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

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#601

Post by giarc »

albatross13 wrote: post #479
ruffrey wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is $19 per dose expensive? Not knowing anything about pharma costs, it seems about what it'd expect. Especially compared to the economic savings.

I think it is, when you read Pfizer's contract and fact0r in things like "Governments have to pay, regardless of whether or not the shipment arrives: on time, damaged, or at all". I suggest you browse their leaked contract: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20616251-albanian-pf... Pfizer has also been strong arming small, Latin American countries, to the tune of trying to get military assets as "collateral" ( h…

>Governments have to pay, regardless of whether or not the shipment arrives: on time, damaged, or at all

Wouldn't this be standard language in any contract? If I buy a widget and they ship it to me, if it gets damaged in transit, or lost in transit I still have to pay the producer, I then go after the delivery company (and/or their insurance) for compensation.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#602

Post by christophilus »

nyokodo wrote: post #505
peakaboo wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me it's the fact that I'm making the decision based on emotional factors. I don't trust big pharma and I don't trust the vaccines. Should be reason enough. There is plenty of things we don't trust in life, so we don't use those things.

> I don't trust big pharma and I don't trust the vaccines. Should be reason enough. This is a good example of what I was talking about. You don’t trust big pharma? Most people who say that will still pop some ibuprofen etc when they get a headache so really they do trust big pharma when it suits them. The real reason is deeper down.

Not really. Ibuprofen has been in use for a very long time, has well known and studied side-effects, and is readily available over the counter in generic form. There is no big lobby interest for Ibuprofin at this time, so the financial incentives there are not suspect.

On the other hand, any time I see a pharmaceutical ad for some new wonder drug, my incientive-caused-bias hackles are immediately raised.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#603

Post by pythonaut_16 »

tomp wrote: post #533
ipaddr wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are mostly worried about long term side effects. Including those who have the vaccine. Understanding that base fear will help bridge the divide between groups.

No, that's just a common excuse. People still smoke, eat McDonalds, rarely exercise, drive in cars, take drugs, have unprotected sex, drink alcohol, ... long-term consequences be damned.

The long term consequences of those things are fairly well known/intuitive at this point.

People are bad at optimizing for low and long term risks, but doing something knowing it's bad for you is different than being anxious about what unknown effects a treatment might have.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#604

Post by bmarquez »

spiderice wrote: post #575
andrew_ wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having to preface a comment with vaccination status is truly unfortunate.

Agreed. It's some variation of an "appeal to authority" logical fallacy (there may be a different logical fallacy that fits better), where the truthfulness of what you say is somehow thought to be influenced by whether or not you've had the vaccine. Even though those 2 things are completely unrelated.

Unfortunately, if he fails to say that he risks getting downvoted, flagged, or labeled as a conspiracy theorist.

This is not limited to the medical field, I was once downvoted on an HN comment until I edited it to state that I wasn't supporting Trump, because people were reading it that way.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#605

Post by azinman2 »

collias wrote: post #576
DangerousPie wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason there is fear is because people keep posting stories like these without putting them into context. It has been clear for a while now that the Pfizer vaccine works and is safe. Just because Pfizer has chosen to keep collecting data doesn't make that there is any doubt about that. This is also why control groups have been given the option to get vaccinated too. It would be highly questionable to prevent…

It definitely hasn’t been clear “for a while now” that the vaccine is safe. They do seem to be effective, though. It really depends on what your definition of “safe” is. The vaccines have stated side effects, some of which can severe. The side effects are relatively rare, but non-zero. The other component is time. We’ve proven that the vaccine is mostly safe…for at least a year out. After that, we have no data. You d…

Getting Covid is not safe, like at all, so it’s so bizarre to me that anyone would look at the safety profile of a vaccine in a vacuum. Any medication has rare side effects. Tylenol has rare side effects that can be severe. Covid has direct effects that are common and severe.

Cigarettes and asbestos are not vaccines and are thus evaluated totally differently (and at a totally different point in time). In past vaccines monitoring, bad things happen right away versus long term:

“Serious side effects that could cause a long-term health problem are extremely unlikely following any vaccination, including COVID-19 vaccination. Vaccine monitoring has historically shown that side effects generally happen within six weeks of receiving a vaccine dose. For this reason, the FDA required each of the authorized COVID-19 vaccines to be studied for at least two months (eight weeks) after the final dose. Millions of people have received COVID-19 vaccines, and no long-term side effects have been detected.” [1]

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/sa...

