Johnson & Johnson Vaccine is Put on Pause

fish82 said:
Clotting was one of the several side effects that showed up in the first clinical trial of the pill. It was known from the beginning. ?‍♂️
Click to expand...
If clotting was a side effect from the beginning, why would they distribute it knowing it wasn't completely safe. Were they hoping it wouldn't be noticed, or just that desperate to get a vaccine out?
 
Harrycrane said:
Control of what exactly? I mean old crazy uncles talk about comuter chips being put in the vaccine to track your every movment? Do you beleive this as well?
Click to expand...
Have you not been paying attention for the last year?
 
y2h said:
Have you not been paying attention for the last year?
Click to expand...

Yes , been hanging on your every word . You can learn a lot from guys like you and malignant narcissist's, pathological liars who were failed one term Presidents who once had full control of the house and senate at one time before losing control of both . I realize what YOU and YOUR kind have been paying attention to the last year . MAGA Winning .
 
Harrycrane said:
Yes , been hanging on your every word . You can learn a lot from guys like you and malignant narcissist's, pathological liars who were failed one term Presidents who once had full control of the house and senate at one time before losing control of both . I realize what YOU and YOUR kind have been paying attention to the last year . MAGA Winning .
Click to expand...
Always weaving something in about Trump...always on your mind.... :ROFLMAO:
 
Harrycrane said:
Yes , been hanging on your every word . You can learn a lot from guys like you and malignant narcissist's, pathological liars who were failed one term Presidents who once had full control of the house and senate at one time before losing control of both . I realize what YOU and YOUR kind have been paying attention to the last year . MAGA Winning .
Click to expand...
DRINK!

Been awhile.
 
90907C6E-BBBF-46D3-BCD6-C9ED6DAD2696.jpeg

i’ll post this here too
 
eastisbest said:
Birth control has decades of data. Covid vaccine, not so much. They put the "stick in the spokes" to give them time to see if they can find identifying causes amongst those clotting, whether it be 6 or 600, in order to better determine who can use it, rather than maybe have a much larger problem crop up with delays in the clotting. Also to see if corrective or preventative measures can be had to address any future issues.

What they did was not just a legal move, it was a smart scientific move.
Click to expand...

In this type of work there is a huge difference between 6 and 600.
 
If you compare the millions upon millions of women’s birth control pills that are taken and the occurrence of these pill causing clots you will notice that these pills have a 2000x more chance of giving a women clots then the J&J shot. More panic porn for the purpose of control.
 
The amount of people harmed by not getting the vaccine now and the amount of harm from the increase in vaccine hesitancy because of this pause will dwarf any side effect if it is even able to be linked.

The fundamental problem of the FDA (and many regulatory body) is that they only account for the seen and not the unseen. Approval of drugs is so risk averse that they focus on avoid side effects on a few far outweighs the cost of many that will suffer in that approval period. One life may be saved by the approval process is seen but the many lives lost in that interim approval period that could have been avoided are unseen.
 
Yorktown said:
If you compare the millions upon millions of women’s birth control pills that are taken and the occurrence of these pill causing clots you will notice that these pills have a 2000x more chance of giving a women clots then the J&J shot. More panic porn for the purpose of control.
Click to expand...
Or perhaps there is a correlation and the combo is an issue? My neighbor was rushed to ER by Ambulance after getting vaccinated- you guessed it, blood clot in lung. She was lucky and survived. The pause is to create a follow up dialogue at vaccine clinic and paper/ website info about blood clotting so people know what to look for. It’s the right move to protect your wives, sisters and daughters.
 
Tigers84 said:
If clotting was a side effect from the beginning, why would they distribute it knowing it wasn't completely safe. Were they hoping it wouldn't be noticed, or just that desperate to get a vaccine out?
Click to expand...

Most drugs have known side effects from the time they're approved and sold to the public. Just watch a typical drug commercial and at the end the narrator reads off a long list of potential side effects. How many times have you laughed and thought "there's no way I'm taking that drug"?
 
Tigers84 said:
If clotting was a side effect from the beginning, why would they distribute it knowing it wasn't completely safe. Were they hoping it wouldn't be noticed, or just that desperate to get a vaccine out?
Click to expand...
Are your serious? Have you never seen drug ads on TV? The list of known side effects should pretty much ensure that no one ever take the drugs.
 
fish82 said:
Clotting was one of the several side effects that showed up in the first clinical trial of the pill. It was known from the beginning. ?‍♂️
Click to expand...

Don't see a point here fish. It showed up in the clinical trial, they knew about it and had a measure of it. Plus, that was a different era and was nowhere near as under the microscope of the vaccine roll-out.

