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

Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

fiercebiotech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 1001 posts

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#401

Post by crottypeter »

throwawaymedia wrote: post #383
mataug wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand this concern, but what can I as an average citizen do about this ? - Should we choose the moderna vaccine instead ? - Should we avoid the oral vaccine, and opt for the injection instead ? - Should we merely be skeptical and wait ?

I'm skeptical and I wait. I'll be the last one in line to take the shot. I'm a software engineer and I know that if you deploy a system to production RIGHT AWAY, something is gonna fail.

But the virus is already in the live prod environment!

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#402

Post by GhettoComputers »

sabujp wrote: post #338
rory wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> some assholes will use it as an excuse not to get vaxxed, completely missing the point (among others, trying to prevent something worse than Delta). It's still quite unclear whether vaccinated or unvaccinated people pose a greater risk via viral evolution (especially w/r/t risk to people that are already vaccinated). Basically comes down to a comparison of a higher level of spread with "normal" genetic drift vs. a…

There's no bad propaganda when it comes to persuading people to get vaccinated. The alternative is the mess we're in now because people hesitate to get vaccinated. This study uses HIV to model sars mutation. HIV is highly mutagenic : https://www.google.com/search?q=hiv+mutation+rate&oq=hiv+mutation+rate&aqs=chrome.0.0i512l6j0i22i30l4.1834j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 sar-cov2 is less mutagenic than the flu and far le…

All those countries are small aside from China whose vaccine is not very effective and people with high East Asian ancestry have natural mutations against COVID. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2818-3

You say vaccination or serious measure, which is the truth? Could a mutation not occur elsewhere and infect a densely populated area? There isn’t evidence that the places most affected were the origins of the virus mutations.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#403

Post by ceejayoz »

salemh wrote: post #394
ceejayoz wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of Pfizer's trial vendors falsified information. https://www.cbs17.com/news/north-carolina-news/fact-check-re... > The Pfizer Phase III trial involved 44,000 people and 153 locations. From August 2020 through Sept. 17, 2020 — when she was fired — Jackson told CBS 17 that Ventavia accounted for at least 1,200 of those people and accounted for three sites. The author of the BMJ piece is quoted as saying “people are…

Why do you trust this company? https://corporatewatch.org/pfizer-six-scandals-to-remember/ 1986: Pfizer had to withdraw an artificial heart valve from the market after defects led to it being implicated in over 300 deaths. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) withdrew its approval for the product in 1986 and Pfizer agreed to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation after multiple lawsuits were brought…

> Why do you trust this company?

The great news is that I don't have to.

The vaccines are being widely administered by dozens of countries, each with their own regulatory authorities, and the whole process is generating enormous amounts of data, including ones outside Pfizer's control/influence.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#404

Post by mataug »

throwawaymedia wrote: post #383
mataug wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand this concern, but what can I as an average citizen do about this ? - Should we choose the moderna vaccine instead ? - Should we avoid the oral vaccine, and opt for the injection instead ? - Should we merely be skeptical and wait ?

I'm skeptical and I wait. I'll be the last one in line to take the shot. I'm a software engineer and I know that if you deploy a system to production RIGHT AWAY, something is gonna fail.

Wait before taking the oral vaccine ? Or wait before taking the existing FDA approved Pfizer vaccine ?

And why not take the J&J or Moderna vaccine if Pfizer is the only concern here ?

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#405

Post by GhettoComputers »

Steltek wrote: post #220
Fellshard wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question: is it necessary to get vaxxed if - all else held the same - the cost is not significantly higher for the antiviral? Wouldn't that cut the risk down so significantly that we can safely say, "Vaccinate if you're at-risk for your own protection, and have negligible risk otherwise"? This changes the entire risk calculation.

I'm guessing you only get this pill if you're hospitalized with severe symptoms. In which case, you're still occupying hospital beds/resources, which is the main remaining threat to rational society.

It was to prevent hospitalization.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#406

Post by ADSSDA »

throwawaymedia wrote: post #370
ceejayoz wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of Pfizer's trial vendors falsified information. https://www.cbs17.com/news/north-carolina-news/fact-check-re... > The Pfizer Phase III trial involved 44,000 people and 153 locations. From August 2020 through Sept. 17, 2020 — when she was fired — Jackson told CBS 17 that Ventavia accounted for at least 1,200 of those people and accounted for three sites. The author of the BMJ piece is quoted as saying “people are…

Quoted post unavailable.

