Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine

[jeremyrh]

A useful video that might help people understand what vaccine efficacy numbers mean and what they don't mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3odScka55A

[Alan Klein]

A useful video that might help people understand what vaccine efficacy numbers mean and what they don't mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3odScka55A

The video does not support that J&J and other vaccines with lower efficacy rates are just as good.  In fact, they support a position that they don't know how good they really are for the normal Covid 19 we have in the USA. This is so because the test for J&J was made in South Africa and other areas where a variant was spreading.  Since Moderna and Pfizer were not tested there, the video claims we don't know how effective they would against the variants.  Of course, that works both ways.  So J&J's effectiveness means little in the USA since it wasn't tested against Covid 19 that predominates in the USA.  So why would you take J&J when you don't really know how effective it is in America?

The other argument the video made is that all vaccines seem to reach 100% effectiveness for suffering less and living should you get it and go to the hospital.  The point they're stressing the herd immunity overall and not the individual.  Again, from a personal standpoint, this still makes Moderna and Pfizer more effective since it has a supposed higher rate of immunity against getting it in the first place.  I'd rather not get infected than be assured that should I get infected because I'm using J&J, I won't die but still need hospitalization.

The whole video seems to be political in trying to get J&J and other less effective vaccines accepted from an overall population standpoint.  I understand that might be true.  But still, from a personal standpoint, in America, you'd want to take the ones that have the higher effectiveness especially because they were the ones tested against Covid 19 and J&J wasn't.

[jeremyrh]

The whole video seems to be political in trying to get J&J and other less effective vaccines accepted from an overall population standpoint. 

It's not remotely political, it's simply explaining what the efficacy numbers are and how they were obtained.

[Alan Klein]

It's not remotely political, it's simply explaining what the efficacy numbers are and how they were obtained.

Who produced the video and why?  When you click on the link there titled Learn More, you go to the CDC website who has taken a political position that all vaccines are equal.  That's false.

To me, it seems they were trying to convince people J&J is just as effective.  For the people who didn't listen to what they really were saying, it seems that way.  But their statements actually prove the opposite or at a minimum, do not prove its effectiveness in America one way or the other because they didn't test it much on the American common strain but rather on a foreign variant. 

[jeremyrh]

Who produced the video and why?  When you click on the link there titled Learn More, you go to the CDC website who has taken a political position that all vaccines are equal.  That's false.

To me, it seems they were trying to convince people J&J is just as effective.  For the people who didn't listen to what they really were saying, it seems that way.  But their statements actually prove the opposite or at a minimum, do not prove its effectiveness in America one way or the other because they didn't test it much on the American common strain but rather on a foreign variant.

You are talking nonsense. Any information that doesn't fit in with your understanding or prejudice you just brush off as "political". Maybe the change in menu at your local burger joint to replace chili sauce with bbq is "political" too. Take off your paranoid glasses and try to assess information on its merits. 

What is said that the numbers quoted for "efficacy" can't be compared like for like. The numbers don't say that the J&J (or AZ) vaccine is as good as Pfizer, but they don't say that it's worse. What they say is that under specific circumstances (very high infection rates, Brazil and SA variants) it gives a good level of protection. Would Pfizer have worked better in that case? - we can't say (I hope it would, cos that's the jab I had). How the different vaccines work in future, with a different background infection level, and a different variant, remains to be seen - in ny case much better than having no vaccine at all.

[Robert Roaldi]

The video does not support that J&J and other vaccines with lower efficacy rates are just as good.  In fact, they support a position that they don't know how good they really are for the normal Covid 19 we have in the USA. This is so because the test for J&J was made in South Africa and other areas where a variant was spreading.  Since Moderna and Pfizer were not tested there, the video claims we don't know how effective they would against the variants.  Of course, that works both ways.  So J&J's effectiveness means little in the USA since it wasn't tested against Covid 19 that predominates in the USA.  So why would you take J&J when you don't really know how effective it is in America?

The other argument the video made is that all vaccines seem to reach 100% effectiveness for suffering less and living should you get it and go to the hospital.  The point they're stressing the herd immunity overall and not the individual.  Again, from a personal standpoint, this still makes Moderna and Pfizer more effective since it has a supposed higher rate of immunity against getting it in the first place.  I'd rather not get infected than be assured that should I get infected because I'm using J&J, I won't die but still need hospitalization.

The whole video seems to be political in trying to get J&J and other less effective vaccines accepted from an overall population standpoint.  I understand that might be true.  But still, from a personal standpoint, in America, you'd want to take the ones that have the higher effectiveness especially because they were the ones tested against Covid 19 and J&J wasn't.

Complete nonsense.

[TechTalk]

J&J's effectiveness means little in the USA since it wasn't tested against Covid 19 that predominates in the USA.

100% false. The J&J vaccine clinical trials were conducted in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru, South Africa, and the United States.

COVID-19 variants circulate faster than samples can be collected and sequenced and proportions vary by state. In California variants are the dominate proportion. Florida and Illinois have all of the CDC Variants of Concern from the UK, California, South Africa, and Brazil circulating. New Jersey has the UK and California variants. In Nevada over 44% of recent samples are variants. The relative proportion of variants currently circulating throughout the U.S. is uncertain, but what is known is that more emerge over time and spread throughout the country.

