A couple of nuggets in a Tuesday Wall Street Journal editorial prompt this in my pea brain. The editorial itself concerns [t]he issue [of] how best to address public anxiety over rare blood clots seemingly associated with the J&J anti-Wuhan Virus vaccine.
The nuggets are these:
six US cases of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) [in] 6.8 million who have received J&J’s vaccine
This particular brain blood clot is extremely rare in the general population—five individuals per million per year….
The J&J association—if it is more than coincidence—works out to less than one incident of this particular brain blood clot per million getting the J&J vaccine, if my third-grade arithmetic is any good.
The question that occurs to me (and that I’ve seen no evidence is being considered) is whether the J&J vaccine has the happy side effect of providing a measure of protection against this already extremely rare type of clot.
A bonus question from my pea brain. The clots seemingly associated with the J&J vaccine have all occurred in women in the age range of 18 to 48. Assuming the clot-vaccine association is more than coincidence, is there something in the metabolism of women, or in some other factor particular to women, that leaves them susceptible to the clot, even if less so than the general population for having had the vaccine? Alternatively, is there something in the metabolism of men, or in some other factor particular to men, that makes them proof against the clot for having had the vaccine?