Pfizer and BioNTech COVID Vaccine has 90% efficacy first look at data

[TeeRick]

I just had to post this outside of the vaccine thread in case folks have not seen the news!

 

https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-announce-vaccine-candidate-against

[LEtue]

Really great news!

[jelayne]

👏👏👏

[TeeRick]

Royal Caribbean Stock up 25% pre-Market today.

[Arizona Wildcat]

The 90% efficacy is super.  The T response suggesting lasting effectiveness also super.

The reality is FDA approval in second half of December.  Very limited vaccine for those most at risk possible this year.  2 doses.  Gottlieb suggested mid 2021 for the majority to be able to be vaccinated with 2 doses.  

 

[verizon]

37 minutes ago, TeeRick said:

Royal Caribbean Stock up 25% pre-Market today.

Yes people who follow my post since February will makes money on RCL

[TeeRick]

34 minutes ago, Arizona Wildcat said:

The 90% efficacy is super.  The T response suggesting lasting effectiveness also super.

The reality is FDA approval in second half of December.  Very limited vaccine for those most at risk possible this year.  2 doses.  Gottlieb suggested mid 2021 for the majority to be able to be vaccinated with 2 doses.  

 

But a vaccine with efficacy!  Even if we have to wait for it.  

[drarill]

Great News!!!

[PTC DAWG]

Line up for your Govt Tracker...

[Miaminice]

While this is great news indeed, the problem lies within a common misconception.

 

The early vaccines do not protect from an infection with Covid. They only supress the illness and milden the case. So there is a possibility that vaccinated people can still be infected and still be infectious.

 

So even if a first group of people will receive the vaccine, all the rest can still be infected by them. Meaning masks, distancing etc. will be necessary until almost everyone is vaccinated or a vaccine is developed which does not just supress the illnes but also the infection.  

 

But it is a great first step!

[poffles]

38 minutes ago, Miaminice said:

While this is great news indeed, the problem lies within a common misconception.

 

The early vaccines do not protect from an infection with Covid. They only supress the illness and milden the case. So there is a possibility that vaccinated people can still be infected and still be infectious.

 

So even if a first group of people will receive the vaccine, all the rest can still be infected by them. Meaning masks, distancing etc. will be necessary until almost everyone is vaccinated or a vaccine is developed which does not just supress the illnes but also the infection.  

 

But it is a great first step!

 

This is now how this reads to me.

 

"The so-called interim analysis looked at the first 94 confirmed cases of Covid-19 among the more than 43,000 volunteers who got either two doses of the vaccine or a placebo. It found that fewer than 10% of infections were in participants who had been given the vaccine. More than 90% of the cases were in people who had been given a placebo."

 

This is speaking to infections and not only suppression of symptoms.  Of the trial participants with the 'vaccine', only 10% were among those confirmed infected.

 

Clearly there is more work to do but this seems to be something a little bigger than easing symptoms. If this is what it seems then this is a very very big step forward.

[markeb]

1 hour ago, poffles said:

 

This is now how this reads to me.

 

"The so-called interim analysis looked at the first 94 confirmed cases of Covid-19 among the more than 43,000 volunteers who got either two doses of the vaccine or a placebo. It found that fewer than 10% of infections were in participants who had been given the vaccine. More than 90% of the cases were in people who had been given a placebo."

 

This is speaking to infections and not only suppression of symptoms.  Of the trial participants with the 'vaccine', only 10% were among those confirmed infected.

 

Clearly there is more work to do but this seems to be something a little bigger than easing symptoms. If this is what it seems then this is a very very big step forward.

 

Pfizer's study plan is available if you follow the rabbit holes from their press release.

 

Their primary efficacy endpoints are in fact indicators of infection (positive nucleic acid amplification tests, which would generally be PCR) in study participants with and without evidence of prior infection. Opposite of some of the other studies that are looking at symptom reduction as the primary endpoint. This could actually be even better news from a public health standpoint than I was thinking. We'll see... 

[TeeRick]

2 hours ago, Miaminice said:

While this is great news indeed, the problem lies within a common misconception.

 

The early vaccines do not protect from an infection with Covid. They only supress the illness and milden the case. So there is a possibility that vaccinated people can still be infected and still be infectious.

 

So even if a first group of people will receive the vaccine, all the rest can still be infected by them. Meaning masks, distancing etc. will be necessary until almost everyone is vaccinated or a vaccine is developed which does not just supress the illnes but also the infection.  

 

But it is a great first step!

Disagree.  Sorry. All the data is not yet available for this vaccine (this is an interim albeit very promising readout) so not even sure how you reached this conclusion of a common misconception.  The readout was prevention from infection.  That is just great news. Let's enjoy it for at least one day!  Even Dr Fauci today said that these results were extraordinary.  

