FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine • Hacker News Board

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#661

Post by morsch » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:13 PM UTC

psychedelican wrote: post #557

zeku wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those aren't equivalent. Preventing obesity is *very* hard, or we wouldn't have obese people. Who actually WANTS to be obese? Preventing your ICU trip due to covid is as easy as driving to the pharmacy once or twice and spending 20minutes there. It's easier than grocery shopping.

But you're forgetting that currently these vaccines are not really doing a great job at decreasing hospitalizations in at-risk populations. Look at Israel. Thanks.

Okay, I looked, and found this.

https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-...

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#662

Post by ldehaan » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:13 PM UTC

auslegung wrote: post #210

ldehaan wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'll be so easy to walk away from a company if they tried to force me to do Anything. But i make tons of money off all this fearmongering, it's great. I can't wait until you have to take a 4th shot, money all the way to the bank. I caught covid for a day, still showing the strongest markers, i never noticed it, all I did was take vitamins and exercise, good friend got the vaccine, still can't walk, sick as a dog.

> I caught covid for a day, still showing the strongest markers, i never noticed it, all I did was take vitamins and exercise, good friend got the vaccine, still can't walk, sick as a dog. Your anecdotal evidence of 2 people sure is convincing! Everyone should do what you're doing.

Buy far out options on antiviral companies? Too late bro, the rate of climb is way down over the past 3 scare runs, which really pumped the price it was great, plus all the obvious drops where you could have made a decent amount on short calls after each news segment about everything opening up :D hahaha I mean seriously dude, you wish you bought in.

Also anecdotes are all there is right now, that's society right now, either you're making money while people pick sides and sell the merchandise like t-shirts that say "I'm vaxxed and I'm awesome" on Amazon, go buy one. Give me your money. I made money on the Trump crap too :D

Anyways you're all suckers and those of us who give 0 craps about sides are laughing all the way to the bank. Keep it up, once you've burned it all down I can buy it up for a pence.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#663

Post by breck » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:13 PM UTC

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #221

version_five wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. No doubt this will be the case for some. So, you've found a logical flaw in people's stated reasons for not wanting a vaccine. How does that help anything? In these kinds of debates, the actual goals or beliefs of both sides often differ from what they say. For example, the government being able…

I recent came across a technique for having a more substantial discussion and it was to ask: "Well, what would it take for you to change your mind?" Not that this is a silver bullet that automatically leads to peace and harmony, but it's a step in the right direction.

> Well, what would it take for you to change your mind?

For me number one would be: if the CDC starts tracking re-infection rate in the non-vaccinated, and puts that data front and center as key KPIs on all their releases.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#664

Post by gzer0 » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:14 PM UTC

jboggan wrote: post #627

pgalvin wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This really, really is not true. Many drug and vaccine approvals in the past have been done before the trial has run its full course. Many drug and vaccine trials have given the placebo group the real drug once safety and efficacy is clear - before the end of the trial. This is not new, and frankly I’m a little surprised to see such conspiracy theories on HN.

I would like to see an example of previous trials where the placebo group was invalidated prematurely by informing them and giving them the actual drug. If this is common practice I'm not aware of it. Note the date on this article - this was back in February of this year: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/9691430... Don't denigrate a perfectly valid criticism of deviations from historical norms of…

The use of placebos in controlled clinical trials must be justified by a positive risk-benefit analysis, and the subjects must be fully informed of the risks involved in the assignment to the placebo group.

Continued assignment of subjects to placebo is unethical, once there is good evidence to support the efficacy of the trial therapy.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) since there was such strong evidence to prove the efficacy, it became unethical for the continued assignment of placebo.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#665

Post by rootusrootus » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:14 PM UTC

linuxftw wrote: post #247

thehappypm wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because getting COVID becomes a problem for every person you come in contact with! Getting vaccinated protects you first, but also stops you from personally handing a disease to everyone you're in contact with. The people around you shouldn't be punished because you like Fox News.

100% false. The vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission.

They do reduce it, however, even in the case of breakthrough infections.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#666

Post by Enginerrrd » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:14 PM UTC

jboggan wrote: post #627

pgalvin wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This really, really is not true. Many drug and vaccine approvals in the past have been done before the trial has run its full course. Many drug and vaccine trials have given the placebo group the real drug once safety and efficacy is clear - before the end of the trial. This is not new, and frankly I’m a little surprised to see such conspiracy theories on HN.

