The blood-clot problem is multiplying

‘Whether the blood issues are ultimately linked to only one vaccine, or two vaccines, or more, it’s absolutely crucial to remember the unrelenting death toll from the coronavirus itself—and the fact that COVID-19 can set off its own chaos in the circulatory system, with blood clots showing up in “almost every organ.” That effect of the disease is just one of many reasons the European Medicines Agency has emphasized that the “overall benefits of the [AstraZeneca] vaccine in preventing COVID-19 outweigh the risks of side effects.” The same is true of Johnson & Johnson’s. These vaccines are saving countless lives across multiple continents.

‘But it’s also crucial to determine the biological cause of any vaccine-related blood conditions. This global immunization project presents a lot of firsts: the first authorized use of mRNA vaccines like the ones from Pfizer and Moderna; the first worldwide use of adenovirus vectors for vaccines like AstraZeneca’s, Johnson & Johnson’s, and Sputnik V; and the first attempt to immunize against a coronavirus. Which, if any, of these new frontiers might be linked to serious side effects? Which, if any, of the other vaccines could be drawn into this story, too? How can a tiny but disturbing risk be mitigated as we fight our way out of this pandemic? And what might be the implications for vaccine design in the years to come?

‘To answer these questions, scientists will have to figure out the biology behind this rare blood condition: what exactly causes it; when and why it happens. This is not an easy task. While the evidence available so far is fairly limited, some useful theories have emerged...

• Theory 1: Platelet problems
• Theory 2: The spike’s the problem
• Theory 3: A suspect sequence
• Theory 4: The mixed bag

Read here (The Atlantic, Apr 17, 2021)

Three different futures for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine

‘Based on what we know so far, the future of the J&J vaccine can fork in at least three different directions. In one, the vaccine flames out; unless many, many more cases come to light soon, this seems unlikely. Either of the other two—in which officials end the pause and return the nation to its regularly scheduled vaccine programming, with or without restrictions on who gets J&J next—are more likely. No matter the outcome, though, today’s announcement won’t quickly be forgotten. Pauses in clinical trials, sprinkled through the past year, have already stoked vaccine hesitancy, skepticism, and outright denialism in many circles. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, previously stigmatized for being “less effective,” now risks a second label: “less safe.” It’s on the precipice of becoming our country’s grody vaccine; maybe it’s already toppled over the edge. An altered reputation in the U.S. will reverberate throughout the world, and set back the global struggle to contain the coronavirus.

‘If the J&J vaccine does return with the FDA’s blessing, we’ll need to rehabilitate it with clear and nuanced messaging, Gounder and many others told me. A vaccine can be excellent. A vaccine can also carry risks. Both can be true; both have been true, for other shots we’ve used. In this case, the gamble could be very small—and still be well worth it.’

Read here (The Atlantic, Apr 13, 2021)

Why you can't compare Covid-19 vaccines

‘In the US, the first two available Covid-19 vaccines were the ones from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna. Both vaccines have very high "efficacy rates," of around 95%. But the third vaccine introduced in the US, from Johnson & Johnson, has a considerably lower efficacy rate: just 66%.

‘Look at those numbers next to each other, and it's natural to conclude that one of them is considerably worse. Why settle for 66% when you can have 95%? But that isn't the right way to understand a vaccine's efficacy rate, or even to understand what a vaccine does. And public health experts say that if you really want to know which vaccine is the best one, efficacy isn't actually the most important number at all.’

View here (Vox, Youtube, Mar 20, 2021)

WHO approves J&J's COVID-19 vaccine for emergency listing

‘The World Health Organization on Friday (Mar 12) approved the emergency listing of Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine, giving its seal of approval to expedite use especially in countries with weaker regulatory agencies. It is the third COVID-19 vaccine after the two-shot regimens of Pfizer/BioNTech and AstraZeneca to receive backing from the WHO, and the first requiring just a single injection.’

Read here (Channel News Asia, Mar 13, 2021)

US Catholic group tells followers to avoid Johnson & Johnson vaccine

‘An American Catholic church body on Tuesday urged its followers to avoid the coronavirus vaccine developed by Johnson & Johnson, alleging that it was “developed, tested and produced using abortion-derived cell lines.”

‘The US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) urged Catholics to choose between the alternatives offered by Pfizer and Moderna because the J&J vaccine raised questions about “moral permissibility.”

“The approval of Johnson & Johnson’s Covid-19 vaccine for use in the United States again raises questions about the moral permissibility of using vaccines developed, tested, and/or produced with the help of abortion-derived cell lines,” said Bishop Kevin C Rhoades, chairman of USCCB.’

Read here (Independent, Mar 3, 2021) 

FDA says single-dose shot from J&J prevents severe Covid

‘Johnson & Johnson’s single-dose vaccine offers strong protection against severe COVID-19, according to an analysis released Wednesday by U.S. regulators that sets the stage for a final decision on a new and easier-to-use shot to help tame the pandemic.

‘The long-anticipated shot could offer the nation a third vaccine option and help speed vaccinations by requiring just one dose instead of two. Food and Drug Administration scientists confirmed that overall the vaccine is about 66% effective at preventing moderate to severe COVID-19, and about 85% effective against the most serious illness. The agency also said J&J’s shot is safe.’

Read here (AP, Feb 25, 2021)