Johnson and Johnson pauses vaccine

@Keepitsimple Remember that it has a 100% efficacy against severe illness, hospitalization, or death.

J&J seems good for younger people.

If I’m gonna shoot crap in my body it needs to be more than 65% effective. @QuixoticSoul

@Keepitsimple 65% doesn't mean 45% failure rate.

True but it’s not enough for me.@Fukfacewillie

@Keepitsimple You'd refuse a shot that gives you 100% protection against severe disease, for a 45% risk of still testing positive (probably asymptomatically)? Okay..

Yes. 45% chance of it failing is huge to me with all that shoot into you it better have better results than 65%.@Elessar

@Keepitsimple 45% is relative to the risk you have now, you realise right? As a plus, risk of positivity, not risk of severe disease (which is the one you have right now).

Are you so concerned about the sh*t we eat and breathe in on a regular basis, or? Unless you live in a room with padded walls for the rest of your life, risk zero doesn't exist.

@Elessar I got the Pfizer vaccine. I feel more confident having that vaccine. Thank you for opinion though.

@Keepitsimple Well, it's a whole different matter if you had another/better option to pick from.

@Elessar On what planet is 45% the inverse of 65%? Where I went to school, here on Earth, it's 35%.

@RedBaron lol, true. I've just taken Ted's number without thinking too much about it.