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

291–300 of 446 posts

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

#291

Post by jackschultz »

tuna-piano wrote: post #41
Jaruzel wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems with the second dose for 18-55 year olds, perhaps 75% will feel fatigue, 50% have chills and 20% will have a fever.[1] This hasn't been widely shared yet and I'm a bit concerned how the public will react. Isn't the Flu vaccine side effects the same though?

Looks like for fever, flue vaccine is more like 1-2%. So maybe 10-20x more fever with this vaccine than flu vaccine. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/flu-shot-facts/2020/09...

Nah depends on what fever means. I got my flu shot this year, and I didn't have a fever, but felt like garbage for a day and a half where it was a struggle to have energy to do much of anything. Fever != feeling crappy.

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

#292

Post by floatingatoll »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #277
floatingatoll wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flu characteristics are well understood and you should encounter no obstacles in doing that research yourself.

I'm not sure why you're assuming bad faith here. I attempted to and found no source indicating a proportion of flu cases with lingering symptoms, with most sources only giving vague statements that symptoms can persist. If you've done the research and found it easy, would you be interested to share the results?

You indicated that a given data point would be interesting and relevant to the conversation, and then didn’t indicate that you had invested any time in researching that data point to contribute it to the conversation. It’s poor form to shrug off that effort into others when your participation in this specific discussion on HN suggests you are both familiar enough and capable enough to attempt to look it up yourself. That you attempted to do so and couldn’t find the answer would have been relevant to mention in your comment, and knowing that now, I’m happy to retract my reply.

(However, regardless, I do not consider researching your line of reasoning to be a valuable use of the time I have available for this discussion, so I will not be doing so. It’s not personal at all, though I imagine that’s of no comfort. Perhaps someone else will do so; I see someone trying in another branch.)

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

#293

Post by hannasanarion »

klmadfejno wrote: post #261
jackfrodo wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhh, points at 2020 The CDC advising people to not buy masks in February because "they don't work" comes to mind. The US Gov in general completely letting businesses and individuals plunge into bankruptcy. I think a lot of people have been awakened to the fact that "the system" is pretty ambivalent to their personal well-being.

Government is incompetent therefore private pharma company vaccines aren't safe. Got it.

You know the private pharma company in question is German, right? Is the German government also responsible for America's high caseload?

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

#294

Post by elicash »

tantalor wrote: post #272
elicash wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is one of those places where Congress (providing funding) and the administration (providing leadership) and the private sector (doing the actual work) were able to work together. I wish there were more examples of this type of thing. One area an effort like this is badly needed is for at-home rapid testing.

A lot of the "actual work" includes distribution, which the govt is handling through military.

Yours isn't an accurate picture of how the vaccine will be distributed. State and local governments are involved, health agencies in the federal government is involved. But private companies play the main role here, too: https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2020/08/14/trump-administrati... As I understand it, the role of the military is mostly in planning logistics:

Army Gen. Gustave F. Perna (who is the four-star general who is COO of Operation Warp Speed): “There will not be this vision that some have that there will be Army trucks driving through the streets delivering vaccines. The commercial industry knows how to do it.”

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/dod-planning-every-logisti...

So yeah, I think my summary -- that administration is playing a "leadership" role -- is quite right here, too.

I think a better point would be to praise the work done by NIAID and others. Obviously I wasn't diminishing the role of these fantastic scientists, or the role of people like Dr. Fauci, only highlighting that this vaccine was developed in the private sector (with roles played at every level of government).

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

#295

Post by just-juan-post »

unnouinceput wrote: post #135
vharuck wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's their life, not yours It's a lot of people's lives, not just theirs. Like with most vaccines, there'll be a fraction of the population who cannot safely get vaccinated. We need to think of this from a public health perspective: more unvaccinated people in spreading-prone situations means more risk to others (including those beyond the immediate situation) and more burden on health systems.

Dude, read my point again. I was asking why would he get upset if is his colleagues decide not to vaccinate. Not anything else.

isn't in insane how over the last few months people just assume their fellow man is a murderer for BREATHING?

this virus is causing more insanity than health effects.

