3 ms·

> But most would not. How could that possibly be true? Basically everyone who isn't a rabid anti-vaxxer is trying to get a Covid shot as soon as possible. And

by jsnell 6y ago

> But most would not. How could that possibly be true? Basically everyone who isn't a rabid anti-vaxxer is trying to get a Covid shot as soon as possible. And pretty obviously none of the participants in a vaccination study is going to be an anti-vaxxer. > 7 deaths in placebo group; 7 in control group That's not true. Why in the world would you fib about something that is this easy to verify? There were 3 deaths in the treatment group, 4 in the control. But more to the point, there were no deaths from Covid in either group. It's not that "7 people died of Covid in the treatment group" which you were clearly trying to imply. Now, why were there no deaths from Covid? Because the size of the trial was set such that they could reasonably expect to find an effect for preventing symptomatic disease. That's why it was the primary endpoint. Why couldn't they run a trial where Covid deaths were the endpoint? Because the IFR of Covid is "only" 1%. To run a trial that could reliably show an effect on the number of deaths, you'd be looking at 100x the participants. I'm sure you're not seriously suggesting running a trial of 3M people. > Are you saying that the idea that humans respond to incentives is absurd? No. I think your suggestions on what Moderna's incentives are absurd. Think about it for a bit: the early results showed no change in the number of deaths. You're suggesting that if they waited and... ummm.. showed no change in the number of deaths, it'd somehow lose them tens of billions. I can't help but notice that the before and after are the same there: "not showing a change in the number of deaths". But also, that's 1.5 years from now. There's a lot of vaccines to be sold right now, and that's what their incentives would be focused on. Not on hypothetical effects that their trial was not designed to surface in the first place. And again, the foundation for this theory is that the trial participants would have agreed to not get a working vaccination for two years, even if on placebo. You've not presented any proof for this except claims about "NIH training".

breck 6y ago
> Why in the world would you fib about something that is this easy to verify? Sorry, that was a typo from memory: not 7 and 7 but 4 and 4. Conclusion is unchanged. From the FDA link I provided, Table 19. Here's a screenshot with the relevant line https://twitter.com/breckyunits/status/1348080756921303041/photo/1 https://twitter.com/breckyunits/status/1348080756921303041/p... > which you were clearly trying to imply. I absolutely was not trying to imply these were COVID deaths. I'm trying to imply that the wholistic expected value of the COVID vaccine needs to be considered. In my personal circle of ~2,000 family and friends, I have lost 4 people in the past ~12 months from Non-Covid (35, 50, 65, 62), for a total of about ~100 healthspan years lost, versus 1 person from COVID (with a healthspan left of ~1). I know >100 people confirmed COVID. One cannot make decisions in isolation. > Now, why were there no deaths from Covid?...that their trial was not designed to surface in the first place. Because they cut the study short! In the clinical study protocol (https://www.modernatx.com/sites/default/files/mRNA-1273-P301-Protocol.pdf https://www.modernatx.com/sites/default/files/mRNA-1273-P301...) they specifically state "To evaluate [Vaccine efficacy] to prevent death caused by COVID-19" as an objective! "The study is designed to primarily evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of mRNA-1273 to prevent COVID-19 for up to 2 years after the second dose of mRNA-1273...Participants are considered to have completed the study if they complete the final visit at Day 759 (Month 25), 24 months following the last dose of IP." > the foundation for this theory is that the trial participants would have agreed to not get a working vaccination for two years, even if on placebo. I can't speak to what the experience of people in this trial was like, as I was not a participant, but I have never been involved with a control group where they have told you that they would tell your your placebo status not even halfway into the study. > I think your suggestions on what Moderna's incentives are absurd. Moderna the corporation has no incentive to keep the control group going because they've already closed the sale so if the long run efficacy turned out to be not as strong, they potentially could be exposed to downside risk. I am not against the vaccine or the rollout. I'm against the destruction of the control group.

by jsnell 6y ago

breck 6y ago

> Why in the world would you fib about something that is this easy to verify? Sorry, that was a typo from memory: not 7 and 7 but 4 and 4. Conclusion is unchanged. From the FDA link I provided, Table 19. Here's a screenshot with the relevant line https://twitter.com/breckyunits/status/1348080756921303041/photo/1 https://twitter.com/breckyunits/status/1348080756921303041/p... > which you were clearly trying to imply. I absolutely was not trying to imply these were COVID deaths. I'm trying to imply that the wholistic expected value of the COVID vaccine needs to be considered. In my personal circle of ~2,000 family and friends, I have lost 4 people in the past ~12 months from Non-Covid (35, 50, 65, 62), for a total of about ~100 healthspan years lost, versus 1 person from COVID (with a healthspan left of ~1). I know >100 people confirmed COVID. One cannot make decisions in isolation. > Now, why were there no deaths from Covid?...that their trial was not designed to surface in the first place. Because they cut the study short! In the clinical study protocol (https://www.modernatx.com/sites/default/files/mRNA-1273-P301-Protocol.pdf https://www.modernatx.com/sites/default/files/mRNA-1273-P301...) they specifically state "To evaluate [Vaccine efficacy] to prevent death caused by COVID-19" as an objective! "The study is designed to primarily evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of mRNA-1273 to prevent COVID-19 for up to 2 years after the second dose of mRNA-1273...Participants are considered to have completed the study if they complete the final visit at Day 759 (Month 25), 24 months following the last dose of IP." > the foundation for this theory is that the trial participants would have agreed to not get a working vaccination for two years, even if on placebo. I can't speak to what the experience of people in this trial was like, as I was not a participant, but I have never been involved with a control group where they have told you that they would tell your your placebo status not even halfway into the study. > I think your suggestions on what Moderna's incentives are absurd. Moderna the corporation has no incentive to keep the control group going because they've already closed the sale so if the long run efficacy turned out to be not as strong, they potentially could be exposed to downside risk. I am not against the vaccine or the rollout. I'm against the destruction of the control group.