Opinion Pfizer Covid Vaccine Efficiency - Not as high as claimed

[Protectandserve]

Moderna uses the same platform as Pfizer.

You're screwed

the author of the blogpost recalculates efficacy using 'suspected covid cases', i.e. trial participants who reported covid-associated symptoms but did not have a positive covid test.

There are many non-covid reasons for having any of the most common covid symptoms, and there is little reason to expect a covid vaccine to be effective against non-covid pathogens that cause these symptoms.


the blog post isnt just about the pfizer vaccine. it is about the level of information currently made public by both pfizer and moderna

 

[BJ@LW&WW]

tbh i wouldnt be terribly concerned. my thoughts are certainly in line with the blog post on the point that more data from the trials should be available sooner, particularly in a situation where there seems to be a significant of vaccine hesitancy. however, what has been published so far from pfizer and moderna are both valid and very positive in terms of efficacy.

 

[HereticBD]

I love how everyone wants to discuss all the minutia of this, when the reality is that they're just setting up a scenario where the "miracle" vaccines don't work, so they have to keep shutting everything down.

By all means, tell me I'm wrong in six months.

 

[ElKarlo]

Nvax will be good, inovio might be good also but they dropped the ball with schedule and they probably won’t have one out until the fall.
Both should also have less side effects than mRNA based vaccines

I agree NVAX has a lot of hype for this. Hopefully it is well founded. mRNA vaccines are still fairly new and really need to be refined imho.
Fall? Might as well not even try. That is kinda unacceptable and they will be last in line for vaccine glass vials and the such. Unless highly effective it will basically forgotten

 

[TeTe]

I got the two injections in my ass and suddenly I have this abnormal growth of muscle.

Did I mention they administer this stuff at the gym too?

 

[TribalDrumz]

I got the two injections in my ass and suddenly I have this abnormal growth of muscle.

Did I mention they administer this stuff at the gym too?

 

[TeTe]

Lmao

I was a bit suspicious when name of the vaccine bottle said "dianabol" on the side of it.

 

[TribalDrumz]

Lmao

I was a bit suspicious when name of the vaccine bottle said "dianabol" on the side of it.

haha Greg Doucette imported. FDA Fraud division approved/ Post Market Surveillance not required.

 

[bufetadanacara]

This isn't surprising at all.

It's also not only Pfizer...

BBC News - Sinovac: Brazil results show Chinese vaccine 50.4% effective
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-55642648

 

[glenwo2]

A man received the coronavirus vaccine and was dead 3 weeks later!

So are we going to die now?

 

[glenwo2]

This thread needs more adorable cats :

 

[Sunnyvale TP]

there are many sars-cov-2 pcr tests out now, with much better ppa and pna that what youre stating. actually false positives are much more common than negatives, and those are already very rare with the currently used tests.
How do you confirm someone has covid to quantify a false positive/negative? with a gold standard pcr test. that is what all fda emergency use authorized covid molecular diagnostics are compared against.

Timing of test can be important. three ideal tests would be ones that tests if a person 1. has been infected, 2. is infected, 3. is contagious. pcr tests can give positives so long as a persons sample contains sars-cov-2 rna, regardless of if the sample actually contains virions. a pcr test is extremely sensitive in detecting what it is designed to: the detection of viral rna. it is in general overly sensitive for the detection of contagious individuals, and not a applicable test for determining past infection.

a bonchoscopy is not a way to detect viral infection. it is a way to observe the lungs and look for symptoms. it cannot be used to confirm the cause of symptoms.

Pretty sure a Bronchoscopy wash/lavage can be used to collect samples of sputum for infection. I have not heard of covid being confirmed that way or seen it either because it is an invasive procedure. But I am pretty sure it can be done.

 

[Queen B]

Thats a whole lot of IFs

If 100% of those 20x suspected symptoms somehow bypassed all of the PCR tests, it would reduce the efficiency too low.
Thats not likely.

Author isnt concluding anything and is simply asking for more transparency in the study

 

[CatchnShoot]

It would also be very interesting to know what are the occupation of the people who were vaccinated and not vaccinated. You can't really compare a bus driver or a nurse to someone who's working at home, working with a small group of people or retired.

It's irrelevant, as placebo and active agent are randomized. Even the people administering the dose don't know the real from the fake.

ie) You have just as much chance getting a nurse getting the placebo as getting the candidate.

Seems the Vaccine could be a lot less effective than suggested by Pfizer, a medical journal published some information on how the numbers could be way off, pfizer Study had about 3410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed cases, which 1594 were in the group who were vaccinated. There were 20 times more suspected cases in the study than confirmed cases.

