1. Less than 1500 5-11 yo’s receiving an mRNA vaccine for the first time qualifies as a “safety” and efficacy study.
2. An 11 yo requires 1/3 the dose of an EUA therapeutic as a 12 year old.
3. We no longer need to use clinical endpoints in studies because the desired impact can’t be proven, and instead substitute lab titers as a proxy for a drug’s clinical effectiveness.
While I love data and analysis, and even data analysis, I figure we can likely come to one conclusion now and use it going forward: Rule One: Pfizer is Pfull of Shit. Rule Two: When in doubt, or when presented with *any* additional data or narrative, refer to Rule One.
And then you have to factor in the effect of boosters to counter waning vaccine effectiveness. I can't believe we're having to discuss the ethics of this, it is beyond insane.
I wonder how they can determine the vax works in children 5-11, if that age group is practically at zero risk from covid. 2,268 looks way too small. And no mention of any possible long term effects.
I would rather let covid propagate among children (of course, keeping an eye for those who get really sick. Where are the treatments BTW?). They would probably develop much better immunity. But alas, seems a lot of vaxed adults are too scared. And to make sure children get jabbed, they might keep getting treated like this:
Is there a pre-pint of their trial anywhere? The study had only 2238 children overall, So that only 1119 in each arm. Plus assuming half were boys and half were girls, that means there were only 560 boys in each control arm. So how can they even make any conclusions based on so few kids and events especially for myocarditis that seems to affect somewhere from 1 out of 6400 to 1 out 20,000 boys? Seems like the study is grossly under powered.
I don't think these numbers for hospitalizations are correct. The data for that hospitalization chart only represents ~10% off the population and so the end result is probably off by about an order of magnitude.
"The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) conducts population-based surveillance for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations in children (persons younger than 18 years) and adults. The current network covers nearly 100 counties in the 10 Emerging Infections Program (EIP) states (CA, CO, CT, GA, MD, MN, NM, NY, OR, and TN) and four additional states through the Influenza Hospitalization Surveillance Project (IA, MI, OH, and UT). The network represents approximately 10% of US population (~32 million people)."
I would never put this vaccine in my kid- thank god she is an adult and is making her own decision to NOT PUT THIS SHOT INTO HER BODY! (but she's lost friends, been ostracized and criticized at work, and shunned by family members her own age)- she is sticking to her decision however and I am proud of her.
Why aren't you writing for the New York Times? Why aren't they begging you to write for them? Why isn't the FDA or the NIH using your stats to strike back at the pharmaceutical companies? Why is this daily dose of sanity not being posted everywhere on the internet? Is it that you haven't learned how to capitalize yet? Surely they have editors who could help. Cats have never been noted for capital letters.
I would like to believe that they’ll be forced to present efficacy data for approval, but then I live in a state where 2 year olds must wear masks in day care despite 18 months of experience indicating that it is unnecessary. We are back to Upton Sinclair’s Jungle!
Due to the very light impact SARS II has on this age cohort the ONLY way a parent should consider vaccinating their kids is if it were a true sterilizing vaccine - and they are the kind, giving type, willing to risk their children to reduce spread. But, it's not. It doesn't. End of story.
Excellent Article. I will add this to my library. I am probably going to have to quit my job and flee my state next year to try and escape the jab for my 11 year old. I am facing termination myself right now for not getting the jab. Great times.
it's absolutely fascinating living through this time. it will make a lengthy case study in authoritarianism if the "good guys" (spoiler: there will be no good guys) win.
Thanks so much to that Bad Cat for writing down what I surmised to be the case about a year ago. This debate on actual efficacy is the one we should be having (and I thought we'd have.) This piece is on what, though, actually happened with the whole child vax question. https://empathy.guru/2021/09/19/societal-narcissistic-inversion/
So, just to get this straight…..
1. Less than 1500 5-11 yo’s receiving an mRNA vaccine for the first time qualifies as a “safety” and efficacy study.
2. An 11 yo requires 1/3 the dose of an EUA therapeutic as a 12 year old.
3. We no longer need to use clinical endpoints in studies because the desired impact can’t be proven, and instead substitute lab titers as a proxy for a drug’s clinical effectiveness.