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

#296

Post by known »

dfsegoat wrote: post #241
known wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In both the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines the RNA is encapsulated in “lipid nanoparticles”. These microscopic droplets of oily liquid — about 0.1 micron in diameter — enclose and protect the fragile genetic instructions as they are manufactured, transported and finally injected into people. https://archive.is/6dxTg

So it's naked mRNA wrapped in oil, basically?

“The lipid nanoparticles have some adjuvant activity, providing a little inflammation with the vaccination that helps the immune system to make antibodies and T-cells that target the Sars-Cov-2 virus,”

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

#297

Post by fairity »

lmilcin wrote: post #52
Neil44 wrote: post #37

This will save lives. However I imagine most people will end up getting the Oxford vaccine, that doesn't have the storage requirements or need a second dose and is a fraction of the cost.

Well, I wouldn't be so happy. Think about it. Out of million people only small percentage would become infected with covid and of that, only small percentage would die. On the other hand, vaccine must be distributed to everybody. Alternatively to people who, by occupation, have to contact many other people, daily. We don't know yet if there are complications from the vaccine. It is not possible to judge long term eff…

There is truth to your comment, but don't expect people to validate your idea.

It's in our best collective interest for everyone to take this vaccine even if there's a 0.01% chance it has negative side effects.

Even on an individual level, the cost-benefit of taking the vaccine is a no-brainer. Even if there's a 0.01% chance of negative side effects, the individual benefit of re-opening society far outweighs that risk.

It's true you can freeload and reap the benefits without the small risk, but if everyone thinks this way, there are no benefits to go around. Can't you just be a team player?

To put things in perspective, a 0.01% risk is like going skydiving once, or getting out of bed and doing your usual routine for a week.

It goes without saying that if the general public doesn't get vaccinated, you should definitely get vaccinated because the risk of catching COVID is worse than the risk of this vaccine.

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

#298

Post by whatshisface »

m1117 wrote: post #157

I'd go and get it ASAP, so I resume my life. Anti-vaxxers can isolate themselves forever :)

Vaccines are not 100% effective. You should continue to isolate until the virus is gone. If everyone that gets vaccinated immediately starts partying again, that 10% or so for whom the vaccine has no effect will contribute to prolonging the pandemic.

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

#299

Post by ericb »

FiberBundle wrote: post #288
ericb wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a good portion of people with long-term effects that weren't "vulnerable" but end up with chronic fatigue, lung damage, or mental health problems. If you compare the frequency of those side effects alone vs. the rarity of side effects we've seen in historical "bad" vaccines, you still end up with a pretty obvious cost-benefit in favor of taking it. From that point of view, "even smaller chance of dying" becom…

I doubt that's a high percentage of infected people. Do you have statistics that back up that claim?

Heart complications (inflammation): up to 60% (after removing pre-existing)

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/...

Mental illness: 20% within 5 weeks

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0...

Chronic Fatigue: 50% at 10 weeks

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.29.20164293v...

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

#300

Post by chadash »

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 :)

I think differently than you. I figure that 20,000 people have had this and haven't had serious complications. So probably a better than 1/20k change that if I get this I'll be okay. And I'll have a much better idea of this by the time I get it since I'm unlikely to get the first round of vaccines anyway since I'm not in an elevated risk group.

Meanwhile, out of a 23,359,180 males in my age group (25-34) in the US, 1,144--or 1 in 20,418--have died [0]. And obviously, the death rate is significantly higher than 1 in 20,418, because not every 25-34 year old has had COVID.

If I get the vaccine and I can go back to living my life normally, that alone is worth the low risk to me. And sure, there's the (remote) possibility that the vaccine has some long-term side effects, but I have to weigh that against the (in my mind higher) possibility of COVID having some long term side effect.

Given that I can't practically isolate myself completely for the next 8 months, I'm getting this vaccine as soon as possible.

[0] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

Post reply on HN