Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Should we take another hard look?

Should we take another hard look?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
23 Posts 7 Posters 261 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • CopperC Offline
    CopperC Offline
    Copper
    wrote on last edited by
    #5

    If Mr. Trump is first in line to receive the vaccine, it will be reckless and evil.

    If Mr. Obama is first in line to receive the vaccine, it will be the sensible, inclusive thing to do.

    JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
    • CopperC Copper

      If Mr. Trump is first in line to receive the vaccine, it will be reckless and evil.

      If Mr. Obama is first in line to receive the vaccine, it will be the sensible, inclusive thing to do.

      JollyJ Offline
      JollyJ Offline
      Jolly
      wrote on last edited by
      #6

      @Copper said in Should we take another hard look?:

      If Mr. Trump is first in line to receive the vaccine, it will be reckless and evil.

      If Mr. Obama is first in line to receive the vaccine, it will be the sensible, inclusive thing to do.

      At least according to the MSM.

      “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

      Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

      1 Reply Last reply
      • Aqua LetiferA Aqua Letifer

        When we politicize science that heavily, we're done for. What's next, pro/con covid vaccine along political lines?

        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nyc
        wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
        #7

        @Aqua-Letifer said in Should we take another hard look?:

        When we politicize science that heavily, we're done for. What's next, pro/con covid vaccine along political lines?

        I can almost see it happening, because Trump will likely be pushing for pre-election approval of the mRNA vaccine, which will cause the (not entirely unjustified) counter reaction about it being a brand new untested technology etc.

        What that scenario has going against it is that Trumpists seem to make up a good chunk of the 50% who say they won’t take a Covid vaccine at all.

        Only non-witches get due process.

        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
        JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
        • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

          @Aqua-Letifer said in Should we take another hard look?:

          When we politicize science that heavily, we're done for. What's next, pro/con covid vaccine along political lines?

          I can almost see it happening, because Trump will likely be pushing for pre-election approval of the mRNA vaccine, which will cause the (not entirely unjustified) counter reaction about it being a brand new untested technology etc.

          What that scenario has going against it is that Trumpists seem to make up a good chunk of the 50% who say they won’t take a Covid vaccine at all.

          JollyJ Offline
          JollyJ Offline
          Jolly
          wrote on last edited by
          #8

          @jon-nyc said in Should we take another hard look?:

          @Aqua-Letifer said in Should we take another hard look?:

          When we politicize science that heavily, we're done for. What's next, pro/con covid vaccine along political lines?

          I can almost see it happening, because Trump will likely be pushing for pre-election approval of the mRNA vaccine, which will cause the (not entirely unjustified) counter reaction about it being a brand new untested technology etc.

          What that scenario has going against it is that Trumpists seem to make up a good chunk of the 50% who say they won’t take a Covid vaccine at all.

          I think Trump is going to push for large trials, not a full roll-out. I could be wrong.

          “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

          Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

          jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
          • L Offline
            L Offline
            Loki
            wrote on last edited by
            #9

            There is an overall 99.4% chance of not dying if you get Covid. How long will we keep the world closed?

            1 Reply Last reply
            • jon-nycJ Offline
              jon-nycJ Offline
              jon-nyc
              wrote on last edited by
              #10

              Come to NY. We’re pretty much open.

              Only non-witches get due process.

              • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
              L 1 Reply Last reply
              • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                Come to NY. We’re pretty much open.

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Loki
                wrote on last edited by
                #11

                @jon-nyc said in Should we take another hard look?:

                Come to NY. We’re pretty much open.

                Compare normal NYC to now NYC. It has to be horrifying for people who live there.

                1 Reply Last reply
                • JollyJ Jolly

                  @jon-nyc said in Should we take another hard look?:

                  @Aqua-Letifer said in Should we take another hard look?:

                  When we politicize science that heavily, we're done for. What's next, pro/con covid vaccine along political lines?

                  I can almost see it happening, because Trump will likely be pushing for pre-election approval of the mRNA vaccine, which will cause the (not entirely unjustified) counter reaction about it being a brand new untested technology etc.

                  What that scenario has going against it is that Trumpists seem to make up a good chunk of the 50% who say they won’t take a Covid vaccine at all.