 

In addition if any other vaccine (presumably through T-Cell response) only suppresses the virus and gives a mild response and saves hospitalizations, lingering health issues and of course deaths, that would be still a very big win.   As opposed to the nothing we had just yesterday.  

 

Shout out to the hero's at BioNTech in Germany and Pfizer today!

[Miaminice]

20 minutes ago, TeeRick said:

Disagree.  Sorry. All the data is not yet available for this vaccine (this is an interim albeit very promising readout) so not even sure how you reached this conclusion of a common misconception.  The readout was prevention from infection.  That is just great news. Let's enjoy it for at least one day!  Even Dr Fauci today said that these results were extraordinary.  

 

In addition if any other vaccine (presumably through T-Cell response) only suppresses the virus and gives a mild response and saves hospitalizations, lingering health issues and of course deaths, that would be still a very big win.   As opposed to the nothing we had just yesterday.  

 

Shout out to the hero's at BioNTech in Germany and Pfizer today!

I said early vaccines - not just talking about the one from Biontech.

 

The conclusion is not mine. In Germany we have a virologist called Drosten  = the German Fauci so to speak. Brilliant guy! He was actually the one who “deciphered” the first SARS virus and his laboratory (Charité Berlin) came up with the first PCR test for SARS-Cov2.

 

He has an extremely informative podcast in cooperation with one of Germany’s public television stations. He explained the above mentioned problems and the danger of relying too much on the first vaccines - especially in terms of public perception that other preventive measures wouldn’t be necessary any more. I am sorry that I can’t translate or explain more of his conclusive and very scientific explanation. 
 

The scripts are available online. However, it's in German only. 

Besides all the above you can be assured that I am just as happy as you are. I really am (and not just because I own Biontech shares LOL). But I am also realistic and worried that some will consider it to be the solve-it-all-wonder-drug which will enable them to throw away all masks and cruise again next week or so 😉

 

Edited November 9, 2020 by Miaminice

[TeeRick]

2 minutes ago, Miaminice said:

I said early vaccines - not just talking about the one from Biontech.

 

The conclusion is not mine. In Germany we have a virologist called Drosten  = the German Fauci so to speak. Brilliant guy! He was actually the one who “deciphered” the first SARS virus and his laboratory (Charité Berlin) came up with the first PCR test for SARS-Cov2.

 

He has an extremely informative podcast in cooperation with one of Germany’s public television stations. He explained the above mentioned problems and the danger of relying too much on the first vaccines in terms of public perception that other preventive measures wouldn’t be necessary any more. I am sorry that I can’t translate or explain more of his conclusive and very scientific explanation. 
 

The scripts are available online. However, it's in German only. 

Besides all the above you can be assured that I am just as happy as you are. I really am (and not just because I own Biontech shares LOL). But I am also realistic and worried that some will consider it to be the solve-it-all-wonder-drug which will enable them to throw away all masks and cruise again next week or so 😉

 

Yes sorry I see that you did say early vaccines and all is dependent on the clinical readouts in their study protocols.  But if the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine has a "prevention of infection" label, the other vaccines that do not have this type of data I cannot see being very successful.

[Arizona Wildcat]

5 hours ago, TeeRick said:

Yes sorry I see that you did say early vaccines and all is dependent on the clinical readouts in their study protocols.  But if the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine has a "prevention of infection" label, the other vaccines that do not have this type of data I cannot see being very successful.

Correct.  Vaccinate, wait 2 weeks, revaccinate, wait a week.  Should be done.

First roll out very late December.  Thus those in care facilities and first responders should be done February early.

To those that say their local area does not have storage required listen to Pfizer presentation.  Pfizer is doing their own distribution.  They developed containers good for 10 days after shipment.  Airlines and military will coordinate flights and priority status.  FedEx, UPS and Amazon have promised to assist.

Seems many posters need to listen to Pfizer presentation.

[nocl]

9 hours ago, Miaminice said:

While this is great news indeed, the problem lies within a common misconception.

 

The early vaccines do not protect from an infection with Covid. They only supress the illness and milden the case. So there is a possibility that vaccinated people can still be infected and still be infectious.

 

So even if a first group of people will receive the vaccine, all the rest can still be infected by them. Meaning masks, distancing etc. will be necessary until almost everyone is vaccinated or a vaccine is developed which does not just supress the illnes but also the infection.  

 

But it is a great first step!

Not quite.  the trials tested for symptoms. so they only know for sure that it keeps symptoms from occurring. however not knowing  if it prevents infection is not the same as you stated that it does not prevent infect. It might very well prevent infection they do not know because the test protocol was not set up to test it.

