Posted on 03/04/2021 8:49:36 PM PST by SeekAndFind
This week, health care providers began administering the first doses of Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine in the U.S. — the third vaccine authorized by the Food and Drug Administration to help stop the coronavirus pandemic.
That's welcome news in a country that still faces high levels of circulating virus in most regions, and a demand for vaccine that still far outstrips supply.
The J&J vaccine has some significant advantages, health officials say. Unlike the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, it can be stored for up to three months at regular refrigerator temperatures, so it's easier to distribute to more places. And you're fully vaccinated after just one dose — a welcome convenience for many recipients who dread the two-shot regimen of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines.
Dr. Leana Wen, an emergency physician and professor at George Washington University, says that's a big plus for the J&J vaccine.
"If there are individuals who may not like needles, who may have concerns about returning for a second shot, who may not want the inconvenience of scheduling a second appointment, or who may be concerned that there isn't enough supply of the vaccine at the moment for a second shot — for those individuals, that convenience of being done [after one dose], fully vaccinated, is really important," Wen says.
Still, the J&J vaccine is a little different from the others. Here's what you need to know.
How does the Johnson & Johnson vaccine work?
The J&J shot is based on a different technology than the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. Those use mRNA, or messenger RNA, to deliver bits of genetic code to cells. This code serves as a sort of instruction sheet — telling cells how to make a harmless piece of the spike protein that sticks out of the surface of the coronavirus. The immune system then learns to recognize the spike protein and fight it.
The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, by contrast, is what's known as a viral vector vaccine — the same technology that's been proven safe and effective in creating an Ebola vaccine and others currently in the works. Basically, Johnson & Johnson started with an adenovirus, which causes the common cold, and inactivated it so it can't make anybody sick. They then used this harmless cold virus to deliver the genetic blueprint of the protein spike to cells, so the immune system will learn to recognize that spike when it runs into the coronavirus.
To be clear, the J&J vaccine "can't give you the cold virus, and it definitely cannot give you COVID," says Dr. Cassandra Pierre, an infectious disease specialist and acting hospital epidemiologist at Boston Medical Center.
Who should get the J&J vaccine?
The vaccine is authorized for people age 18 and older.
How long does it take for protection to kick in?
With all three vaccines, immunity builds over a few weeks after immunization. Data from Johnson & Johnson show that most vaccinated trial participants had a robust immune response 15 days after getting the shot, with significant protection reached by day 29.
Will I be as well protected against getting super sick with COVID-19 if I get the J&J shot as if I get a two-dose version from Pfizer or Moderna?
"When we look at the thing we probably care about most — making sure that we don't end up in the ICU or dying — the efficacy of the three vaccines is virtually identical," says Dr. Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, chair of the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco.
The perception that some vaccines may be better than others has to do with the topline numbers from efficacy studies. The mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna were both found to be about 95% effective against preventing symptomatic COVID-19 after the second dose. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, by contrast, was found to be 66% protective against moderate and severe disease overall worldwide, and 72% protective against such cases in the U.S.
But you can't really compare those numbers head to head, says Pierre, because "these were different trials in different places at different times," and the strains of the coronavirus running around were likely somewhat different. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was tested more recently, including in South Africa and Brazil, at a time when more contagious variants of the coronavirus were widely circulating in those countries. The Moderna and Pfizer clinical studies, meanwhile, were started earlier, before such variants had become widespread.
Given those differences, Bibbins-Domingo says "the number you should probably compare is 85%" — that's how effective the J & J vaccine was found to be at preventing severe disease four weeks after immunization.
Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, agrees that the J&J vaccine seems to be "terrific" at saving lives. He tells NPR he's advising his family members to take whichever vaccine comes their way first.
Which vaccine offers the best protection against the worrisome coronavirus variants?
We can't compare the vaccines head to head on this question, Pierre says, because the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines haven't been subjected to rigorous clinical trials in places where these variants are widespread. But we can say that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine performs well against the variants first detected in Brazil and South Africa, because it was tested in both countries at a time when the variants were already rampant there. And in both countries, the J&J vaccine was still shown to be highly effective against severe disease, according to an analysis posted by the FDA.
"What we see is that we still have good efficacy with this vaccine regardless — even in these areas where the variants were highly prevalent," Pierre says. "And I think that's really a fire-tested way to say that this particular vaccine is unequivocally good." She notes that preliminary data also suggest the J&J vaccine might offer protection against asymptomatic infection.
Why shouldn't I just hold out for the vaccine with the highest efficacy rate?
Get whichever vaccine you can as soon as you're eligible, Pierre, Jha and other infectious disease experts urge. The longer you go unvaccinated, the longer you're at risk of contracting a COVID-19 infection that potentially could kill you.
"I view it as a race against time," Pierre says, based on the data and her own experience with her mom. Pierre scrambled to schedule an immunization appointment for her mother as soon as the older woman became eligible. But before she could get immunized, she was diagnosed with COVID-19.
