Pfizer clinical trial data: not good at all

[Evol]

I think a lot of people are living in 2 different worlds. Those who want to impose their will on other and those who don't. I don't know how that gets resolved.

Got my vax, got covid. Hoping they don't make a booster 'mandatory' but I think that's a matter of when not if.

 

[Actual_Cryptid]

And the virologist just cited stated that the virus was only spreading in unvaccinated people?

if only there was an article you could read to answer your questions about what's in the article.

 

[crich]

I think a lot of people are living in 2 different worlds. Those who want to impose their will on other and those who don't. I don't know how that gets resolved.

Got my vax, got covid. Hoping they don't make a booster 'mandatory' but I think that's a matter of when not if.

No doubt. Look at the world we live in. Society is slowly accepting that its OK for a 6 year old to declare that theyre the opposite gender and start taking hormone therapy. The government officials that are not prosecuting the parents and physicians are the same ones that are going to steamroll the population with whatever mandates they see fit.

 

[Actual_Cryptid]

No doubt. Look at the world we live in. Society is slowly accepting that its OK for a 6 year old to declare that theyre the opposite gender and start taking hormone therapy. The government officials that are not prosecuting the parents and physicians are the same ones that are going to steamroll the population with whatever mandates they see fit.

Hey, look it's one of those people who wants to impose their will on others.

No doctor is prescribing hormone therapy for 6 year olds. That's the new "same sex marriage is a slippery slope to bestiality." It's super transparent that as soon as the religious right lost the ability to impose their religious beliefs about marriage on people, they moved on to transgender people instead.

But that's part of the problem. It's not freedom vs tyranny, it's "I don't like that I can't impose my will on other people" on both sides of the political aisle, and even on both sides fo the vaccine discussion. See: people who are indignant and assaulting people because they can't fly on an airplane without a mask or patronize a restaurant without being vaccinated.

To repeat myself, if you want to say it's about freedom and individual choice, you don't get to flip around and demand that you be allowed to use the government as a weapon against people doing things that don't hurt you.

 

[Skerhunter]

if only there was an article you could read to answer your questions about what's in the article.

Obviously you didn’t read the article that you cited. The article stated vaccines would help reduce the rate at which the virus mutates. But then the virologists states that the virus was only spreading via unvaccinated people.

Which is not true…get it?

 

[MattB]

What is your specialization? I highly doubt you are more qualified to offer an opinion on thr subject than Dr McCullough. There is no evidence the vaccine is safe or effective. Particularly regarding long term effects of the MRNA vaccine. In fact I think it is super irresponsible to push these onto people without disclosing all of the potential side effects so they can have informed consent. You MDs don’t do that because they don’t provide the information to you.

No evidence the vaccines are effective? That data is available in troves for anyone who cares to look. No offense, but that is a massively ignorant take.

 

[Actual_Cryptid]

Obviously you didn’t read the article that you cited. The article stated vaccines would help reduce the rate at which the virus mutates. But then the virologists states that the virus was only spreading via unvaccinated people.

Which is not true…get it?

that's not what he said though. Once again, this is an exercise in "clip out only the words convenient for me."

"And I think we're seeing that now across the U.S., in places where there are good vaccination rates, you're seeing that the virus isn't spreading as easily. It's only spreading in unvaccinated people. So the strength of vaccination in terms of not only protecting people, but now limiting the emergence of other variants by reducing the overall replication of the virus in the population is clearly seen."

Cutting a single sentence out and pretending the speaker means something entirely different is not behaving with integrity. We should all be striving to behave with integrity here.

 

[Chucklehead]

No, the point was that the correlation between obesity and hospital admission does not indicate that losing weight protects one against hospitalization. To begin to make that assertion you would need to control for vaccination status, because people who are unvaccinated are also more likely to be obese.

How can that not be a reasonable inference considering the now known action of the virus in the two linked articles? You think you need clinical trials to prove that its better to not be obese with this virus when we know its behavior?
Pfizer didn't do any hospitalization prevention studies, but they reasonably assumed, based on infection rate, that it was probable that it would protect against hospitalization. I think you can make the same type of assumption in this case.

Political affiliation is important because I know (because my family does this) that the response is typically to blame city liberals or some other "not me" group. This stuff effects everybody.

That has nothing to do with obesity or health in general. Leave politics out of it. Its irrelevant and only clouds judgement with emotional responses.

