Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

statnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 344 posts

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#301

Post by bXVsbGVy »

andrekandre wrote: post #296
spamizbad wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 1976 swine flu outbreak is one example of what can go wrong if you rush a vaccine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak It was rushed by the Ford administration for political reasons and got a lot of people very sick.

slight aside, but from that link, was surpised to see "jet injectors" were used in 1970s.... i just toally assumed this stuff was sci-fi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:8365_loresOLDSCHOOL.jpg

I think this used at least at late 80's in developing world, I'm 30 and have a scar (almost impossible to notice). My parents have very deep scars.

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#302

Post by nfw2 »

School-Cotton wrote: post #232
CydeWeys wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It would be tragic, for example, to see any serious side-effects from a vaccine in people under the age of 20, who have essentially no risk from infection. They have little risk of death if they have no comorbidities, but even for a 20 year old, just getting COVID-19 is likely gonna be worse than the side effects from almost any vaccine imaginable. I've had vaccine side effects and I've had COVID and I'd take ten m…

> just getting COVID-19 is likely gonna be worse than the side effects from almost any vaccine imaginable Do you have any non-anecdotal articles that quantify this?

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5...

Even with experimental concerns like the small sample size, 55% incidence of long-term neurological effects is pretty alarming

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#303

Post by elorant »

outside1234 wrote: post #247
mchusma wrote: post #233

I hope that the benchmark for approval is "for a given group, the risk of the vaccine is lower than the risk of COVID". This has some good commentary: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/09/on... some thoughtful commentary. I believe that for at risk populations it is very likely that taking a phase III vaccine candidate is the safer option right now, let alone after another month of data. I think…

If the vaccine confers only limited immunity - but the users run off and act like they are immune for life - we could pretty quickly end up in a situation where giving a vaccine could result in 5 deaths where 1 only would have happened without it because people would have been more careful. This is why it is important to understand not only that it doesn't kill people, but how much immunity it provides.

Sure, and if we wait for too long the worldwide economy will collapse and then we'll have a gazillion deaths from side effects. We can't go down the path of wild assumptions because it won't lead us anywhere.

If the vaccine confers limited immunity we can at least do a better work at protecting the elderly who are extremely vulnerable. And then, as research progresses we'll have better knowledge on how to fight this thing.

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#304

Post by MCOfficer »

crx07 wrote: post #294
avaika wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well. As of now the Russian vaccine doesn't look like a trustworthy solution. Recently Russians published article in The lancet [1], but scientists who read this have a lot of questions. Especially on data consistency. They even published open letter to head of vaccine research Denis Logunov with open questions [2]. According to first reaction by Denis Logunov (don't have a link on this) the open letter doesn't worth…

This is nonsense -- I'm at high risk, and I'd take a flight to Russia right now to get a dose of Sputnik V if I knew I wouldn't catch COVID-19 on the trip. Those grandstanding against these vaccines in the name of safety should know that they're directly responsible for deaths, and what's about to happen is we will just end up with a candidate from the least scrupulous manufacturer, because data are easy to manipulat…

[Speaking as non-high-risk person,] I'd trust scientists to define when a vaccine is safe. The pledge is a politic action, but is explicitly against politic influence.

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#305

Post by crx07 »

cameldrv wrote: post #297
crx07 wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely this. I'm in an at-risk population, as are the two others in my household, and this pattern of perpetually delaying is driving me insane. I'll gladly take a 0.1% chance of an unspecified SAE over a 50% chance of death. I'm about to the point where I'd consider outright bribing someone at a research lab to slip me a dose of any of them, even if I had to administer it myself.

The Moderna trial is enrolling, I know someone who is in it. You only have a 50% chance of getting the vaccine, but given your preferences, why not sign up for the trial?

Because I've left home exactly once since the second week of April, and I'm not leaving again until I have a 100.0% chance of getting the vaccine, full stop.

