4 ms·

This is great news! I'm holding out for the J&J shot myself :) I find it to be a better product than the others.

by passivate 6y ago

servercobra 6y ago
Can you explain why you think it's a better product? Genuinely curious as I haven't done much comparison myself.
- dmitrygr 6y ago
  Adenovirus-based vaccines have existed a while, so it is not as new as mRNA vaccines are. That is my reason. Why the downvotes? it is a legit answer to the OP's question
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- raphlinus 6y ago
  Speaking for myself (team J&J), single dose is definitely more convenient. Anecdotally, reactions seem to be less severe than for the mRNA vaccines. And, while it's only a minor speed bump to our gold-plated healthcare delivery system, the fact that it doesn't need an extreme cold chain means it's logistically much easier to handle.
- passivate 6y ago
  Because of their confidence (and the FDAs confidence) in their single-dose immunogenicity data, and also the fact that they ran trials in regions (brazil, SA, US) at times when new variants were prevalent.
neither_color 6y ago
I was holding out too but the opportunity to get Pfizer part 1 came up this week and I figured "this indefinite suspension could take months might as well get this out of the way now." Oh well. Im always wrong about these things. Either way in three more weeks I'll be done doing the "needful." No side effects for me besides my arm sore to the touch the day after, but not painful. Similar to the day after a weightlifting workout.
- aaronbrethorst 6y ago
  Same for me on Monday. Oh well.
decafninja 6y ago
I'm the opposite. I was sort of resigned to getting the J&J but was hoping for the Pfizer. My wife got an appointment before I did and did get the J&J. Then this clotting news happened, and I subsequently got my appointment - Pfizer. So I guess I got what I wanted. My wife is perfectly fine though, no side effects. If given the J&J vaccine, I would have taken it too.
GloriousKoji 6y ago
I was under the impression adenovirus based vaccines are worse in the long run because the adenovirus acts as a vehicle for the proteins we're immunizing against (coivd) and that immunity can also occur against the adenovirus rendering it useless as a vehicle for proteins in the future.
- passivate 6y ago
  Yes, there are certain strains that wouldn't work as vectors. HAd26 (used in J&J) has not shown reduced immunogenicity based on studies conducted. It was used in other vaccines previously, and that hasn't impacted its performance here. While it's not a problem now, the situation might change in the future, so you were right to ask the question. These issues of pre-existing immunity are taken seriously inside vaccine companies too. (Note that while I work in biotech, I'm not claiming to be an expert on this topic, so don't take these as definitive claims of truth. People shouldn't be taking HN comments as a source of any kind of medical advice anyway.)
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

This is great news! I'm holding out for the J&J shot myself :) I find it to be a better product than the others.

servercobra 6y ago

Can you explain why you think it's a better product? Genuinely curious as I haven't done much comparison myself.

dmitrygr 6y ago
Adenovirus-based vaccines have existed a while, so it is not as new as mRNA vaccines are. That is my reason. Why the downvotes? it is a legit answer to the OP's question
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
raphlinus 6y ago
Speaking for myself (team J&J), single dose is definitely more convenient. Anecdotally, reactions seem to be less severe than for the mRNA vaccines. And, while it's only a minor speed bump to our gold-plated healthcare delivery system, the fact that it doesn't need an extreme cold chain means it's logistically much easier to handle.
passivate 6y ago
Because of their confidence (and the FDAs confidence) in their single-dose immunogenicity data, and also the fact that they ran trials in regions (brazil, SA, US) at times when new variants were prevalent.

neither_color 6y ago

I was holding out too but the opportunity to get Pfizer part 1 came up this week and I figured "this indefinite suspension could take months might as well get this out of the way now." Oh well. Im always wrong about these things. Either way in three more weeks I'll be done doing the "needful." No side effects for me besides my arm sore to the touch the day after, but not painful. Similar to the day after a weightlifting workout.

aaronbrethorst 6y ago
Same for me on Monday. Oh well.

decafninja 6y ago

I'm the opposite. I was sort of resigned to getting the J&J but was hoping for the Pfizer. My wife got an appointment before I did and did get the J&J. Then this clotting news happened, and I subsequently got my appointment - Pfizer. So I guess I got what I wanted. My wife is perfectly fine though, no side effects. If given the J&J vaccine, I would have taken it too.

GloriousKoji 6y ago

I was under the impression adenovirus based vaccines are worse in the long run because the adenovirus acts as a vehicle for the proteins we're immunizing against (coivd) and that immunity can also occur against the adenovirus rendering it useless as a vehicle for proteins in the future.

passivate 6y ago
Yes, there are certain strains that wouldn't work as vectors. HAd26 (used in J&J) has not shown reduced immunogenicity based on studies conducted. It was used in other vaccines previously, and that hasn't impacted its performance here. While it's not a problem now, the situation might change in the future, so you were right to ask the question. These issues of pre-existing immunity are taken seriously inside vaccine companies too. (Note that while I work in biotech, I'm not claiming to be an expert on this topic, so don't take these as definitive claims of truth. People shouldn't be taking HN comments as a source of any kind of medical advice anyway.)
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]