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

Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

pfizer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 446 posts

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#111

Post by fairity »

lmilcin wrote: post #52
Neil44 wrote: post #37

This will save lives. However I imagine most people will end up getting the Oxford vaccine, that doesn't have the storage requirements or need a second dose and is a fraction of the cost.

Well, I wouldn't be so happy. Think about it. Out of million people only small percentage would become infected with covid and of that, only small percentage would die. On the other hand, vaccine must be distributed to everybody. Alternatively to people who, by occupation, have to contact many other people, daily. We don't know yet if there are complications from the vaccine. It is not possible to judge long term eff…

Others have pointed out the misinformation in your comment, but even if you believed this, why talk about it? This is the type of idea you should probably keep to yourself (as it’s in your own best interest for it to not spread).

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#112

Post by xiphias2 »

refurb wrote: post #96
xiphias2 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also depends on the known safety profile. With AstraZeneca some people already have to take pain medications after taking the vaccine...I wouldn't be comfortable putting using that vaccine without much wider testing. Fortunately I don't need to though, because soon we'll probably have 2 great vaccines to choose from.

Taking OTC pain relief medicines after a vaccine is not that unusual, either for pain or fever. Ask any parent who has gone through a vaccine series with their kid. And I can remember getting my tetanus booster in secondary school and when I rolled over in my sleep waking up because my shoulder was so swollen and painful. I'm not dismissing the fact that the vaccines might cause serious side effects. In fact, it's ex…

I was talking about AstraZeneca that would be the first vaccine using a modified adenovirus. It looks to have somewhat more side effects than the Pfitzer vaccine.

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#113

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

baybal2 wrote: post #36
qwerty456127 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite being extremely pro-vac I'm going to postpone getting vaccinated with this for as long as possible (at least a couple of years hopefully). Even if they would disallow me to travel abroad I would rather stay in my home country. I've heard about a guy who volunteered to try the Russian vaccine - he got extremely sick and almost died from inflammatory cardiomyopathy as the result. So I want to see thousands of p…

And what so? Sputnik 5 is a live virus vaccine, Moderna and Fizer are RNA vaccines with, hopefully, no live viral material as such.

It's not really a "live" virus - it's an adenovirus (actually, two types of adenovirus) that's been modified so that it can't replicate. The adenoviruses have also been modified to carry the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#114

Post by qwerty456127 »

jbd28 wrote: post #22
qwerty456127 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite being extremely pro-vac I'm going to postpone getting vaccinated with this for as long as possible (at least a couple of years hopefully). Even if they would disallow me to travel abroad I would rather stay in my home country. I've heard about a guy who volunteered to try the Russian vaccine - he got extremely sick and almost died from inflammatory cardiomyopathy as the result. So I want to see thousands of p…

This isn’t a mid 2000s windows OS update. Don’t be part of the problem, take the shot and grow up

> This isn’t a mid 2000s windows OS update.

It always is. This can never change. Experience has cemented "always wait for a service pack" as my #1 rule of life.

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#115

Post by yread »

raven105x wrote: post #73
klmadfejno wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well a one second google search says chickenpox is 98% effective, so already that's not unheard of. I would think extremely low p values are not just normative, but required for a vaccine to reach public acceptance. This vaccine is noteworthy for the speed at which it was developed, but its not the first really good vaccine. edit: and because I'm getting a lot of downvotes for some reason, Anthrax, Measles, Rubella,…

> required for a vaccine to reach public acceptance. This leads to frightening considerations. The reason FDA testing is so stringent is that trying to explain statistics along with a myriad of other fields, that are at this point likely too complex and exhaustive for any one human to fully comprehend even if they spent their entire lifetime learning, to the "public" for them to truly make an informed decision is a f…

> If by some very low chance this introduces an inheritable change, and if by an even lower chance that inheritable change leads to genetic collapse in 10-20 generations - just to be very clear, this is extremely unlikely - we have opened the window to humanity's end.