Your article is authored by Josephe Mercola. The dude has been antivaccine since the 90s. He's a crank, of course he's going to write an article with no data in support to fearmonger against vaccines. He has literally made millions telling people vaccines are poison and selling herbal supplements and snake oil.

Contrast that with this article which cites an actual virologist (Mercola is an osteopath, he has no background in virology or epidemiology or even immunology) that illustrates why an unvaccinated population drives mutations: https://hub.jhu.edu/2021/07/19/andrew-pekosz-delta-variants/

They still have no idea if mutations are coming from vaxed or unvaxed.
And if you accept that, "you need to stop/limit viral replication to prevent mutation", it makes the fact we have no early treatments after two years even more ridiculous. "Go home and let the virus replicate until you can't breath, then we'll do something when you get to the hospital." Thats been our treatment plan.

I'm not saying its one way or the other. The point is, we don't know.

 

[Chucklehead]

that's not what he said though. Once again, this is an exercise in "clip out only the words convenient for me."

"And I think we're seeing that now across the U.S., in places where there are good vaccination rates, you're seeing that the virus isn't spreading as easily. It's only spreading in unvaccinated people. So the strength of vaccination in terms of not only protecting people, but now limiting the emergence of other variants by reducing the overall replication of the virus in the population is clearly seen."

And to be fair to him, (the author)
That was written before Omicron. Vaccines were way more effective against the Alpha and Delta waves.
It looks like everyone is going to get Omicron.

 

[Actual_Cryptid]

How can that not be a reasonable inference considering the now known action of the virus in the two linked articles? You think you need clinical trials to prove that its better to not be obese with this virus when we know its behavior?
Pfizer didn't do any hospitalization prevention studies, but they reasonably assumed, based on infection rate, that it was probable that it would protect against hospitalization. I think you can make the same type of assumption in this case.


That has nothing to do with obesity or health in general. Leave politics out of it. Its irrelevant and only clouds judgement with emotional responses.

They still have no idea if mutations are coming from vaxed or unvaxed.
And if you accept that, "you need to stop/limit viral replication to prevent mutation", it makes the fact we have no early treatments after two years even more ridiculous. "Go home and let the virus replicate until you can't breath, then we'll do something when you get to the hospital." Thats been our treatment plan.

I'm not saying its one way or the other. The point is, we don't know.

"We observed that obese people are likely to have worse outcomes" is different than "losing weight will protect you against hospitalization." The first result I linked regarding the outcomes for overweight people hospitalized (better outcomes., pre-COVID) illustrates that. We don't need a clinical trial, we have other data we can look at, and sure enough there's strong correlations between vaccine status, income, and obesity as well as between vaccine status and hospitalization and outcome. So what we do know is that getting vaccinated is something easy you can do that, no matter your weight, provides protection against hospitalization. I would suspect if we were also looking at other health conditions (history of smoking, lung disease, alcohol consumption, diabetes, etc, all things that also correlate well to poverty) we could see some strong correlations between those and positive health outcomes.

Unless we had data on people from similar socioeconomic status and could compare outcomes for people who lost weight vs people who did not and their hospitalization, we couldn't make an inference on whether losing weight provides any protection. Does that make sense? That's also not a clinical trial, btw, it's a review of available data. The more confounding factors (other things happening that can change the outcome) the less we can make an inference based on a point of data. Again, we know shark attacks and ice cream sales both rise sharply at the same time, but once we consider other factors (people buy ice cream and go to the beach more in the summer) it lessens the likelihood that we can make any inference about the correlation.

We don't have early treatments (yet.) We can't magically make them appear. There have been hundreds of studies looking at sugegsted interventions, from the same old snake oil (vitamin megadoses, hydroxchloroquine, ivermectin) to some novel drugs and antivirals, but no success yet. Merck is seeking approval for a pill (antiviral) that they've been working on since May of 2020 IIRC, but there were some complications early on. You can read more about it here:

Merck’s COVID pill loses its lustre: what that means for the pandemic

Molnupiravir was initially heralded by public-health officials as a game-changer for COVID-19, but full clinical-trial data showed lower-than-expected efficacy.

www.nature.com

It is incredibly frustrating that we don't have good early interventions for most respiratory viruses. That's why vaccination is important.

