Live data from Hacker News

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

fiercebiotech.com

141–150 of 1001 posts

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

#141

We had reports of people who wanted to take weird-ass drugs-of-the-day just to refuse getting vaccinated. And screaming "conspiracy" when their efficacy was not confirmed to be as high as they expected. Good that we have something that actually works, bad that some assholes will use it as an excuse not to get vaxxed, completely missing the point (among others, trying to prevent something worse than Delta).

The same antivaxxers who ”refuse to take experiemental drugs from big pharma Pfizer” will gobble this pill down no questions asked. Which just proves, the anti-vaxxer moment is based on the primitive instinct of ”pain and needles=bad” Being scared of vaccines should be considered the same thing as having a fear of dentists. Or pets hating going to the vet.

I'm not sure that's how it works. There's a calculus to this I don't quite understand.

The group blesses and curses treatments based on contradictory criteria.

Ivermectin is blessed, supposedly because it is cheap. Molnupiravir is cursed, because it is a new drug Big Pharma wants you to pay more for. The vaccines are cursed, even though they're cheap. Monoclonal antibodies are blessed, even though they are very expensive, and are effectively just the products of vaccination.

I think it's more likely people are just doing what they are told by whoever influences them the most. None of it has to be consistent or make any kind of sense.

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

#142
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...?

Unfortunately, it's expensive. The cost of R&D to bring a new drug to market is around $1 billion, and this doesn't include the cost of marketing (though it does include the cost of drugs that fail the approval process)(see https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762311 ). At these numbers, it's hard to raise the money unless you think the drug is gonna be profitable.

On the one hand, yep absolutely.

However on the other hand I look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Queen_Elizabeth_(R08) which cost $4 billon to build.

A billion is a lot of money but not for governments, it's kinda tragic when you look at what we spend on some things that we haven't figured out a more sensible way of allocating resources.

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

#143

We had reports of people who wanted to take weird-ass drugs-of-the-day just to refuse getting vaccinated. And screaming "conspiracy" when their efficacy was not confirmed to be as high as they expected. Good that we have something that actually works, bad that some assholes will use it as an excuse not to get vaxxed, completely missing the point (among others, trying to prevent something worse than Delta).

Genuine question: is it necessary to get vaxxed if - all else held the same - the cost is not significantly higher for the antiviral? Wouldn't that cut the risk down so significantly that we can safely say, "Vaccinate if you're at-risk for your own protection, and have negligible risk otherwise"? This changes the entire risk calculation.

I guess even if that were the case, there'd still be the increased risk of catching and passing it to vulnerable people with reduced immunity.

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

#144
I am thinking: if and when this is approved, we have to think about distribution.

This drug is fantastically effective at preventing hospitalisation and death, if administered within three days of symptom onset.

That gives quite a long time! But we still need to make it easy to take. Do pharmacies give it out? ER rooms? We don't want to wait until people are hospitalised; we are trying to avoid that.

So when you test positive, does the government send you out a pill with the "sorry, you have to isolate" SMS?

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

#145

Does anyone have a sense as to when US society will completely eliminate COVID measures? Is it just me or is there no clear exit criteria anymore? This will go on forever without exit criteria.

Probably about as long as they will make us take our shoes off at the airport.

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

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they won’t. conspiracy theories are based on instincts and emotions not any science or rationality. pills are basically just food(=good) to the subconscious lizard brain, zero negative connotations from evolution, zero conspiracy theories

But if that were an iron truth, wouldn't people be comfortable with GMOs?

GMO’s is emotional, largely based on the public image around the word ”mutant” meaning a hulk like green person that was irradiated by a James Bond villain etc

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

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comparable individual outcome, worse societal outcome - you still spread it, so no reduction in overall cases, unlike a vaccine.

Vaccine doesn't prevent spreading.

No: https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/vaccinated-people...

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

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the consequence of not taking it is death, I think people would run to the front of the queue, though.

But that's just it, there's less than a 2% chance of dying even if you get COVID.

A 2% chance of death is actually very high risk for most people. Obviously with a name like dontcare007 I'm sure you've a huge appetite for risk that others don't.

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

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn’t we establish last week the vaccine is not effective at stopping the spread of the virus?

It's not a binary yes-no question. It is still effective at stopping the spread of the virus, though not perfect.

It's not quite a binary yes-no question, but the vaccines not being effective enough for it to be possible to achieve herd immunity through vaccination alone makes a huge difference in how widely the virus ends up spreading.
Post reply on HN