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

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#281

Post by xyzzyz »

antattack wrote: post #229
xyzzyz wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replacing “unvaccinated” with “obese” here gives an argument for forcing obese people on diet against their will.

It's unamerican to force people to do something. However, smokers, for example, pay higher insurance premiums and alcohol is taxed higher.

Yeah, smoking is just about the only thing the insurance companies are legally allowed to upcharge for. That’s one of the main reasons Obamacare was passed in the first place.

The whole reality is now completely dystopian. We have people calling for denying healthcare to people who took “my body, my choice” as a right, because they voluntarily chose to not take the vaccine. However, these same people would be completely appalled by the idea of letting a drug addict die on the street from overdose, even though it is also a result of their voluntary choice to take drugs. The very same people who call for denying people things like a right to eat at a restaurant or get groceries without vaccine passport, claim that requiring ID to vote is a violation of civil rights, and all that despite the fact that black Americans are least vaccinated group in US. Total insanity.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#282

Post by pattrn »

input_sh wrote: post #95
tasogare wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly like governments are moving goalposts with their measures: one lockdown... second one... wait no, a third one is necessary; herd immunity will be reached at 70% vaccination + infected, ah no actually only vaccinated count and it's 90%... did I say 99%? No, it will be 100%! Meanwhile in Japan: people living freely their lives with no lockdowns, no forced vaccination, no vaccine pass. Another model is possible…

You may wanna look into Japan's cases and covid measures again. They got fucked over hard by the Olympics that about 80% of the population was against. 3x as many cases as their previous worst wave, despite travel being banned from pretty much everywhere and virtually nobody opposing masks.

It will be interesting to see if those cases result in many deaths. Typically when viruses mutate they become less deadly, so there's a chance these new cases won't have nearly as negative an outcome as the previous waves. The data is still coming in, but initial numbers look like a negligible amount of deaths compared to their historical numbers.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#283

Post by ceejayoz »

Markoff wrote: post #258

Question for everyone defending and promoting mRNA (1st ever approved 2020) and viral vector vaccines (2019) - do you also use all your software in Alpha/Beta versions and never wait for Stable? Or is it just your body you DGAF, but you have higher requirements for software?

Clinical trials are the alpha.

Emergency Use Authorization was the beta, and like Gmail's, probably went on far longer than it really had to stay in that state.

Full approval is the stable.

Being on an older Mac OS is also unlikely to get me killed.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#284

Post by acdha »

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…

> 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.

This line of thought leads to the sentence immediately following the one you quoted: if there are a large percentage of people who were hesitant due to sincere safety concerns, the mountain of data showing that the vaccines are low-risk will translate into more of them getting vaccinated but if they're motivated by factors which are not affected by scientific data then the primary mechanism for ending the pandemic will be the kinds of requirements which are made possible by full approval. That either gets people vaccinated or removes them from many contexts where they pose risk to everyone else.

Right now there are a lot of concerns raised about vaccine safety on political and social media. Some of those are devout anti-vaccination activists but I believe that they are still a relatively small fraction of the hesitant. When not being vaccinated comes with a direct personal cost we'll see how sincere those beliefs are.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#285

Post by oblio »

Izkata wrote: post #272
bluGill wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> herd immunity will be reached at 70% vaccination + infected, ah no actually only vaccinated count and it's 90%... did I say 99%? No, it will be 100%! 70% is enough for the original Covid. Covid moved the goalposts to Delta which needs different numbers. This is not experts moving the goalposts, this is Covid changing on us - as was always expected to happen and why experts said we don't know what % is required unti…

It was 84% for the original covid. Anything lower was a lie.

I think 70% was part of the original messaging based on general epidemiology statistics.

It was probably updated once we found out more about Covid-19 Alpha, and later for Delta.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#286

Post by vlovich123 »

icegreentea2 wrote: post #117
vlovich123 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why isn’t the EUA process the default then? It sounds like manufacturing being after approval would just be a cost thing producers could figure out without needing the FDA involved…? Edit: also why is there such a large lag between EUA and full FDA approval? That flow chart seems misleading.