Pierre's mom recovered from that infection, but more than 500,000 other Americans have not been so fortunate.
Any particular safety or efficacy concerns that people with underlying conditions should worry about with the J&J vaccine?
The CDC says any of the three COVID-19 vaccines authorized for use in the U.S. can be given to people with underlying medical conditions, as long as they don't have contraindications, such as a history of severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of a vaccine or any of its components.
Medical specialists who care for people with diabetes, cancer, coronary artery disease or other conditions that put them at increased risk of severe disease if they get COVID-19 are encouraging their patients to get vaccinated.
The guidance for anyone pregnant or breastfeeding is more nuanced: The CDC and groups such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists say all three vaccines should be made available to those who are pregnant, but they leave the choice about whether to get vaccinated up to each individual. That's because pregnant people were excluded from the initial clinical trials for all three vaccines, so there's no firm direct evidence yet on how the vaccine will perform in this group.
That said, taking into account work with other vaccines and animal data, the CDC says that "based on current knowledge, experts believe that COVID-19 vaccines are unlikely to pose a risk to the pregnant person or fetus." Meanwhile, getting COVID-19 can pose a significant risk: Research from the past year has shown that those who are pregnant are at higher risk of a severe case of the disease if they get infected.
Pfizer has recently started a large trial of its vaccine among those who are pregnant, and J & J says it also has plans for such a trial, so more direct evidence about efficacy in that group is on the way.
Though it's not yet known whether the COVID-19 vaccines will be as effective among patients who are immunocompromised as they are in other people, the vaccines are safe for that group, and "it is recommended that people who are immunocompromised can get this vaccine," says Dr. Kathleen Mullane of the University of Chicago School of Medicine. She's an expert in the treatment of infections in immunocompromised patients — such as organ transplant recipients — and served as an investigator in clinical trials for both the Moderna and Johnson and Johnson vaccines.
Mullane advises that no matter which COVID-19 vaccine an immunocompromised patient signs up for, they should talk to their doctor ahead of time. There's a chance their doctor may adjust the patient's usual medication or treatment schedule ahead of the shot in order to boost the vaccine's effectiveness. Your own medical team knows your situation best, and is your best guide in this case, Mullane says.
What kind of side effects should I expect with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine?
Just as with the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, the most common side effects are pain and redness at the site of injection, chills, headaches, nausea, body aches, fatigue and fever for a day or two. But many people who get these vaccines don't experience any side effects. If you do feel achy or feverish after the shot, it's fine to take a painkiller like Tylenol or ibuprofen, but don't take it beforehand — that might blunt the immune response, Pierre says.
Side effects tend to be more common in young people because they have more robust immune systems, so it's just a sign that the vaccine is doing its job, Bibbins-Domingo notes. If you don't experience side effects, don't worry either, she says — there are plenty of vaccines "where the most you might feel is a little bit sore at the injection site."
As with any of the COVID-19 vaccines, there is a remote chance that you could experience a severe allergic reaction, according to the FDA; this would most likely occur within a few minutes to an hour after getting the shot. That's why vaccinators ask people to stick around for 15 or 30 minutes after getting the shot so they can be monitored and treated if that extremely rare event happens.
But all the experts NPR spoke with say the bottom line is that all three vaccines the FDA has authorized for used against COVID-19 are safe and highly effective. "I would choose any of the three," Pierre says, "because I know that they will work and they will protect me and they will protect my family."
As Wen says, "We also want to put an end to this pandemic as soon as we can. And that means getting some level of immunity into as many people as possible and as quickly as possible."
NPR's Selena Simmons-Duffin contributed reporting to this story.
This group of experimental gene therapy injections does not meet the CDC's definition of vaccines. You can still be infected and transmit the illness to others. Why are they calling it a vaccine?
LOLOL!!!
“Why are they calling it a vaccine”
Why do they call a congressman honorable?
Why do they call a congressman honorable?
Well played, Sir. Well played.
As with any of the COVID-19 vaccines, there is a remote chance that you could experience a severe allergic reaction....
No thanks!
Why even risk or bother for something with a 98% survivability?
They are doing a lot of dancing to try to say this number doesn't really matter. If the number is accurate, then for every 20 unvaccinated getting ill there would be 1 on the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine getting ill or 6-7 on J&J. I'll take the one where I have 1/6 the chance of illness if I have a choice.
Granting of Emergency Use Authorization for the wuhan virus vaccines means that the agency doing the authorization does not recognize and allow non-vaccine medications- therapeutics- such as ivermectin or HCQ + azithro + zinc.
I would trust what someone who stands to make a lot of money off what they are trying to sell me?
Like I’d trust a used car salesman.
And the pharm companies are exempt from liability from damages incurred from use of their *vaccine*.
I have a question: who do you trust the most to stick a needle in you?