 

the problem is that there does not appear to be a validated means to easily detect infection and it's not practical to bring 40,000 people in for swabs samples and pcr each week.

 

no data is not the same as assuming it does not protect.

[nocl]

6 hours ago, TeeRick said:

Yes sorry I see that you did say early vaccines and all is dependent on the clinical readouts in their study protocols.  But if the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine has a "prevention of infection" label, the other vaccines that do not have this type of data I cannot see being very successful.

I do not think any of them will have that label without additional trials.

[Host Jazzbeau]

These threads take me back to Western Civ, Locke vs Hobbes.  You can tell who is who, even now.  Is there no good news that won't be countered by some Hobbesian 'but'...

[Germancruiser]

Host Jazzbeau- I agree- I so agree!

[Host Jazzbeau]

2 minutes ago, Germancruiser said:

Host Jazzbeau- I agree- I so agree!

 

Thank you!  I'll even give calculus to Leibnitz in gratitude!

[nocl]

8 hours ago, markeb said:

 

Pfizer's study plan is available if you follow the rabbit holes from their press release.

 

Their primary efficacy endpoints are in fact indicators of infection (positive nucleic acid amplification tests, which would generally be PCR) in study participants with and without evidence of prior infection. Opposite of some of the other studies that are looking at symptom reduction as the primary endpoint. This could actually be even better news from a public health standpoint than I was thinking. We'll see... 

however keep in mind that the pcr tests are to confirm covid infection for those that report symptoms. they are not being used to check for infection in any that do not report symptoms.

 

so Pfizers study is also a study of symptoms, not infection.

 

I have come to conclusion that they are not testing for infection because they do not have a validated method for checking for infection and doing weekly pcr tests on 40,000 as a test would not be practical for a number of reasons.

[Dennis#1]

Thanks TeeRick for your post and the referenced article.  Great news.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Dennis#1

[markeb]

34 minutes ago, nocl said:

however keep in mind that the pcr tests are to confirm covid infection for those that report symptoms. they are not being used to check for infection in any that do not report symptoms.

 

so Pfizers study is also a study of symptoms, not infection.

 

I have come to conclusion that they are not testing for infection because they do not have a validated method for checking for infection and doing weekly pcr tests on 40,000 as a test would not be practical for a number of reasons.

 

I've gone through the study plan a couple of times today, and I'm now stuck with your interpretation, not my original interpretation. The study would not catch asymptomatic infections that could be contagious. Unless their actual data is different, which seems unlikely. It's a study of disease prevention. The press release is exactly technically correct, but at this point the general public (it's a press release, not a technical paper) does not recognize the significant terminology difference between the use of SARS-CoV-2 (the actual virus and infection) and COVID19 (the disease that requires evidence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and some subset of symptoms). We're now months into reporting "COVID19 cases" based purely on laboratory testing with or without symptoms. There's a "how not to" book waiting to be written on the terminology subject alone!

 

They are doing nasal swabs and PCR before each vaccine dose, but the next PCR requires symptoms. What's not clear to me (you'd need the actual data) is how many people with a URD that met the COVID19 symptom criteria received a swab and negative PCR and were not diagnosed with COVID19 (and whether those numbers were statistically significant between the vaccinated and placebo groups). That could possibly give you more insight into infection reduction, but that's not an endpoint of the study..

 

[markeb]

1 hour ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

These threads take me back to Western Civ, Locke vs Hobbes.  You can tell who is who, even now.  Is there no good news that won't be countered by some Hobbesian 'but'...

 

I think I was able to do some form of history instead of Western Civ, a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away! And then rapidly retreat back to calculus, physics, chemistry, etc., where facts were facts (although we'd have a beer with just about anyone in those days)!

 

Not sure which "but" you're referring to. I'm pretty confident the logistical challenges (cold chain mostly) can be worked out in most of the world, so I'm with you on that "but". I'm also hopeful if a vaccine is safe and effective, most people will eventually come around to being vaccinated. For the record, I'm pretty optimistic on those.

 

Several of us have seen perfectly good appearing vaccines and pharmaceuticals fail miserably right at this point in their trials. Usually with little or no warning. And a few (Vioxx, for instance) that made it past this point and were actually approved, then were pulled from the market for significant adverse events. So that "but" I'm afraid is based on experience. And, unfortunately, 90% of what probably matters.

 

Never really did Locke and Hobbes. Been into Jeffersonian versus Hamiltonian theories of government recently thanks to Lin-Manuel Miranda (and living in Virginia). Probably more into Jeffersonian theories of viniculture. If you'd like to discuss Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, and Jomini, I'm in. 😀

 

I like to at least think of myself as a practical optimist...