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

Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

clinicaltrialsabundance.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 100 posts

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#51

Post by basch »

freediddy wrote: post #46
CountHackulus wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the article, you'll see that they did in fact meet the full requirements by August 2021. The EAU plus criteria were met quickly, but they did meet every criteria normally used.

All the doctors and medical professionals were forced to get vaccinated in early 2021. If something went wrong, the very people that we depend on could have suffered mass casualties. And many of them did suffer from effects from the vaccine, even though they likely had already contracted COVID beforehand and a vaccine was unnecessary. This is the problem with mandates and anti-science thinking.

>many of them did suffer from effects from the vaccine

what does many in this sentence mean? are you claiming that a large percent of health professionals "suffered effects"?

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#52

Post by linuxftw »

hobonation wrote: post #44
techteach00 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The communication to the public wasn't honest enough. My parents are very much by the book. They follow instructions. They were very surprised to get Covid 3 times after following their vaccination and booster schedule. It wasn't made clear enough to the public that these shots were not sterilizing vaccines.

The sometimes said the opposite, sadly: CDC Director Rochelle Walensky- March 2021 statement: Walensky told MSNBC: "Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick. And that it's not just in the clinical trials but it's also in real world data."

And we know this was an outright lie, because the clinical trials did not include contracting the virus as an endpoint. In fact, in Pfizer's data, they only used PCR tests on symptomatic people, rather than periodic testing.

So to say the clinical trials reflected absence of infection is a deliberate lie. Either they knew what the data said and lied, or they didn't know what the data said and stated they did, which is a lie.

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#53

Post by linuxftw »

notfromhere wrote: post #24
davydm wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the answer to the actual question posed by the article is simple: money. Big companies made huge bank by offloading risk onto people. Let's not pretend it was anything else.

Covid killed lots of people, what are we even talking about. I was healthy and vaccinated when I got covid and that did a number on me, I don't know where I'd be today if i wasn't

Well, that's because you didn't get your booster soon enough.

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#54

Post by basch »

softwaredoug wrote: post #33
davydm wrote: post #2

[flagged]

The only real risk I’ve been able to find in literature of mRNA vaccines is myocarditis in young men Occurring in roughly 8 out a million doses. ( https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availabi... ) You make your own risk assessment, but that seems extremely low risk as a drug that prevents millions of deaths

epidemiological risk of myocarditis from COVID-19 infection is from seven to over forty times higher than the risk associated with receiving an mRNA vaccine.

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#55

Post by basch »

linuxftw wrote: post #16
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> many people still sit with the issues they caused From the vaccines? Is there any clinical basis for this category of long-term vaccine harm?

You're aware that the J&J was pulled from the market due to cardiac issues, right? It's not a theory that actual people were actually harmed by the products, the only question is risk/reward.

J&J was not an mRNA vaccine either. the J&J vaccine gave further evidence that mRNA vaccines are the safer path.

it was blood clotting issues.

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#56

Post by basch »

jedberg wrote: post #29
linuxftw wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're aware that the J&J was pulled from the market due to cardiac issues, right? It's not a theory that actual people were actually harmed by the products, the only question is risk/reward.

More cardiac issues than the other vaccine options but far less than the virus. If it were the only option it would still be on the market. It was only pulled because better options showed up.

it was blood clotting, not cardiac

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#57

Post by chimprich »

ralusek wrote: post #50
chimprich wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And they were rushed out This implies that corners were cut. They were not. They went through the full regulatory procedures. > many people still sit with the issues they caused Few medicines are entirely without side effects. The effects of the virus were in general far worse. Millions of lives were saved from the vaccines. > Not a win Apart from the millions of lives that were saved. > at the very least, they red…

> This implies that corners were cut. They were not. They went through the full regulatory procedures. That's absolutely not true. The standard for new vaccines, iirc, required a period of something on the order of 7 years. Time, in this case, is not a function of procedure that can be expedited in an emergency, but is actually an important element in and of itself. Many issues do not manifest immediately and actuall…

> That's absolutely not true. The standard for new vaccines, iirc, required a period of something on the order of 7 years.

I'm going to stop you there. "That's absolutely not true" versus "iirc". You're making a vehement argument based on remembered nonsense.

There was no such requirement. And if there was, then you should have no problem citing it.

> I could go off forever on this topic

Please don't.

> The amount of obfuscation and gaslighting

Such irony.

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#58

Post by basch »

techteach00 wrote: post #30
davydm wrote: post #2

[flagged]

The communication to the public wasn't honest enough. My parents are very much by the book. They follow instructions. They were very surprised to get Covid 3 times after following their vaccination and booster schedule. It wasn't made clear enough to the public that these shots were not sterilizing vaccines.

definitely a lot of misinformation from the get go, from not needing masks, to waring masks to protect oneself (vs protecting others), to most of the scientific world needing to redefine airborn because of a bad assumption that permeated all of literature.

I remember VERY early on in the covid timeline, I believe it was in germany, a study came out that said it wasnt surviving on surfaces, and we still oversanitized for eons instead of focusing on not breathing each others air.

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#59

Post by JumpCrisscross »

linuxftw wrote: post #36
jedberg wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More cardiac issues than the other vaccine options but far less than the virus. If it were the only option it would still be on the market. It was only pulled because better options showed up.

> far less than the virus Unfortunately, this isn't a claim that can be made. We don't know how many people got the virus, or how many times. And IIRC, the cardiac issues of the virus were mostly in older demographics, the J&J was affecting young a healthy people.

> the cardiac issues of the virus were mostly in older demographics, the J&J was affecting young a healthy people

I have a friend who got Type 1 diabetes after Covid attacked his pancreas. (And he got infected in March 2020, so this isn't someone choosing to be diseased getting their just desserts.)

Re: Why were Covid vaccine trials so fast?

#60

Post by freediddy »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #45
freediddy wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trials missed the fact that younger males under 40 have a material increased risk myocarditis from the vaccine. And when reports of that started coming out, the media and "medical establishment" fought against those reports and said the people who were saying this were "anti-vaxxers". But finally the CDC acknowledged this and added it to their communication without accountability or apologies. Their reaction was…

COVID itself causes a significant increase in the risk of myocarditis, substantially higher than the vaccines. Symptoms similar but milder and less frequent is a general expectation of any vaccine, especially early forms of the vaccine. Early vaccines were deactivated or variant forms of the actual disease, and modern vaccines generally contain fragments of the actual disease.

No. Risk of myocarditis for males under 40 after the 2nd dose of Moderna was at >4X higher than the risk of myocarditis. This is indisputable. There is a clear signal that the vaccines caused injury that weren't detected until years after the "trials".

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/epdf/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA....

Post reply on HN