Pfizer’s Early Data Shows Vaccine Is More Than 90% Effective

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/09/health/covid-vaccine-pfizer.html

I’ve been reading about this today and it sounds promising.

I am not anti-vax or anti-science in any way, however I am still hesitant to get in line for the first ever approved mRNA vaccine.

Looks to me like they are over-hyping a very small sample size and very early results.

Here is my understanding of the trial so far. 4400 people were divided into 2 groups. One group received 2 doses of the vaccine, the other a placebo. So 7 days after everyone received the second dose, 94 people had tested positive for covid. I don't see the exact breakdown, but the majority of those 94 cases (10 times more) were of the placebo group, leading to the conclusion that the vaccine is 90% effective (blocked 90% of the cases in the vaccine group.

So to me several things:

1.) that 7 day window seems very short. people can get sick up to weeks after exposure, so to say 7 days later these are the numbers seems premature to me.

2.) 94 people total from both groups tested positive. That seems a very small sample size. Maybe it is the blackjack AP in me, but I learned long ago never to try to extract anything from a small sample size.

3.) Let's say that despite the small sample size, these numbers turn out to be exactly correct and there would be 90% less cases for people that received the vaccine. How long would that protection last? I mean it has only been weeks since they gave the second round. They can't possible know if any immunity will last 3 weeks, 3 months or 3 years.

4.) long term effects. Again it has been weeks since they gave half the participants the vaccine. WEEKS! what if 4 months down the road, all these people suffer strokes? That is extreme but it serves the point. There is a reason why these trials usually move slowly to be sure they are safe LONGTERM. I understand the desire to rush, but some things really can't and shouldn't be rushed.

I want a vaccine as much as anybody. I am in a higher risk group, have shutdown my activates several times when I see increases in cases and still I got covid back in April and had a complication several months later. I want to get back to my regular Vegas life.

Really it is the narrative we woke up to today that alarms me. The narrative should have been very cautious optimism based on very early results. Instead, everywhere I read and see the story, the narrative is the vaccine is a success and we are about to start vaccinating the masses.

I don't have much of an opinion either way, I was just posting the information. With all medical advances, at some point it won't be unheard of to see vaccines happen even faster than this. We will be saying,(SNL's Gumpy old man voice) "when I was a kid, we got sick, and and almost died, AND WE LIKED IT"

I do wonder if this news came out a few weeks ago if the election results would have went the other way.

Quote: AxelWolf

I do wonder if this news came out a few weeks ago if the election results would have went the other way.

I have pondered this myself, and I know I'm risking getting political here, but I feel the answer is it would not have moved the needle as DJT insisted a virus was imminent thoughout the campaign. He was right.

Quote: AxelWolf

I don't have much of an opinion either way, I was just posting the information. With all medical advances, at some point it won't be unheard of to see vaccines happen even faster than this. We will be saying,(SNL's Gumpy old man voice) "when I was a kid, we got sick, and and almost died, AND WE LIKED IT"

I do wonder if this news came out a few weeks ago if the election results would have went the other way.

This vaccine is still in phase one trials.

I'm not putting it down (I am sure everyone will say I am biased because of my Cytodyn investment and yes I am aware of where that's going and it's not good at the moment)

But having studied up on FDA trials there are three phases, each phase getting larger and and longer.

Even if the vaccine works it's still going to take better part of a year to go through phase two and three. Those people believing the nightmare is over don't understand pharmaceutical development.

As for the election, who can tell how it would have affected it. It's also possible as the reality of timeline for vaccine approval set in there would have been an even more deleterious affect one way or the other

Quote: darkoz

This vaccine is still in phase one trials.

According to Pfizer's press release yesterday (and other articles I have read), they are in the middle of Phase 3 trials.

Quote: Joeman

According to Pfizer's press release yesterday (and other articles I have read), they are in the middle of Phase 3 trials.

Some people at extreme risk might get it early. But otherwise March sounds about right for bigger rollout.

Quote: darkoz

This vaccine is still in phase one trials.

I'm not putting it down (I am sure everyone will say I am biased because of my Cytodyn investment and yes I am aware of where that's going and it's not good at the moment)

But having studied up on FDA trials there are three phases, each phase getting larger and and longer.

Even if the vaccine works it's still going to take better part of a year to go through phase two and three. Those people believing the nightmare is over don't understand pharmaceutical development.

As for the election, who can tell how it would have affected it. It's also possible as the reality of timeline for vaccine approval set in there would have been an even more deleterious affect one way or the other

I think you’re info is wrong about status of the vaccine trial. It’s phase three and they think it could complete by end of November.

Quote: unJon

I think you’re info is wrong about status of the vaccine trial. It’s phase three and they think it could complete by end of November.

Yes, appears I was mistaken.

Well, explains why Cytodyn is tanking right now.

I still have faith in Cytodyn for HIV so holding my shares.

Let's see how this Pfizer info pans out

Here's the problem. Vaccines usually take between 10 and 12 years to develop, test, get approved and produce. If I was under 40 with a 99.99% survival rate, I would not get one. No long term study on effects.

