4 ms·

Interesting. Could you drop a link to the document you’re talking about?

by kgc 2y ago

mlyle 2y ago
He's talking about the Pfizer multi-national trial (which included a lot of enrollees in South Africa), and greatly distorting it. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577#t2 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577#t2 Yes, the primary endpoint shown in here was comparing 7 days after dose 2 of the vaccine to 7 days after dose 2 of the placebo group. (table 2): https://www.nejm.org/cms/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577/asset/619bcb14-245e-4b0e-80d8-b9d803517af6/assets/images/large/nejmoa2034577_t2.jpg https://www.nejm.org/cms/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577/asset/619bcb1... However, figure 3 breaks down the efficacy vs. time, and it shows no effect like he describes: https://www.nejm.org/cms/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577/asset/fe40d074-355a-416e-957c-0bb69ef30bfc/assets/images/large/nejmoa2034577_f3.jpg https://www.nejm.org/cms/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577/asset/fe40d07... Instead, the vaccine and control groups were about the same until roughly day 10-12 after the first dose, and then dramatically diverged (though not as decisively as after dose 2).
genewitch 2y ago
unfortunately the source eludes me for my paragraph, but this https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10810638/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10810638/ is some light reading although it has been retracted. however, it mentions a bit about it (such as moving people from placebo to treatment cohort and using those people in the data for the treatment cohort.) I never made the statement that this was their South Africa (or africa) study. It isn't difficult to find the CEO of Pfizer saying their vaccine was "100% effective" in africa on twitter (there was a video, as well). that was my first claim. Then i said "Now pfizer did this a different time ..." edit: the source eludes me because i originally saw it on my cellphone in a video (the paper) and the bullet points were being read by an asian female. I failed to bookmark/save the video, and i have a hard time chasing down research that is this controversial without a DOI or PMC due to the ... tens of thousands of papers containing the same keywords. I'm not claiming it's "buried" or "being kept from us" or anything conspiratorial, but it never got any play on mainstream media and would obviously get shadowbanned on any large site with funding from pfizer (et al) because of the "fact checkers want you to know that the vaccine has been proven safe and effective!" modal. this has the 2/3rds participants excluded https://www.fda.gov/media/159195/download https://www.fda.gov/media/159195/download but i am done for today, i have to crack some hydrogeology textbooks so i hope this stays up so i have my own reference for the next time i mention this

Interesting. Could you drop a link to the document you’re talking about?

by kgc 2y ago

Interesting. Could you drop a link to the document you’re talking about?

He's talking about the Pfizer multi-national trial (which included a lot of enrollees in South Africa), and greatly distorting it. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577#t2 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577#t2 Yes, the primary endpoint shown in here was comparing 7 days after dose 2 of the vaccine to 7 days after dose 2 of the placebo group. (table 2): https://www.nejm.org/cms/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577/asset/619bcb14-245e-4b0e-80d8-b9d803517af6/assets/images/large/nejmoa2034577_t2.jpg https://www.nejm.org/cms/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577/asset/619bcb1... However, figure 3 breaks down the efficacy vs. time, and it shows no effect like he describes: https://www.nejm.org/cms/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577/asset/fe40d074-355a-416e-957c-0bb69ef30bfc/assets/images/large/nejmoa2034577_f3.jpg https://www.nejm.org/cms/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577/asset/fe40d07... Instead, the vaccine and control groups were about the same until roughly day 10-12 after the first dose, and then dramatically diverged (though not as decisively as after dose 2).

genewitch 2y ago

unfortunately the source eludes me for my paragraph, but this https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10810638/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10810638/ is some light reading although it has been retracted. however, it mentions a bit about it (such as moving people from placebo to treatment cohort and using those people in the data for the treatment cohort.) I never made the statement that this was their South Africa (or africa) study. It isn't difficult to find the CEO of Pfizer saying their vaccine was "100% effective" in africa on twitter (there was a video, as well). that was my first claim. Then i said "Now pfizer did this a different time ..." edit: the source eludes me because i originally saw it on my cellphone in a video (the paper) and the bullet points were being read by an asian female. I failed to bookmark/save the video, and i have a hard time chasing down research that is this controversial without a DOI or PMC due to the ... tens of thousands of papers containing the same keywords. I'm not claiming it's "buried" or "being kept from us" or anything conspiratorial, but it never got any play on mainstream media and would obviously get shadowbanned on any large site with funding from pfizer (et al) because of the "fact checkers want you to know that the vaccine has been proven safe and effective!" modal. this has the 2/3rds participants excluded https://www.fda.gov/media/159195/download https://www.fda.gov/media/159195/download but i am done for today, i have to crack some hydrogeology textbooks so i hope this stays up so i have my own reference for the next time i mention this