[Alan Klein]

Others can watch the video and draw their own conclusions. Then they can chose J&J if they agree with you and Moderna or Pfizer if they agree with me. Simple.

[TechTalk]

Others can watch the video and draw their own conclusions.

... which will provide a vastly more accurate picture than the one you paint.

[jeremyrh]

Others can watch the video and draw their own conclusions. Then they can chose J&J if they agree with you and Moderna or Pfizer if they agree with me. Simple.

That would be worrying if I thought anyone was dumb enough to take your medical advice.

[TechTalk]

I seem to recall clearly how many democrats for political reasons before the election put down "Trump's vaccine" telling the world how they wouldn't take it.

I seem to remember you claiming this before and failing to substantiate it when you were challenged. Got any more this time around?

Democrats face quandary on vaccine support as election nears
President Donald Trump is escalating his promise for a coronavirus vaccine before Election Day.

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-virus-outbreak-elections-public-health-archive-8790eda23e94aec7cf7b4beaaa67ceaf

Please tell us what in the article that you linked confirms your false assertion that "democrats for political reasons" told "the world how they wouldn't take" "Trump's vaccine". I'll save you some time... absolutely nothing.

The pushback was against Trump claims, "for political reasons", that vaccines could start shipping before election day and the distrust expressed was in regard to what Trump was saying. The basic message to the public was to trust what the science and scientists say regarding vaccines, not Trump.

[Alan Klein]

Please tell us what in the article that you linked confirms your false assertion that "democrats for political reasons" told "the world how they wouldn't take" "Trump's vaccine". I'll save you some time... absolutely nothing.

The push back was against Trump claims that vaccines could start shipping before election day and the distrust expressed was in regard to what Trump was saying—NOT the vaccines, which hadn't completed their FDA evaluation or received authorization for use.

You deliberately clipped out the part of my response that refuted your point. Let me repeat it here.  and the fact is he did release effetive vaccines in time.  Democrats were claiming it couldn't be done in two years, maybe by Spring when the fact is 20,000,000 shots were given befor Biden became president.

But across America, Democrats, independents and even some Republicans do not trust his administration to produce a safe and effective vaccine on such an aggressive timeline. Such hesitancy threatens to exacerbate the public health risk for millions of Americans whenever a vaccine is released.

With the Nov. 3 election fast approaching, Democratic officials face a delicate political challenge.

Should they attack Trump’s vaccine claims too aggressively, Democrats risk further undermining public confidence in a possible lifesaving medicine while looking as though they are rooting against a potential cure. But if they don’t push back, it makes it easier for Trump to use the real or imagined prospect of a vaccine to boost his reelection campaign.

[TechTalk]

You deliberately...

Enough with the smoke and mirrors. Cut to the chase. Where does the article you cite quote Democrats saying they won't take a vaccine? That's your specific accusation.

[TechTalk]

J&J plant authorization clears way for big boost in U.S. COVID-19 shots

Reuters - March 23, 2021

https://www.reuters.com/article/J&J plant authorization clears way for big boost in U.S. COVID-19 shots

A large plant being used to manufacture Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine was cleared by U.S. regulators on Tuesday, setting the stage for the weekly U.S. supply to surge more then 20 percent.

About 27 million COVID-19 vaccine doses will be allocated to U.S. states and other localities this week, including 4 million from J&J, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters. That is the largest allocation yet, up from 22 million last week.

Earlier, the Indiana plant at which Catalent Inc is helping to manufacture the J&J vaccine received U.S. regulatory authorization, the companies said.

J&J’s shipments had slowed considerably since the first week of the month, but the new authorization will enable it to ship out millions of doses.

J&J tapped contract manufacturers Catalent and Emergent BioSolutions Inc to scale up production and meet its global supply targets. Catalent provides the final stage - called fill and finish - while Emergent makes the drug substance.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized the one-shot J&J vaccine in February, but only for its production facility in the Netherlands and a small fill-and-finish plant in the United States.

[jeremyrh]

Slobo - interested in your "insider's take" on this new item:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/25/i-am-begging-you-get-the-vaccine-pockets-of-fear-emerge-in-serbia

[sf]

Kudos to those who have posted in this topic.
It is both informative and civil.

Didn't last, did it?

S

[sf]

The necessity for people to use real names seems to have been considered here: https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=131904.msg1131072#new. I don't see you swearing at TechTalk or jeremyrh (who even uses a stolen comedian's photograph).

I see jeremyrh has changed his avatar.

S

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Slobo - interested in your "insider's take" on this new item:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/25/i-am-begging-you-get-the-vaccine-pockets-of-fear-emerge-in-serbia

Typical for today's journalism (or any journalism). If there is a good news, ignore it and search for the bad one. Those sell the papers. Of course we have pockets of anti vaccers, every country does. But you do not become #2 in Europe and #3-4 in the world if that would be a dominant factor.

 

[Michael West]

Don't kids sit closer than 3 feet?  I don't see how that changes anything.

The CDC had to "say" something to justify their existence. 

[LesPalenik]

So, it looks like 200 million shots will be administered in the first 100 days of Biden's presidency.
Under promised and over delivered, unlike many things over promised and under delivered under the previous president.