I liked your post because I hadn't heard that they hadn't taken money "yet". They'll get paid. That said, not taking money and whether or not their announcement had anything to do with politics have nothing to do with each other.
OT- A Very Significant Pfizer Vaccine Update (Nov. 18)
- Thread starter RedCap
- Start date
you know what i was saying. trump had nothing to do with Pfizers vaccine good or bad. yet he has tried repeatedly to take credit for it. thats all im talking about. that vaccine is not here because of anything trump did. it is here because pfizer and partners spent the money and did the work. alone
and pfizer wants everyone to know that trump didn't have anything to do with it
Because his "Operation Warp Speed" even according to the NY Times has been a huge success. You do remember Fauci etal talking about 2 years to produce a vaccine right? I do believe that some of those big bad for profit drug companies deserve some credit as well.
Clearly they that's why they waited until after the election. That said, IF it had been left up to the FDA and their protocols we would be over a year away from a vaccine hitting the market. I don't like Trump but he got stuff done. This is one of them.
this seems reasonable although i would still contend that even without a flu vaccine deaths due to the flu would be a quarter of what covid is so far and we are still adding over 1000 more deaths per day. by the time we get to March this might be the equivalent of 10 years worth of flu deaths even without a flu vaccine. so it isnt as deadly as feared but its contagiousness makes up for a lower death percentage by infecting an extraordinary large number of people. a very small % of a very large number still ends up being a large number.
pfizer was not part of operation warp speed. so it had nothing to do with it
secondly, drug companies would have been all over this with or without operation warp speed. in fact, there is really no conclusive evidence that operation warp speed has made any difference at all. its just an assumption. Pfizer beat out all the operation warp speed companies and they did it without being part of it. so maybe operation warp speed was a waste of money?
Now you're just being dishonest. EVERY single company coming to market with a vaccine took advantage of the streamlined testing and approval process of Operation Warp Speed. EVER SINGLE ONE. Without Trump stepping on toes and pushing buttons we would still be analyzing phase one testing data.
thats not true. trump did not make up the protocols. the FDA adjusted their protocols on their own. the president does not tell the FDA what to do. we would be in the same place no matter who was in the white house in terms of vaccine development. The FDA is independent of the white house. they were going to do what's in the best interest of the american public no matter what trump thought. We could have accomplished this without a president. all trump has done since the very beginning was downplay the significance of this virus. Yet he was the one responsible for getting a vaccine out? thats ludicrous. the drug companies deserve the credit. trump deserves blame
stepping on toes and pushing buttons? trump downplayed the virus from the beginning. he didn't do shit. the FDA and drug companies did it without him. The FDA does not need his approval to approve protocols. they would have acted the same with or without trump
they dont do what he says. they discredited much of his opinion on other covid related therapies. the drug companies and the FDA work together. and they would have accomplished this either way.
we would not still be analyzing phase 1 data. thats an exaggeration. the FDA would change their requirements without trump. just ask them. they've already said it
You're a fool who has never dealt with the federal bureaucracy if you really believe that the FDA would have changed their protocols without a President kicking their butts.
I have no interest in debating the politics of the vaccine development - either pro or con regarding Pfizer involvement with Operation Warp Speed. But I was curious and found these facts, at least according to Google:
"In July, Pfizer got a $1.95 billion deal with the government’s Operation Warp Speed, the multiagency effort to rush a vaccine to market, to deliver 100 million doses of the vaccine. The arrangement is an advance-purchase agreement, meaning that the company won’t get paid until they deliver the vaccines. Pfizer did not accept federal funding to help develop or manufacture the vaccine, unlike front-runners Moderna and AstraZeneca."
Separately, Pfizer is/was partnered with a German firm on this Covid-19 vaccine development so it is/was a joint effort.
"In July, Pfizer got a $1.95 billion deal with the government’s Operation Warp Speed, the multiagency effort to rush a vaccine to market, to deliver 100 million doses of the vaccine. The arrangement is an advance-purchase agreement, meaning that the company won’t get paid until they deliver the vaccines. Pfizer did not accept federal funding to help develop or manufacture the vaccine, unlike front-runners Moderna and AstraZeneca."
Separately, Pfizer is/was partnered with a German firm on this Covid-19 vaccine development so it is/was a joint effort.
Why wouldnt we belive big pharma. I mean they have only lost a billion dollar lawsuit in the past. They are good honest people that would never try ripping off people.
