Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant • Hacker News Board

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#121

Post by logicchains » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:26 PM UTC

nicoburns wrote: post #104

logicchains wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some places are already completely back to normalcy, like many red states. Normalcy comes from accepting the virus and going back to life as normal; there's not a single place that's achieved normalcy by bringing covid rates down to zero.

It's not really normalcy if one still has to be concerned about catching covid and/or passing it on to vulnerable relatives though.

>if one still has to be concerned

Nobody "has to be" concerned, it's their choice. Every time we get in a car we could end up having an accident and wiping out a family of four, that doesn't stop us driving. Life has risks, everyone dies eventually. There are far worse things in life than death.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#122

Post by userbinator » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:26 PM UTC

cure wrote: post #75

bmitc wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the CVS person who did my booster, the booster for Pfizer is a full dose while the Moderna booster is a half dose (relative to each manufacturer's original first and second shot doses).

According to this source https://www.statnews.com/2021/02/02/comparing-the-covid-19-v... the original Pfizer dose was 30 micrograms of vaccine, while Moderna's was 100 micrograms. If that is correct, then Moderna's booster would still be more vaccine (50 micrograms) than Pfizer's original dose. Of course more is not necessarily better!

One wonders if another full dose of Moderna would provide even better protection, given that a correlation has been found with the dosage: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28580745

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#123

Post by silent_cal » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:26 PM UTC

yvdriess wrote: post #94

silent_cal wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they should not make recommendations to the public, because they aren't a public agency - they have a conflict of interest. It's like a hedge fund manager giving public advice on stock picks.

Not the same. They are not giving advice or recommendations, they are reporting the results of a study. That's the beauty of a good scientific study: you do not have to trust the author. In fact don't, the more people try to find errors the better.

Please spare me. You "science" worshippers got some good mileage out of this myth in the past, but now it is obvious that the last thing you want is for people to criticize Pfizer, the CDC, the NIH, or anyone within 100ft of them. In fact, their critics are being systematically purged from the world's largest communications channels, and they are almost always censored on this site as well. "Science" can't handle any criticism whatsoever.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#124

Post by boringg » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:27 PM UTC

junon wrote: post #21

neither_color wrote: post #11

It's not deadly enough for me to consider a booster, I'll pass on this supplementary shot https://www.marketwatch.com/story/who-has-not-seen-any-repor...

We don't know how deadly it is. This article grossly misinterprets what literally every epidemiologist is saying right now which is "we don't f***ing know, just chill and let us do our jobs". It is irresponsible and incorrect to state "it's not deadly". We can hardly detect it, we are still doing retroactive testing to see if omicron has been around longer than thought, and to see if it resulted in deaths.

So heres the thing. That might be right, but if it turns out omicron is deadly, we have a quiver in our arrow thats ready to fly in the near future (roll outs, manufacturing and public campaign will take some time).

So in the case of a deadly fourth wave we have some strategy instead of just huck and pray.

Only reason we have any sense of normalcy is through the scientific achievement of these vaccines and the public campaigns. So yah im super happy to hear pfizer is getting ready fir this.

Are they a business and do we need to watch them? Yes, but afaik they saved our sorry butts alongside moderna.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#125

Post by Smooth-Weather » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:27 PM UTC

TheRealWatson wrote: post #72

Smooth-Weather wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those who are vulnerable can take the booster if they want to.

Unfortunately not everyone can take the vaccine.

Yes, indeed. But sadly, taking the vaccine doesn't prevent you from spreading the virus.

In France, cases are still increasing even if more than 75% of the population is vaccinated. We are closing the nightclubs, again, (which were allowed to people tested negative or fully vaccinated) because the virus is still spreading in the vaccinated population. Fortunately, it adds a protective layer for you, but as we can see now: not for the others.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#126

Post by silent_cal » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:28 PM UTC

unclebucknasty wrote: post #116

silent_cal wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly the point I'm trying to make - it's just advertising, and you're all acting like it's an announcement from a public health authority.

> you're all acting like it's an announcement from a public health authority. I think people are "acting like" it's scientific data about a vaccine of interest to the public. Are you suggesting the data is unreliable or falsified? If so, and you have a basis for that, please cite. Otherwise, it's difficult to understand why you're implying people shouldn't be interested in this information.

Yes, it's unreliable because the publisher has a massive conflict of interest. Or did you not know that Pfizer makes money when people use its shots?

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#127

Post by nicoburns » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:28 PM UTC

mwint wrote: post #113

nicoburns wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really normalcy if one still has to be concerned about catching covid and/or passing it on to vulnerable relatives though.

You don’t have to be concerned. Another commenter brought up that the death rate per 100k is in the range of 1.1 (vaccinated) to ~5 (unvaccinated). Car accidents are >10/100k/yr.

I don't think an average is very useful here. For example, that figure is going to be much higher amongst elderly people. And many people are in contact with people who are vulnerable for other reasons (e.g. I have a relative going through chemotherapy). Incidence of long covid is also much higher than that of death. Some people may not be able to afford time off work if they catch covid, etc, etc.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#128

Post by nsxwolf » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:29 PM UTC

Why haven’t they updated the vaccine? I thought one of the major benefits of this technology was the ease with which you can modify them.

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#129

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:30 PM UTC

altacc wrote: post #102

mwint wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, does anyone believe we’ll get back to normalcy? What’s the path?

Personally I think the path is countries which have a high vaccination level need to stop implementing restrictions whilst making mitigations such as increasing healthcare capacity (which they should have done 18 months ago but many didn't), paying for rapid testing, enabling PTO for people who think they are sick, sensible mask mandates, etc... These countries need to lead the way to accepting we've waited for vacci…

[deleted]

Re: Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

#130

Post by salawat » Wed, Dec 08, 2021, 2:30 PM UTC

giarc wrote: post #62

silent_cal wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they should not make recommendations to the public, because they aren't a public agency - they have a conflict of interest. It's like a hedge fund manager giving public advice on stock picks.

>It's like a hedge fund manager giving public advice on stock picks. Why not? Stock picking is their job. Given that logic, a teacher shouldn't tell people how to teach their kid to read, and a plumber shouldn't tell people how to change a faucet.

Your hedge fund manager can also knowingly give bad info to improve the actual portfolio they are or agenda they are running.

Yes, that's technically fraud/market manipulation. That@s why most hedge fund managers won@t give financial advice until after they've been paid, and are, at best, either selling the money management angle with all the right regulatory and compliance check marks ticked, or they're selling you fast access to market actors + quantitative fiscal analysis results.

Either way, I wouldn't advise necessarily blindly taking one's advice. Just because you "do it as your job" doesn't mean you're necessarily terribly good at it. Never mind the whole "completely punting on your own responsibility as a capital allocator" thing.

Remember, everybody punting to hedge funds and such is the reason the economy overtime has trended toward centralization. Once everybody knows the guy managing everyone else's money, it's only a matter of time til the information engineering starts.