Have they given you an approx surgery date?
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Do you have the link to the full document or publication, rather than just a screenshot?
From what I can see, it looks like for a specific study in a South African population, 100% efficacy was observed. If these were the numbers derived, those were the numbers derived... It's also not unheard of to see 100% efficacy in a trial setting, though this does not often translate to a real world setting for a variety of factors.
This isn't the same thing however, as Pfizer claiming their vaccine is 100% effective.
I knew that is what you were referring to as it was spoken about on one of the earlier vaccine threads. That was in reference to a clinical trial of 800 against the SA variant. Of those 800 who received the vaccine, 0 tested positive and 9 tested positive in the placebo group which would make the vaccine 100% effective in this scenario.
“On April 1, Pfizer released a press release stating that the vaccine was "100% effective in preventing COVID-19 cases in South Africa, where the B.1.351 lineage is prevalent."
“In the small clinical trial in South Africa, which included 800 participants, nine tested positive for COVID-19, all of whom were in the placebo group and did not receive the Pfizer vaccine.”
Again, though I don't really see why you're pushing this point? The stats for the original trials looked fine (and you can believe how heavily they were scrutinised) - I don't see any evidence that Pfizer exaggerated or lied about what was observed in trials.
I'd be asking questions as to the cause but unfortunately I'm not with her at appointments and she wouldn't understand what they're talking about the only reason I know what it is is because she got the consultant to write it down on a piece of paper ,but no explanation to what caused it , he's not seen it before they actually got a group of consultants to meet to discuss her case
Gosh it seems ludicrous that no one was with her. I'm guessing that's because of the covid procedures? Your poor MIL, I bet she's so confused.I'd be asking questions as to the cause but unfortunately I'm not with her at appointments and she wouldn't understand what they're talking about the only reason I know what it is is because she got the consultant to write it down on a piece of paper ,but no explanation to what caused it , he's not seen it before they actually got a group of consultants to meet to discuss her case
Thanks - so what problem were you seeing with this?
This is the clinical trial they are reporting on:
In South Africa, where the B.1.351 lineage is prevalent and 800 participants were enrolled, nine cases of COVID-19 were observed, all in the placebo group, indicating vaccine efficacy of 100% (95% CI, [53.5, 100.0]).
If no-one is infected in your intervention group, that is indeed a efficacy of 100% - so don't see an issue?
I see the rest of the page describes trials in additional population, including their large Phase 3 study, which resulted in slightly lower efficacy.
I wasn’t seeing a problem with this. I just offered the link as it is something I have previously talked about on the earlier vaccine threads. I also posted (in response to @rainbowlemon) pretty much the same above regarding the study and what it found.
Apologies @Prefrontalmedialcortex - thought I was quoting the original poster who I believe is seeing an issue with this reporting 
“As LiveScience reports, the Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson clinical trials all found that their vaccines were essentially 100 percent effective in preventing severe disease six to seven weeks after trial participants had received a first/single dose. As biotech journalist Anna Nowogrodzki notes, "Zero vaccinated people in any of the trials were hospitalized or died of COVID-19 after the vaccines had fully taken effect." Now that's the kind of vaccine efficacy that we can all cheer.”
reason.com
100% safe for teens too:
www.bloomberg.com
Vaccines Are 100% Effective at Preventing COVID-19 Hospitalizations and Deaths
Wondering what "95 percent efficacy" means? I've got some good news for you.
reason.com
100% safe for teens too:
Pfizer Vaccine Gives 100% Protection at Ages 12-15 in Study
Pfizer Inc. said its Covid-19 vaccine was 100% effective in a final-stage trial in kids ages 12 to 15, a finding that could pave the way for teens and pre-teens to get shots before the next school year.
www.bloomberg.com
It’s fine. I tried explaining it on the earlier threads a while back but to no avail.Apologies @Prefrontalmedialcortex - thought I was quoting the original poster who I believe is seeing an issue with this reporting
I don’t have a particular problem just pointing out what was claimed.
Who's said the vaccine is "100% safe for teens" @rainbowlemon? Couldn't see that in the article you linked.
No intervention is 100% safe so I wouldn't trust any expert claiming this one jot.
You seem to be ignoring the questions about the Pfizer data though? I'm still a little confused as to what the problem is you're seeing?
No intervention is 100% safe so I wouldn't trust any expert claiming this one jot.
You seem to be ignoring the questions about the Pfizer data though? I'm still a little confused as to what the problem is you're seeing?
You posted :
“I don't believe Pfizer ever claimed 100% effectiveness (or do you mean efficacy?) - do you have a link? “
I posted items that would suggest they did.
“I don't believe Pfizer ever claimed 100% effectiveness (or do you mean efficacy?) - do you have a link? “
I posted items that would suggest they did.
Attachments
But to what end? Pfizer accurately reported their results from a study in a specific population. This isn't really "claiming" anything.
The fact they reported this alongside the lower efficacy reported in other populations is a good standard of dissemination, IMO.
See my post above
Yeah our local hospital have strict rules in place she wasn’t even allowed a visitor the whole month she was in .
So again I can't really comment on a screenshot as I only have the headline to go on - did the study Bloomberg are quoting from derive 100% efficacy? Was this even for the Pfizer vaccine or was it moderna?
If it did then I mean that's a fair enough headline. Responsible reporting would include the concepts that effectivness is likely to be lower and all the relevant caveats, but journalists are notoriously not great at doing this.
Incidentally you can't really blame scientists or drug companies for how the media reports on things - due to the problem outlined above.
It looks like Bloomberg are talking about Pfizer, I could not read the full article as it is behind a paywall.
I'm really sorry to hear this - please challenge this immediately and take it up with PALS if you're struggling to get anywhere <3
Nationally, restrictions on hospital visitors have been relaxed (with exceptions on certain wards). I would be really suprised if they are doing this in line with Trust policy - your local hospital page should outline this!
- Status