I tend to think the overlap between political affiliation, poverty, obesity, and health outcomes is extremely important, because there is absolutely aa political element to the response, how leaders talked about the importance of our response, which leaders spread misinformation or tried to cut funding to rural healthcare networks. I keep hoping that by bringing it up maybe people will see how good responses and a strong investment in our health infrastructure benefits us all.

 

[KurtR]

How did we go from d to o for virus mutation names?

 

[Actual_Cryptid]

How did we go from d to o for virus mutation names?

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.

www.cdc.gov

They have a nice chart. Variants are named and added to the "variants being monitored" list when they occur in enough number to merit closer inspection, variants of concern. That list starts with Alpha and goes on through the Greek alphabet. We mostly only heard about the variants of concern, Delta and Omicron.

 

[isItFallYet]

Hey, look it's one of those people who wants to impose their will on others.

No doctor is prescribing hormone therapy for 6 year olds. That's the new "same sex marriage is a slippery slope to bestiality." It's super transparent that as soon as the religious right lost the ability to impose their religious beliefs about marriage on people, they moved on to transgender people instead.

But that's part of the problem. It's not freedom vs tyranny, it's "I don't like that I can't impose my will on other people" on both sides of the political aisle, and even on both sides fo the vaccine discussion. See: people who are indignant and assaulting people because they can't fly on an airplane without a mask or patronize a restaurant without being vaccinated.

To repeat myself, if you want to say it's about freedom and individual choice, you don't get to flip around and demand that you be allowed to use the government as a weapon against people doing things that don't hurt you.

This may be the first thing that we have agreed on. It doesn't make me happy that kids are changing their sexes at a young age, but I would never tell someone what to do in regards to my opinions. What bothers me is when we are made to look bad because we don't support it. What bothers me even more is when people aggresively demand that we respect them and their lifestyles.

 

[BBob]

How did we go from d to o for virus mutation names?

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.

www.cdc.gov

They have a nice chart. Variants are named and added to the "variants being monitored" list when they occur in enough number to merit closer inspection, variants of concern. That list starts with Alpha and goes on through the Greek alphabet. We mostly only heard about the variants of concern, Delta and Omicron.

Nice way to dance around the actual question asked. I'm pretty sure you knew exactly what he was referring to but chose to do the dance...

 

[KurtR]

thats cool so its like a bunch of frat bros picking their name. Omicron does sound the most bad ass.

 

[KurtR]

Nice way to dance around the actual question asked.

no i was being a smart ass and their was no actual real question behind it. I dont really care how they name it but i figured i would get some kind of cool link

 

[BBob]

thats cool so its like a bunch of frat bros picking their name. Omicron does sound the most bad ass.

A scientist/researcher friend of mine were joking months ago about which one would get the big hype, Omicron we decided. Well geez whadda you know!

 

[Mike Islander]

To be honest i haven’t made up my mind on this. I am personally not taking anything for it but my symptoms are mild and I have no risk factors to have severe Covid. Unfortunately it’s not like taking antibiotics for strep throat…there’s no magic bullet out there that’s for sure.

But do you, as an MD, have a specific regimen of treatment that YOU follow to treat pre-hospitalization Covid patients? Are you aware of any?

 

[BBob]

no i was being a smart ass and their was no actual real question behind it. I dont really care how they name it but i figured i would get some kind of cool link

Well they did skip over a couple for well you know, leftist reasoning so they wouldn't offend anyone or anything. Which is quite ironic because they went to this naming system to avoid offending anyone or anything from the previously used system.

 

[Mike Islander]

One theme I find interesting is that many will question the advice/motivations of big pharma, healthcare systems, government health agencies, etc. but take almost without question the direction/advice of people like the one in the OP - as though they are just good guys doing god’s work with no profit incentive whatsoever.

As intimated earlier in this thread, the COVID anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists are running an industry with annual revenue in excess of $1.0Bn, and I do not know if people who repeat their misinformation are willfully ignorant or complicit.

As opposed to Big Pharma's paltry $1.27 trillion annual revenue. 1270X more revenue at stake.

As for all things that matter, be your own best researcher. Consider the data over the source; then consider the source of the data creation. Then cross reference the literature. Then look at the statistics of the actual real world outcomes. Then make your best informed decision.

Hiding any facts prevents informed decision and leads to mistrust that fuels groups that won't take anything from those who hide the data seriously.