Phase3 Trial:Remdesivir Significantly Reduced Risk of Hospitalization with Covid(gilead.com)
gilead.com
Phase3 Trial:Remdesivir Significantly Reduced Risk of Hospitalization with Covid
https://www.gilead.com/news-and-press/press-room/press-releases/2021/9/veklury-remdesivir-significantly-reduced-risk-of-hospitalization-in-highrisk-patients-with-covid19
13 comments
They did this a year too late, and even after doing so, waited four months to reveal the results.
And it only works early in the disease course.
So, you have to actually know you have the disease and be willing to go into to the doctor immediately to get an intravenous drug regimen.
The Venn diagram between those who will do that and those who are already vaccinated is probably 100%.
So, you have to actually know you have the disease and be willing to go into to the doctor immediately to get an intravenous drug regimen.
The Venn diagram between those who will do that and those who are already vaccinated is probably 100%.
Treatment options are always welcome. The vaccines are not that effective in the people who need it the most.
The vaccines are incredibly effective in the people who need it the most.
The vaccine response is directly proportional to immune system function. It is not as strong[1] in older people, who are also most at risk from the disease.
[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03739-1
This isn't mutually exclusive with the vaccine being effective. However, we're heading towards less than 70% effectiveness (95% with fresh booster) against severe cases in the older age groups[2]. These cases add up.
[2] https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-...
[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03739-1
This isn't mutually exclusive with the vaccine being effective. However, we're heading towards less than 70% effectiveness (95% with fresh booster) against severe cases in the older age groups[2]. These cases add up.
[2] https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-...
> The vaccines are not that effective
> They are 70% effective / 95% effective.
Pick a lane?
> They are 70% effective / 95% effective.
Pick a lane?
These are age cohort averages. If you die of COVID despite being vaccinated, clearly the vaccine was 0% effective and early treatment could possibly have helped.
Either way, 70% is not incredible in my book. The 95% from the booster will not last.
Either way, 70% is not incredible in my book. The 95% from the booster will not last.
You are confusing the outcomes of 'serious illness' - which you presented numbers for, and 'death'.
Yes you are correct to say if something is effective 999,999 in a million, it is 0% effective in the 1 person.
As you specifically mention deaths, but present no information regarding it here is the UK data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsde...
All cohorts: 51,281 total covid deaths in the 6 months Jan - July 2021. 640 of which had 2 doses of a vaccine.
Yes you are correct to say if something is effective 999,999 in a million, it is 0% effective in the 1 person.
As you specifically mention deaths, but present no information regarding it here is the UK data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsde...
All cohorts: 51,281 total covid deaths in the 6 months Jan - July 2021. 640 of which had 2 doses of a vaccine.
You picked a source that not age-stratified and also looks at a timeframe when many were not vaccinated in the first place.
I can give you a source for deaths in the past few weeks in Israel, but only stratified between over/under 60:
https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/what-do-new-israeli-d...
The picture is similar: Efficacy of around 70% (two doses) and 95% (fresh booster) against death. This is far from "one in a million". If you age-stratified this data further, you would likely get better efficacy though.
I can give you a source for deaths in the past few weeks in Israel, but only stratified between over/under 60:
https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/what-do-new-israeli-d...
The picture is similar: Efficacy of around 70% (two doses) and 95% (fresh booster) against death. This is far from "one in a million". If you age-stratified this data further, you would likely get better efficacy though.
Assume for the purpose every single one of the ~600 is old. Same outcome. Indeed leaving them in, according to your own source makes vaccines look worse than they are! Given how the large sample size etc is I am more than comfortable taking the UK unstratified data and clncluding the vaccines are effective.
> Because of age confounding, it is crucial to stratify by age groups, and further to remove children from the <60yr group; otherwise Simpson's paradox makes vaccines look like they are not effective in protecting against COVID-19 deaths at all.
> Because of age confounding, it is crucial to stratify by age groups, and further to remove children from the <60yr group; otherwise Simpson's paradox makes vaccines look like they are not effective in protecting against COVID-19 deaths at all.
No matter how you twist and turn it, the vaccines are significantly less effective in the people who need it the most, to the point where a significant amount of deaths, in both absolue and relative terms, occur in the fully vaccinated. That means better options for treatment are still needed. That is the point I am making, nothing else.
You are litterally making shit up by saying a significant amount of deaths, in both absolue and relative terms, occur in the fully vaccinated
Best of luck to you on your propaganda campaign.
Best of luck to you on your propaganda campaign.