Excargodog

No evidence yet that it is the antibody that is causing the clots. Could just be inflammation of the vessels from something else. We know that birth control pills increase risk which has never had anything to do with anti COVID antibodies.

And assuming it WAS antibody causing the clots, it’s hardly like these people won’t have antiCOVID antibodies after they do get infected - assuming they survive the infection.

but not all statistically significant events are reasons to stop doing something. A ten fold increase in the risk of something that has one chance in a million of killing you might be a totally acceptable price to pay for an 80% decrease in something with a 1% chance of killing you if you have no better options.

Mesabah

The delivery system of both types of vaccines are cleared by the liver within 24hrs. The only thing left over is the antibodies.

AYLflyer

Glad to see them taking things so seriously, and disappointing to see those who yesterday were praising the CDC and science now saying to just keep administering the vaccines even though an issue may have been found. I got my J&J shot a little over a week ago and am all for vaccines and science, but many people have been completely blinded by covid fear.

They must know more than they're letting on (I don't mean that in a conspiratorial way), hopefully it's just a speedbump.

rickair7777

So what? That doesn't mean any triggered effects don't continue to play out. That sort of thing can realistically take as long as a couple weeks to play out. Much after that, yeah nothing but immune system response and adverse effects from that will also show within a few weeks, so maybe a six week realistic window for adverse affects of any sort (based on science and extensive practical experience over many decades).

Also J&J's delivery system is a a viral vector... so you can actually have an immune response to THAT, in addition to the payload. Coincidentally (but by no means conclusive), AZ also uses a similar adenovirus viral vector delivery system.

Again, that's why I had a slight preference for mRNA... it's new but it's very precise and targeted, without a lot of biochem overhead. Sometimes progress is actually a *good* thing (cue the pitchfork toting mob now).


Modern is certain there are no observed bloood-clotting issues with their vaccine, and unless they're straight-up lying they should have enough data by now...

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyl...after-jj-pause

Mesabah

I think they are straight up lying about the blood clotting related to the vaccine. You would have to directly inject the vaccine into the blood stream, and it go to the brain. Coincidentally, this reaction is also the same as side effects caused by actual Covid.

Mesabah

Similar condition found in the mRNA vaccines. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/08/h...ine-blood.html

rickair7777

Similar??? That's not similar to blood clotting, quite the opposite in fact. The article is anecdotal and the incidence reported in the article is right about one in a million. At that rate, it's probably indistinguishable from background noise, and worst case it's still a lot safer than covid, or the risk of covid.

Mesabah

The J&J/AZ reaction is caused by, immune thrombocytopenia, same condition.

skywatch

Not aiming this at you Rick, but using your comment about anecdotal as the launching pad to note that I find it humorous that people will take some anecdotal stories about”long Covid” and spin that into a complete crisis, but dismiss some “anecdotal” blood clotting as not worth stopping vaccinations for.

Also Boiler, not sure I agree with your math from earlier - these vaccines could have undesirable side effects (autoimmune?) we won’t see for years, in addition to the immediate things like blood clotting and/or allergic reactions. And there have been estimates that up to five times as many people have had Covid as have simply tested positive for it, so while it may not change the CFR calculation enough for some, I do think it changes it.

BoilerUP

What are your specific disagreements? I cited the source of my information (CDC Data Tracker), you're free to check my work.

I will stipulate one error - there are no demographic statistics for what ages and genders took which specific vaccines. That being said, 54.8% of all people receiving COVID vaccine are women, so it is probably a reasonable assumption that 50% of J&J vaccine has gone to women aged 18-49. Accordingly, the 5500 times higher odds of dying from a confirmed positive COVID case than developing CVST from the Janssen vaccine is incorrect - its only 2750 times higher.

*could* is a speculative word.

CVST is the specific issue currently being discussed.

That is an absolutely valid point...but that doesn't change Case Fatality Ratio, it would change Infection Fatality Ratio. The current CDC figure is 4.6 estimated actual infections for every one reported confirmed positive case, making the 1.80% CFR an estimated 0.39% IFR. That figure, while important in the overall picture of the pandemic, doesn't materially change the MASSIVE delta in probability of a 18-49 year old woman developing CVST from the Janssen vaccine and dying from a confirmed COVID case.