-Kris
DS (9/05)
DD (8/08)
DD (9/12)
J&J is saying that they are hopeful their final results will put them at the same rough efficacy as Pfizer and Moderna, so above the 80% expected.
If that turns out to be the case, then I would want J&J, as you would achieve that full level of protection of the one shot. Versus the only partial protection of the first Pfizer/Modern shot, while waiting weeks for the full protection with the second shot.
Regardless, I would, of course, take any shot available.
I have multiple family members in healthcare (doctors and administrative), and all have received the vaccine. All but one of my 70+ relatives have received the vaccine, and most of the 65+. 70 was the age requirement here, 65 the age requirement in the next state, which is like 30 minutes away. They have mainly gotten the Pfizer.
The only elderly relative who has not received the shot is totally housebound, with full-time home caregivers. There is no infrastructure for delivering shots at home (and her doctor does make housecalls, and would do so to deliver the shot, if allowed), and no plans have been made for the infirm outside of facilities. Definitely a large oversight, but I have hopes some of these oversights will be addressed with a new administration who actually plans to (gasp!) do something.
#BidenHarris2020 “It’s easier to be a parent this morning. It’s easier to be a dad. It’s easier to tell your kids character matters. It matters. Telling the truth matters. Being a good person matters.”
There was an article in the LA Times today that it is going to take until June to vaccinate every one 65 and over, thus pushing all of the other categories back. Their hope is vaccine production speeds up, but almost all of the next shipment that the city is receiving is allotted to give the health care workers their second dose. It’s a huge mess here!
The logistics are part of the reason I'm looking at the J&J. If the same amount of production would protect twice as many people (only one dose needed), that would seem to be the way to go.
I'm the first to admit I'd like to learn more... but the new tech of these vaccines scare me. I just don't think we have enough time under them to show long-term effects. And, of course, that the government has shielded the manufactures for lawsuit over side effects only makes me more frightened. Why would that be needed if the vaccine was tested well enough? The country is planning to vaccinate millions and millions of people with a vaccine that did not exist a year ago. Who knows what will happen in ten years? Twenty? Cancers, immune issues, fertility problems? Not to mention putting it into developing bodies of children.
My understanding is that the J&J vaccine, while still new, has a similar approach as the Ebola vaccine that has been out for several years (in limited use, but longer timeline). Mostly, I think, it is the lack of time at concerns me.
I welcome links to information from reliable sources - please help talk me down!
Isn’t J&J currently looking at two shots to match the protection of Moderna and Pfizer?
Weigh your long term concerns against the known info they have *now* on the damage even mild Covid can do to major organs like lungs, heart, brain. I think we are going to see folks with long term disabilities from this, physical and mental both. Lungs scarred from Covid inflammation- what could that do to cancer risk? Or risk of heart attack in someone previously healthy? I’ll take vaccine risks over those.
With Johnson and Johnson's results now out, and their vaccine having significantly lower efficacy than the other two, I would prefer one of the others (though, as mentioned, would still take any).
I also recently read that Moderna's efficacy goes down to 86% for people over 65, while Pfizer's is 94%. So I am VERY happy that most of my older relatives have gotten Pfizer.
#BidenHarris2020 “It’s easier to be a parent this morning. It’s easier to be a dad. It’s easier to tell your kids character matters. It matters. Telling the truth matters. Being a good person matters.”