Use of Johnson & Johnson COVID Vaccine is Paused

[JustSomeBloke]

Covid: UK may approve one-dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine suspended by US FDA over blood clot fears | Daily Mail Online

The six women who developed clots – representing a rate of around one in a million – were aged between 18 and 48; one of them died and another is in hospital, the New York Times reports.

Thrombosis seems to be a common side effect with these COVID vaccines. The stated rate may only be one in a million, but I expect that will turn out to be under-reported.

And the vaccine is reportedly not even close to 100% effective at stopping infection. So by extension, recipients can probably still transmit the virus to others.

Clinical trials suggest the vaccine offers 100 per cent protection from severe Covid leading to hospitalisation or death, and around 66 per cent protection from mild infection.

So what exactly is the benefit to healthy young people, with no underlying health issues, who have a negligible risk of being hospitalised or dying of COVID? Why do these people need protecting from a 'mild infection'. Why not just let their God-given immune system do its job, and stop interfering?

 

[IntriKate]

We still don't know the longer term affects either. No way am going to be pressured into getting one.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

We still don't know the longer term affects either. No way am going to be pressured into getting one.

Hear here!

 

[expos4ever]

Why do these people need protecting from a 'mild infection'. Why not just let their God-given immune system do its job, and stop interfering?

Let's examine the logic of this statement of yours:

And the vaccine is reportedly not even close to 100% effective at stopping infection. So by extension, recipients can probably still transmit the virus to others.

This is incorrect. If, repeat if, the virus is at least partially effective at stopping infection, it will most certainly, reduce transmission.

The bottom line is this:

- qualified experts who went to real medical schools agree that young people should get vaccinated.
- this is not only about you - it is about your responsibility to the larger society.

And as for "interfering" - if you are willing to withdraw from society then, and only then, can you make this claim without contradiction. Otherwise, when you show up at the grocery store unvaccinated, you are most definitely "interfering" with my "right" to live free of preventable illness.

 

[Hammster]

We still don't know the longer term affects either. No way am going to be pressured into getting one.

Same.

 

[JustSomeBloke]

Let's examine the logic of this statement of yours:

And the vaccine is reportedly not even close to 100% effective at stopping infection. So by extension, recipients can probably still transmit the virus to others.

This is incorrect. If, repeat if, the virus is at least partially effective at stopping infection, it will most certainly, reduce transmission.

If people can become infected, then they can shed virus and infect others. The 34% that become infected, even though they have been vaccinated, will likely infect others.

The bottom line is this:

- qualified experts who went to real medical schools agree that young people should get vaccinated.
- this is not only about you - it is about your responsibility to the larger society.

Qualified experts have now paused use of this vaccine.

As for my responsibility to the larger society, it was paid when I endured months of lockdown, a wrecked economy, and massive future tax rises to buy time for the elderly until a vaccine could be created.

It's also worth noting that here in the UK, diagnosis of other life threatening conditions, such as cancer, has taken a massive hit due to the almost exclusive focus on COVID. No doubt many people will die as a result of the decision to prioritise COVID above everything else. The average age of a COVID fatality in the UK exceeds the national life expectancy, so prioritising COVID has most likely given elderly people a bit of extra time, while condemning huge numbers of younger cancer sufferers to an early death.

Edit: And I forgot to mention that mental health is deteriorating due to lockdown, so we're all paying dearly in that respect. Humans are social creatures. We're not meant to be isolated from friends and family for months at a time. The extreme social isolation has almost certainly accelerated dementia deaths in UK care homes, as families have been blocked from visiting their elderly relatives for long periods of time.

And as for "interfering" - if you are willing to withdraw from society then, and only then, can you make this claim without contradiction. Otherwise, when you show up at the grocery store unvaccinated, you are most definitely "interfering" with my "right" to live free of preventable illness.

And you are interfering with the right of young healthy people not to be subject to an experimental medical treatment that offers no benefit to them.

It's also worth noting that totally eliminating disease and death here on earth is a secular view. As Christians we fix our eyes elsewhere.

 

[Isilwen]

It's also worth noting that totally eliminating disease and death here on earth is a secular view.

Just when I thought I have heard everything! Good grief!

Statements like the one I quoted almost make me not want to be a Christian anymore.

 

[JustSomeBloke]

Just when I thought I have heard everything! Good grief!

Statements like the one I quoted almost make me not want to be a Christian anymore.

I'm not sure why you responded like that. We should do what we can to preserve life, but that doesn't mean that we can ignore the adverse impacts on one demographic, in order to try and protect a different demographic.

I believe that the Nuremberg codes apply here. It is not a conspiracy to say that these vaccines are still experimental. Yes, they have been trialled, but the approvals are emergency type approvals. Nuremberg codes and medical ethics require informed consent, and that people are not coerced into accepting experimental medical treatments.

Certainly here in the UK, there is a big drive to introduce vaccine passports. That is a fact, not a conspiracy. It's published all over the MSM that the UK government wants to introduce vaccine passports. From that point of view, by being denied access to goods and services, people would be being coerced into taking an experimental medical treatment.

Edit: Corrected from Nuremberg laws to Nuremberg codes

 

[AvilaSurfer]

Isn’t blood clotting also associated with oral contraceptives? I don’t see anyone pausing those.