At 52, I probably still won't unless forced to by my employer.

If I was 60+, I would get it, since long term effects probably aren't as urgent as the 5-7% death rate.


ZCore13

Personally, I am more excited about the antibody treatment from Lilly that is getting the fast track. Again this is a treatment not a vaccine. This is an antibody made in a laboratory as opposed to early antibody treatments from the blood of people who recovered and it triggers the immune system to start making it's own antibodies to fight the virus.

Results show if given early it will reduce the severity and length of any symptoms and reduce the likelihood of hospitalization, which all sounds great. The one statistic I don't understand is that it doesn't change the death rate?? If people aren't getting as sick and hospitalized, I would think the death rate would be lower. Maybe I am misinterpreting the data.

Quote: kewlj

Personally, I am more excited about the antibody treatment from Lilly that is getting the fast track. Again this is a treatment not a vaccine. This is an antibody made in a laboratory as opposed to early antibody treatments from the blood of people who recovered and it triggers the immune system to start making it's own antibodies to fight the virus.

Results show if given early it will reduce the severity and length of any symptoms and reduce the likelihood of hospitalization, which all sounds great. The one statistic I don't understand is that it doesn't change the death rate?? If people aren't getting as sick and hospitalized, I would think the death rate would be lower. Maybe I am misinterpreting the data.

It's called a a MAB (Monoclonal AntiBody).

Same type of therapuetic as Cytodyn's Leronlimab.

(Very frustrating for me).

The reason the death rate isn't lowered is because it is targeting mild/moderate symptoms or basically helping people who were not going to die most likely anyway

Quote: darkoz

The reason the death rate isn't lowered is because it is targeting mild/moderate symptoms or basically helping people who were not going to die most likely anyway

Yeah but every severe case that requires hospitalization and end in death, starts out as a milder/moderate case and then progresses (rather quickly with this virus). If you can identify cases early and treat wouldn't you stop that progression?

If it is not stopping that progression, it is just treating symptoms, not doing anything to fight the virus. But the description is that triggers the immune system to start making it's own antibodies to fight the virus. That should result in better results all around, including lower death rate. I mean the way it is being described right now, it is like a cancer treatment that doesn't lower the cancer death rate. ???

Quote: kewlj

Yeah but every severe case that requires hospitalization and end in death, starts out as a milder/moderate case and then progresses (rather quickly with this virus). If you can identify cases early and treat wouldn't you stop that progression?

If it is not stopping that progression, it is just treating symptoms, not doing anything to fight the virus. But the description is that triggers the immune system to start making it's own antibodies to fight the virus. That should result in better results all around, including lower death rate. I mean the way it is being described right now, it is like a cancer treatment that doesn't lower the cancer death rate. ???

It's because covid has multiple stages.

Those that don't progress to the second stage (cytokine storm) will be helped by getting well faster.

Those that do progress to the cytokine storm stage will need a different therapuetic that affects the cytokine storm.

Although there are many MAB's, there are different MOA (Methods Of Action).

You are correct that MAB's don't kill the virus. They inhibit some aspect of it's properties so that the virus is less effective (which gives the body a chance to fight with it's own Antibodies in theory

Quote: darkoz

Well, explains why Cytodyn is tanking right now.

I still have faith in Cytodyn for HIV so holding my shares.

Do you think you jumped in the deep end (so to speak) without enough stock market experience? That's been my impression. Yes, it looked like you researched which is of course a good thing.

Sorry, if I'm wrong, as I thought you had said it was your first big foray. We all make mistakes of course.

Quote: rxwine

Do you think you jumped in the deep end (so to speak) without enough stock market experience? That's been my impression. Yes, it looked like you researched which is of course a good thing.

Sorry, if I'm wrong, as I thought you had said it was your first big foray. We all make mistakes of course.

Well, zero stock market experience.

But I still believe in the science. In fact Eli Lilly has just had their own similar drug approved.

What I didn't reckon on was the influence of Big Pharma on the FDA.

I don't like conspiracy theories so I will just state a few facts.

Fact. Every major pharmaceutical company has at least one member on the FDA board of directors

Fact, the only approved drug EUA for Covid-19 up till now was Remdesvir (and briefly Hydroxychloriquine)

Fact. Remdesvir is owned by Gilead.

Fact Gilead is the only Big Pharma that has 18 board members on the FDA

Correction
44K participants
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/09/health/covid-vaccine-pfizer.html

"After early human trials, they determined that two vaccine candidates produced a robust immune response, including antibodies against the virus and powerful immune cells known as T cells. They chose the one with fewer side effects to start a trial with more than 30,000 volunteers in the United States, Argentina, Brazil and Germany. In September the company expanded the trial to 44,000 participants

So, I know a few people have claimed I invested in a pump n dumps mainly because Cytodyn is a penny stock.

Just wondering how Pfizer is any different.

