Pfizer vaccine 90% effective

Careful, I've noticed a clear trend...when threads turn objectively against covidiots, they either abandon the thread or a mod deletes it. Common sense and science are not allowed to prevail.

Runner10287 wrote:

Harambe wrote:

300k dead and counting the USA.

0/10 try harder simp.

Less than 1% of the over all population. But those people of the less than 1% who may die from this can get the vaccine if they want.

I am a European citizen. Europe, you know. Where Holocaust took place. What you write is only possible where people are infected by a inhumane decease, Right, I am overplaying. But you deserve it. When you reach 0,5 mill , still Okay. What about 1 M? And BTW you still have a president who is in the denial mood. Though, he is "turning the corner" and he is responsible for how poor US handled the virus.

It's amazing how all of the positive news on vaccines and long lasting immunity waited until after the election to get released.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/immunity-to-the-coronavirus-may-last-years-new-data-hint/ar-BB1b6dwt?ocid=msedgntp&pfr=1

huh what wrote:

Finally some good news...let’s roll this thing out and get our lives back.

I have a serious question on the vaccine. How exactly is the effectiveness determined? I think I read that the 95% was derived from the fact that very few of those who got the vaccine caught the virus, while many more in the placebo group caught it. But do we know that both groups were equally exposed to the virus?

I would appreciate someone who knows responding.

ReallybroReally wrote:

huh what wrote:

Finally some good news...let’s roll this thing out and get our lives back.

I have a serious question on the vaccine. How exactly is the effectiveness determined? I think I read that the 95% was derived from the fact that very few of those who got the vaccine caught the virus, while many more in the placebo group caught it. But do we know that both groups were equally exposed to the virus?

I would appreciate someone who knows responding.

I think the raw number for the Moderna vaccine was just 90 cases in control group and 5 in the treatment. 5/90 = 94%.

You assume with a large enough trial that the two arms are nearly equivalent populations. There is a lot of work that goes into recruiting a representative sample and/or controlling for differences between the two arms.

Truther wrote:

It's amazing how all of the positive news on vaccines and long lasting immunity waited until after the election to get released.

Yeah it is amazing that trials started months back where we expected to get results at the end of October to early December happened to to get the results in the middle of November. What an unexpected event.

Harambe wrote:

ReallybroReally wrote:

I have a serious question on the vaccine. How exactly is the effectiveness determined? I think I read that the 95% was derived from the fact that very few of those who got the vaccine caught the virus, while many more in the placebo group caught it. But do we know that both groups were equally exposed to the virus?

I would appreciate someone who knows responding.

thank you. I guess we all hope that they got the sample correct and did have adequate controls on

I think the raw number for the Moderna vaccine was just 90 cases in control group and 5 in the treatment. 5/90 = 94%.

You assume with a large enough trial that the two arms are nearly equivalent populations. There is a lot of work that goes into recruiting a representative sample and/or controlling for differences between the two arms.

Thank you. I guess we all hope that they got the sample correct and did have adequate controls on both arms. When we depend on statistical confidence we sometimes can get lead astray.

ReallybroReally wrote:

Harambe wrote:

thank you. I guess we all hope that they got the sample correct and did have adequate controls on

I think the raw number for the Moderna vaccine was just 90 cases in control group and 5 in the treatment. 5/90 = 94%.

You assume with a large enough trial that the two arms are nearly equivalent populations. There is a lot of work that goes into recruiting a representative sample and/or controlling for differences between the two arms.

Thank you. I guess we all hope that they got the sample correct and did have adequate controls on both arms. When we depend on statistical confidence we sometimes can get lead astray.

For sure - we should have lots more data soon as they identify more cases. Especially with case counts soaring in the USA we should expect a good test of the vaccine.... to look for a silver lining.

Harambe wrote:

ReallybroReally wrote:

Thank you. I guess we all hope that they got the sample correct and did have adequate controls on both arms. When we depend on statistical confidence we sometimes can get lead astray.

For sure - we should have lots more data soon as they identify more cases. Especially with case counts soaring in the USA we should expect a good test of the vaccine.... to look for a silver lining.

I have to say, the Astrazenneca news only makes we wonder more. Accidental small does works 95%, planned full dose only 62%?

ReallybroReally wrote:

I have to say, the Astrazenneca news only makes we wonder more. Accidental small does works 95%, planned full dose only 62%?

AZ botched their trial and/or didn’t report results fully and/or made some big errors. Hard to say yet.

ReallybroReally wrote:

I have to say, the Astrazenneca news only makes we wonder more. Accidental small does works 95%, planned full dose only 62%?

Yeah, it looks like AZ is going to have to do another large trial before getting FDA approval.

Read this peer reviewed article. Dangers of C19 vaccine that they don't want you to know.

Everywhere you look with Team Covid you see fraud.

How ignorant one must be to not to examine the swine flu hoax of 2009- see it's the exact same people, same entities and same script- and understand that here we are again- massive profiteering via manipulation and coercion.

Results of the study:

COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralizing antibodies may sensitize vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralizing antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ijcp.13795

Not results. The text was in the article, but not results. That actually matters a lot. This is NOT based on results from the vaccines currently being tested. Could it happen? Yes. Do we have any evidence that the risk compares to the benefits in these cases: no. Risk disclosures are always expected to be very thorough such that if there is to be ANY misunderstanding, it will be to exaggerate, not minimize risk.

real info wrote:

ReallybroReally wrote:

I have to say, the Astrazenneca news only makes we wonder more. Accidental small does works 95%, planned full dose only 62%?

Yeah, it looks like AZ is going to have to do another large trial before getting FDA approval.

Nah.

The issue was with the math, not with the outcomes.

They found an error in the math. They'll re-calibrate and come again.

Nothing changes with the patient data.

What will be interesting is to see what effectiveness the Moderna and BioNtech vax had. Was it higher than the numbers AZ presented?

Obviously it was low enough that they needed a second dose.

In the end, I'd take the AZ dose if it comes on the market. More due to the storage being predictable. Distribution of the others, where they need to be minus the everything to travel well, doesn't give me confidence