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

561–570 of 1001 posts

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#561

Post by nitrogen »

h_anna_h wrote: post #518
ramesh31 wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A great point. The same people decrying a vaccine that has been safely administered to nearly a billion people at this point and extensively studied will be the first ones to try all sorts of untested homeopathic and "alternative" nonsense.

Citation needed. This to me seems like an attempt to group various people who disagree with you and classify them as lunatics.

Indeed, there are plenty of people who "believe in science" and trust authority figures, who believe in various forms of woo.

We can do better than guilt by association. It's a very weak argument, and turns more people away from potential vaccination. In fact insulting the remaining audience is worse than preaching to the choir, because it even turns away people who were previously 100% on one's side.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#562

Post by kelnos »

tasogare wrote: post #34
cbg0 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely than not, they'll just move the goalposts farther and find a different excuse for not getting it.

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…

The goalposts would not have moved if people actually put the health of their communities over their personal desires and convenience.

Other models are certainly possible, but only work in places where people have higher trust in their government, and think about collective welfare over their own individual selfishness. Unfortunately, people in the US (and much of the West) care too much about "mah lib-ur-tee" than doing their part to help keep their neighbors healthy.

Also I think your focus on Japan is a little weird; they went through their own bad time with COVID, and even consider the recent case of the large flare-ups surrounding the Olympics.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#563

Post by singhrac »

nanis wrote: post #482
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Control group(s) were given vaccines after 14 days I saw some conspiracy theory that said this weeks ago and just shook my head at how ridiculous that would be. At least it seemed like a conspiracy theory because my view of control group was apparently something else. Emergency use authorization, for a vaccine that was never tested on humans, and both Pfizer and Moderna eliminated the control groups? What the hell!…

> I saw some conspiracy theory ... What conspiracy theory? StatNews[1]: > Pfizer and BioNTech speed up timeline for offering Covid-19 vaccine to placebo volunteers > Pfizer and its partner BioNTech plan to offer their Covid-19 vaccine to any clinical trial volunteer who received placebo by March 1, several months earlier than initially planned. and NPR[2]: > Long-Term Studies Of COVID-19 Vaccines Hurt By Placebo Reci…

I don't see the link between these articles and the control groups receiving the vaccine after 14 days? It seems here that Pfizer gave permission for participants to get vaccinated on March 1st, which is 8 months after the start of phase 3 trials.

Imagine you volunteered for a very experimental trial for the greater good and then were told that you were given a placebo and now cannot receive a vaccine for several years and will have to be more cautious. You can see in the article that a volunteer from the trial is strongly advocating for giving the participants access to vaccines.

Obviously this complicates the statistical analysis (you can try to use a double-blind crossover study to get some statistical power out of this, but clearly the messaging gets more complicated), but I'm not seeing anything about a "14 day" timeline.

It's also worth noting that any study participant can just freely choose to break the study and go in and get vaccinated (lowering the measured efficacy of the vaccine)_whenever they want. Giving them a concrete date is a good alternative to that.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#564

Post by hall0ween »

learc83 wrote: post #516
hall0ween wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation? It's a bold claim, without any evidence to back it up. HN is different than the comments section of a news site.

Look through a list of vaccine safety recalls. Here's a highlight of the big ones--this is the list that most vaccine hesitant people talk about when they discuss their issues with vaccine safety. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.... None of the side effects in that list took more than a few weeks to occur, and the majority them happened within a few days. >HN is different than the comments…

Thanks for the list too. Looking at the examples from the 90s on - aside from the rotavirus vaccine - this looks like a list of examples for why there should not be concern. Concerns were raised for vaccines and subsequently found to be uncorrelated.

Regardless of interpretation too, this doesn't support the claim the commenter made - there has never been a vaccine recalled within a year.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#565

Post by giantg2 »

ryandrake wrote: post #320
giantg2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"...instead find a new reason not to get it." Or continue an existing reason: "Information is not yet available about potential long-term health outcomes."

The great thing about that excuse is that the amount of information needed can be set arbitrarily. There will never be enough information available to satisfy people using this excuse. It'll just be "INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER"[1] until the end of time. 1: https://www.physics.princeton.edu/ph115/LQ.pdf

I agree in general. The difference here is that the quote about longterm effects being unknown is from the FDA. A layperson could set their standard as being when the FDA has that information. Hopefully the FDA has objective procedures and measure to make those determinations. I feel that would be a reasonable approach.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#566

Post by lkbm »

albatross13 wrote: post #430
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 already triple vaxxed (booster), but there are plenty of aspects to this that help drive people's fear: - Phase 3 trials for Pfizer not complete until May 2023: ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04368728 ) - Control group(s) were given vaccines after 14 days: ( https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/9691430... ) - Pfizer generates 1.9bn in revenue off of 100m doses, just in the USA alone, cre…

The NPR citation you posted suggests the Moderna control group was offered the vaccine in January 2021, about 14 days after it was approved.

Moderna was approved on December 18, 2020.[0]

Moderna phase 3 trial started on July 27, 2020.[1]

IE, the control group was offered the vaccine more than five months after the trial began. This is before completion of the trial (Oct 2022 for Moderna, IIRC), which is an issue, but this "14 day" as written seems to be suggesting that it was 14 days after the trial began, when it's actually five month.

Additionally, when a treatment proves to be highly effective, it's normal and appropriate to start providing that treatment to the control group early, because leaving them to die or otherwise suffer an illness is considered unethical. This isn't something unique to the COVID vaccines.

[0] https://www.fda.gov/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/modern...

[1] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/07/phase-3-...

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#567

Post by dham »

wombatpm wrote: post #440
dham wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

J&J and AZ are more traditional vaccines. People have been looking for treatments hence the HCQ and invermectin investigations. Look at how long it took them to make steroids a standard treatment option. We now have a variant that is more contagious (delta) I’m waiting for the variant that is more deadly.

A virus doesn't become more contagious and deadly. It can only do one or the other. Think good, fast, cheap in programing terms. Pick 2.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#568

Post by hatware »

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.

> people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”.

What is it, day 600 something of "just two weeks" to stop the spread? Oh wait, that's just the _other side's_ fault for not following the rules as well as you did.

From where I sit, it seems like a lot of people are having a hard time admitting that shutting down the world's economy may have been the wrong choice, hindsight.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#569

Post by misiti3780 »

a_imho wrote: post #450
vvilliamperez wrote: post #239

Like someone else mentioned, I think the core issue is "Should the government have the right to mandate medical procedures?" In my mind, I'm vaccinated, so what does it matter to me if others are not?

Kevin Sorbo's take https://twitter.com/ksorbs/status/1417538663018344448 Remember to get vaccinated or a vaccinated person might get sick from the virus that they were vaccinated against because you’re not vaccinated. I'm really interested a rebuttal to this.

That argument makes sense only if the borders were shut down though -- right ?

I'm pro vaccine, but even if everyone in the US got vaccinated in the next month we would still have to worry about vaccine-resistant variants coming in via other places.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#570

Post by neither_color »

albatross13 wrote: post #430
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 already triple vaxxed (booster), but there are plenty of aspects to this that help drive people's fear: - Phase 3 trials for Pfizer not complete until May 2023: ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04368728 ) - Control group(s) were given vaccines after 14 days: ( https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/9691430... ) - Pfizer generates 1.9bn in revenue off of 100m doses, just in the USA alone, cre…

>I'm already triple vaxxed (booster),

May I ask why? I've had two shots without much hesitation but this whole booster thing came out of nowhere and gives me "fool me twice" vibes. I understand getting a flu shot every year to target new strains but this would be the exact same shot as 8 months ago.

Post reply on HN