                  I think Trump is going to push for large trials, not a full roll-out. I could be wrong.

                  jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nyc
                  wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                  #12

                  @Jolly said in Should we take another hard look?:

                  @jon-nyc said in Should we take another hard look?:

                  @Aqua-Letifer said in Should we take another hard look?:

                  When we politicize science that heavily, we're done for. What's next, pro/con covid vaccine along political lines?

                  I can almost see it happening, because Trump will likely be pushing for pre-election approval of the mRNA vaccine, which will cause the (not entirely unjustified) counter reaction about it being a brand new untested technology etc.

                  What that scenario has going against it is that Trumpists seem to make up a good chunk of the 50% who say they won’t take a Covid vaccine at all.

                  I think Trump is going to push for large trials, not a full roll-out. I could be wrong.

                  There’s an n=30k trial going on now. Though the endpoints are listed at 2 years (Oct 2022, given the lag time of getting 30k people stuck from a 7/20 start), the FDA has made lots of noises about granting pre-approval at the 6 month mark if all is going well.

                  I think Trump will push hard for a late October approval, or at least some creative rebranding of the trial status to make it seem like a pre-election victory.

                  Only non-witches get due process.

                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                  jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
                  • jon-nycJ Offline
                    jon-nycJ Offline
                    jon-nyc
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #13

                    I can even imagine him declaring it approved himself on Twitter.

                    Or saying on twitter that it has shown safety and efficacy but the FDA/deep state is trying to keep it ‘suppressed’ to help Biden.

                    Only non-witches get due process.

                    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • L Offline
                      L Offline
                      Loki
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #14

                      Other countries will be out in front of us. We can benefit from their results for decision making.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ Offline
                        jon-nycJ Offline
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #15

                        Yes and no. Both China and a Russia have an ‘approved’ vaccine. But they’re basically doing phase 3 with a different name - ‘limited rollout’.

                        True, they’ll hit a bigger N and will show safety and efficacy earlier. But (a) we won’t necessarily be able to trust their data and (b) the drugs aren’t identical, so it doesn’t help us approve ours any quicker.

                        Only non-witches get due process.

                        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                        L 1 Reply Last reply
                        • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                          Yes and no. Both China and a Russia have an ‘approved’ vaccine. But they’re basically doing phase 3 with a different name - ‘limited rollout’.

                          True, they’ll hit a bigger N and will show safety and efficacy earlier. But (a) we won’t necessarily be able to trust their data and (b) the drugs aren’t identical, so it doesn’t help us approve ours any quicker.

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          Loki
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #16

                          @jon-nyc said in Should we take another hard look?:

                          Yes and no. Both China and a Russia have an ‘approved’ vaccine. But they’re basically doing phase 3 with a different name - ‘limited rollout’.

                          True, they’ll hit a bigger N and will show safety and efficacy earlier. But (a) we won’t necessarily be able to trust their data and (b) the drugs aren’t identical, so it doesn’t help us approve ours any quicker.

                          I am talking about pressure to move fast. Results will go viral even if people challenge them. We going to just sit there? Really? I doubt it.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • jon-nycJ Offline
                            jon-nycJ Offline
                            jon-nyc
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #17

                            Listen to Moderna’s, AZ’s, or Pfizer’s earnings calls. Nobody’s just sitting around.

                            Only non-witches get due process.

                            • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • JollyJ Jolly

                              At an old drug?

                              https://thefederalist.com/2020/08/20/why-is-the-media-suppressing-information-about-hydroxychloroquines-effectiveness-against-covid/

                              AxtremusA Offline
                              AxtremusA Offline
                              Axtremus
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #18

                              @Jolly said in Should we take another hard look?:

                              At an old drug?

                              https://thefederalist.com/2020/08/20/why-is-the-media-suppressing-information-about-hydroxychloroquines-effectiveness-against-covid/

                              Why give "the media" power over what drugs to promote, what drugs to bury?
                              For that matter, why give any politician power over what drugs to promote, what drugs to bury?

                              Let the medical establishment do their thing and you pay attention to the medical establishment. The CDC, the FDA, the WHO, the revered academic journals ... pay attention to those.
                              Yeah, from time to time, they make mistakes.
                              But they are still a lot than "the media", a lot better than just about any politician.

                              JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                              • jon-nycJ Offline
                                jon-nycJ Offline
                                jon-nyc
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #19

                                As if on cue.

                                https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/23/trump-considering-fast-tracking-astrazeneca-vaccine-before-election.html

                                But it’s the AZ. Probably a wiser choice, it’s the one the Russians stole so it’s gotten more testing.