Big Pharma
The CDC
WHO
The Biden Administration
Anthony Fauci
Woody Woodpecker
The big question: Does the J&J vaccine use an adjuvent? Adjuvnets are some nasty chemicals that stimulate the immune response to the actual vaccine antigen.
What are these nasty adjuvent chemicals? The aluminum salts in some U.S. licensed vaccines are aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, alum (potassium aluminum sulfate), or mixed aluminum salts.
The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, by contrast, is what’s known as a viral vector vaccine — the same technology that’s been proven safe and effective in creating an Ebola vaccine and others currently in the works. Basically, Johnson & Johnson started with an adenovirus, which causes the common cold, and inactivated it so it can’t make anybody sick. They then used this harmless cold virus to deliver the genetic blueprint of the protein spike to cells, so the immune system will learn to recognize that spike when it runs into the coronavirus.
Overall survivor stats. In one’s 80’s survivorbility drops to high 70-80%
Medical people are concerned that the spike protein produced for the general viral group, and not specifically for the Covid-19 virus will produce an "overwhelming" immune response, risk long term inflammation issues and autoimmune illnessnes, not of this tested.
IN CNN's report, they speak about an "overwhelming immune response" like that's always a good thing, when they know that ADE (excessive response) is a risk to health/survival. They know that the spoke protein the so-called vaccine produces is different from the one the body would naturally produce if exposed to Covid-19, and they don't know how those differences will impact health. They don't know what else would trigger those spike proteins, and if the response will be excessive.
"Luckily, all three appear to stimulate an overwhelming immune response -- one much stronger than people get after a natural infection. So far, it appears to be enough to continue at least partially protecting people from the most concerning variants."
Coronavirus vaccines: How J&J's is different from the others - CNN
It's smoke and mirrors. If the effort behind the vaccination program were sincere, the medical community would not be withholding effective treatments like HCQ and others to force people to get the vaccine. It's not even a vaccine in that none are claimed to prevent infection or illness, but it is hoped they will reduce illness.
~~~~~~~~~~~
The J&J vaccine used a process SIMILAR to their Ebola virus, but not the same. Both J&J and Astrazenica use a viral vector and there are physicians who are deeply concerned about this technique. It's never been successfully done (Ebola is similar but not the same) and for this reason, they haven' t been able to produce other much needed vaccines.
Here's an excerpt of a computer generated transcript (so typos and no punctuation) of a dr. talking about this viral vector technique as it applies to Astrazenica (and J&J is also viral Vector).
i mean it’s it’s it’s interesting maybe
that we can
use that virus technology particularly
to uh maybe put an insulin gene into a
diabetic that isn’t producing insulin
so i mean that technology is being
played with in other sectors
um but any time that
cells have been con
conjured have been told to conjure up a
foreign
viral protein and express it on its
native cell that’s never
actually prevented the disease despite
the fact that it did produce
some immune response now that doesn’t
make sense
to some but it we’re missing a piece we
don’t have the technology figured out
yet
so the technology doesn’t work main
reason
He notes the testing indicates an "immune response" and that can be underwhelming (not protective) or overwhelming (auto immune or inflammatory) or just right, but they haven't mastered the technology.
He has a section wherein he discusses the threat Astrazenica vaccine poses to all persons, whether vaccinated or not. Too complex to describe but basically, the combinations of Astrazenica (similar to J&J vaccine viral vector) with common viruses found in broad popuations can result in a combination of a new, novel virus with the stealth of Covid-19 virus (not recognized easily by the body) and the unfamiliarity of the vector - the body would not recognize it as a threat, would not know how to respond to it. This coudl then be shared among persons both vaccinated and not, none prepared to deal with the resulting combination.
Setting asside the complexities of the experts, there are safe treatments instead of vaccines. The survival rate is 99.6 or 99.8 range. Why be a lab rat when safe treatments are available? Why start down the path of becoming medically dependent on the newest/next rushed vaccine, boosters etc, they are already claiming that we'll need more for variations of the virus or that the current vaccines were not designed for the variations. Why is this so different from human history until now? They want us on a medical drip line afraid to leave home unless we've gotten the latest experimental gene therapy and are double masked. Why are they treating this illness like it's worse than Ebola? We have an immune system, but we're just supposed to switch to reliance on vaccines and shut down natural immunity. The only reason they are calling these experimental gene therapies "vaccines" is because the vaccine companies are immune from the damage their products do.
They're saying they'll deny us our constitutional rights to assemble, they'll keep our economy shut down, keep our kids in isolation, if we don't obey and take their vaccine. Does that sound right?
I’m saving that image!
Overall survivor stats. In one’s 80’s survivorbility drops to high 70-80%
Does this include those (in the 80++ age group) who were in, or sent to, nursing homes and NOT given early, effective treatments?
What % of those, in this age group who died from horrid China virus, were NOT given EARLY, effective treatments?
Perfect!!
Careful, now.....you’ll soon get the f-💣 thrown at you by the experimental, unproven agent pushers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.