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

151–160 of 446 posts

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

#151

Post by _jesseb »

enragedcacti wrote: post #142
737maxtw wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding of at least the Pfizer vaccine was that it primarily lowered the risk of developing COVID from a COV-19 infection. Also if I read it properly that means you could/would wond up in the asymptomatic spreader category. IF all of that is true (and if i misunderstood, please correct me!) It would make the most sense to give it to higher risk individuals first.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but the latest I had heard was that _pre-symptomatic_ spread was the issue rather than asysmptomatic. As in, if you got covid but never developed symptoms, you likely never had enough viral load to transmit the virus. If you later showed symptoms then you likely had a high viral load between contraction and showing symptoms and were likely to transmit the virus. So if this stop…

Yeah, that's my understanding as well. There's a period of time between when you initially get it and when you start showing symptoms (4-5 days is the number I've heard) where you are contagious but most likely don't know it. That's why Covid is particularly nasty, because it spreads before it shows symptoms.

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

#152

Post by dragonwriter »

sekai wrote: post #103
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 :)

Few key facts: • In the entire history of vaccines, only one has been recalled because the vaccine itself caused long term side effects (a rotavirus vaccine that had rare complications and no deaths for those under 1yr). If you can't find any papers about it, that's why. It's like finding a paper on death by lava lamp explosions. It's happened ( https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-dec-01-na-brief... .), but…

> These studies were larger than usual to make up for the decreased time

Larger studies don't make up for decreased time in either identifying long term effectiveness or identifying delayed effects.

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

#153

Post by ceejayoz »

bamboozled wrote: post #141
ceejayoz wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > for Emergency Use Authorization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_use_authorization > authorizes FDA to facilitate availability of an unapproved product, or an unapproved use of an approved product, during a declared state of emergency from one of several agencies or of a "material threat" by the Secretary of Homeland Security Rushed, yes, but via an existing set of rules for this sort of sc…

Wasn’t Remdesivir also given emergency approval and is now to be avoided ?

In the sense that it's not as helpful as initially thought, not that it's actively dangerous.

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

#154

Post by bluGill »

jdndbfbf wrote: post #140
bluGill wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too late for that - the beta testers have already found it good. A phase 3 trial is beta test.

I'll let you test it for me and find out what the long term effects are.

I'll take my chances.

My sister-in-law is dead. A brother-in-law is still unsure if we can talk across a room without fainting (6 months ago he was running several miles a day). This is just in my tiny circle of close family.

Thousands in a much larger sample of had the vaccine with no side effects anywhere near that bad.

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

#156

Post by brobdingnagians »

unnouinceput wrote: post #120
Kye wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The Italian bridge that collapsed after decades because of faulty assumptions about the concrete involved is a more accurate comparison. Assuming we know more than we do, and thinking it has no serious side effects because non have appeared in the first few months is not logically consistent.

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

#158

Post by dsjoerg »

jdndbfbf wrote: post #140
bluGill wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too late for that - the beta testers have already found it good. A phase 3 trial is beta test.

I'll let you test it for me and find out what the long term effects are.

You should balance that against your chance of contracting COVID-19, and the unknown long term effects of COVID-19.

For me, the long-term consequences of the vaccine seem to be better understood (theoretically, not empirically) than the long-term consequences of a COVID-19 infection.

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

#160

Post by saguntum »

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 :)

This comment and another got me looking into mRNA more. It seems like an mRNA vaccine is more akin to food you consume that produces a desired effect, rather than something permanently sticking around in your body. It doesn't permanently modify your genetics.

mRNA is usually produced by DNA and is temporarily used by cells to create proteins. In this case, the mRNA is used to create proteins with a similar structure to the coronavirus. These proteins produce the desired immune response but do not harm you. Like other proteins, they don't stick around permanently, just the immune response does. Additionally, the mRNA itself only lasts several minutes to days. [0]

It's a relatively simple biological process that's well understood. This gives me a lot of confidence in its safety profile. Unlike a regular vaccine, you also don't have to create the protein directly, which leads to fewer errors during production from my understanding. You're producing a simpler, more basic compound, and can be more certain about the quality of individual doses.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messenger_RNA#Degradation

Post reply on HN