EUA can be applied to many different product categories including diagnostics (basically every single PCR and antigen test in the US up to very recently was initially released under EUA), therapeutics (for example the FDA granted an EUA on chloroquine for threatment of COVID), other medical devices (for example PPE) and vaccines. The EUA rules for each category is different in how they differ from the categories base…

> In real terms, it looks like the two big time savers was reducing long-term effects follow up from 6 months to 2 months, and well as probably an abbreviated review of manufacturing processes.

That's plausible. Thanks!

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#287

Post by ch4s3 »

Markoff wrote: post #175
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…

This approval doesn't change a thing, about no known long term effects of viral vector vaccines (first time approved by any medical agency in world in November 2019) and mRNA vaccines (first time approved by any medical agency in world in December 2020). Sorry for not wanting to inject myself with unproven technology with unknown long term effects. Why politicians and certain pharma companies keep pushing these vacci…

To be fair, we've been shooting mRNA into people for medical research since about 1992. Early attempts were for gene therapy, but the approach has been abandoned because the mRNA breaks down so quickly. Beyond that, the mRNA is telling your cell to produce structural proteins. We've been using structural proteins in vaccines for AGES. Random bits of structural proteins are circulation around your body, being broken down, recycled, and eliminated as waste all of the time. There's no reason to believe that this structural protein is dangerous by itself.

I can't figure out what these vaccines do that could even have long term effects beyond getting your immune system to recognize the protein.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#288

Post by argvargc »

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.

The facebook posts typically reference one of several organised groups of hundreds of working doctors, some of whom claim to have directly observed high levels of concerningly-serious adverse reaction, even among small sample groups (eg, small town doctors who vaccinated many in the town).

If a doctor is recommending you don't take it based on their experience and expertise, it carries a bit more weight than "something you read on facebook". And if you can't trust doctors now, who may even be your own doctor, why would you trust anyone else, or "some other doctor"?

This is not something that can be resolved by bullying or mandates. It can only be resolved by open dialogue and debate between the two sides, which thus far, has been prevented.

Censorship and stifling of debate only hardens the opinions of either side.

It also makes no sense - many areas have massive resistance, no matter what has been thrown at them - proving the fear of "if we let them talk freely they'll influence others and go off and do whatever they want!" isn't founded. Basic human psychology, along with experience, shows the reverse has proven true.

If you stop people who are suspicious of something from being able to talk about what they're suspicious of, they get even more suspicious of it.

Certainly, there is no other time in history widespread censorship has resulted in anything other than widespread division, suspicion and ultimately, violence.

If employers mandate based on this approval, it will likely just result in mass walk-outs.

Minds are not won by force.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#289

Post by thepasswordis »

pornel wrote: post #273
thepasswordis wrote: post #200

People don’t want to take the vaccine because others are trying to force them to. They would say “it’s not FDA approved!” not as the core of their hesitancy, but because they were trying to be appeal to pro-vax peoples decision making framework. I don’t think we should be able to require them to. To many of you here: imagine the Trump admin trying to require you to take the vaccine in November of last year. Cities wo…

Here's the deal: you don't have to take the vaccine, but promise to stay away from people, and not burden hospitals when you get covid. It's not your personal choice when it can harm other people (e.g. immunocompromised people who can't get the vaccine themselves, other people who need ICU beds).

I will happily stay away from hospitals if they stop regulating drugs, and medical treatments.

Also: I did take the vaccine.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#290

Post by dham »

sleepysysadmin wrote: post #232
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”. Disclaimer: I am fully vax, so not the target audience. The subject is worth discussion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_vaccine#History RNA vaccines have decades of failures. Following the normal drug approval processes 100% of RNA attempts have failed. The only reason we got the vaccine today…

I took J&J and I agree with you. Why can't be people be scared. I don't judge anyone who won't take the vaccine.

I will say that we should have focused more on treatments instead of vaccines and then had a more traditional vaccine built on proven technology. Then we could have gotten everyone protected at the same time, stopping the variants.

Post reply on HN