FDA limits use of Johnson & Johnson’s Covid-19 vaccine, citing clotting risk

  1. Antivaxxers don't give a shit anymore. Scientist don't give a shit anymore, everyone for themself. Big tech and sleazy journalists in bed with gates, anyone who tried to question the profit margin was labeled, etc. They should all go to prison and stop selling out humanity.

  2. Feel like this should be more talked about, but not in a “GOTCHA” type of way that both sides like to use. More as in awareness.

  3. More information is always better; as a consumer I like to be informed. Such a difference to see an American drug ad where half of it is potential side effects but then a short turn around vaccine isn’t really supposed to have its side effects talked about. I understand the greater good of wrangling a pandemic and glad they didn’t sit on this for the 50-75 years or whatever.

  4. I don't think this should be seen as a big gotcha or a game changer in the vaxxer/anti-vaxxer argument. It's a known fact that NEW vaccines can occasionally have unforeseeable side effects. This really dangerous side effect was so rare that the pattern of blood-clotting only became noticeable after millions of people took the J&J vaccine. So of course it didn't show up in the clinical trials! Side effects THIS rare won't manifest in clinical trials consisting of thousands of people. To spot the problem, the vaccine would have had to have been tested on millions of people prior to deployment. Clinical trials on that scale simply aren't realistic. Fortunately, clinical trials large enough to screen out all common side effects are conducted. And this is why, in the first few months of a new vaccine's deployment, it is subjected to enhanced safety monitoring - organizations like the CDC go over hospital data looking for any worrisome patterns so they can pull the vaccine off the market if necessary. You don't do this with older established vaccines because they've been around long enough to show us all their possible side effects.

  5. Issue is, there are people who understand science. In science, you constantly accumulate information and adjust your course of action based on this. In a time of needing to quickly execute a vaccine, not surprising you see something like this.

  6. Is this post shadow banned? It's major news and barely has traction compared to others posted after it. Posts about potential issues with the vaccines seem to always gets pushed down or deleted.

  7. I think it just isn't that much news. We knew that J&J had clotting issues. The number of people who got the J&J was much lower than the mRNA vaccines, both because the manufacturing shut down, the reported clotting issues, and the relative lack of efficacy (which led to medical advice that those who got it should come back and get Pfizer or Moderna). So, it makes sense to stick with the mRNA vaccines.

  8. What is there to say? The few of us who got J&J early on already went through all the thoughts when it got pulled off the market to investigate blood clots the first time, and have lived with many months of stories about how much less effective it is than mRNA vaccines. By this point most people who would get vaxxed are already there, no one is busting down doors to get the J&J vaccine. It's not exactly breaking news, you know?

  9. i don’t think this is very newsworthy. the only story here is that the FDA moved 1 year more slowly than most european countries. we knew about this issues literally 1 year ago

  10. Got the J&J last year and just recently got the Moderna booster. Luckily the article did state you’re most “at risk” 1-2 weeks after getting the shot.

  11. How long does the risk last? Like, if you get the vaccine and haven’t gotten a clot in 24 hours, are you good? A week? Three months? A year? Forever? Forever-ever??

  12. I didn't see anything talking about what specifically in the vaccine was causing the TTS. Is there a specific chemical used in the vaccine that causes inflammation which then increases the chance of clotting? Or is a chemical causing clotting itself to occur independently of arteries? Or something else?

  13. So the commonality between the J&J shot and the AstraZeneca shot is obviously the technology. It’s old now, with a deactivated virus using the same proteins as the new virus tacked on to it. AZ had some reports of blood clots as well especially in women for some reason. Probably something to do with the adjuvants not present in the nanolipid delivery vehicle the mRNA shots use. Really glad I got Pfizer.

  14. I was originally supposed to get J&J last April as my vaccine, but I woke up the day of my appointment to the news blowing up because the FDA had paused its usage and texts/calls from friends and family telling me not to get it. I remember at the time the FDA was getting a lot of criticism for what people felt was inciting fear over a small risk (especially when the risk of blood clots from a covid infection unvaccinated was much higher) and shaking the faith in vaccines of those who were hesitant/on the fence. Interesting that they are making this call now, though I understand the reasoning.

  15. You make it sound like “conspiracy theorists” were the ones who uncovered it can cause blood clots, or the only ones saying it. Nobody ever denied that there’s a chance of blood clots. Same with AstraZeneca.

  16. No-one expected the vaccines to be 100% side-effect free, just like no-one expected the vaccines to be 100% effective against COVID. There aren't really any vaccines, or medicines for that matter, that work in that way. But they're still the best protection we've got 🤷🏼

  17. Wow no way 🥸🥸🥸 lmao not like everyone was censored and called science deniers if we called these vaccines out… now all of you will deal with the consequences ( eventually, when they either leak or release data of what’s actually occurring)

  18. Scary, but I'm still glad I got the vaccine so far I haven't had covid... So yeah all Good I guess. I'm glad they are continuing the research are improving with the new information and are sharing it with the public. There are too many government entities who think it's best to keep things hushed up.

  19. If anyone thought there was zero risk at taking any vaccine you’re a damn fool. Small or not still a risk

  20. Anyone who overemphasised and exaggerated the risk is more foolish, there's no choice to live your life avoiding every risk so most people are happy to settle for the least risky option.

  21. Three cases per million doses. Almost 20 million doses, 60 cases of reported issues, 9 deaths. Compare that to the risk of issues due to covid, or death due to covid.

  22. It is a shame that the one time vaccines haven't worked out. 3 deaths per million seems like low odds but when there are better options it is clear that is unacceptable.

  23. Somehow this is still sooooo much less scary to me than the idea of my DNA interacting with mRNA that wasn't created using the nucleotide sequence of my DNA(like all of the other mRNA that any DNA in human history has ever interacted with).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin