[ad_1]
Seema Shah, a bioethicist at Chicago’s Lurie Children’s Hospital, says that even if it wasn’t the right break, it would be worse to stop distributing the Johnson & Johnson shot later without stopping to investigate the clots.
“I keep thinking about counterfactual,” he says. “If the FDA hadn’t paused, what kind of signal would that send?”
Having opportunities can increase confidence
Many health care providers and government officials have seen the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, which uses conventional virus-based technology to provide the necessary genetic information, as a useful alternative to Pfizer and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines. Since it requires a single dose, it is very suitable for people who may not have enough space to schedule a second dose, for example college students and homeless people.
Many other people prefer the option of a single shot, either for convenience or because they don’t like starting needles. They can have concert and shift staff narrow windows in which they can get a vaccination appointment, making Johnson & Johnson a better option.
The Johnson & Johnson vaccine is also easier to distribute and administer because it does not require the cold storage temperature required by mRNA vaccines. This makes it convenient to include patients who come home, people from rural communities, and patients in pop-up clinics that do not have special freezers.
“If the FDA hadn’t paused, what kind of signal would that send?”
Seema Shah, bioethicist at Lurie Children’s Hospital in Chicago
Despite these benefits, the vaccine later created mistrust manufacturing issues and studies that have shown it was less effective in preventing infection: Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were 95% and 94% effective against symptomatic infections, while Johnson & Johnson shots were 72% against moderate or severe cases. While the comparison isn’t perfect, it can be added to see titles on inferiority, and those working to build trust should be taken into account.
“It will take some important messaging to make people understand that we are not putting a bad vaccine on you; there is no such thing as a bad vaccine that we would continue to use,” says Fernandez Lynch. He also warned that doctors will need to communicate with patients now in order to gain confidence. These are the ones that explain the relatively low risk of side effects or offer alternatives for those who are concerned.
He said that building that trust is a long game: “It’s not just today; it’s not just a J&J vaccine; it’s not just mediocre vaccines. It’s a trust in science, government and public health.”
This story Pandemic Technology Project, Supported by the Rockefeller Foundation.
[ad_2]
Source link