While I love data and analysis, and even data analysis, I figure we can likely come to one conclusion now and use it going forward: Rule One: Pfizer is Pfull of Shit. Rule Two: When in doubt, or when presented with *any* additional data or narrative, refer to Rule One.
Children do not need these vaxxines.
This isn't about personal health or public health or the greater good.
And then you have to factor in the effect of boosters to counter waning vaccine effectiveness. I can't believe we're having to discuss the ethics of this, it is beyond insane.
I wonder how they can determine the vax works in children 5-11, if that age group is practically at zero risk from covid. 2,268 looks way too small. And no mention of any possible long term effects.
I would rather let covid propagate among children (of course, keeping an eye for those who get really sick. Where are the treatments BTW?). They would probably develop much better immunity. But alas, seems a lot of vaxed adults are too scared. And to make sure children get jabbed, they might keep getting treated like this:
https://twitter.com/456trainMama/status/1439209826668658688
Oh, and Fauci seems to be out there lying again:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2021/09/20/did-fauci-really-say-more-kids-have-died-of-covid-than-the-flu-n2596123
the covidians would throw your kids in to baal if the big pharma media said so.....
say no!
Is there a pre-pint of their trial anywhere? The study had only 2238 children overall, So that only 1119 in each arm. Plus assuming half were boys and half were girls, that means there were only 560 boys in each control arm. So how can they even make any conclusions based on so few kids and events especially for myocarditis that seems to affect somewhere from 1 out of 6400 to 1 out 20,000 boys? Seems like the study is grossly under powered.
I don't think these numbers for hospitalizations are correct. The data for that hospitalization chart only represents ~10% off the population and so the end result is probably off by about an order of magnitude.
"The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) conducts population-based surveillance for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations in children (persons younger than 18 years) and adults. The current network covers nearly 100 counties in the 10 Emerging Infections Program (EIP) states (CA, CO, CT, GA, MD, MN, NM, NY, OR, and TN) and four additional states through the Influenza Hospitalization Surveillance Project (IA, MI, OH, and UT). The network represents approximately 10% of US population (~32 million people)."
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/COVIDNet/COVID19_5.html
The AAP reports 18,479 hospitalizations from 23 states, which also coincides with about an order of magnitude adjustment.
https://downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP%20and%20CHA%20-%20Children%20and%20COVID-19%20State%20Data%20Report%209.9%20FINAL.pdf
Still a super bad number for the vaccine, but is likely closer to 8.8x vs 88x
I would never put this vaccine in my kid- thank god she is an adult and is making her own decision to NOT PUT THIS SHOT INTO HER BODY! (but she's lost friends, been ostracized and criticized at work, and shunned by family members her own age)- she is sticking to her decision however and I am proud of her.
Why aren't you writing for the New York Times? Why aren't they begging you to write for them? Why isn't the FDA or the NIH using your stats to strike back at the pharmaceutical companies? Why is this daily dose of sanity not being posted everywhere on the internet? Is it that you haven't learned how to capitalize yet? Surely they have editors who could help. Cats have never been noted for capital letters.
This is about to get very interesting and very tragic.
I would like to believe that they’ll be forced to present efficacy data for approval, but then I live in a state where 2 year olds must wear masks in day care despite 18 months of experience indicating that it is unnecessary. We are back to Upton Sinclair’s Jungle!
Due to the very light impact SARS II has on this age cohort the ONLY way a parent should consider vaccinating their kids is if it were a true sterilizing vaccine - and they are the kind, giving type, willing to risk their children to reduce spread. But, it's not. It doesn't. End of story.
Excellent Article. I will add this to my library. I am probably going to have to quit my job and flee my state next year to try and escape the jab for my 11 year old. I am facing termination myself right now for not getting the jab. Great times.
it's absolutely fascinating living through this time. it will make a lengthy case study in authoritarianism if the "good guys" (spoiler: there will be no good guys) win.
Thanks so much to that Bad Cat for writing down what I surmised to be the case about a year ago. This debate on actual efficacy is the one we should be having (and I thought we'd have.) This piece is on what, though, actually happened with the whole child vax question. https://empathy.guru/2021/09/19/societal-narcissistic-inversion/