Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Igel

(35,300 posts)

8. No, it means that it doesn't fit the criteria.

Reply to PoindexterOglethorpe (Reply #5)

Wed Oct 13, 2021, 05:17 PM

Oct 2021

I think that Pfizer after 6 months still has better outcomes than the J&J at 3 months, but there's a larger drop-off in immunity. Could be wrong, but you really need to read what the criteria is.

Not that the criteria and science matter. It'll be approved for for booster shots, at least for some groups (my prediction: The same as for Pfizer).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

An F.D.A. analysis suggests that J.&J. has not presented robust evidence for booster shots. [View all] BumRushDaShow Oct 2021 OP

I'd prefer a different brand for added protection. Merlot Oct 2021 #1

I saw an article around the end of September BumRushDaShow Oct 2021 #2

I'll be on the look out for that, thanks Merlot Oct 2021 #3

I think this is the article where I saw it BumRushDaShow Oct 2021 #4

This is one of the questions the government should be deciding this week BlueIdaho Oct 2021 #7

Does that mean the J&J shot actually confers better and longer immunity? PoindexterOglethorpe Oct 2021 #5

No, it doesn't. LisaL Oct 2021 #6

No, it means that it doesn't fit the criteria. Igel Oct 2021 #8

No, it means that it doesn't fit the criteria. Igel Oct 2021 #9