4 ms·

That's literally what the vaccine clinical trials addressed.. It's a very easy calculation when you assume the virus is endemic and eventually everyone will ca

That's literally what the vaccine clinical trials addressed.. It's a very easy calculation when you assume the virus is endemic and eventually everyone will catch it.

Izkata 5y ago
Pfizer's trial showed higher all-cause mortality in the vaccine group, so probably not the best example. (IIRC it was like 15 vs 18 or 21; not high, but it is enough to question the actual safety IMO)
- mikeyouse 5y ago
  Which study? And against which population? Because the all-cause mortality assuming everyone is infected with Covid in both groups is overwhelmingly in favor of the vaccines.
  - Izkata 5y ago
    I said trial, not study. It's the one they got the EUA under; everyone was hyper-focused on the covid-only results and kinda just ignored that part of it.
    - mikeyouse 5y ago
      I was using the terms interchangeably since they publish the trial results as a study in medical journals but ok. Specifically, which phase of the Pfizer trials? They got the EUA after completing three phases.. Phase 1/2: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2639-4.pdf https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2639-4.pdf Page 10 shows 0 deaths in the trial with the most severe adverse event being a "disturbed sleep" event. Phase 3: https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577?articleTools=true https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577?articleTo... This was the big RCT trial with 43,400 participants. 2 participants in the medication group died, 4 participants in the control group died, so the vaccine cuts deaths from unrelated causes by 50%! (joking of course) In any case, they didn't even include all cause mortality as an end point. So again - please provide a link to whatever it is you're referring to because "trust me bro, more people died" doesn't really cut it.
      - Izkata 5y ago
        Sorry, I did misremember the exact timing - It was the people from Phase 3, but at the 6-month follow-up: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34525277/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34525277/ (see Figure 1, 15 dead in control group, 16 dead in vaccine group) There was another report I remember seeing (but can't find now) that was about this same group that broke it down by cause of death. That one showed a reduction in covid deaths (I think it was like 2 or 3 covid vs 4 covid), with other causes more than making up the difference. But again with such low numbers it doesn't really prove anything, just that I think it's enough to raise questions and definitely doesn't warrant the "safe and effective" mantra.
        mikeyouse 5y ago
        > definitely doesn't warrant the "safe and effective" mantra. This is just the dumbest thing. Literal antivaxx nonsense in the most pejorative way possible. Something like 260 million Americans are vaccinated, there is literally no evidence of vaccine injury, especially when compared to the rates of the supposed injuries (myocarditis included) in those who contract covid. Follow-on studies show a 95% decrease in the rate of mechanical ventilation/death in those who have been boosted. The vaccines are the very definition of safe and effective. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7112e1.htm#T2_down https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7112e1.htm#T2_down
yucky 5y ago
The trials nuked their own control groups though - https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/969143015/long-term-studies-of-covid-19-vaccines-hurt-by-placebo-recipients-getting-immuni https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/9691430... In no other circumstance would those trials be considered scientifically sound when they intentionally destroyed their own control groups.
- mikeyouse 5y ago
  The trials didn't nuke their control groups... the efficacy of the vaccines were so high that the members of the control groups decided on their own to get vaccinated. Ensuring informed consent is a cornerstone of good medicine. Would we get better statistical power if more people had chosen to remain unvaccinated? Sure. Is it ethical to deny people a highly effective, life-saving vaccination to maintain that statistical power? Of course not. Nobody "intentionally destroyed" anything.. We don't even know how many chose to remain unvaccinated, it's likely enough to still be very informative. Why is it so easy for people to lie like this?
  - yucky 5y ago
    > Would we get better statistical power if more people had chosen to remain unvaccinated? Sure. So...they nuked their control groups. I'm not sure why you start off your comment denying it, then explain that I was exactly right. There is no control group.
    - mikeyouse 5y ago
      You literally don't know that - the only evidence you have is articles saying that some of the people in the control groups opted to get the vaccine. And "they" didn't nuke their control groups -- you're implying this was something the pharma companies did, not something patients decided to do. "The control groups were nuked" is something you could claim, which is still overblown because you have no idea how many people actually chose to be vaccinated vs. not.
      - 5y ago

That's literally what the vaccine clinical trials addressed.. It's a very easy calculation when you assume the virus is endemic and eventually everyone will catch it.