I would like to see an example of previous trials where the placebo group was invalidated prematurely by informing them and giving them the actual drug. If this is common practice I'm not aware of it. Note the date on this article - this was back in February of this year: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/9691430... Don't denigrate a perfectly valid criticism of deviations from historical norms of…

This happened with low-dose Aspirin for prevention of heart-attacks and strokes. The protective effect was so profound that they considered it unethical to let the control group proceed without it.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#667

Post by criticaltinker » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:14 PM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #614

criticaltinker wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Pfizer vaccine works and is safe Yes the vaccine has been proven to be safe for most adults in the short-term. But blanket statements like this over-simplify the reality of the situation. People need to be aware that for certain sub-populations (eg pediatrics & pregnant women), there is insufficient scientific evidence - in terms of clinical trials and longitudinal studies - to conclude that the benefits of vac…

For pregnant women the conclusion has been in for a while that COVID-19 leads to a higher incidence of hospitalizations and complications and it has been advice from OBGYN's to get vaccinated with Pfizer ASAP: source - my wife is currently pregnant and we were told this by our OBGYN, who also suggested Astrazeneca would be unlikely to be harmful but couldn't professionally recommend it as their were no formal studies…

> The conclusion has been in for a while that COVID-19 leads to a higher incidence of hospitalizations and complications

Yes just about any symptomatic illness is going to lead to hospitalization and complications during pregnancy.

I understand how the language on the CDC page you cited may lead you to believe that vaccines are conclusively recommended, but take a look at this page from the CDC [1] (updated August 11th) for a more balance appraisal. They say that evidence about the safety is "limited" but "early data" is reassuring. Almost all of the links on the page you cited are to ongoing trials. It's a misrepresentation of science to say that the recommendation to vaccinate pregnant women is conclusive.

And if we're trading anecdotes, my wife's OBGYN advised her not to get vaccinated yet, because it's unclear what the long-term risks are for mother and baby, and because it's unclear if vaccination provides any additional benefits for mothers who have acquired immunity through natural infection.

If you can provide any citations to primary sources supporting your claim that vaccination is conclusively recommended I would appreciate it - I'm keeping an open mind here.

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

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#668

Post by rajin444 » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:15 PM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #524

jesusohchrist wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like fauci 2 Shots of vaccine to end covid -> Most Americans will have to take booster shots -> Booster shots may not be one time thing

The difference is that Fauci's words here are based on the available science and medical understanding at the time, and that changes rapidly as more studies are done and we are able to observe how new virus variants behave in the wild. The vaccine hesitant's tendency to move the goalposts when their reason du jour for refusing vaccination is invalidated is based on misinformation and unfounded fear. The exact opposit…

Health leaders and politicians entire job is to build and maintain trust. Mistakes like this only reinforce vaccine hesitancy. Those that are hesitant know that the science is settled - until it isn't. The only method to account for unknown unknowns is time.

It would have been entirely possible for Fauci et. al to say "The vaccine data appears to show 95%+ efficacy, but we will be waiting to lift lockdown mandates be sure". That kind of messaging shows both a respect for science and a commitment to everyone's health. However, it was an unpopular political decision, so mandates were lifted.

This isn't the first time they've changed their course after making a decision prematurely. To the vaccine hesitant, why is this FDA approval any different? There's massive political pressure to approve these vaccines.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#669

Post by StephenAmar » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:15 PM UTC

notheretoo wrote: post #574

pgalvin wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This really, really is not true. Many drug and vaccine approvals in the past have been done before the trial has run its full course. Many drug and vaccine trials have given the placebo group the real drug once safety and efficacy is clear - before the end of the trial. This is not new, and frankly I’m a little surprised to see such conspiracy theories on HN.

Can you prove your statement by providing an example please?

Please actually look at the change history in https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/history/NCT04368728

The completion date was changed multiple times since April 2020 and they clearly appended booster trials to the existing trials and pushed back the dates.

It truly is that simple.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#670

Post by anonuser123456 » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 5:16 PM UTC

flowerlad wrote: post #203

thehappypm wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're over-simplifying the Alzheimer's treatment. The medicine was shown to be effective in reducing plaques, and has been approved for any medical use where reducing plaques is the goal. However, reducing plaques does not seem to actually help patients with Alzheimer's. So the medicine "works" in the sense that it does what it's supposed to (reduce plaques) but does not help Alzheimer's patient outcomes and…

> However, reducing plaques does not seem to actually help patients with Alzheimer's Just like reducing cholesterol does not lower heart attacks. Read more about that here: https://medium.com/@petilon/cholesterol-and-statins-e7d9d8ee...

That article uses Gary Taubes as a reference.

I like Gary, but on the issue of cholesterol is more complex than he portrays.

It is absolutely the case that LDL-C is correlated with heart disease at the population level. It is absolutely the case that LDL-P is correlated with heart disease at the individual level. Beyond the correlation, there is considerable mechanism of action evidence that small particle lipoproteins are the driver of atherosclerosis.

The primary issue with statins / LDL is that they are prescribed based on LDL-C, which is not appropriate at the individual level and are thus considerably over proscribed. LDL-C only matters at the population level, not individual. When lowering LDL-C for the population, you will only see small benefits since most people get little to no benefit from the drug.

However, people with high LDL-P will absolutely see a benefit from statins. You need only look at the FH groups to see this.