 

[JustSomeBloke]

Isn’t blood clotting also associated with oral contraceptives? I don’t see anyone pausing those.

You are absolutely correct. However, as far as I'm aware, there has never been any UK government plans to coerce people into taking oral contraceptives, by denying goods and services to those who refuse to take them.

And it's unfortunate that I have to keep repeating that vaccine passports are not a conspiracy theory. They are now a very real possibility in the UK.

MPs will be given a vote on plans for vaccine passports before they are given the green light, it's been reported.

 

[GOD Shines Forth!]

As for my responsibility to the larger society, it was paid when I endured months of lockdown, a wrecked economy, and massive future tax rises to buy time for the elderly until a vaccine could be created.

And while the powers behind the scientific community deliberately pretended to un-know what they in fact knew :the antivirals (Hydroxychloroquine/Ivermectin/Favipiravir) are highly effective in early treatment (in combo with Zinc and Azyth). They are being used around the world, in many cases without a prescription.

As I pointed out in another thread, Favipiravir was created by our DOD (with MediVector, Inc.) for soldier use. They thought it would be helpful for them then! Unfortunately it is not available here in the USA fully. Fujifilm Japan patented it as Avigan and are using it along with other countries. We all know how silly and frivolous and unscientific the Japanese are, though, right?!? Lol, that's the kind of nonsense we've been called to believe when something didn't fit the powers' mission. Otherwise "brilliant" members of the scientific community suddenly were cast as know-nothings.

 

[expos4ever]

If people can become infected, then they can shed virus and infect others. The 34% that become infected, even though they have been vaccinated, will likely infect others.

It is difficult to believe you are serious.

How is it not patently obvious that your argument is false? The fact that some people who get vaccinated will get infected does not - and this is smash-my-head-on-my-keyboard-obvious - mean that there is not a benefit to getting the vaccine.

Again, it is beyond obvious that those who are spared from infection by the vaccine will not be infecting others!

And even if the vaccine does not prevent infection at all, the argument for getting the vaccine can be understood by a 7 year old: the vaccine reduces the risk of severe disease and death (apart from whether it has an effect on transmission).

 

[expos4ever]

Qualified experts have now paused use of this vaccine.

So? They paused AstroZeneca too for a while. Now it appears that the benefit of the vaccination vastly outweighs the risk except for a cohort of very young women.

Specific issues with specific vaccines aside, there is no credible argument against getting vaccinated (except for very rare exceptions)

 

[expos4ever]

It's also worth noting that here in the UK, diagnosis of other life threatening conditions, such as cancer, has taken a massive hit due to the almost exclusive focus on COVID. No doubt many people will die as a result of the decision to prioritise COVID above everything else.

If you are not simply guessing and have solid, defensible reasons for believing that, on balance, the focus on Covid has made things worse overall, then, please, present it.

...., so prioritising COVID has most likely given elderly people a bit of extra time, while condemning huge numbers of younger cancer sufferers to an early death.

Again, you need to actually defend this rather shocking assertion. Let me concede that the focus on Covid likely has reduced quality of care in other areas.

You guys always deploy the same strategy - you focus on one aspect of what is really a very complex problem. Sure, young cancer sufferers almost certainly are getting worse care than if we did nothing about Covid.

But what if we actually did nothing starting last March. I am told that the more transmissions there are, the more variants there will be. And, as we are seeing right now, some of these variants are more transmissible and more dangerous. So if we let Covid run rampant, who knows what an awful situation we might be in now.

 

[expos4ever]

It's also worth noting that totally eliminating disease and death here on earth is a secular view. As Christians we fix our eyes elsewhere.

....and there we have it, the smoking gun.

Jesus healed the sick! You are effectively saying "that's nice, but that is not an example I choose to follow".

 

[expos4ever]

Certainly here in the UK, there is a big drive to introduce vaccine passports. That is a fact, not a conspiracy. It's published all over the MSM that the UK government wants to introduce vaccine passports. From that point of view, by being denied access to goods and services, people would be being coerced into taking an experimental medical treatment.

Interesting framing. And, of course, misleading.

Do you think a grocery store or an airline is being unreasonable to deny service to people who insist on shouting at the top of their lungs while in the grocery store, or on the plane?

I suggest that it is entirely reasonable for service providers to deny service to those who refuse to comply with "public interest" regulations, when it is easy for people to abide by such regulations.

Is is "coercion" if I am required to not scream at the top of my lungs on an airplane?

 

[expos4ever]

And it's unfortunate that I have to keep repeating that vaccine passports are not a conspiracy theory.

Who said they were a conspiracy theory? Post number, please.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I'm by no means saying that all vaccines are bad, and I will be getting mine, but I'm fine with such a pause....just tells me someone is doing their job.

Why they didn't catch that before they let this vaccine go to the general public is a bit of a concern, but either way, the appointed experts are our best logical bet, so I'm happy to go with whatever they say to do.

 

[expos4ever]

...but either way, the appointed experts are our best logical bet, so I'm happy to go with whatever they say to do.

I agree. It seems pretty clear to me that the experts are of one voice - get your hind end down to vaccination centre post-haste.

It really beggars credulity to imagine that they are either all wrong or otherwise intentionally try to lead us astray.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Well this is bad news. This was the vaccine I was looking at getting...