Izkata 5y ago

Pfizer's trial showed higher all-cause mortality in the vaccine group, so probably not the best example. (IIRC it was like 15 vs 18 or 21; not high, but it is enough to question the actual safety IMO)

mikeyouse 5y ago
Which study? And against which population? Because the all-cause mortality assuming everyone is infected with Covid in both groups is overwhelmingly in favor of the vaccines.
- Izkata 5y ago
  I said trial, not study. It's the one they got the EUA under; everyone was hyper-focused on the covid-only results and kinda just ignored that part of it.
  - mikeyouse 5y ago
    I was using the terms interchangeably since they publish the trial results as a study in medical journals but ok. Specifically, which phase of the Pfizer trials? They got the EUA after completing three phases.. Phase 1/2: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2639-4.pdf https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2639-4.pdf Page 10 shows 0 deaths in the trial with the most severe adverse event being a "disturbed sleep" event. Phase 3: https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577?articleTools=true https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577?articleTo... This was the big RCT trial with 43,400 participants. 2 participants in the medication group died, 4 participants in the control group died, so the vaccine cuts deaths from unrelated causes by 50%! (joking of course) In any case, they didn't even include all cause mortality as an end point. So again - please provide a link to whatever it is you're referring to because "trust me bro, more people died" doesn't really cut it.
    - Izkata 5y ago
      Sorry, I did misremember the exact timing - It was the people from Phase 3, but at the 6-month follow-up: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34525277/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34525277/ (see Figure 1, 15 dead in control group, 16 dead in vaccine group) There was another report I remember seeing (but can't find now) that was about this same group that broke it down by cause of death. That one showed a reduction in covid deaths (I think it was like 2 or 3 covid vs 4 covid), with other causes more than making up the difference. But again with such low numbers it doesn't really prove anything, just that I think it's enough to raise questions and definitely doesn't warrant the "safe and effective" mantra.
      - mikeyouse 5y ago
        > definitely doesn't warrant the "safe and effective" mantra. This is just the dumbest thing. Literal antivaxx nonsense in the most pejorative way possible. Something like 260 million Americans are vaccinated, there is literally no evidence of vaccine injury, especially when compared to the rates of the supposed injuries (myocarditis included) in those who contract covid. Follow-on studies show a 95% decrease in the rate of mechanical ventilation/death in those who have been boosted. The vaccines are the very definition of safe and effective. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7112e1.htm#T2_down https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7112e1.htm#T2_down

yucky 5y ago

The trials nuked their own control groups though - https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/969143015/long-term-studies-of-covid-19-vaccines-hurt-by-placebo-recipients-getting-immuni https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/9691430... In no other circumstance would those trials be considered scientifically sound when they intentionally destroyed their own control groups.

mikeyouse 5y ago
The trials didn't nuke their control groups... the efficacy of the vaccines were so high that the members of the control groups decided on their own to get vaccinated. Ensuring informed consent is a cornerstone of good medicine. Would we get better statistical power if more people had chosen to remain unvaccinated? Sure. Is it ethical to deny people a highly effective, life-saving vaccination to maintain that statistical power? Of course not. Nobody "intentionally destroyed" anything.. We don't even know how many chose to remain unvaccinated, it's likely enough to still be very informative. Why is it so easy for people to lie like this?
- yucky 5y ago
  > Would we get better statistical power if more people had chosen to remain unvaccinated? Sure. So...they nuked their control groups. I'm not sure why you start off your comment denying it, then explain that I was exactly right. There is no control group.
  - mikeyouse 5y ago
    You literally don't know that - the only evidence you have is articles saying that some of the people in the control groups opted to get the vaccine. And "they" didn't nuke their control groups -- you're implying this was something the pharma companies did, not something patients decided to do. "The control groups were nuked" is something you could claim, which is still overblown because you have no idea how many people actually chose to be vaccinated vs. not.
    - 5y ago