that-can-lead-to-cancer/viruses.html https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/infectious-agent... It takes quite a long time to prove the link between a viral infection and a cancer that develops decades later, so it'll be a while before we know for sure.
  - TrevorJ 6y ago
    I think that given the fact that we've been getting sick from corona-family viruses for years with no suspected link to cancers, this should be of relatively low concern, barring any specific information. There are other potential longer term side effects that at least seem to have some emerging data to back them up, which seem more concerning to me.
    - makomk 6y ago
      How would we even know? In order to tell if coronaviruses caused cancer, we'd need to be keeping track of which people had ever been infected with one of them and how many of them ended up with cancer, and we're not. It'd just fall into the background level of cancer incidence otherwise. Hell, we haven't even figured out if they're the main cause of Kawasaki disease yet, and that's a fairly spectacular and dangerous condition affecting children. There's some evidence that some common viruses in the family might be really deadly to elderly people, but that doesn't seem to have been researched much either. There's a lot we just don't know.

strikhedonia 6y ago

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

rllearneratwork 6y ago
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.

newaccount7 6y ago

So I created a new account for this to avoid linking personal information... I had blood clots in my lungs last week a few days after getting the J&J vaccine. I'm an otherwise totally healthy man in my 30s, no preconditions. The hospital reported it to the vaccine reporting agency, which I assume is reviewing all this information. I'm not sure if they considered my case when making this decision. My clots were different type than what these women experienced (pulmonary, not cerebral). Of course vaccinating the public is extremely important right now. If the risks of clotting really are 1 in a million, it makes sense to re-instate it. I also think that's an obvious conclusion and the people working on this are well aware of the public health trade-off. I suspect they are working with more information than what's in the press release, and its prudent to give them some time to work through it.

chrisco255 6y ago
These are not vaccines. They are gene therapy marketed as vaccines. No one has any clue as to their long term side effects. The under 30 odds of death for Covid-19 are statistically zero percent. The rush to inject a brand new medication into the entire world pop without regards for individual risk profile is ridiculous, reckless, madness.
- lucasmullens 6y ago
  > No one has any clue as to their long term side effects. The under 30 odds of death for Covid-19 are statistically zero percent. Can't you flip that around? No one has any clue as to the long term side effects of Covid-19. The under 30 odds of death for getting the vaccine are statistically zero percent.
- titzer 6y ago
  110+ million vaccinations in the US and holy goddamn, no major issues. 31 million infections and 550,000+ dead, in a year. Millions of long haul COVID cases. Debilitating lung conditions, brain fog, lasting consequences already from the virus, and you wanna crow about long term consequences of the vaccine. What in the actual roasting hell. I've noticed you, specifically, posting pro-virus misinformation since the very beginning. Half a million people died, man. I wish you would just spare us your trolling, damn it!

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

amelius 6y ago

Some experts have said that it's probably an immune reaction to the adenovirus which is used as the delivery mechanism in the vaccine. Wouldn't the side effects therefore be limited to the first weeks after the injection only?

dragontamer 6y ago

> 6 obvious deaths that we're aware of. 1 death. The other cases are severe blood clotting but still alive by my understanding. That's literally one-in-6-million chance of death with regards to this blood-clotting issue. A vanishingly smaller chance than the 1-in-40,000 (or 150-in-6-million) a healthy young person has of dying of COVID19. So 1 death, 5 severe reactions related to blood clotting. Definitely a cause of concern, but lets not overplay the stats here. This just another "Trolley problem": 150-people (even youngsters) would die from COVID19 vs the 1-person who died from the J&J vaccine. If we include the general population (instead of focusing on the youngest and healthiest of us): COVID19 mortality rate is 1%ish, or 60,000-people-per-6-million.

bscphil 6y ago
Three quick points: You have to multiply the IFR by the odds that the person gets COVID to begin with. In countries where there's no community transmission (Australia) or in countries where it's possible to kill the virus just by vaccinating the at-risk population combined with shut-downs, the multiplier should be pretty small. Even in countries that have handled it badly, it still might be only a 1/3 or 1/2 chance of catching it. So as a young healthy person my chances of dying from COVID are probably less than 1/100000. I bring this up because I think it misses the actual point. Even if the vaccine had a 1/100000 chance of death or major complications, I would still take it. Because my life is not the only one that matters. Killing the virus is likely (in this country) to require most people who are physically capable (including the young) of taking the vaccine. My taking on a 1/100k risk with the vaccine vs a 1/100k risk without the vaccine is worth it, because for most other adults, the risk is much greater than 1/100k if the population doesn't get vaccinated. Fortunately, I don't think pausing J&J is necessarily the wrong decision, even given the argument I just made. AFAIK it's the least common of the three vaccines, and so there should not be many "missing" vaccinations that result from the pause. The fact that taking a risk is justified does not mean that pointless risk is justified.
kelnos 6y ago
It's not clear to me that the J&J vaccine's supply is large or critical enough that it's going to make that much of a difference (yet). If the supplies of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are such that most people with J&J appointments can just get one of the others instead, that's really not that big a deal. Walk-ins might be affected, though, but I'm not sure what percentage of the total daily vaccinations are walk-ins vs. appointments. And as a sibling mentions, the general risk of dying from COVID-19 is not 150 in 6M, because the probability of getting (symptomatic) COVID-19 needs to be factored into that figure. I would not be surprised that if that probability drops to under 1 in 6M after accounting for that, though of course the symptomatic infection risk differs based on demographics. One thing that I am worried about, though, is that this might make people trust all the vaccines less in general. My girlfriend and I had J&J appointments for this Friday; fortunately we were able to get a walk-in Moderna shot today, but the issues with the J&J vaccine did give her a little anxiety even about the Moderna vaccine. I think that (and worse) might be pretty common, and isn't unreasonable.

stjohnswarts 6y ago

I agree but only because about 5% of the vaccines currently distributed are J&J in the USA. The others will more than make up for it I'm sure. I think when we hit the wall and the supply outstrips the demand in the next few weeks as we approach 60-65% vaccinated and qanon and hippy antivaxxers are unwilling, I bet in month there will be so many open spots that they'll start cutting back manufacturing unless Biden convinces Moderna and Pfizer to keep going full speed ahead and we say distribute to Mexico/Central America/South American countries (like we ought to do).

rsuelzer 6y ago

6 deaths? I thought it was 1 death and 5 serious injuries?

mantap 6y ago

This is what worries me. I have had the AZ vaccine. Will I be at risk of this syndrome every time I am exposed to coronavirus? In other words, is the risk cumulative?