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#306

Post by elorant »

crx07 wrote: post #294
avaika wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well. As of now the Russian vaccine doesn't look like a trustworthy solution. Recently Russians published article in The lancet [1], but scientists who read this have a lot of questions. Especially on data consistency. They even published open letter to head of vaccine research Denis Logunov with open questions [2]. According to first reaction by Denis Logunov (don't have a link on this) the open letter doesn't worth…

This is nonsense -- I'm at high risk, and I'd take a flight to Russia right now to get a dose of Sputnik V if I knew I wouldn't catch COVID-19 on the trip. Those grandstanding against these vaccines in the name of safety should know that they're directly responsible for deaths, and what's about to happen is we will just end up with a candidate from the least scrupulous manufacturer, because data are easy to manipulat…

And what will happen if you get the vaccine and it doesn't work, but you live your life assuming that it did. You'll stop being as cautious as you are today, and if by any chance you get infected you'll die. How on earth is that a better solution?

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#307

Post by mardifoufs »

bXVsbGVy wrote: post #301
andrekandre wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

slight aside, but from that link, was surpised to see "jet injectors" were used in 1970s.... i just toally assumed this stuff was sci-fi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:8365_loresOLDSCHOOL.jpg

I think this used at least at late 80's in developing world, I'm 30 and have a scar (almost impossible to notice). My parents have very deep scars.

Yep, I think everyone from my parents generation in morocco have a very distinguishable, large round scar that resembles a burn scar. Not only does it look painful, but it also looks like an absolutely perfect way to spread diseases. They were lucky AIDs wasn't really around at the time!

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#308

Post by crx07 »

elorant wrote: post #306
crx07 wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is nonsense -- I'm at high risk, and I'd take a flight to Russia right now to get a dose of Sputnik V if I knew I wouldn't catch COVID-19 on the trip. Those grandstanding against these vaccines in the name of safety should know that they're directly responsible for deaths, and what's about to happen is we will just end up with a candidate from the least scrupulous manufacturer, because data are easy to manipulat…

And what will happen if you get the vaccine and it doesn't work, but you live your life assuming that it did. You'll stop being as cautious as you are today, and if by any chance you get infected you'll die. How on earth is that a better solution?

I assume nothing.

I've left home exactly once since the second week of April, the next time I leave will be to get vaccinated (whether next week or years from now), and the very next time I leave after that will be to get my antibody levels checked. If the level is satisfactory, I'll resume leaving with an N95 or KN95 mask at all times until more is known.

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#309

Post by sugarpile »

ars wrote: post #2

"82% of Democrats and 72% of Republicans expressed concern that the Covid-19 vaccine approval process would be driven more by politics than by science. More than 80% of independents, Republicans, and Democrats said they would worry about the safety of a vaccine that was approved quickly." Wow. And lest you think this is a Trump thing, the figures are similar in European countries. A bad COVID vaccine (one that doesn'…

“A bad COVID vaccine (one that doesn't work), or heaven help us, one that causes harm, could set public healthcare back decades.”

I see this a lot (and am not jumping on you), do you mind explaining why you feel this way? To me one of the few things that could restore my faith in public health after how this pandemic has been handled is allowing widespread early access to the vaccine with full access to whatever data has been gathered. In flight is fine.

This “hur dur the masses can’t be trusted to make their own decisions” shit has got to stop. It has become clear public health in the US is more politics than health so any sort of management on an individual level gets zero trust from me.

Re: Covid vaccine makers commit to not seek approval until complete Phase III trials

#310

Post by c6401 »

orwin wrote: post #240
DenisM wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> country that refused to go on lockdown What? Moscow lockdowns were some of the harshest outside East Asia.

I think grandparent meant "refused to go on lockdown on time". I have contacts in khazan ( not sure if orthographied correctly), the harsh lockdowns were due to a miscomprehension of the word "exponential growth" and overused hospitals.

>refused to go on lockdown on time Not sure if there was a definitive understanding when it was on time. As far as I remember, lockdown in Moscow started on March 23.
Post reply on HN