I& #39;m a physician & woman who& #39;s in the under 50 age group. I& #39;d chosen to receive the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. If I knew then what I know now about the risk of a rare but serious blood clotting disorder, I would have chosen another vaccine. https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="🧵" title="Thread" aria-label="Emoji: Thread"> @postopinions https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/04/24/its-good-resume-jj-vaccine-younger-women-should-be-warned-against-it/">https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/...

The blood clotting disorder associated with J&J, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS), is not a run-of-the-mill blood clot. Of the 15 women who had TTS, 3 died. 7 remain hospitalized, 4 in intensive care. Most were previously healthy women, median age of 37. /2

15 cases out of 8 million doses seems like a very low risk. The risk for women in the 18-49 group is higher--1 in 80,000.

This is still low, and benefits of preventing severe illness from #covid19 still far outweigh risks if the J&J is the only vaccine available. /3

But it& #39;s not. And that& #39;s the key. There are two other very safe & effective vaccines (from Pfizer & Moderna) that do not pose any risk of TTS.

Why didn& #39;t the CDC & FDA issue a warning that advises women under 50 to receive one of these two other available vaccines instead? /4

Some younger women will still opt to receive the J&J. It& #39;s one-dose, and those scared of needles or can& #39;t easily return for a second may prefer it.

That& #39;s their choice. But the default position should be to direct women under 50 to other vaccines that don& #39;t carry this risk. /5

Informed decision-making involves knowing risks, benefits, & alternatives--and having these alternatives offered to a group identified to be highest risk.

After all the emphasis federal health officials put on prioritizing safety, it’s what we should expect from them. /END