Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 121

Thread: I can't tell you if I'm vaccinated. That would violate HIPAA rules.' What an Idiot!

  1. Top | #51
    Contributor Trausti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    8,621
    Archived
    372
    Total Posts
    8,993
    Rep Power
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Trausti View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ideologyhunter View Post

    % of Dems who have received at least their first covid vaccine shot: 86%
    % of Repubs: 45%
    Pretty slick point shaving, huh?
    Now imagine an alternate timeline where Pfizer didn’t deliberately halt development to throw the election, the vaccine came out when expected, and Trump wins. Those numbers would be flipped.
    Halt development? What are you smoking??

    Besides, the development was over long before the election. My memory is that the "development" of the Pfizer vaccine took two days--pasting a new code into the candidate SARS vaccine. Everything past that was simply testing.
    Look up a few posts. Pfizer halted testing in late October - which was against its own timeline - then resumed the day after the election. This should be a pretty big news story, but the media got the election result it wanted.

  2. Top | #52
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    33,055
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    129,807
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Trausti View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhea View Post

    They absolutely would not be. Why would you think that.
    You think their dear leader would have embraced it? Changed his public statements on vaccination? You think the republicans would have jumped on it? And the democrats would have behaved differently than normal?

    And you think Pfizer deliberately delayed?

    Seriously on this stuff? Wow…. Wow.
    Covid-19 vaccine from Pfizer and BioNTech is strongly effective, early data from large trial indicate

    In their announcement of the results, Pfizer and BioNTech revealed a surprise. The companies said they had decided not to conduct the 32-case analysis “after a discussion with the FDA.” Instead, they planned to conduct the analysis after 62 cases. But by the time the plan had been formalized, there had been 94 cases of Covid-19 in the study. It’s not known how many were in the vaccine arm, but it would have to be nine or fewer.

    Gruber said that Pfizer and BioNTech had decided in late October that they wanted to drop the 32-case interim analysis. At that time, the companies decided to stop having their lab confirm cases of Covid-19 in the study, instead leaving samples in storage. The FDA was aware of this decision. Discussions between the agency and the companies concluded, and testing began this past Wednesday. When the samples were tested, there were 94 cases of Covid in the trial. The DSMB met on Sunday.

    This means that the statistical strength of the result is likely far stronger than was initially expected. It also means that if Pfizer had held to the original plan, the data would likely have been available in October, as its CEO, Albert Bourla, had initially predicted.
    So the timeline was for the results by October. But they chose to stop the 32-case analysis testing in late October, leaving samples in storage, and then resumed the scheduled testing the Wednesday after the election. Yeah, that's a big fucking surprise.
    I don't know the details but this sounds like a case of overtaken by events.

    An interim analysis is normally about detect abject failures and stopping the test. A good result would not result in faster approval.

  3. Top | #53
    Member *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    24,504
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    41,057
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith&Co. View Post
    The people who define HIPAA rules and PMI, with respect to HIPAA, say it's PMI. I do not understand the difficulty, here.
    But, hey, you know, at some point you just gotta say, if it's that important to you that 2+2=5, you do you.
    I don't understand your difficulty.

    Public acknowledgement of something makes it not personal information.

    2 + 2 = 4
    Nope. Without a release they can still neither confirm nor deny. Every so often we see cases in the news where someone is proclaiming something happened and the medical facility (or occasionally the police) just says they're not allowed to say anything. I've seen it happen in cases where the public "acknowledgement" was obviously false.

    (Personally, this is an aspect of the law I would like to see changed--making a public claim about something HIPAA-protected should allow the release of a minimum rebuttal.)
    Baloney.

    After watching it on TV any doctor in the world can say Biden got the vaccine.

    It is not personal information.

    It is public knowledge.

  4. Top | #54
    Loony Running The Asylum ZiprHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Do you like my pretty crown?
    Posts
    26,016
    Archived
    3,034
    Total Posts
    29,050
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Trausti View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post

    Halt development? What are you smoking??