Did the clotting show up in the trials of the vaccine? If not, then that's why they suspended it. It was an unexpected result. Any product developer would put a hold status on something that could kill. Well, except auto industry so let's call it, most. I don't think suspending was a mistake or just about law suits. Its good science to at least give it a short pause to see if the problem can be isolated. If not, then they'll add another line to the disclaimer.
 
eastisbest said:
Don't see a point here fish. It showed up in the clinical trial, they knew about it and had a measure of it. Plus, that was a different era and was nowhere near as under the microscope of the vaccine roll-out.

Did the clotting show up in the trials of the vaccine? If not, then that's why they suspended it. It was an unexpected result. Any product developer would put a hold status on something that could kill. Well, except auto industry so let's call it, most. I don't think suspending was a mistake or just about law suits. Its good science to at least give it a short pause to see if the problem can be isolated. If not, then they'll add another line to the disclaimer.
Click to expand...
1 person in 7 million has died, right?
 
Hammerdrill said:
1 person in 7 million has died, right?
Click to expand...

No idea. And irrelevant.

Their presumption has to be it's a delayed response. The number affected needs some time to materialize. Besides, are you really for forcing companies to sell products if they see a potential problem? That people have a right to their product? Free? Where is the slippery slope thread? Or are you proposing the government pick up the legal tabs if there was an oversight?

It won't be long. It is needed. If they cannot isolate the problem or determine that there is not a linked problem; because of the low numbers affected it will just add to the disclaimer as several have already said.

Let them do the smart thing and stop pretending the pod masters and click baiters have a clue.
 
Let's just get this over with and all hide under our beds for all of eternity, or until Dr. "follow the science" tells us it's safe to come out.
 
eastisbest said:
No idea. And irrelevant.

Their presumption has to be it's a delayed response. The number affected needs some time to materialize. Besides, are you really for forcing companies to sell products if they see a potential problem? That people have a right to their product? Free? Where is the slippery slope thread? Or are you proposing the government pick up the legal tabs if there was an oversight?

It won't be long. It is needed. If they cannot isolate the problem or determine that there is not a linked problem; because of the low numbers affected it will just add to the disclaimer as several have already said.

Let them do the smart thing and stop pretending the pod masters and click baiters have a clue.
Click to expand...
I don't think 1 person in 7 million is significant, and it is absolutely relevant. No treatment is without risk. Surely you know this.
 
Hammerdrill said:
I don't think 1 person in 7 million is significant, and it is absolutely relevant. No treatment is without risk. Surely you know this.
Click to expand...

But you don't get a vote. ? That number is not relevant to the process. All that matters is what the researchers decide. If this was not a predicted problem based upon the clinicals then they would want to either rule out a connection or determine a connection. Why would you have a problem with that? It's their research, their product, their decision, right?

As almost anyone on the research and develpment side of a product (or readers of Dilbert) will tell you, it's almost a miracle to get the front-office money-men to listen if there's a concern. This may be a miracle in the making. lol
 
eastisbest said:
But you don't get a vote. ? That number is not relevant to the process. All that matters is what the researchers decide. If this was not a predicted problem based upon the clinicals then they would want to either rule out a connection or determine a connection. Why would you have a problem with that? It's their research, their product, their decision, right?
Click to expand...
Why do I have a problem? because it makes no sense. LOL, and who said I got a vote? What an odd thing to say. And the FDA decided for them, J&J didn't decide this.
 
eastisbest said:
Don't see a point here fish. It showed up in the clinical trial, they knew about it and had a measure of it.
Click to expand...

Yes, it showed up with a 1000x higher occurrence than the current J&J. And yet, the drug was approved for use, since even that elevated risk was deemed acceptable. Thats's the point...our risk/benefit tolerance has shifted to the point of arguably dangerous.

eastisbest said:
Plus, that was a different era and was nowhere near as under the microscope of the vaccine roll-out.
Click to expand...

The era has nothing to do with it. And I'm not sure how you get to "nowhere near as under the microscope" for a vaccine that was brought to market in 7 months. ?‍♂️

eastisbest said:
Did the clotting show up in the trials of the vaccine? If not, then that's why they suspended it. It was an unexpected result.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine it did not, considering the occurrence stands at 1/1,133,333. Even if it did, it would have been dismissed at that level as inconsequential, and likely not even mentioned.

eastisbest said:
Any product developer would put a hold status on something that could kill. Well, except auto industry so let's call it, most.
Click to expand...

I think we both know that's not true lol.

eastisbest said:
I don't think suspending was a mistake or just about law suits. Its good science to at least give it a short pause to see if the problem can be isolated. If not, then they'll add another line to the disclaimer.
Click to expand...

It's not good science to suddenly shift the risk tolerance level so sharply...especially in a case where the effect occurs 1000 times less frequently than commonly used drugs, and almost 2000 times less frequently than natural occurrence.

The odds of clotting from the vaccine currently stand at 1/1,133,133. Conversely, the odds of the same clotting occurring in those hospitalized with COVID are about 1 in 5. The math clearly shows that the "pause" will likely cost more lives than it "saves."

The sciencing is simply not great here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top