Is Johnson & Johnsonsay (NYSE: JNJ) COVID-19 vaccine actually better than Pfizersay (NYSE: PFE) and Modernsay (NASDAQ: MRNA) vaccines? You might think so if you just look at the votes of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the three vaccines. Hierin Motley Fool Live video recorded on March 3, 2021however, contributors to Fool.com, Keith Speights and Brian Orelli, say why not read too much about J&J receiving stronger support from the advisory committee than its competing vaccines did.
Keith Speights: The big news from last week over the weekend, of course, was that the FDA gave the long-awaited, and I think a long-awaited, emergency use authorization to the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine. You and I have talked about this before, but there’s another twist to it, so I thought we could touch a little.
The FDA’s advisory committee has now met three times to review the submissions for COVID-19 vaccines in the US. If you go back to December, I think it was December. Wow, time has flown. However, the committee looked at the Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine and they voted 17 in favor of granting emergency authorization, four against it and one person abstained. When the committee did not take too long after that, Moderna’s vaccine was reviewed and it was 20 to 0 unanimously, but one person did not like it in that case.
But in the case of Johnson & Johnson last week, the Advisory Committee 22 voted to nothing with no abstention. There was no difference at all. So I’m curious, should investors read anything about this about Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine that has stronger Advisory Committee support than the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines?
Brian Orelli: It could be that the Advisory Committee is only getting more comfortable with COVID-19 vaccines. There were no implementation or safety issues for Pfizer and Moderna, so I think that may be why Johnson & Johnson had no abstentions or votes.
The no votes for Pfizer and BioNTech I think we’m mostly due to the big age difference. Pfizer and the FDA wanted 16 years and older, and some of the advisory committee members thought they might have to go, they would start at 18. I think it was the no votes were basically on the difference between 16 and 18. hear the reason for abstinence on the Modern.
Games: If I remember correctly, it was just that the committee member did not think the EUA process was the right way to go. I think that person thought there was a better way to move forward. Clearly, they have changed their minds.
Orelli: Well, yes, or it could be another day. The members of the committee turn in and out, so it is quite possible that the person who did not remember at the Modernas did not sit on the Johnson & Johnson.
Games: Yes, I did not compare the grid with the previous one.
Orelli: This is a group of outside experts, but it’s much larger than the 22. They can come in and out depending on their availability, so it’s possible that the person did not sit on the Johnson & Johnson one.
Games: But the difference in voices does not necessarily mean that one vaccine is better or worse than the other, does it?
Orelli: No. I would argue that Johnson & Johnson is the worst of the three, just from an efficiency standpoint, and of course there are some issues they have to deal with more deviation than Pfizer or Moderna did. But regardless, I would say that Johnson and Johnson are probably still the worst of the three, even if it is taken into account, and therefore I would say that I think it was more just the committee became very comfortable with the issuance of emergency permits for coronavirus vaccines.
Games: Yes. I think it has certainly helped Johnson and Johnson that there has been at least relative success with the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine so far.
This article represents the opinion of the author, who may not be in agreement with the ‘official’ recommendation position of a Motley Fool premium advisory service. We are furry! Questioning an investment thesis – even one of our own – helps us all to think critically about investments and to make decisions that help us become smarter, happier and richer.