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

351–360 of 446 posts

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

#351

Post by fooflarney »

dboreham wrote: post #301
throwaway3699 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not anti vaxx. But I totally understand after institution after institution failed us all, that people will be skeptical about a miracle vaccine developed in mere months. I have faith in the scientists, but anyone can see the incentives are dodgy here.

I think it's easier to support this concern the older you get. Here's why: as you age, you begin to see documentaries on TV and YouTube that expose widespread government coverup and misinformation operations from the past, (and this is crucial) about episodes through which you lived. The obvious example for me is the nuclear industry. A concrete example: in the 1970s we were told that nuclear power plants were entire…

Agree 100%, people underestimate how vicious and cruel supposedly benevolent the wizards of capitalist drug manufacturers can be. Much of our modern pharmaceuticals originate from Nazi organizations like IG Farben, pfizer, bayer, merck... (operation paperclip) all not prosecuted after ww2. Your nuclear example is one I also remind people of as well. As climate change wreaks havoc (something science rationale minded folk believe), somehow they think events like Fukushima will "just be fine", when the reality is that Fukushima will possibly never be contained, and we may have multiple fukushima type events globally if the inability to power and manage them is taken away by circumstances beyond a government or intl agencie's control.

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

#352

Post by jackfrodo »

bawolff wrote: post #338
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.

Scientists are people to. They don't magically know how a new never before seen virus works, instantly. It takes time to study it. Advice at the beginning are best guesses; some is going to turn out to be wrong. With time and experience, knowledge gets more firm, advice shifts and solidifies.

Exactly. And going by vaccine timelines, we're still at the very beginning, so I don't blame people for being hesitant to get injected with it.

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

#353

Post by fairity »

I get the sense that a lot of HN users are down-voting any comment that calls into question this vaccine's safety.

I think this will end up having the opposite effect than intended.

There's truth that there's a remote chance this vaccine has long-term side effects. From my reading, I would estimate that risk to be 0.0001% - 0.01%.

If your goal is to promote vaccination, it's better to actively engage in the conversation by explaining how the benefits far outweigh the risks. Silencing dissenting opinions will only serve to reinforce those beliefs.

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

#354

Post by jMyles »

Exmoor wrote: post #323
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #312

Do we know how long does the vaccine holds? Is that like polio and lasts for years, or like the flu and you need a new dose each year?

I'm in a rush, so hopefully someone can dig up some actual links to scientific papers, but current immunity from naturally infected people has stayed strong and shows no sign of weakening. The immune response from the vaccination has at least as strong, so in all likelihood we're looking at very long response.

> The immune response from the vaccination has at least as strong

Is that true? I always thought it was at most as strong (eg, David Katz says so here: https://youtu.be/YLLENema1Co?t=462), but I'm seeing this assertion float around also. Which is it?

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

#355

Post by gpm »

bluGill wrote: post #137
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 :)

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

The phase 3 trials is not over yet for another 2 years... which no one wants to wait for... hence the emergency use authorization.

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

#356

Post by sidr »

singemonkey wrote: post #168
throwaway3699 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not anti vaxx. But I totally understand after institution after institution failed us all, that people will be skeptical about a miracle vaccine developed in mere months. I have faith in the scientists, but anyone can see the incentives are dodgy here.

Please cite the lengthy list of institutions that have failed us all.

The FAA and its allowing Boeing to "self-certify" the 737-MAX.

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

#357

Post by bawolff »

jackfrodo wrote: post #352
bawolff wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scientists are people to. They don't magically know how a new never before seen virus works, instantly. It takes time to study it. Advice at the beginning are best guesses; some is going to turn out to be wrong. With time and experience, knowledge gets more firm, advice shifts and solidifies.

Exactly. And going by vaccine timelines, we're still at the very beginning, so I don't blame people for being hesitant to get injected with it.

We're hardly at the "beginning". There have been very large trials to establish safety and efficacy. Sure its not like we have years of study, but its hardly the beginning. More like the middle.

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

#358

Post by youareostriches »

fairity wrote: post #353

I get the sense that a lot of HN users are down-voting any comment that calls into question this vaccine's safety. I think this will end up having the opposite effect than intended. There's truth that there's a remote chance this vaccine has long-term side effects. From my reading, I would estimate that risk to be 0.0001% - 0.01%. If your goal is to promote vaccination, it's better to actively engage in the conversat…

How does non-expert speculation contribute to the discourse?

Certainly, we need to hear from all perspectives, but the opinions need to be informed and come with appropriate education.

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

#359

Post by brewdad »

aphextron wrote: post #205
saguntum wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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. This is a really good analogy. It's important to note that this stuff literally has to be stored at cryogenic temperatures just so it won't completely degrade before being injected. Once inside your body, it's comp…

Is there a way to package the vaccine that would "prove" proper handling all through the chain of custody? Sort of the biological equivalent of the shock tags moving companies put on boxes containing fragile items.

Given how sensitive to temperature this vaccine is, I would like some reassurance that no one mishandled it along the way.

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

#360

Post by floatingatoll »

lallysingh wrote: post #310
floatingatoll wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think voluntary exceptions will be granted for Covid, and I’m hard-pressed to come up with a case where an involuntary medical exception would be necessary for someone that is mobile. (No doubt a one in a billion case exists, of course.)

Allergies to one of the components? Raw egg allergies can preclude some vaccinations.

Neither vaccine under consideration today uses eggs or triggers the egg allergies that the most common influenza vaccines can. The general population degree of allergic reactions to vaccines is 1-2 people per million, with hives as the most common outcome; or between 1500 and 3000 people across the United States in a 100% vaccination scenario, of which many would get hives and no worse.

Egg allergies trigger careful treatment protocols surrounding many influenza vaccines, but do not in any way preclude vaccination or exempt one from it. Specifically, if your allergic reaction to eggs is severe enough to impair breathing, delivery of the vaccine must be delivered in a monitored medical setting that can treat you if an allergic reaction that impairs your breathing. You are only precluded from receiving an egg-based vaccination once you have experienced a severe reaction from an egg-based vaccine. Egg allergy alone is not sufficient.

Post reply on HN