Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Spring Banter


Baroclinic Zone
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, WhitinsvilleWX said:

I'm not sure why  you persist with this argument. I've told you that an event this rare would most assuredly not been picked up. I do know a little about what I'm talking about . 

Then why not just test all drugs for six weeks and blast them out there? Why even have a full auth process at all?

I'm sure all the major side effects show up in the six week period. Just call it quits after that.

  • Weenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Then why not just test all drugs for six weeks and blast them out there? Why even have a full auth process at all?

I'm sure all the major side effects show up in the six week period. Just call it quits after that.

LOL. Now you're just ranting non sense. I've said that studies would be done for 2-3 years with several hundred thousand people and a 6 in 6.5 million effect probably wouldn't be picked up. That's why pharma have whole department that follow a drug through its life cycle. Its called pharmacovigilance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

All I can think of is the end of every drug commercial that lists all the possible side effects... including just about everything short of an alien life form coming out of your rectum.  "Ask your doctor, this drug is a miracle but in rare cases...."

My favorite is the "Do not take if allergic to"  That seems a bit obvious

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WhitinsvilleWX said:

LOL. Now you're just ranting non sense. 

That's fine, I just don't really get the logic that because it was only 6 reported cases out of x million doses it would have therefore never been possible to find this issue in a full trial. That seems like a random guess on your part, IMO.

In a full trial, they may have found many minor cases of blood clots that didn't require hospitalization but were still caught because the subjects were under observation.

They have no one under observation after getting the shot. This is all being driven by selection-bias now in terms of who gets so bad they show back up to the hospital. You have zero clue how many people are suffering at home with vaccine side effects right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

That's fine, I just don't really get the logic that because it was only 6 reported cases out of x million doses it would have therefore never been possible to find this issue in a full trial. That seems like a random guess on your part, IMO.

In a full trial, they may have found many minor cases of blood clots that didn't require hospitalization but were still caught because the subjects were under observation.

They have no one under observation after getting the shot. This is all being driven by selection-bias now in terms of who gets so bad they show back up to the hospital. You have zero clue how many people are suffering at home with vaccine side effects right now.

Can you point to an example of a vaccine trial where subjects are held in a hospital for 6-14 days (i.e. when these clots occurred) after dosing for observation? 

(There may be examples-I honestly don't know)

Otherwise sounds like a straw man...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WhitinsvilleWX said:

Gardasil ran phase I, II, and II trials with full approval. The total in the trials was around 50,000 people. 

Zostavax ran about 80,000 total. Boostrix (dTAP booster) ran a total of 12,000.

 

Clinical trials do not run as many patients as people think. 

80,000 people is the size of Fall River.....it's a LOT of people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, bch2014 said:

Can you point to an example of a vaccine trial where subjects are held in a hospital for 6-14 days (i.e. when these clots occurred) after dosing for observation? 

(There may be examples-I honestly don't know)

Otherwise sounds like a straw man...

Subjects in trials report their symptoms and status regularly. Random people getting the shot now only show up in the data after they are near death in the hospital. Selection bias. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WhitinsvilleWX said:

Its nowhere near a million. Or 6 million. The argument is that a side effect that affects 6 in almost 7 million would have been picked up in a trial. That's not true.

Clearly more than six people have had blood clot issues. Six people were so bad off that they ended up in the hospital over it. That’s all we know right now. Selection bias. This same error was made when politicians tried to calculate the hospitalization rates in the early days of COVID. It’s why Cuomo said he needed 40k ventilators and entire new hospitals to be built. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PhineasC said:

This same logic can be used to argue kids and young adults don’t need to worry about COVID either, BTW. 

I 100% agree, they don't. More kids die from the flu in any given year than Covid. They can carry the virus and infect those more susceptible to it. However, once that age group is fully vaccinated it won't matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BuffaloWeather said:

I 100% agree, they don't. More kids die from the flu in any given year than Covid. They can carry the virus and infect those more susceptible to it. However, once that age group is fully vaccinated it won't matter. 

No way many parents are going to inject their kids with an EUA vaccine for a disease that doesn’t even affect them. Adults can get vaccinated and be safe without needing kids to get the vaccine.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some data on under 18 covid cases.

Only 46 people died from covid between 0-17 years old in the USA since covid started.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#SexAndAge

477 ages 0-17 died from the flu in the 2018-2019 flu season

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

Here is the full data

https://downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP and CHA - Children and COVID-19 State Data Report 4.1.21 FINAL.pdf

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PhineasC said:

No way many parents are going to inject their kids with an EUA vaccine for a disease that doesn’t even affect them. Adults can get vaccinated and be safe without needing kids to get the vaccine.

I agree, that is what I meant. The older more susceptible get the vaccine, youths don't really need to worry right now. The only issue is the Brazilian variant is impacting the younger population. However, we don't have enough data on it yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BuffaloWeather said:

I agree, that is what I meant. The older more susceptible get the vaccine, youths don't really need to worry right now. The only issue is the Brazilian variant is impacting the younger population. However, we don't have enough data on it yet. 

It’s actually a very good thing if young people all get very mild COVID and then recover. That’s how you break the back of the pandemic (with vaccinations too for the older adults).

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Clearly more than six people have had blood clot issues. Six people were so bad off that they ended up in the hospital over it. That’s all we know right now. Selection bias. This same error was made when politicians tried to calculate the hospitalization rates in the early days of COVID. It’s why Cuomo said he needed 40k ventilators and entire new hospitals to be built. 

Maybe I should hire you to run the Therapeutic area unit at my company since you know so much about how to power and run a clinical trial. 

Like I said, you and I think alike on a lot of stuff, but you're in my area of expertise and I'm here to tell you, that you don't know shyte about drug development. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

No way many parents are going to inject their kids with an EUA vaccine for a disease that doesn’t even affect them. Adults can get vaccinated and be safe without needing kids to get the vaccine.

I tend to agree with this..at least in the near term. I know they are doing trials on 6 month olds, but I'm going to pass on this for my 3 year old whenever it gets EU approved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, WhitinsvilleWX said:

Maybe I should hire you to run the Therapeutic area unit at my company since you know so much about how to power and run a clinical trial. 

Like I said, you and I think alike on a lot of stuff, but you're in my area of expertise and I'm here to tell you, that you don't know shyte about drug development. 

LOL that’s fine. No need to get defensive. I’m sure you guys did a great job with the jab and all is well. 

  • Weenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

No way many parents are going to inject their kids with an EUA vaccine for a disease that doesn’t even affect them. Adults can get vaccinated and be safe without needing kids to get the vaccine.

you haven't been paying attention to the media:lol:. Now that the elderly are vaccinated and 40+ are on their way, they've said schools are spreaders now. Trickle down disease

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...