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#606

Post by collias »

leesalminen wrote: post #594
collias wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It definitely hasn’t been clear “for a while now” that the vaccine is safe. They do seem to be effective, though. It really depends on what your definition of “safe” is. The vaccines have stated side effects, some of which can severe. The side effects are relatively rare, but non-zero. The other component is time. We’ve proven that the vaccine is mostly safe…for at least a year out. After that, we have no data. You d…

Don’t forget Vioxx!

I have never heard of Vioxx and just looked it up…wow.

Great example.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#607

Post by p_j_w »

peakaboo wrote: post #94
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.

Even if true, so what? It's their bodies. They should be allowed to choose, just like you are.

It's my car, I should be allowed to choose to drive it drunk.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#608

Post by spywaregorilla »

xyzzyz wrote: post #281
antattack wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's unamerican to force people to do something. However, smokers, for example, pay higher insurance premiums and alcohol is taxed higher.

Yeah, smoking is just about the only thing the insurance companies are legally allowed to upcharge for. That’s one of the main reasons Obamacare was passed in the first place. The whole reality is now completely dystopian. We have people calling for denying healthcare to people who took “my body, my choice” as a right, because they voluntarily chose to not take the vaccine. However, these same people would be complet…

Requiring an ID to vote is a violation of civil rights purely because local governments make it difficult for poor people to get IDs for free. If everyone was issue a government ID for free, this would be a nonissue.

I'm not aware of any grocery stores requiring a vaccine passport, but in general, the bar for a private business allowing customers in should be a lot more malleable fluid that voting restrictions.

It's not a contradiction of principles to point this out even if poor black people are among the lowest vaccination groups.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#609

Post by dfxm12 »

chitowneats wrote: post #530
dfxm12 wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal is to stop the people from getting infected as much as possible, for a couple of reasons, mostly to stop mutations and also to make sure hospitals aren't over-loaded. It sounds like we're at least already on the same page with not wanting hospitals to be over-loaded. Getting a vaccine is much better at preventing reinfection than only having had COVID in the past, according to the CDC study quoted below (bas…

Sure, happy to elaborate. The best example of this is my niece who is a nurse in NYC. She cannot participate at all in city life after the mandate and will soon lose her job over it this Fall. She's very seriously considering leaving the city and her profession entirely. Those who feel that when push comes to shove, people will just get vaxxed, are in for a rude awakening. I understand that you believe that unvaxxed…

She cannot participate at all in city life after the mandate and will soon lose her job over it this Fall.

I do believe the carrot works better than the stick, but I don't think this goes as far as being "treated like a threat".

I understand that you believe that unvaxxed are where the mutations happen.

I didn't say this and this is not my full belief :( . Mutations can happen at any new infection (including breakthrough infections, yes). So, the premise is to reduce new infections as much and as fast as possible. I think we're on the same page that vaccination greatly reduces your chance of infection (even more than having previously been infected before). Getting the most people vaccinated, as fast as possible, is the most efficient way to achieve that.

Overall, though, you've gotten pretty far away from the original question, "Well, what would it take for you to change your mind [to get the vaccine]?"

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#610

Post by cglace »

ckjla wrote: post #583
cglace wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your personal risk management is at odds with my childs safety. Not everyone is able to be vaccinated at the moment. "In addition, a growing body of evidence suggests that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines also reduce asymptomatic infection and transmission." https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br...

In general (and I don't mean you), parents have had zero regard for others being infected with the flu for as long as I can remember. I've gotten the worst flu of my life (coughing for months) from a visiting parent with an infected child (the parent knew it and did not tell). Secondly, children have a very low risk, the flu is more dangerous to them than Covid. Thirdly, assume that the growing body of evidence is co…

"Thirdly, assume that the growing body of evidence is correct . The vaccinated coworker who has a new Tinder date every week and mixes with large crowds in clubs will still be a higher risk than a reclusive, un-vaccinated, masked individual."

The overlap between antivaxers and masks does not work that way.

"In general (and I don't mean you), parents have had zero regard for others being infected with the flu for as long as I can remember. I've gotten the worst flu of my life (coughing for months) from a visiting parent with an infected child (the parent knew it and did not tell)."

So this is about revenge? I really have no clue what you point is.

"Secondly, children have a very low risk, the flu is more dangerous to them than Covid."

The number of children with severe symptoms is growing.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/more-kids-are-hospitalized-with...

Post reply on HN