Indeed, extremely unlikely. Have you considered that writing this comment could also trigger the "end of humanity" by some as-of-yet unknown and unforeseen butterfly effect? Extremely unlikely, but still. Better consider it.

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#116

Post by koalala »

refurb wrote: post #61
gvv wrote: post #29

Well just like I don't immediately update to the latest OS I think I'll wait for the beta testing to happen :)

As someone who has some experience with clinical trials and drug approvals, I'd be quite comfortable taking the vaccine. A clinical trial size of 40,000 (20,000 receiving the vaccine) is way larger than a lot of other drugs that people are comfortable taking. Is there zero risk of serious side effects? Of course not, there never is. But the trial gives enough data to say the risk is worth the benefit. Edit: The FDA h…

can you give an example of popular drugs that have been approved with smaller trials?

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#117

Post by unnouinceput »

strombofulous wrote: post #48
solarhoma wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think private companies will require vaccination to return to work? *Here is an article I found on the subject. Essentially stating in general employers could require vaccination. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/08/26/coronavirus-...

I hope so. I would be upset if I got the vaccine and people who didn't have it were allowed to work near me, but I would just keep WFH. I would be outraged if I were forced to work with them

Why would you be upset for? It's their life, not yours. Once you get vaccinated, ideally, you get immune to the virus. You neither can develop the disease nor spread it. It's the same as saying you don't want to work with people who didn't got vaccinated by any other number of vaccines (let you search wiki for full list as exercise) and I'm pretty sure it already happened.

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#118

Post by klmadfejno »

raven105x wrote: post #73
klmadfejno wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well a one second google search says chickenpox is 98% effective, so already that's not unheard of. I would think extremely low p values are not just normative, but required for a vaccine to reach public acceptance. This vaccine is noteworthy for the speed at which it was developed, but its not the first really good vaccine. edit: and because I'm getting a lot of downvotes for some reason, Anthrax, Measles, Rubella,…

> required for a vaccine to reach public acceptance. This leads to frightening considerations. The reason FDA testing is so stringent is that trying to explain statistics along with a myriad of other fields, that are at this point likely too complex and exhaustive for any one human to fully comprehend even if they spent their entire lifetime learning, to the "public" for them to truly make an informed decision is a f…

I just want to note that you clipped by part of my sentence that said "required for public acceptance", said that was bad, and ignored the previous clause which indicated extreme statistical evidence for its efficacy.

As for the rest of this nonsense, no, there is no chance that this induces a genetic collapse. mRNA vaccines do not alter your DNA.

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#119

Post by lmilcin »

wonderwonder wrote: post #100
lmilcin wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey. I am not anti vaccine. Your comment is uninformed in that you did not read my comment with comprehension and that you don't understand what stupid stuff anti-vaxxers are serving. My kids are all vaccinated and so am I and I don't suggest to people to not vaccinate. I am just trying to cool down the too happy thinking that the vaccine is some magical tool that automatically causes problems to go away with no risk…

"the best decision is to let vaccinate everybody else but don't take vaccine yourself" This is unfortunately exactly what anti-vaxxers do, they enjoy the benefits of herd immunity thanks to the vast majority of people getting vaccinated but spread negativity & doubt about the vaccine at the same time. The current Covid vaccines have had a very large testing group and been put through the same strict regulations as an…

[flagged]

Re: Pfizer submits Covid vaccine to FDA for approval, to distribute in December

#120

Post by unnouinceput »

Kye wrote: post #77
rayiner wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I think "don't use version 1.0" advice applies here just like it does for software. No it doesn’t, because vaccine development is more like bridge building than software development.

Can you pull out the threads on that argument a little? Taken at face value, it's not meaningful. Bridges launch with huge, sometimes catastrophic problems.

And that's exactly the point. Once it launches it either crashed down or stays up. As for this vaccine it got 30k tests. It's the equivalent of before launching said bridge the entire heavy machinery of the construction company stood on it and didn't collapsed.
Post reply on HN