Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re: FDA approved when? (Score 1) 308

Where in the continental United States can you get Tozinameran with the Comirnaty branding and legal bindings? Name 1 place. No, not an old batch with the Pfizer branding - the actual approved legally distinct entity.
That 1st part about Tylenol (name brand) was to demonstrate the legal differences and you still didn't get it.
The millions of old vials that still say Pfizer Tozinameran aren't _legal_ equivalents of vials that would say Comirnaty. ... again - shell game.

Comment Re:Why does the gov hires consultants ? (Score 1) 34

They do hire experts, but they're usually kept busy shifting data between and amongst databases, keeping up with email and mandatory training, trying to spend end of year funds, applying for intergovernmental grants, etc... while barely-qualified contractors do most of the real work. Government positions are always going to be inefficient because we demand levels of accountability that would bankrupt a competitive business.

Comment Re:FDA approved when? (Score 1) 308

Yay, you can read a propagandist summary that omits the legal distinctions. Look again at the original documents. Only the medically interchangeable yet legally distinct Comirnaty jab is approved, while the Pfizer branded product was granted an extension to it's Emergency Use Authorization until the Comirnaty versions are packaged for distribution. You will only ever have access to the jabs with no legal liability protection. This is by design. Its a shell game with no prize.

Comment Re: FDA approved when? (Score 1) 308

Tylenol, paracetamol and acetaminophen are the same drug. Only one of those has legal liability to the manufacturers of Tylenol though. The drug safety sheets will all be the same. Things can be medically interchangeable yet legally distinct. Now find the queen.

Comment Re:FDA approved when? (Score 1, Informative) 308

Can you get Comirnaty anywhere in the continental United States? Nope. Its another shell game. You will only ever be able to get the legally distinct Pfizer jab with full indemnity and emergency use authorization - not full FDA approval. They needed to have a fully approved vaccine in order to implement mandates, but none were really proven safe and effective enough to warrant full approval... thus the shell game with the least objectionable solution.

Comment Re:Unprofessional Disagreement (Score 2) 450

The big difference was that he only needed 1 patient to prove his theory - himself: ethics be damed, it was his body. Contrast with covid where it is so undeadly and takes so long to spread that you need as many as 600,000* subjects to do a rigorous, ethical and statistically significant year long study (more subjects if you want to do it in less time). Can you imagine any of our health agencies trying to manage a study that large? If it cost $1000 per subject, that's already 600 million dollars, so it needs to be a multibillion dollar treatment, not some off patent drug that costs less than $10

*based on a 1/5000 fatality rate for the age group commonly used in studies and ~1/10 chance of contracting it in a year to have an estimated 12 deaths for statistical significance.

Comment Re: Meanwhile, in other cover ups (Score 0) 123

Actually it really isn't. These are all novel vaccines for a novel virus. There's a reason PhDs have become _more_ vaccine hesitant, not less. Everything from the mRNA to the lipid envelopes it is delivered in is new as is targeting only a single spike protein rather than an aggregate of the the whole virus. On top of that their fatality rate is higher than the summation of fatalities from every other vaccine since we started tracking... and it hasn't even been a year. As if huge death counts wasn't a big enough problem, there are even more long term side effects and waning efficacy over time or no efficacy as soon as there's a variant with a sufficiently different spike protein. AFAIK the yet-to-be-authorized novavax vaccine uses existing vaccine technology that's in hepB and pertussis vaccines, so it may not have the same issues if it's authorized (estimate Q3of2021) Ironically, the fact that novavax is using existing technology, made it require a lengthier approval process because the FDA doesn't even know what they don't know about the mrna vaccines yet. Only luck will differentiate Dr. Fauci from Dr. Mengela. Perhaps instead of vaccine passports we can just wear special gold stars.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Engineering without management is art." -- Jeff Johnson

Working...