Did you have a sore arm and a slight fever for a day or so?
Sore arm and couldn’t sleep the first night.
So you dont think that a $1.8B purchase order through OWS effected how Pfizer went about their development? Sure, they didnt take R&D money, but its pretty naive to think that a guaranteed distribution contract didnt effect how they operated.
I have lots of experience with Corona virus vaccines and I'm actually a little surprised the number isn't even higher as in the 98-99% range. Part of that IMO is the manner in which they assess efficacy. I don't think they do ANY CMI testing which likely confers some longer term immunity even if you don't develop the threshold level of circulating antibodies that they look for.
I've said from the beginning, we can develop and produce a vaccine in months IF we can get the CDC and FDA out of slow motion. I've also said that undoubtedly it will be very safe and effective. Duration of immunity is to be determined but my suspicion with the 2 dose regimen that it will be an annual booster.
The last numbers before all of the favorable post-election news had acceptance rate going to be around 60%. Those who don't get the vaccine will likely get naturally infected. That's their choice. A dumb choice IMO, but it's their body.
Last edited:
There is no doubt that Pfizer has guarantees $$$$$$$$ to do this now or later. They took the big money as they and others nearly quit making animal medicines. We struggle to get much needed animal pharmaceuticals as they followed the money.
This times 1000. Like Trump or not he pushed the buttons to get Operation Warp Speed in action. Money and slashing of red tape and bureaucracy that slow sheet up to just justify a job to little power mongers. This would never have been possible under Obama, Hilary or Biden.
would overall efficacy (of those that get vaccinated) be diminished by a low vaccination rate...?
i plan to get one. fwiw.
I've worked in the pharmaceutical industry and am familiar with the FDA for 30 years. They dont make a decisions or need approval from the President for anything. They have protocols in place for times like this. They are incentivized by profit and perception not by the desires of a president. You are the ignorant one. You apparently are unfamiliar with the pharmaceutical industry and the FDA. I have lived it for the last 31 years
Your obsession for a spray painted fat man has either made you ignorant or you just dont know anything about it either way. The FDA slashes its own red tape. It doesn't need a buffoon to tell them what to do or why. They have plans in place for pandemics. they can change their standards on their own. they work for the health of the american people. Not trump
Theres a whole buttload of FDA people in my brothers Pfizer manufacturing plant right now. They dont even mention Trump or anyone else outside the FDA when talking about their vaccine guidelines. Both the FDA and Pfizer employees laugh at Trump every time he mentions them. Like he knows nothing about either one of them but keeps mentioning them. its a running joke in both organizations
they haven't actually shown the public the data yet. how they assess efficacy will determine where they got the 94-95% efficacy headline. there are different ways to assess efficacy and they have not made it public yet.
Efficacy might be preventing symptoms. efficacy might be causing an antibody response. efficacy might be preventing replication of the virus. the 60% expectation might be the prevention of symptoms. and the 94% might be one of the other measures.
ummm... Sorry but you're wrong about this one. We've been using Corona virus vaccine in animals for decades. IF you know which strain you're targeting, it's extremely easy to build a vaccine to them and they are highly antigenic so the vaccines are extremely effective. Thank Trump for getting this in gear and move on.
Don't be such a moron. The FDA "slashed it's own red tape" because Trump was going to roll heads if they didn't. Period. End of discussion. When the President of the United States makes a phone call to an agency head and his minions, they get a little nervous about their cushy little jobs.
Last edited:
He's not wrong. Under Biden, we'd have to first give pelosi and others a chance to profiteer in the companies that were going to produce the 'winning' vaccine. Google the Visa IPO if you are not tracking.
No. IF you're immune you're immune. Actually those who don't get vaccinated and continue to allow for a harbor of the virus will boost overall population immunity by repeat exposure to the vaccinated. We would never get everybody vaccinated and eliminate the virus worldwide. That's a fantasy. Hopefully this thing slowly begins to mutate and becomes nothing more serious than a bad cold.....er wait..... Once we get the more susceptible vaccinated that's what this is already.
It's a sham.
"The final analysis was triggered when 170 cases of symptomatic COVID-19 developed among the 43,661 enrolled participants, of which 41,135 had received a second dose of the vaccine as of November 13.
Of the 170 cases, 162 were in the placebo group and eight were in the vaccinated group, yielding the 95 percent efficacy."
