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

FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

fda.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 1001 posts

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#151

Post by thehappypm »

tohnjitor wrote: post #73
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.

FDA approval is mostly meaningless. Just this year they approved an Alzheimer's treatment which ended clinical trials early because it didn't work. https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/06/08/th...

I think you're over-simplifying the Alzheimer's treatment. The medicine was shown to be effective in reducing plaques, and has been approved for any medical use where reducing plaques is the goal. However, reducing plaques does not seem to actually help patients with Alzheimer's. So the medicine "works" in the sense that it does what it's supposed to (reduce plaques) but does not help Alzheimer's patient outcomes and should not be used for that purpose. The FDA made the bone-headed decision to let the medicine get its seal of approval anyway, knowing full well that every doctor in the USA would prescribe it anyway.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#152

Post by Alex3917 »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #142
tohnjitor wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FDA approval is mostly meaningless. Just this year they approved an Alzheimer's treatment which ended clinical trials early because it didn't work. https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/06/08/th...

No, it’s not meaningless. That’s hyperbole and a misunderstanding of what’s going on. That story was all over the headlines not because it was normal. It was in headlines, and in the front of your mind, because it was the exception that proves the rule. That’s not typical. Regardless, the FDA approval was mostly about assessing safety of the drug in controlled trials and follow-ups. Likewise, the vaccine studies were…

> That story was all over the headlines not because it was normal.

It was in the headlines because it is normal, and some people were trying to improve the system but they failed. There are tons of existing drugs that have been approved based on surrogate endpoints, e.g. iirc the entire class of statin drugs.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#153

Post by ceejayoz »

runako wrote: post #133
HideousKojima wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, so long as you don't need groceries in a major city.

I live in a major city and I have never even heard of requiring vaccinations to buy groceries. Is this a thing that exists somewhere? I would love to read more on this.

I'm not aware of anywhere in the US requiring it for groceries.

NYC is notable for requiring it for indoor dining, gyms, and a few others. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/03/nyregion/nyc-vaccine-mand...

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#154

Post by sharken »

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…

These cheap shots or trench war between both sides does nobody any good, it divides people instead of unite them.

For me the major issue with the vaccine is the extremely fast track from inventing it to getting it out the door.

An FDA approval will not change my mind on the safety of the vaccine, only time can do that.

By that i mean that we need more time to assess the long-term effects, something that many pro-vaccine people seem unwilling to accept. That is unfortunate.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#155

Post by supportlocal4h »

ceejayoz wrote: post #12
giantg2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"...instead find a new reason not to get it." Or continue an existing reason: "Information is not yet available about potential long-term health outcomes."

Of course, we don't have much info on the long-term health outcomes of getting COVID , either. It's like worrying about the long-term impact of breathing fire extinguisher powder while being engulfed by flames.

More like being inundated by smoke. My town is currently experiencing intermittent days of smokiness from fires burning 100s of miles away. People are dying in those fires. Homes are being destroyed.

But the local fire department isn't doing anything about it. Nobody around here is installing sprinklers as a precaution. They act like there is no fire at all.

Covid is a serious thing. But "engulfed by flames" is the exact overstatement that causes people to question the motivation of fear-mongers.

I'm vaccinated. I wear a mask. I think too many people are whipping up a frenzy for profit. Why don't we lockdown our highways when there are 600,000 deaths from auto accidents? Why not lockdown breweries when there are 2 million drunk-driving incidents? Why isn't there a frenzy over influenza?

Covid frenzy has a better marketing campaign. It's the kind of thing that has people claiming we are "engulfed by flames" when things get smoky.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#157

Post by tedunangst »

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."

Do people not understand quotation marks?

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#158

Post by antattack »

peakaboo wrote: post #94
cbg0 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely than not, they'll just move the goalposts farther and find a different excuse for not getting it.

Even if true, so what? It's their bodies. They should be allowed to choose, just like you are.

"Even if true, so what? It's their bodies. They should be allowed to choose, just like you are."

Is this still true if unvaccinated takes a hospital bed away from someone else or increases insurance costs to everyone else due to more expensive care?

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#159

Post by throwawaysea »

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.

From https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/23/us/politics/fda-approval-...

> Some experts have estimated that full approval might convince just five percent of those who are unvaccinated to get shots.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#160

Post by thehappypm »

sithlord wrote: post #111
ceejayoz wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I'll start by saying I am vaccinated, got it the first week immunocompromised people could: But I do not believe that this is valid at all, being that this is the very first mRNA vaccine. >By looking at other vaccines historically and seeing that side effects tend to happen in the first few weeks. I feel like what you are saying is basically like someone asking "How do we know that self driving cars will be safe on t…

I actually think your analogy of self-driving cars is a good one. If a billion people had safely rode in self-driving cars in the last year, and it saved hundreds of thousands of lives, I think we'd be approving them too.
Post reply on HN