Thread: Vaccinations
View Single Post
Old 04-02-2021, 08:56 AM   #341
SailinAway
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 991
Thanks: 256
Thanked 280 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkxingu View Post
I don't know the exact answers, but

1. There is the consideration of effectiveness AND duration AND current situation. As I know it, the second shot is a booster for longevity that also increases immunity. Pair that with the current level of vaccination, and that the Pfizer/Moderna vaccines were tested with earlier variants, and it's better/necessary to have the second jab (if most/everyone's vaccinated and the vaccine works for most variants, 75% is fine...)

2. Given #1, it makes sense to offer/take the one-jab J&J because it can vaccinate twice as many people. So, a town with 40k people with 80% vaccinated at 75% effectiveness is safer than 40% of a town with 95%. Add in that J&J and Pfizer/Moderna may be closer to each other in effectiveness when including new variants, and J&J is a game-changer. I mean, it's half the shipping, storage, production, manpower, etc. costs, doesn't require crazy storage, and already has other manufacturers making it. I would be surprised if Pfizer/Moderna doesn't figure out a one-jab or that J&J becomes the only one.
Thanks for this helpful information! Reading between the lines, I think you're saying in #2 that J&J is beneficial for society, but that doesn't necessarily make it the best choice for individuals, if they have a choice---confirmed by jeffk. Currently in NH we do have a choice, which changes the picture.
SailinAway is offline