Covid-19 Vaccine Protocols Reveal That Trials Are Designed to Succeed | Hacker News Reader

Covid-19 Vaccine Protocols Reveal That Trials Are Designed to Succeed

forbes.com

39 pointsAndrewBissell21 comments

How do we know the source isn't just spreading FUD? I'm as skeptical as the next guy, but the writer's poor English is making my BS-sense tingle.

Looking at Wikipedia (which reads like it was written by a PR person) he seems fairly qualified to talk about viruses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_A._Haseltine#HIV/AIDS_...

I actually looked the author up as well. I was pretty surprised that what seem to be pretty glaring grammatical errors made their way into what ostensibly is a pretty important article. I wonder if he would publish it with Forbes on the condition that nothing was reworded.

There is no editor involved for Forbes Contributors. They're basically just third-party bloggers that post on the Forbes site.

He’s also been critical of other drug trials, so it seems like this is something he does... seems like a reasonably trustworthy source.

I found the arguments lacking. I don't think there was any plan on preventing infection on the first batch of vaccines, and even the FDA does recommend a minimum of 50% efficacy.

Infection prevention or preventing severe symptoms, are however part of the secondary endpoints of the trials, something that it is not mentioned in the article.

For a counter argument, see https://mobile.twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1308474303810...

Here is another article giving a good overview of the whole process with a bit less alarmist take

https://www.ft.com/content/e5012891-58da-4a4f-8a05-182adf3ba...

This feels like FUD especially from Forbes. Any more authoritative sources? This can’t be a secret.

This shows you didn't read the full article, especially the part at the bottom—the author's bio:

"I am a scientist, businessman, author, and philanthropist. For nearly two decades, I was a professor at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health where I founded two academic research departments, the Division of Biochemical Pharmacology and the Division of Human Retrovirology. I am perhaps most well known for my work on cancer, HIV/AIDS, and genomics. My work now also includes efforts to improve access to high quality, affordable healthcare for people in low, middle, and high income countries alike. I am chair and president of ACCESS Health International, a nonprofit organization I founded that fosters innovative solutions to the greatest health challenges of our day. Each of my articles at Forbes.com will focus on a specific healthcare challenge and offer best practices and innovative solutions to overcome those challenges for the benefit of all."

Would it even be ethically possible to run the trials in such a way that they would expect deaths or serious symptoms in the control group?

Bottom line, more severe endpoints would take more time to gather. Deaths, specifically, are so low right now they might not be significant.

Makes sense. But what about reducing infections?

I imagine it’s difficult to determine whether someone has been infected given the short lived and unproven nature of the antibody response. Symptoms, on the other hand, can be self reported.

What a confused mess. What’s the message here?

Is this one of these ‘we can’t be sure so let’s just wait for five years’ pieces?

I also love how we’re all supposed to listen to the experts. Except you know, those experts, in this case the people who approve these protocols.

This is completely horrifying. None of these so-called "vaccines" should ever see the light of day.

Why? Should we pull the flu vaccine off the market even though it saves lives?

Even when the flu vaccine isn’t dialed in for that year’s strain, it still generally makes symptoms less severe.

If these vaccines turn covid-19 into a typical cold style coronavirus, that is 100% a victory.

Because Moderna covid-19 is a new type mRNS vaccine. God knows what harm can it do to people's DNA.

This isn't good. Read.

Here's hoping these "vaccines" aren't mandatory. I'm not an anti-vaxxer, but if I'm going to get a new vaccine, it better do more than keep me from getting the sniffles from one specific virus.

I think most, if not all, all vaccines prevent you from getting (the symptoms of) a specific infection. Plus, vaccinations do not prevent mutation if only some of a population gets them.

also "getting the sniffles" is trivializing the dangers of Covid-19 somewhat....

Reply on news.ycombinator.com