NoPie

32 ms·

301.
by NoPie 5y ago
While it is true, we cannot compare Japan with socialist countries like Cuba or China where social conformity is forced much stronger. Japan had problems with HPV vaccine uptake which shows that social conformity is not enough and many Japa
302.
by NoPie 5y ago
https://archive.fo/3wYHy I appreciate his honest take on what CDC did wrong and what problems we will have in future.
303.
by NoPie 5y ago
However, vaccine mandates increase tribalism. The UK is not so different from the US culturally. If the UK could do it without vaccine mandates (with the exception of medical professionals but that's understandable) why not the US? I a
304.
by NoPie 5y ago
The raise of fuel prices was an immediate cause but it probably was long burning dissatisfaction with the economic hardships of the masses vs. prosperous kleptocratic elite. On the other hand it seems that the economy of Kazakhstan was one
305.
by NoPie 5y ago
It's clearly a joke, and it was probably meant that the food they sell is nowhere near real authentic Chinese one could get in Hong Kong.
306.
by NoPie 5y ago
We should compare both. It is clear that getting immunity for naive person by vaccination is much more preferable. But in case when one has been already infected, there is no reason to admit that he has very little to gain by additional vac
307.
by NoPie 5y ago
Sorry, it doesn't seem like that at all.
308.
by NoPie 5y ago
Most likely this. It is hard to imagine that covid has disproportional ability to cause lasting side-effects without causing causing severe disease and/or death.
309.
by NoPie 5y ago
It doesn't work like that with cold viruses. You get it as a child and then every year with minimum effect. Maybe at the end of your life when your body and immune system is weak it causes severe disease and/or death. The same wit
310.
by NoPie 5y ago
The end-game is not so much that the virus adapts (which can happen but mutations are not that easily predicable) but that our immune systems become adapted. We can see this already. Previously infected and/or vaccinated people can get
311.
by NoPie 5y ago
It's a rubbish assumption though. According to the UK data (which is age stratified), unvaccinated children get infected much more often. You could say that children have strong immune systems therefore they don't get sick but onl
312.
by NoPie 5y ago
Most likely, the reason for vaccine passes is that the authorities believed that they will limit the spread of covid. When it didn't happen they could not backtrack and just continued with vague notions that it will help to improve vac
313.
by NoPie 5y ago
That's true but the government data from the UK also showed that the vaccinated (age group above 30 years old) got infected more often than unvaccinated. The reasons are unclear, maybe it is the testing issue or that vaccinated are les
314.
by NoPie 5y ago
Also obligatory https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/the-phrase-no-evidence...
315.
by NoPie 5y ago
Yes, the problems in one site, especially if not dealt with properly, might indicate larger problems. We all know that the trials were rushed and for a very good reason, there was a pandemic. Still, if issues are discovered they should be
316.
by NoPie 5y ago
You apparently use the word trial differently than it is used in pharma. Pfizer had one large trial that involved many sites. Three of those sites run by Ventavia had problems. That's why the headline says “in trial”. But even if you d
317.
by NoPie 5y ago
It is an issue but that issue has to be solved by different means than having fact-checkers saying that BMJ is wrong. BMJ clearly states at the top of every page that it is meant for healthcare professionals.
318.
by NoPie 5y ago
And? It's very precise and describes exactly what happened.
319.
by NoPie 5y ago
The issues with Ventavia, if true, are not something typical or expected at all. And it is even less expected that any reported issues will not be followed up by the regulator. While it is true that many trials suffer from similar issues, i
320.
by NoPie 5y ago
>> The first question in everybody's head when reading this article is, "Were the vaccine trials legitimate or not?" You are writing complete rubbish. BMJ does not question the legitimacy of the vaccine trials. With thi
321.
by NoPie 5y ago
I don't know what FDA review memorandum involves but it doesn't sound that the FDA did investigation. It could be simply that the FDA checked submitted documentation from that site and concluded this because the CRO hadn't pr
322.
by NoPie 5y ago
It definitely does. There have been many scandals with pharma and regulators. Opioid crisis is one example, even though all involved parties currently blame each other and it has not been established who shares the most guilt yet. In either
323.
by NoPie 5y ago
The issue is that proper investigation was not done. We need more transparency and this is not what is happening. What happened with the data from these researchers? There are no indications that they were removed from the study analysis. I
324.
by NoPie 5y ago
Or it means that FDA is not doing its job properly. It could be do to lack of manpower or whatever but the fact that the FDA did not inspect the sites in question doesn't mean that the complaint wasn't justified. It just means it
325.
by NoPie 5y ago
BMJ correspondents understand the industry and see some failures in one of the most important clinical trials for this pandemic. They consider this unacceptable and seeing that regulators haven't really done their job at overseeing thi
326.
by NoPie 5y ago
The solution is not to discredit BMJ but to explain how BMJ article doesn't mean what antivax is insinuating. I totally understand that when BMJ writes that this clinical research organization did a mess is this trial, someone misreads
327.
by NoPie 5y ago
It will not be misunderstood by intended readers of BMJ. As for facebook it has all kinds of readers and groups including those that are meant for professionals.
328.
by NoPie 5y ago
It was ultimately Pfizer's trial and Pfizer bears all responsibility for their contractors.
329.
by NoPie 5y ago
HN is also complicit. I learned about the BMJ letter ( https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2957 ) from the HN article https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29582147 As you can see, it is gone, pract
330.
by NoPie 5y ago
Most people are "not at risk" in a sense that their risk is clearly much less than for others. There is no zero risk of anything, so we should not aim for that. It would help if you explained what is wrong. As it looks now, you ju

More ›