VAERS is a great thing, but it's deeply unfortunate that antivax conspiracy theorists have used it to spread lies like yours.

https://www.science.org/content/article/antivaccine-activist...

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#407

Post by odyssey7 »

prepend wrote: post #70
phh wrote: post #13

> Pfizer used data on patients who were treated within three days of symptom onset as the headline finding in its press release > There were six hospitalizations and no deaths among the 607 patients who received Paxlovid within five days of symptom onset, compared to 41 hospitalizations and 10 deaths in the placebo cohort. > Like Merck, Pfizer excluded people vaccinated against COVID-19 from its late-phase study. No…

If the cost is low enough and the side effects are mild enough it could work. People would take it before a test is positive so would end up taking it when they didn’t really need it. It’s similar to the antivirals for flu where you need to take it early on so it becomes habit to test early and start early. Home labs will help with this too. Where someone could take a test, get a prescription and pickup within a few…

A useful comparison. I have never taken Tamiflu because I know I’d need to haul my weak, shivering, flu-infected self through public to see a doctor to get the Rx, go to the pharmacy… all for the personally-uncertain benefit of Tamiflu.

Nowadays, this should be easier with so many virtual appointment options and delivery services. It should be, but is it?

There should be an app that does all of it for you. 1. Scan your insurance card. 2. You get notified when a doctor is ready for your virtual visit. 3. If appropriate you get the Rx written. 4. That day, some delivery service will bring you the Rx. 5. Maybe a testing service stops by as well.

Insurance companies should want to participate if it decreases Flu or Covid hospitalization for a reasonable cost.

Anyone want to make this happen? My fall classes are nearly all finished.

Edit: Pharmaceutical companies may wish to partner as well. Lots of avenues for this kind of service to find revenue.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#408

Post by ceejayoz »

djanogo wrote: post #397
ceejayoz wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of Pfizer's trial vendors falsified information. https://www.cbs17.com/news/north-carolina-news/fact-check-re... > The Pfizer Phase III trial involved 44,000 people and 153 locations. From August 2020 through Sept. 17, 2020 — when she was fired — Jackson told CBS 17 that Ventavia accounted for at least 1,200 of those people and accounted for three sites. The author of the BMJ piece is quoted as saying “people are…

Your take is completely wrong, OP didn't make it "political", he said Pfizer falsified data and your post confirms that.

> he said Pfizer falsified data

Which is an assertion the BMJ article doesn't support.

"Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight. Paul D Thacker reports"

"A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial."

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#409

Post by dragonwriter »

colordrops wrote: post #110

Does anyone have a sense as to when US society will completely eliminate COVID measures? Is it just me or is there no clear exit criteria anymore? This will go on forever without exit criteria.

Most COVID measures are not at the US federal level. Some mandated measures have exit criteria, at the level of government issuing them.

> This will go on forever without exit criteria.

It will go on without an exit decision, but the exit criteria that have been issued have frequently been adjusted anyway, because understanding of how current metrics project the future have evolved. Which is probably why their are fewer announced criteria and more reliance on periodic, holistic review.

Re: Pfizer's oral Covid-19 antiviral cuts hospitalization, death by 85%

#410

Post by nsxwolf »

nsxwolf wrote: post #141
tsywke44 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same antivaxxers who ”refuse to take experiemental drugs from big pharma Pfizer” will gobble this pill down no questions asked. Which just proves, the anti-vaxxer moment is based on the primitive instinct of ”pain and needles=bad” Being scared of vaccines should be considered the same thing as having a fear of dentists. Or pets hating going to the vet.

I'm not sure that's how it works. There's a calculus to this I don't quite understand. The group blesses and curses treatments based on contradictory criteria. Ivermectin is blessed, supposedly because it is cheap. Molnupiravir is cursed, because it is a new drug Big Pharma wants you to pay more for. The vaccines are cursed, even though they're cheap. Monoclonal antibodies are blessed, even though they are very expen…

I'm being downvoted but in March, conservatives were screaming about how unfair it was that prisoners were getting their shots first. Things aren't always what they seem.
Post reply on HN