Originally Posted by
twowhat?
It's hard for people to not fixate on that number. Every scientist is trained, and trained again, and reminded constantly throughout their careers, to never make cross-trial comparisons. Differences between how studies were conducted, the patient population, how endpoints were measured, and a whole bunch of other things contribute to differences in results.
In the US, I think the number for J&J is actually 72% (efficacy = protection against moderate/severe disease). Moderna and Pfizer measured efficacy differently ("symptomatic infection", I think). Those are two VERY different measures of efficacy. Also remember that the J&J study was conducted during the time period of emerging variants. The difference in circulating virus pool alone could make a big impact on efficacy. If you consider that the J&J study enrolled patients with these variants and STILL came out ahead with an efficacy rate of 72% in the US, that's FANTASTIC. I guarantee you if the Moderna and Pfizer studies were done at the exact same time as the J&J study, the results would be different.
All that's to say...get the first vaccine offered to you!!! J&J is conducting a study to see if an added booster could boost their efficacy (and in theory, it totally would). Also remember that the J&J vaccine, in trials, offered 100% protection from severe disease 49 days after the single dose tested. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. During a time of circulating variants. That is FANTASTIC, y'all!!!!
eta: I get your concern - and it's why we have to continue mitigation strategies. No matter which vaccine you get, you're at risk of contracting asymptomatic or mild disease and we don't know enough about long-term effects. Even though I'm fully vaccinated, I sure as hell still don't want to catch it. Now, I think that being vaccinated gives you a leg up on long covid. This hasn't been proven, but it would make sense that a faster, stronger immune response that takes control of the virus early and prevents it from causing as much damage as a natural infection would also translate to less risk of long-term effects.
Thank you for this. I've read it before but it wasn't sinking in. You are completely correct about the efficacy numbers. I've had my first Pfizer so I'm locked in but DH is eligible as of today. He could likely get the J&J and I'm feeling better about it. I, too, am most afraid of long covid, not death so I truly hope the vaccines will decrease the likelihood.
Originally Posted by
carolinacool
My state will begin administering J&J today. At yesterday's press conference, the secretary of the state health department said she plans to receive J&J later this week and she's excited about the ease of it being one shot while still being very effective. It's clear she's being strategic about choosing that version and making a big announcement. Based on the press questions she and the governor were getting, a lot of people just don't want it, so state leaders are trying to change the narrative around it.
I'll be able to receive my vaccination at the end of the month, and if the J&J is the first one available to me, I think I'll take it.
I didn't watch the whole press conference and didn't realize she is getting the J&J this week. What a brilliant strategy and I hope other officials do the same. It could really help with J&J acceptance and prevent hold-outs for an mRNA vaccine.
Mom to Two Wild and Crazy Boys and One Sweet Baby Girl