FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine • Hacker News Board

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#121

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:29 PM UTC

version_five wrote: post #83

acdha wrote: post #6

I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. I think a huge factor will be how many employers, colleges, etc. are now willing and legally able to require vaccination. It’s one thing to say you trust something you read on Facebook more than your doctor and quite another to walk away from a job because of it.

> I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. No doubt this will be the case for some. So, you've found a logical flaw in people's stated reasons for not wanting a vaccine. How does that help anything? In these kinds of debates, the actual goals or beliefs of both sides often differ from what they say. For example, the government being able…

[deleted]

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#122

Post by JulianMorrison » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:29 PM UTC

peakaboo wrote: post #86

acdha wrote: post #6

I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. I think a huge factor will be how many employers, colleges, etc. are now willing and legally able to require vaccination. It’s one thing to say you trust something you read on Facebook more than your doctor and quite another to walk away from a job because of it.

I think you are right. People won't change their minds about it. But the question is, should they be allowed to control what goes inside their bodies? In my opinion, the answer is a huge YES OF COURSE.

When it's something like weed, sure. When it's something that is a public good on a social level, like vaccination, there's precedent for requiring it when medically safe.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#123

Post by throwawayboise » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:29 PM UTC

formerly_proven wrote: post #75

bart_spoon wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which still wouldn't be a logical argument, given that the same applies regarding long-term health outcomes regarding getting sick with Covid. But I suspect you are right.

"But Covid is something natural, while the vaccine is man-made."

COVID may be man-made as well. Or at least enhanced.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#124

Post by DSMan195276 » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:29 PM UTC

dannyz wrote: post #57

nanis wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where exactly do you get the 1.7%? Is it computed the same way the breakthrough deaths are computed? What is the denominator in each case? I see, you are using this table[1] ... This is the case fatality rate (which is inflated depending on how many infections are never recorded). Using the numbers provided by the CDC, if we put the cases in the denominator and not the vaccinated population, we have: Hospitalized or…

Even if we had that data it wouldn't be a fair evaluation of vaccine efficacy. The elderly are the most vaccinated demographic, have the highest number of breakthrough infections, and have the highest mortality rate. There are too many confounding variables.

Just to add on to what you're pointing out, the existing UK data[1] makes this even more obvious. Technically it reports that about 2/3s of the total deaths were of vaccinated people (402 fully vaccinated deaths, 253 unvaccinated), even though only about 1/3 of cases are in fully vaccinated people (47,008 vs 151,054). But this is totally expected because the vaccinated rate in the >50 age range is extremely high, and they account for practically all the deaths (from those groups the 50 population, there were way more vaccinated cases than unvaccinated (because the rate is so high), so if you calculate the CFR for just that age range it's actually about ~6% for the unvaccinated and only ~1.8% for the fully vaccinated, so in reality those who got the vaccine had much better outcomes even though when combining both age groups it looks like it was much worse.

[1]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#125

Post by daenz » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:30 PM UTC

peakaboo wrote: post #86

acdha wrote: post #6

I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. I think a huge factor will be how many employers, colleges, etc. are now willing and legally able to require vaccination. It’s one thing to say you trust something you read on Facebook more than your doctor and quite another to walk away from a job because of it.

I think you are right. People won't change their minds about it. But the question is, should they be allowed to control what goes inside their bodies? In my opinion, the answer is a huge YES OF COURSE.

The counter that is commonly used against that is "well when it affects other people's health, then you don't get to choose."

There are a lot of assumptions in that counterargument that people will hope you don't examine, for example, the assumption that the probability of a covid transmission ending in harm crosses the same probability threshold if, say, drunk driving ending in harm. I say it doesn't. And since the stakes are so high with what we're talking about allowing the government to do, the burden of proof is on needing to prove the individual's likelihood for serious harm being high.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#126

Post by theptip » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:30 PM UTC

felipellrocha wrote: post #55

acdha wrote: post #6

I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. I think a huge factor will be how many employers, colleges, etc. are now willing and legally able to require vaccination. It’s one thing to say you trust something you read on Facebook more than your doctor and quite another to walk away from a job because of it.

Huge odds. People were anti-vaxxers before, and were just looking for an excuse to justify their position. Goal post moving is a thing to be expected nowadays

I don’t think this is the right take. The actual opinion poll numbers suggest that the “never vax” population has remained fairly constant over time, while the “vax hesitant” population started higher and has gradually decreased.

See for example https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/unvaccinated-america-in...

There’s a pretty stable “never” population at 14%, and you see that as time goes on the hesitants have been gradually been getting won over.

I’m sure some in the “never” camp are using “it’s not been approved” as their current first-line given reason. But I think you need to break down the groups a bit more. There are genuinely people who are not fundamentally anti-vax that are just nervous about how fast the vaccines were developed or scared about what having “RNA” in the vaccine means (I don’t share these concerns but I understand where they come from). Some of these people will at the margin be persuaded by things like full approval.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#127

Post by jerf » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:30 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #65

throwawaysea wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a pivot for me, particularly since I got the vaccine, but I think there are legitimate reasons to be hesitant and removing one reason doesn’t invalidate other reasons people may bring up. The big one in my mind is how do Pfizer, BioNTech, or the FDA validate safety of the vaccine over the long term? For instance what if it turns out that something approved today turns out to be carcinogenic twenty years from…

> The big one in my mind is how do Pfizer, BioNTech, or the FDA validate safety of the vaccine over the long term? By looking at other vaccines historically and seeing that side effects tend to happen in the first few weeks. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/expect/af... > Vaccine monitoring has historically shown that side effects generally happen within six weeks of receiving a vaccine dose.

"By looking at other vaccines historically and seeing that side effects tend to happen in the first few weeks."

"Other vaccines historically" work on fundamentally different principles. We can not use that data to assume that mRNA vaccines are going to work the same way.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#128

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:30 PM UTC

Do you hear that? It's the sound of millions of goalposts being moved.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#129

Post by throwawayboise » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:31 PM UTC

josephorjoe wrote: post #71

bluGill wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm expecting most fortune 500 companies will now mandate all employees be vaccinated, along with most colleges.

Yes, i would expect a lot of announcements this week. Looks like NYC Public Schools are going to mandate all staff be vaccinated ( https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/23/nyregion/nyc-schools-empl... ). I would expect most hospitals/health care organizations to pretty quickly mandate it as well. There is very little incentive for a large organization to take on the added costs of allowing a large percent of their staff/me…

Where I live, 50% are unvaccinated. That's not a small minority.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#130

Post by bastardoperator » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 2:31 PM UTC

c7DJTLrn wrote: post #40

eganist wrote: post #2

My biggest concern now is around seeing those who hedged their willingness to get the vaccine on its approval instead find a new reason not to get it. So with that in mind, I'm much more keen on seeing how employers will decide on vaccination mandates now that at least one vaccine is fully approved. Any news yet on whether any more employers are likely implementing mandates (if they haven't already this morning) base…

Concern? Why? The virus is under control in countries where the vaccine rollout has been swift. Why do you sound so keen to force something on people that they don't want, regardless of their reasons? Shouldn't people have the right to choose what they take? If people can lose their jobs over it then clearly they don't have that right - that's a form of coercion/blackmail. I think the focus on a small minority of peo…

It's socially irresponsible and the impact to others is possible death. I wouldn't have a problem if these people weren't spreading death to others, but instead, they choose to force themselves on the rest of us because "freedom". The same people that don't understand vaccines are also likely to think masks don't work, so they take zero precautions when it comes to their safety and others.

The focus is just, these folks are robbing everyone else of their freedom and happiness.