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

Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

fiercebiotech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#431

Post by throwawaymedia »

ceejayoz wrote: post #408
djanogo wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your take is completely wrong, OP didn't make it "political", he said Pfizer falsified data and your post confirms that.

> he said Pfizer falsified data Which is an assertion the BMJ article doesn't support. "Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight. Paul D Thacker reports" "A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the compan…

> Ventavia executive identified three site staff members with whom to “Go over e-diary issue/falsifying data, etc.” One of them was “verbally counseled for changing data and not noting late entry,” a note indicates.

> At several points during the late September meeting Jackson and the Ventavia executives discussed the possibility of the FDA showing up for an inspection (box 1). “We’re going to get some kind of letter of information at least, when the FDA gets here... know it,” an executive stated.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#432

Post by nradov »

jjuel wrote: post #194
peakaboo wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not touching any Pfizer drugs with a 10 foot pole. I guess I'm one of the few actually wise humans left.

So if you get strep throat you are going to turn down the Z-pack?

The first line treatment for strep throat is penicillin or amoxicillin. Z-pack (Azithromycin) would typically only be used in case of a penicillin allergy, or maybe resistant bacteria.

https://www.goodrx.com/blog/z-packs-still-good-for-infection...

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#433

Post by dustintrex »

ryanobjc wrote: post #421
thehappypm wrote: post #390

It’s crazy that money is such a huge incentive. Knowing that a cure for Covid is a potentially $100B market means you throw the kitchen sink at it. Imagine being this lab. Do you think they ever had trouble hiring an assistant? Buying new equipment? Getting bonuses? This environment must be fantastically different from the typical meat grinder of bio R&D.

Therefore how can you trust this drug? Follow the money! It’s just big science trying to propagate a pandemic to make more money! If this sounds insane, we’ll ok just reflecting the common anti vax sentiments I hear on this web site (ugh).

Except that this pill won't be given to people unless they're already sick with COVID. Not that this will stop the tinfoil hat brigade, but it's going to be much less controversial than universal vaccine mandates.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#434

Post by grey413 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #387
throwawaymedia wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

If you open up the actual VAERS ( https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html ), you'll see disclaimers like this: > Reports may include incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental and unverified information. > The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted or used to reach conclusions about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines. The numbers are suddenly high, in part, because of this: htt…

Agreed. The reports that VAERS provides can hint at rare adverse outcomes for vaccines, but it simply doesn't hold any significance compared to clinical trials. Comparing them is just outright false equivalence.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#435

Post by jtbayly »

ceejayoz wrote: post #347
throwawaymedia wrote: post #337

Before everyone becomes super excited, I want you all to read this article from Nov 2: https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635 Read it carefully. Pfizer falsifies clinical data and covers up significant adverse effects. FDA knows about all of that and covers their asses. Whatever comes from Pfizer will be authorized without any questions being asked. It's not even a legislation, but a straight up internal arrangeme…

One of Pfizer's trial vendors falsified information. https://www.cbs17.com/news/north-carolina-news/fact-check-re... > The Pfizer Phase III trial involved 44,000 people and 153 locations. From August 2020 through Sept. 17, 2020 — when she was fired — Jackson told CBS 17 that Ventavia accounted for at least 1,200 of those people and accounted for three sites. The author of the BMJ piece is quoted as saying “people are…

Wait a minute. I don’t see any political position in the comment you’re replying to. I don’t even see a hint of one. I can’t even figure out what political position on what topic would be likely.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#436

Post by raesene9 »

bun_at_work wrote: post #319
toyg wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's not really researchers that I'm worried about, it's their bosses.

Can you provide an example of a treatment people would like that 'big pharma' wouldn't produce because they couldn't make a profit on it? This is such a ridiculous argument, IMO. As a thought experiment consider something like cancer treatment. If some pharma company researcher found a way to 100% prevent or reverse cancer, why would the company hide that? In the best case, they could make a ton of money from it by s…

Whilst I don't buy the malice (big pharma deliberately not curing things they could) argument, there's plenty of things they don't do 'cause they don't think they'll make a profit on them.

Novel drug research is extremely expensive and time consuming, logically speaking a for-profit pharma company will assign its resources to the research which is most likely to make a profit.

As a result rare conditions will not attract the research necessary to create drugs to treat them. To give you a concrete example, AFAIK there was never a vaccine for MERS which is a coronovirus which preceded COVID-19.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#437

Post by ceejayoz »

throwawaymedia wrote: post #431
ceejayoz wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he said Pfizer falsified data Which is an assertion the BMJ article doesn't support. "Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight. Paul D Thacker reports" "A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the compan…

> Ventavia executive identified three site staff members with whom to “Go over e-diary issue/falsifying data, etc.” One of them was “verbally counseled for changing data and not noting late entry,” a note indicates. > At several points during the late September meeting Jackson and the Ventavia executives discussed the possibility of the FDA showing up for an inspection (box 1). “We’re going to get some kind of letter…

> Ventavia

> Ventavia

You're aware that Pfizer isn't spelled V-E-N-T-A-V-I-A, yes?

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#438

Post by penultimatebro »

DownGoat wrote: post #353
ashleyn wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The long term risks for either is not knowable. Hospitalisation is an acute scenario that can lead to death, negating any concerns about the long-term in the first place. The short term risk of hospitalisation in the unvaccinated versus the vaccinated is well-known. Given what we know, it still makes sense to get vaccinated, and it may make sense for those at risk of hospitalisation (vaccinated or otherwise) to take…

Actually the long term risk of the covid-19 vaccines is well understood. You will not get a side effect from the vaccines in a year from now. For all of the vaccines created for any disease, the longest recorded period between taking the vaccine and side effects presenting is 6 weeks. 3.1 billion people are fully vaccinated for covid-19, many of them have been for longer than 6 weeks.

Ha ha, funny satire.

Wait, reading this again... you’re serious?

So do you have an actual time machine and can go to the future and know side effects a year from now?

The long term effects are unknowable. This mRNA technology is brand new so please don’t compare that to a traditional vaccine.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#439

Post by thinkcontext »

orangepurple wrote: post #318
cossatot wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaccination is in large part about beating the epidemic , i.e. the population-scale prevalence of the pathogen, by preventing most of the infections and therefore disease transmission. This pill is about treating disease symptoms, but while doing nothing to limit disease spread. So while on a personal level, there may not be dramatic differences in death rates etc., on a population level the differences are huge.

Incorrect, mRNA COVID vaccination is about reducing symptoms in infected patients. It does absolutely nothing to slow down or stop the spread of COVID.

This is one of the most persistent pieces of misinformation I've seen, especially in the face of clear data.

The reduction in transmission rate for the vaccinated is 89%. Even for someone with a breakthrough infection of the more contagious Delta variant being vaccinated means a 63% reduction.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2294250-how-much-less-l...

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#440

Post by thehappypm »

toyg wrote: post #76
savant_penguin wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's here in _two_ years

One one side: great job, pharma industry! We're gonna live forever! On the other side: what are you folks not curing, with your magic powers, just because you know you won't be able to make a buck from it...?

Diseases like COVID are probably some of the easier ones to cure. It’s a foreign body that is tangible. We deeply understand how the virus replicates and how it works. We know which proteins and nucleosides to target. We don’t have that luxury for diseases like cancer, autoimmune diseases, and the like.
Post reply on HN