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

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#891

Post by Izkata »

detaro wrote: post #304
ARandomerDude wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can be hesitant of these new mRNA vaccines but for classic vaccines that use dead / weakened viruses, that doesn't make you an "anti-vaxxer". Exactly. I've had more vaccines than most people ever will because of my time in the military. I'm good with it, I think it was smart given the circumstances. The question isn't "are traditional vaccines OK?" (yes) but "do I trust other people's ability to modify my DNA w…

> do I trust other people's ability to modify my DNA without error? There is no vaccine that's based on people's ability to modify your DNA, so no need to worry about that. (I wonder how the idea that they do still keeps floating around...)

Probably the AstraZeneca and J&J ones, which do use DNA instead of mRNA.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#892

Post by wait_a_minute »

renaudg wrote: post #882
Markoff wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This approval doesn't change a thing, about no known long term effects of viral vector vaccines (first time approved by any medical agency in world in November 2019) and mRNA vaccines (first time approved by any medical agency in world in December 2020). Sorry for not wanting to inject myself with unproven technology with unknown long term effects. Why politicians and certain pharma companies keep pushing these vacci…

The mistake you're making is "omission bias" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omission_bias ) You're refusing the "beta" (installed by billions of users) version of something that can save your life because you (mistakenly) believe the choice is between that, and staying as you were before. It's not. That's no longer true with the Delta variant. Now it's really a choice between "carefully designed, just officially dec…

> There is just no theoretical basis for why anything wrong would happen here.

Do you have a source for this? I’d like to read more about it. Also, what about people who have antibodies from prior infection with covid?

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#893

Post by stathibus »

sixstringtheory wrote: post #760
stathibus wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A drug should be approved once it is very likely causing more good than harm. Err, that sounds really scary and wrong to me. Seems to me that a drug should be approved when all the side effects are known, results are well characterized among a large sample set over a sufficiently long time frame, and it is determined that the drug is "safe" in the absolute sense. It may be the case that we are better off taking a v…

> Seems to me that a drug should be approved when all the side effects are known, results are well characterized among a large sample set over a sufficiently long time frame, and it is determined that the drug is "safe" in the absolute sense. How long is sufficient? How large of a test group is sufficient? In the "absolute" sense, there is no known drug that is safe. That is extremist thinking that only serves to mud…

Its not my job to figure out "how safe" or "how certain", but I can definitely say with confidence that "more safe than harmful" and "more likely than not" are both really bad answers.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#894

Post by [deleted] »

bratcomplex wrote: post #625
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.

This this a Bifurcation of the issue. lumping people whom; have a cation bias, are alt medicine nuts, classic anti vaxers, etc, together shuts down discourse and divides people.

[deleted]

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#895

Post by acdha »

zacharytelschow wrote: post #390
eganist wrote: post #2

My biggest concern now is around seeing those who hedged their willingness to get the vaccine on its approval instead find a new reason not to get it. So with that in mind, I'm much more keen on seeing how employers will decide on vaccination mandates now that at least one vaccine is fully approved. Any news yet on whether any more employers are likely implementing mandates (if they haven't already this morning) base…

"Clinical studies from Israel, the Cleveland Clinic, England and elsewhere have demonstrated beyond a doubt that natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2 provides robust and durable protection against reinfection comparable to or better than that provided by the most effective vaccines." source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/vaccine-mandate-natural-immunit... (Referenced studies are linked in the article). Why should people who…

WSJ editorials also endorsed taking horse dewormer as a COVID cure. Favorable coverage by a political ally of an activity filing a lawsuit is not to be confused with a scientific consensus

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7032e1.htm

“Among Kentucky residents infected with SARS-CoV-2 in 2020, vaccination status of those reinfected during May–June 2021 was compared with that of residents who were not reinfected. In this case-control study, being unvaccinated was associated with 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with being fully vaccinated.”

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#896

Post by ljf »

megous wrote: post #829
ljf wrote: post #821

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/regulatory-approv... Question, do you personally know anyone with long term health issues that they believe we're caused by the vaccine?

Yes. That's the reason why I'm searching every once in a while for some studies.

I feel your pain, my wife got long covid back before that was at least accepted to be a thing. At first doctors are very dismissive, but gradually there were a critical mass of people able to demonstrate measurable symptoms.

Here is hoping that somehow your friends symptoms pass soon and are mild.

After seeing what long covid can do to a healthy 40yo woman with no preexisting conditions, where no one understands them at first, I can imagine the stress.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#897

Post by s1artibartfast »

hartator wrote: post #29

Interesting that most comments focus on the social aspect of this instead of deciphering the science behind that approval.

The most interesting science is not public and probably never be. What, if any, internal debate was occurred at the FDA, their pre-approval questions for manufacturers, and their responses, ect.

Without this, all we really have to go on is the public information that was release a year ago.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#898

Post by handoflixue »

slumdev wrote: post #890
handoflixue wrote: post #828

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd heard others arguing for it and hadn't personally investigated it, so I appreciate the response! I do think that given my own evaluation of the risks and rewards, the NVICP is perfectly sufficient for my own needs, but I can certainly see how one would be opposed to this on a systemic level, or if you believe the risk-reward ratio skews differently

> the NVICP is perfectly sufficient for my own needs How do you reach this conclusion? At a max $250k per life, paid through a secret court with the deck stacked against the plaintiff, it doesn't appear to be sufficient for anyone's needs.

It's a simple risk-reward calculation: the vaccine protects me from Covid-19. The chance of side effects is very low. The chance of severe, long-term complications that cause me more than $250K in damages is even lower.

Yeah, there's a tiny risk that I'll end up in a situation where I get screwed over, but I'm significantly more likely to suffer harm from Covid.

Your own calculations will vary, of course - this is just the math given my own risk factors.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#899

Post by newacct583 »

mindcrime wrote: post #539
newacct583 wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, the government being able to tell you what to do, vs. it not. People end up locking in to trivialities like approval or some study, but they just obscure the real debate. Is government regulatory authority really the "real debate"? That too seems like an projected excuse, trivially proven by the fact that the same people who are most invested in the libertarian framing are the ones who believe a secret…

the fact that the same people who are most invested in the libertarian framing are the ones who believe a secret government agent has been working for the last four and a half years to extrajudiciously round up pedophiles and liberals. FWIW, that's not even close to true among the Libertarians I know. And as a Libertarian myself, I know quite a few. The set of people who "believe a secret government agent has been wo…

> And as a Libertarian myself, I know quite a few.

Yes, but obviously that's not a representative sample. My point was that the population of genuine libertarians for whom this seems like a first principles argument is dwarfed by the general population of Q-adjacent social conservatives who are happy to adopt libertarian framing but really just want the government to do what they want.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#900

Post by s1artibartfast »

kristjansson wrote: post #709

All of these comments following the pattern "I'm vaccinated but [insert vaccine hesitancy content here]" sound quite a lot like the "I'm a democrat but [insert pro-trump content]" comments that abounded in the last cycle. I don't know what to make of it. Is this a rhetorical strategy that really works? A tic of people experiencing cognitive dissonance?

It is a desperate plea for people to not be written off entirely out of tribal affiliation.

Discussion has devolved into two camps largely villainizing each other, so it is an appeal to address the content of their posts opposed to some claim of the 5G/ microchip/ reptilian crowd

Post reply on HN