Andrew Huberman· PhD
Was the J&J vaccine an mRNA vaccine as well? No, it was an adn noirus vector vaccine, right? And it was the single shot. Yeah. And it was like the Astroenica vaccine, similar technology, adn noirus vector vaccine.
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
Was the J&J vaccine an mRNA vaccine as well? No, it was an adn noirus vector vaccine, right? And it was the single shot. Yeah. And it was like the Astroenica vaccine, similar technology, adn noirus vector vaccine.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
in terms of the adenovirus vectors the replication defective adenovirus vectors there's the replication effect of simian adenovirus Vector which is that that was put forward by the Jenner Institute at the University of Oxford in the UK that it's partnered with AstraZeneca and then the um the Johnson Johnson product which is Johnson that is the wholly owned uh subsidiary of Johnson Johnson and that's a replication effect of adenovirus type 26.
in terms of the adenovirus vectors the replication defective adenovirus vectors there's the replication effect of simeon adenovirus vector which is that that was put forward by the jenner institute at the university of oxford in the uk that it's partnered with astrazeneca and then the um the johnson johnson product which is johnson that is the wholly owned uh subsidiary of johnson johnson and that's a replication defective adenovirus type 26.