No, really. I'm not trying to turn this blog into some poor man's version of The Onion or The Babylon Bee. This is stuff you can't make up. Two stories, one after the other:
However, "new language" will be included in the warning label, acknowledging a "remote risk" of blood clots. That should restore trust! Expect lengthy lines for the J&J injection--NOT.
You might wonder how remote "remote" is--especially if you're a woman aged 30-39, which seems to be the least remote group, i.e., the group most likely to experience the reality of this remote risk. How could they possibly calculate that risk in such a short time, even as new cases of clotting are cropping up? And are there other risks that might, you know, pop up down the road?
What little faith a sizable skeptical portion of Americans may have had in covid vaccines or the so-called "scientific process" may have just been crushed on Friday afternoon when shortly before 5am a CDC Panel recommended in a 10-4 vote (with 1 abstaining) to resume use of the J&J Covid vaccine, saying that it would add a warning about rare clots but not restrict its use as "benefits outweigh the risks. The decision sets the stage for regulators to allow use of the shot to resume.
Somehow I doubt that those injection centers that have been closing due to plummeting demand will need to be reopened.