9 ms·

You are completely wrong -- totally warped by the narrative. Look at the Pfizer press release, Nov 9, 2020 - the first sentence: "Vaccine candidate was found

You are completely wrong -- totally warped by the narrative. Look at the Pfizer press release, Nov 9, 2020 - the first sentence: "Vaccine candidate was found to be more than 90% effective in preventing COVID-19 in participants without evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first interim efficacy analysis" https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-announce-vaccine-candidate-against https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta...

junon 5y ago
Your own misunderstanding of the difference between SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 do not entitle you to assert anything about the subject.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  It matters not. The public was lead to believe that the vaccines were highly effective and safe. Now they are realized to be not so effective (against Delta/Omicron) and not so safe (J&J/Janssen recently "de-preferenced" by CDC due to clotting). We are still wearing masks, when we were once told the vaccinated didn't need to mask. Two years later, there is no end in sight. If you want to build trust, don't oversell the product when you don't really know what you are talking about.
  - jjulius 5y ago
    >The public was lead to believe that the vaccines were highly effective and safe. Now they are realized to be not so effective (against Delta/Omicron)... You mean how they typically clarified they didn't know how efficacy would play out in future variants? Because that was definitely a thing.
  - maxerickson 5y ago
    The vaccines are highly effective and safe. A low rate of people suffer any significant issues from vaccination, and very few vaccinated people become severely ill. They work great. If the other vaccines were not available, the J&J vaccine would make sense for most people compared to not taking it.
  - junon 5y ago
heyitsguay 5y ago
For the variants at the time. The spread of the delta and omicron variants was tracked so closely and garnered so much attention in large part due to their abilities to at least partially evade vaccine-induced immunity, but this was always a known risk. The larger the infected population, the more chances for such an event to occur, hence the importance of measures like vaccinations, social distancing, and lockdowns to curb the spread.
- jmarbach 5y ago
  In this case we should edit the title of the post to clarify, "for the variants as of x date" - agree or disagree? As to not spread misinformation.
  - heyitsguay 5y ago
    Yeah that's a big omission that i don't see addressed in the article. In particular given the development timeline, does it have the same efficacy for the omicron variant? I doubt the trials being reported here tested it.
jjulius 5y ago
First, as another user pointed out, for the variants of the time. Second, "completely" is a strong word there; your link, and the part you quoted, still clarifies that it's possible to get infected. Edit: You are also misreading what you're quoting[1]. [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29619347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29619347
- jmarbach 5y ago
  You're right. I will never question Pfizer again. There could be infinite mutations of the virus moving forward which would impact the weight of their claims.
  - jjulius 5y ago
    >I will never question Pfizer again. I didn't say you, nor myself or anyone else, shouldn't question them, just that they haven't been incorrect in this instance as you've suggested. I'm not sure why your snark is needed in your multiple responses here.
    - jmarbach 5y ago
      The Pfizer vaccine is not 90% effective. That’s a fact.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - mthoms 5y ago
        They didn’t claim it would be. They claimed it was 90% effective in the (time limited) study which they performed. It’s fair that you might have misinterpreted that as meaning it will be 90% effective. Especially if you don’t know how viruses work, but that’s not what was actually claimed.
someotherperson 5y ago
Maybe I'm misinformed, but as I understood it, COVID-19 is the disease brought upon by SARS-Cov-2 infection. That line on its own doesn't suggest it prevents infection, it suggests it prevents the COVID-19 disease (i.e 90% chance of being left with a asymptomatic infection).
- jjulius 5y ago
  You are 100% correct. You contract SARS-CoV-2, which then turns in to COVID-19[1]. [1]https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-020-00459-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-020-00459-7
- maxerickson 5y ago
  It's a technical distinction lost on the public. Maybe that's a bad thing, but it is what it is.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    I mean, if you're not noticing infection but noticing only the disease, it makes perfect sense to the public.
    - maxerickson 5y ago
      The public pretty much just thinks of both together as 'sick'.
maxerickson 5y ago
It's sophistry, but "COVID-19" in that press release means symptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2, not just infection.
hamburglar 5y ago
You seem very, very attached to a conclusion that isn’t supported by your own information. Are you really sure you haven’t been “warped by a narrative?”
- jmarbach 5y ago
dang 5y ago
Please edit swipes out of your comments here. They only make things worse. Your post would be fine without the first sentence. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

junon 5y ago

Your own misunderstanding of the difference between SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 do not entitle you to assert anything about the subject.