I don't know exact size of groups, but assuming it is 1/2 and 1/2
21,830 placebo group - 21,668 didn't get Covid - 99.26% didn't get Covid
21,831 vaccine group - 21,823 didn't get Covid - 99.96% didn't get Covid
I don't know how you could assume equal exposure across groups and difference in infection percent in groups would be easily within the margin of error for exposure differences.
Edit: This is how I think they calculate the "95% effective rate"
1 - .9926 = .0074 and 1 - .9996 = .0004 ||||| .0074 - .0004 = .0070 ||||| .0070/.0074 = .945946
Pfizer reports final vaccine results: 95% efficacy
Experts are eager to see the full data, but the top-line results are very positive.
Last edited:
They have professional statisticians who figure out what can be validated by the data so personally I trust them. It's not the first rodeo for these statisticians who have been doing this same type of analysis for previous medical trials for years now.It's a sham.
"The final analysis was triggered when 170 cases of symptomatic COVID-19 developed among the 43,661 enrolled participants, of which 41,135 had received a second dose of the vaccine as of November 13.
Of the 170 cases, 162 were in the placebo group and eight were in the vaccinated group, yielding the 95 percent efficacy."
I don't know exact size of groups, but assuming it is 1/2 and 1/2
21,830 placebo group - 21,668 didn't get Covid - 99.26% didn't get Covid
21,831 vaccine group - 21,823 didn't get Covid - 99.96% didn't get Covid
I don't know how you could assume equal exposure across groups and difference in infection percent in groups would be easily within the margin of error for exposure differences.
Edit: This is how I think they calculate the "95% effective rate"
1 - .9926 = .0074 and 1 - .9996 = .0004 ||||| .0074 - .0004 = .0070 ||||| .0070/.0074 = .945946
Pfizer reports final vaccine results: 95% efficacy
Experts are eager to see the full data, but the top-line results are very positive.arstechnica.com
BUT if skeptical doubting Thomas types believe they're smarter than the professional statisticians they of course are free to step aside while others participate in getting the vaccination. No one is going to complain if they'd rather take their personal chances with the virus. Everyone can pick their own preference for which risk they want to take. But be assured no choice is risk free.
Last edited:
Everyone will build immunity somehow. Either through an infection or through a vaccination.
Once a vaccine is publicly available, the shutdowns/mask wearing/banning of gatherings needs to cease.
If you don't prioritize protecting yourself don't expect others to do it for you.
Once a vaccine is publicly available, the shutdowns/mask wearing/banning of gatherings needs to cease.
If you don't prioritize protecting yourself don't expect others to do it for you.
hey, there's plenty of argument about the tests now, but im really thinking moving forward - efforting to vaccinate many unwilling participants.
its my understanding that any herd immunity via any vaccine will wane with participation rates less than like 70% (just a swag), no...?
in short, many wont take it severely diminishing its effectiveness.
its my understanding that any herd immunity via any vaccine will wane with participation rates less than like 70% (just a swag), no...?
in short, many wont take it severely diminishing its effectiveness.
But those vaccinated should have the 95% immunity regardless of how many people choose to be vaccinated. So herd immunity becomes far less important to anyone once they are vaccinated. And those who choose not to get vaccinated probably don't care about herd immunity.
If some people don't want to get the vaccine, fine. I'm OK with them getting the virus if they choose to personally take that risk once the vaccine was/is available to them. At that point it becomes like thinning out the herd IMO of those who aren't all that smart. Sorry to be blunt but I won't be sympathetic to their situation if they have rejected vaccination.
Last edited:
You can totally stop outbreaks of neonatal Corona virus enteritis in pigs, dogs and cattle with vaccination. You don't necessarily prevent all infections but you stop death loss and decrease illness dramatically. So it depends on how you want to define efficacy. IF you want to define it as a certain level of circulating neutralizing antibody then probably in the upper 90s. IF you want to define efficacy as being able to stop ALL illness then probably less than 90%. IF you define efficacy as the ability to prevent deaths then most of them approach 100%. Most cattle producers vaccinate all of their cows against Corona virus calf scours which in turn pass on colostral antibodies which are absorbed by the newborn.
We'll need to get booster vaccinations similar to flu shots annually IMO. I don't think this goes away any time soon. Even IF we made vaccination mandatory in this country, this thing isn't going away. We're WAY too mobile as a society and there's no way in hell our neighbors to the south vaccinate everybody. In an odd way having people shedding virus in our population may in the long run help our population immunity be re-challenging vaccinated people with live virus.
Similar threads
