Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Booster shots: FDA advisory panel rejects widespread Pfizer jabs in blow to Biden's plan
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="hedrick" data-source="post: 76241210" data-attributes="member: 239032"><p>Biden jumped the gun, based on what he was hearing. But this isn’t a blow to any plans, unless you think plans can’t change based on evidence.</p><p></p><p>Unless you’re more interested in politics than health, the interesting thing is that it doesn’t appear that boosters are necessary for most people. Initial reports fromIsrael certainly made it look like boosters are necessary, but there are subtle statistical issues with the summaries that were initially published.</p><p></p><p>Here’s a detailed review of some Israeli data <a href="https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated" target="_blank">https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated</a>. The implications are interesting. It’s enough to make me skeptical about a lot of reports of decreased effectiveness.</p><p></p><p>the question is whether the same issue is present in the recent comparison of Pfizer, Moderna and Jansen. Here’s the most recent paper. <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7038e1.htm?s_cid=mm7038e1_w" target="_blank">https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7038e1.htm?s_cid=mm7038e1_w</a></p><p><a href="https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7038e1.htm?s_cid=mm7038e1_w" target="_blank">T</a>hey certainly tried to control for other factors.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hedrick, post: 76241210, member: 239032"] Biden jumped the gun, based on what he was hearing. But this isn’t a blow to any plans, unless you think plans can’t change based on evidence. Unless you’re more interested in politics than health, the interesting thing is that it doesn’t appear that boosters are necessary for most people. Initial reports fromIsrael certainly made it look like boosters are necessary, but there are subtle statistical issues with the summaries that were initially published. Here’s a detailed review of some Israeli data [URL]https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated[/URL]. The implications are interesting. It’s enough to make me skeptical about a lot of reports of decreased effectiveness. the question is whether the same issue is present in the recent comparison of Pfizer, Moderna and Jansen. Here’s the most recent paper. [URL='https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7038e1.htm?s_cid=mm7038e1_w']https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7038e1.htm?s_cid=mm7038e1_w T[/URL]hey certainly tried to control for other factors. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Booster shots: FDA advisory panel rejects widespread Pfizer jabs in blow to Biden's plan
Top
Bottom