                                Only non-witches get due process.

                                • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                  @Jolly said in Should we take another hard look?:

                                  @jon-nyc said in Should we take another hard look?:

                                  @Aqua-Letifer said in Should we take another hard look?:

                                  When we politicize science that heavily, we're done for. What's next, pro/con covid vaccine along political lines?

                                  I can almost see it happening, because Trump will likely be pushing for pre-election approval of the mRNA vaccine, which will cause the (not entirely unjustified) counter reaction about it being a brand new untested technology etc.

                                  What that scenario has going against it is that Trumpists seem to make up a good chunk of the 50% who say they won’t take a Covid vaccine at all.

                                  I think Trump is going to push for large trials, not a full roll-out. I could be wrong.

                                  There’s an n=30k trial going on now. Though the endpoints are listed at 2 years (Oct 2022, given the lag time of getting 30k people stuck from a 7/20 start), the FDA has made lots of noises about granting pre-approval at the 6 month mark if all is going well.

                                  I think Trump will push hard for a late October approval, or at least some creative rebranding of the trial status to make it seem like a pre-election victory.

                                  jon-nycJ Offline
                                  jon-nycJ Offline
                                  jon-nyc
                                  wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                                  #20

                                  @jon-nyc said in Should we take another hard look?:

                                  I think Trump will push hard for a late October approval, or at least some creative rebranding of the trial status to make it seem like a pre-election victory.

                                  From the CNBC piece:

                                  One option, according to the FT report, would involve the U.S. Food and Drug Administration awarding “emergency use authorization” for the vaccine, which was developed by Oxford University and AstraZeneca.

                                  Only non-witches get due process.

                                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • jon-nycJ Offline
                                    jon-nycJ Offline
                                    jon-nyc
                                    wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                                    #21

                                    Funny thing is AZ hasn’t even started recruiting for their big n=30k P3 trial in the US.

                                    They do have an n=5k trial in Brazil though which started dosing last quarter.

                                    Only non-witches get due process.

                                    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • jon-nycJ Offline
                                      jon-nycJ Offline
                                      jon-nyc
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #22

                                      Oh wow. The administration told GOP lawmakers they would approve a vaccine before the election but weren’t sure which one. AZ is just considered the best candidate.

                                      https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/23/world/covid-19-coronavirus.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

                                      Only non-witches get due process.

                                      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • AxtremusA Axtremus

                                        @Jolly said in Should we take another hard look?:

                                        At an old drug?

                                        https://thefederalist.com/2020/08/20/why-is-the-media-suppressing-information-about-hydroxychloroquines-effectiveness-against-covid/

                                        Why give "the media" power over what drugs to promote, what drugs to bury?
                                        For that matter, why give any politician power over what drugs to promote, what drugs to bury?

                                        Let the medical establishment do their thing and you pay attention to the medical establishment. The CDC, the FDA, the WHO, the revered academic journals ... pay attention to those.
                                        Yeah, from time to time, they make mistakes.
                                        But they are still a lot than "the media", a lot better than just about any politician.

                                        JollyJ Offline
                                        JollyJ Offline
                                        Jolly
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #23

                                        @Axtremus said in Should we take another hard look?:

                                        @Jolly said in Should we take another hard look?:

                                        At an old drug?

                                        https://thefederalist.com/2020/08/20/why-is-the-media-suppressing-information-about-hydroxychloroquines-effectiveness-against-covid/

                                        Why give "the media" power over what drugs to promote, what drugs to bury?
                                        For that matter, why give any politician power over what drugs to promote, what drugs to bury?

                                        Let the medical establishment do their thing and you pay attention to the medical establishment. The CDC, the FDA, the WHO, the revered academic journals ... pay attention to those.
                                        Yeah, from time to time, they make mistakes.
                                        But they are still a lot than "the media", a lot better than just about any politician.

                                        Lad, if you don't think politics enter into the world of Big Pharma, you are naive.

                                        “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                        Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        Reply
                                        • Reply as topic
                                        Log in to reply
                                        • Oldest to Newest
                                        • Newest to Oldest
                                        • Most Votes


                                        • Login

                                        • Don't have an account? Register

                                        • Login or register to search.
                                        • First post
                                          Last post
                                        0
                                        • Categories
                                        • Recent
                                        • Tags
                                        • Popular
                                        • Users
                                        • Groups