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/0...ccines-we-need-more-details-and-the-raw-data/

"With 20 times more suspected than confirmed cases, this category of disease cannot be ignored simply because there was no positive PCR test result. Indeed this makes it all the more urgent to understand. A rough estimate of vaccine efficacy against developing covid-19 symptoms, with or without a positive PCR test result, would be a relative risk reduction of 19% (see footnote)—far below the 50% effectiveness threshold for authorization set by regulators. Even after removing cases occurring within 7 days of vaccination (409 on Pfizer’s vaccine vs. 287 on placebo), which should include the majority of symptoms due to short-term vaccine reactogenicity, vaccine efficacy remains low: 29% (see footnote)."


Nobody is being honest in this race, labs are not fully disclosing numbers and we might get a vaccine that does very little.

LOL...you link to an OPINION piece from some dude that's salty 'cause he's not been granted access to the raw data. The FDA have the raw data, btw, it's not only Pfizer that has access (I assume that other regulatory bodies in other countries are granted similar access, but I don't KNOW that to be a fact).
You want to do an independent study, have at it li'l bitch.

 

[CatchnShoot]

I believe the Russian one more at this point. For several reasons

1) They really wanted the win
2) They have not shown to lie and adjusted and are fair with the success ratio %
3) ALL THE WESTERN MEDIA and Globalist big Pharm companies have been bashing the Russian vaccine while moderate powers who arent insanely biased (Argentina, Israel, Brazil etc seek to buy it or have already)
4) There government made it, not corrupt corporate influenced for profit organizations

1) I believe that the Jets will win the SuperBowl this year, 'cause "they really want the win"... are you fucked?

2) The Russian govenment doesn't lie? Heard of Sergei and Yulia Srkipal? How about Alexander Litvinenko? Or Alexei Navalny? How about not being allowed to use the Russian flag in the Olympics due to systematic doping/cheating.... Systemically Shady, on a level Trump could only dream of......are you fucked x 2
3) Bashing for good reason... released prior to stage 3 trials which are pretty much a planetary standard, based on a trial size of 72 people--TOTAL. In addition to that, they've been caught infiltrating the other bio firms developing vaccines in order to steal tech.
All that said, it does appear to be a sound mechanism IMO (using an adenovirus particle to introduce the antigen) and although not at it's initial target efficacy, it does seem to be around 90% effective if we can believe the Russian data....... there is a larger study underway in India, so I would await confirmation there, but I hope/suspect it will remain around that threshold.

4) The Russian Government is the biggest criminal organization in the world, that it is a state sponsored vaccine program does NOT do Sputnik-V's credibility any favors. Perhaps only slightly less dicey then the Chinese vaccine candidate.

 

[Lubaolong]

I wouldn’t put a ton of faith in a guy who is associate professor in the pharmacy department who speaks at antivaxx conferences. He has always tried to raise red flags about vaccines, and BMJ has received communications from a lot of concerned experts regarding keeping him on as an editor. It’s just ridiculous at this point some of the concerns he’s trying to raise. You always have to be humble and take into account the possibility of something unexpected out of left field, but at this point, these vaccines look golden. I will be surprised if Nobel prizes aren’t handed out for this work.

 

[Sano]

Great contributions in this thread so far!

 

[slavomir]

I believe the Russian one more at this point. For several reasons

1) They really wanted the win
2) They have not shown to lie and adjusted and are fair with the success ratio %
3) ALL THE WESTERN MEDIA and Globalist big Pharm companies have been bashing the Russian vaccine while moderate powers who arent insanely biased (Argentina, Israel, Brazil etc seek to buy it or have already)
4) There government made it, not corrupt corporate influenced for profit organizations

Yeah thats why Putin isnt having the vaccine.

 

[The_Renaissance]

I wouldn't be too concerned about but I am convinced that none of these vaccines are going to make much of a difference to be honest. People are still gonna die, like every other year. Elderly and vulnerable people mainly even if they've had the vaccine. Things will start looking up around May just in time for spring/summer when the virus naturally fizzles out and disappears for a few months......we'll be told it's the vaccine, it won't be the vaccine.

Come autumn, here comes the 'new variant' and we all know what happens for the next few months after that.

 

[phoenixikki]

It's irrelevant, as placebo and active agent are randomized. Even the people administering the dose don't know the real from the fake.

ie) You have just as much chance getting a nurse getting the placebo as getting the candidate.




LOL...you link to an OPINION piece from some dude that's salty 'cause he's not been granted access to the raw data. The FDA have the raw data, btw, it's not only Pfizer that has access (I assume that other regulatory bodies in other countries are granted similar access, but I don't KNOW that to be a fact).
You want to do an independent study, have at it li'l bitch.

But how random is it? We can't really know if the data isn't available.
Besides: should it be really random? We know that the virus overwhelmingly affects people old people with several serious health-issues. They need the vaccine more than anyone else thus it should be more effective for them. If you're saying that a vaccine is 90% percent effective for people who have close to 0% of a change in getting sick than it doesn't mean much really.