Pfizer stock hit an all-time annual high Monday when they made an announcement about very premature positive findings about their covid vaccine. (in fact only seven day post vaccine treatment stats. The vaccine needs to last a lot more than seven days)

Ummm, do you think this might have had anything to do with their premature announcement??

https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/pfizers-ceo-cashed-out-60-of-his-stock-on-the-same-day-the-company-unveiled-the-results-of-its-covid-19-vaccine-trial/articleshow/79169201.cms

There is nothing illegal about taking action to buy or sell stock by preexisting shareholders, including management, after a truthful statement is disclosed to the general public. Sometimes such action is taken by the general public to mean that the major shareholders do not have trust in the future value of the company, but still, nothing illegal.

In the case of CYDY, it is alleged that its CEO and others at CYDY made knowingly or recklessly false statements to pump the price of the stock.

And these allegations go back for months, in multiple arenas, not just this most recent one.
IMPORTANT INVESTOR NOTICE: The Schall Law Firm Announces it is Investigating Claims Against CytoDyn Inc. and Encourages Investors with Losses of $100,000 to Contact the Firm
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/important-investor-notice-schall-law-182000651.html

Quote: MDawg

There is nothing illegal about taking action to buy or sell stock by preexisting shareholders, including management, after a truthful statement is disclosed to the general public. Sometimes such action is taken by the general public to mean that the major shareholders do not have trust in the future value of the company, but still, nothing illegal.

In the case of CYDY, it is alleged that its CEO and others at CYDY made knowingly or recklessly false statements to pump the price of the stock.

And these allegations go back for months, in multiple arenas, not just this most recent one.
IMPORTANT INVESTOR NOTICE: The Schall Law Firm Announces it is Investigating Claims Against CytoDyn Inc. and Encourages Investors with Losses of $100,000 to Contact the Firm
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/important-investor-notice-schall-law-182000651.html

Lol, those are not lawsuits

Those are law firms trying to create a case.

Law firms have been quote "investigating" for months

To date no lawsuit has been filed involving general public stockholders because no one feels cheated because no one has complained or found any malfeasance.

Meanwhile you are going to sit here and argue that a stock sale by a PFIZER CEO ON THE VERY DAY THEY ANNOUNCED TRIAL SUCCESS THAT BOLTERS THE PRICE TO IT'S ALLTIME HIGH ISN'T SUSPICIOUS (AND SALE BEING AT THAT HIGH)

That suggestion is the biggest joke of the year

Quote: darkoz

Lol, those are not lawsuits

Those are law firms trying to create a case.

Law firms have been quote "investigating" for months

To date no lawsuit has been filed involving general public stockholders because no one feels cheated because no one has complained or found any malfeasance.

Meanwhile you are going to sit here and argue that a stock sale by a PFIZER CEO ON THE VERY DAY THEY ANNOUNCED TRIAL SUCCESS THAT BOLTERS THE PRICE TO IT'S ALLTIME HIGH ISN'T SUSPICIOUS (AND SALE BEING AT THAT HIGH)

That suggestion is the biggest joke of the year

Per the article you linked it was a predetermined sale locked in on August 19.

Quote: unJon

Per the article you linked it was a predetermined sale locked in on August 19.

Which makes it even more suspicious.

The price wasn't predetermined. Just the date.

If you were set to sell your stock in a company on a predetermined date, wouldn't you want a convenient press release announcing fantastic trial results to come out from your company that very morning?

So that your predetermined sale is at an all-time annual high?

If I got as much of my salary in stock as some employees do, like say tech company employees, I would constantly and consistently be selling that stock to buy index funds and balance the portfolio rather than buying them with funds from the rest of my salary. If they’re not selling it, they’re unbalanced.

Quote: darkoz

Which makes it even more suspicious.

The price wasn't predetermined. Just the date.

If you were set to sell your stock in a company on a predetermined date, wouldn't you want a convenient press release announcing fantastic trial results to come out from your company that very morning?

So that your predetermined sale is at an all-time annual high?

It’s a very fair point. I expect FINRA and SEC will be looking into that.

Your mind races ahead worried that someone is saying something you fear he might be saying.



I said these were allegations. Who said there were lawsuits? You did. But...there are no such allegations against PFE at this time.

Meantime, without lifting a finger my long term stocks rose low to mid six figures today without lifting a finger, because - they are all solid companies and not penny stocks, and I won at the tables again this morning. Here in Vegas over a month now, and still ahead.

CYDY appears to be garbage, as most penny stocks are but particularly it would seem, this one, and the sooner anyone who got scammed into buying it accepts it, the better. Do not buy any more shares would be my suggestion to anyone who was duped into buying it by either CYDY's officers, or by...anyone else. Maybe you may ask that anyone else to cover your losses since his next post might be something to the effect of that he's printing money and could care less that he's losing his arse on CYDY. Hell, at the Baccarat tables I'll sometimes toss a black chip to someone who loses a hundred dollar bet, just for luck. Maybe DarkOz will toss you guys all your losses on CYDY since it was he who convinced you to buy the stock, no, and he's rolling so high?