throwawayboise 5y ago
It matters not. The public was lead to believe that the vaccines were highly effective and safe. Now they are realized to be not so effective (against Delta/Omicron) and not so safe (J&J/Janssen recently "de-preferenced" by CDC due to clotting). We are still wearing masks, when we were once told the vaccinated didn't need to mask. Two years later, there is no end in sight. If you want to build trust, don't oversell the product when you don't really know what you are talking about.
- jjulius 5y ago
  >The public was lead to believe that the vaccines were highly effective and safe. Now they are realized to be not so effective (against Delta/Omicron)... You mean how they typically clarified they didn't know how efficacy would play out in future variants? Because that was definitely a thing.
- maxerickson 5y ago
  The vaccines are highly effective and safe. A low rate of people suffer any significant issues from vaccination, and very few vaccinated people become severely ill. They work great. If the other vaccines were not available, the J&J vaccine would make sense for most people compared to not taking it.
- junon 5y ago

heyitsguay 5y ago

For the variants at the time. The spread of the delta and omicron variants was tracked so closely and garnered so much attention in large part due to their abilities to at least partially evade vaccine-induced immunity, but this was always a known risk. The larger the infected population, the more chances for such an event to occur, hence the importance of measures like vaccinations, social distancing, and lockdowns to curb the spread.

jmarbach 5y ago
In this case we should edit the title of the post to clarify, "for the variants as of x date" - agree or disagree? As to not spread misinformation.
- heyitsguay 5y ago
  Yeah that's a big omission that i don't see addressed in the article. In particular given the development timeline, does it have the same efficacy for the omicron variant? I doubt the trials being reported here tested it.

jjulius 5y ago

First, as another user pointed out, for the variants of the time. Second, "completely" is a strong word there; your link, and the part you quoted, still clarifies that it's possible to get infected. Edit: You are also misreading what you're quoting[1]. [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29619347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29619347

jmarbach 5y ago
You're right. I will never question Pfizer again. There could be infinite mutations of the virus moving forward which would impact the weight of their claims.
- jjulius 5y ago
  >I will never question Pfizer again. I didn't say you, nor myself or anyone else, shouldn't question them, just that they haven't been incorrect in this instance as you've suggested. I'm not sure why your snark is needed in your multiple responses here.
  - jmarbach 5y ago
    The Pfizer vaccine is not 90% effective. That’s a fact.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - mthoms 5y ago
      They didn’t claim it would be. They claimed it was 90% effective in the (time limited) study which they performed. It’s fair that you might have misinterpreted that as meaning it will be 90% effective. Especially if you don’t know how viruses work, but that’s not what was actually claimed.

someotherperson 5y ago

Maybe I'm misinformed, but as I understood it, COVID-19 is the disease brought upon by SARS-Cov-2 infection. That line on its own doesn't suggest it prevents infection, it suggests it prevents the COVID-19 disease (i.e 90% chance of being left with a asymptomatic infection).

jjulius 5y ago
You are 100% correct. You contract SARS-CoV-2, which then turns in to COVID-19[1]. [1]https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-020-00459-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-020-00459-7
maxerickson 5y ago
It's a technical distinction lost on the public. Maybe that's a bad thing, but it is what it is.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  I mean, if you're not noticing infection but noticing only the disease, it makes perfect sense to the public.
  - maxerickson 5y ago
    The public pretty much just thinks of both together as 'sick'.

maxerickson 5y ago

It's sophistry, but "COVID-19" in that press release means symptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2, not just infection.

hamburglar 5y ago

You seem very, very attached to a conclusion that isn’t supported by your own information. Are you really sure you haven’t been “warped by a narrative?”

jmarbach 5y ago

dang 5y ago

Please edit swipes out of your comments here. They only make things worse. Your post would be fine without the first sentence. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html