    Besides, the development was over long before the election. My memory is that the "development" of the Pfizer vaccine took two days--pasting a new code into the candidate SARS vaccine. Everything past that was simply testing.
    Look up a few posts. Pfizer halted testing in late October - which was against its own timeline - then resumed the day after the election. This should be a pretty big news story, but the media got the election result it wanted.
    I;m not finding anything about Pfizer halting testing in October. J&J did so in October due to a test participant getting ill. Got a link about Pfizer?
    When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

    Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor but because we can't satisfy the rich.

  5. Top | #55
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,633
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,106
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Trausti View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post

    Halt development? What are you smoking??

    Besides, the development was over long before the election. My memory is that the "development" of the Pfizer vaccine took two days--pasting a new code into the candidate SARS vaccine. Everything past that was simply testing.
    Look up a few posts. Pfizer halted testing in late October - which was against its own timeline - then resumed the day after the election. This should be a pretty big news story, but the media got the election result it wanted.
    I;m not finding anything about Pfizer halting testing in October. J&J did so in October due to a test participant getting ill. Got a link about Pfizer?
    Based on the info, I read that 32-case number was increased to 62-case, likely because they wanted a better idea as to the required number of doses for the vaccine via a larger pool. One typically wants more data when timelines have been cut.

    Quote Originally Posted by article
    After discussion with the FDA, the companies recently elected to drop the 32-case interim analysis and conduct the first interim analysis at a minimum of 62 cases. Upon the conclusion of those discussions, the evaluable case count reached 94 and the DMC performed its first analysis on all cases. The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%, at 7 days after the second dose. This means that protection is achieved 28 days after the initiation of the vaccination, which consists of a 2-dose schedule. As the study continues, the final vaccine efficacy percentage may vary. The DMC has not reported any serious safety concerns and recommends that the study continue to collect additional safety and efficacy data as planned. The data will be discussed with regulatory authorities worldwide.

  6. Top | #56
    Loony Running The Asylum ZiprHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Do you like my pretty crown?
    Posts
    26,016
    Archived
    3,034
    Total Posts
    29,050
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post

    I;m not finding anything about Pfizer halting testing in October. J&J did so in October due to a test participant getting ill. Got a link about Pfizer?
    Based on the info, I read that 32-case number was increased to 62-case, likely because they wanted a better idea as to the required number of doses for the vaccine via a larger pool. One typically wants more data when timelines have been cut.

    Quote Originally Posted by article
    After discussion with the FDA, the companies recently elected to drop the 32-case interim analysis and conduct the first interim analysis at a minimum of 62 cases. Upon the conclusion of those discussions, the evaluable case count reached 94 and the DMC performed its first analysis on all cases. The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%, at 7 days after the second dose. This means that protection is achieved 28 days after the initiation of the vaccination, which consists of a 2-dose schedule. As the study continues, the final vaccine efficacy percentage may vary. The DMC has not reported any serious safety concerns and recommends that the study continue to collect additional safety and efficacy data as planned. The data will be discussed with regulatory authorities worldwide.
    So they didn't actually halt the trials but expanded them?
    When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

    Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor but because we can't satisfy the rich.

  7. Top | #57
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,633
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,106
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Based on the info, I read that 32-case number was increased to 62-case, likely because they wanted a better idea as to the required number of doses for the vaccine via a larger pool. One typically wants more data when timelines have been cut.
    So they didn't actually halt the trials but expanded them?
    From how I read it, someone can correct me, they decided to set a higher threshold for number of cases from 32 to 62. One wouldn't need to quit anything to do that.

  8. Top | #58
    Loony Running The Asylum ZiprHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Do you like my pretty crown?
    Posts
    26,016
    Archived
    3,034
    Total Posts
    29,050
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Based on the info, I read that 32-case number was increased to 62-case, likely because they wanted a better idea as to the required number of doses for the vaccine via a larger pool. One typically wants more data when timelines have been cut.
    So they didn't actually halt the trials but expanded them?
    From how I read it, someone can correct me, they decided to set a higher threshold for number of cases from 32 to 62. One wouldn't need to quit anything to do that.
    That's how I read it too.
    When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

    Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor but because we can't satisfy the rich.

  9. Top | #59
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,633
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,106
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    From how I read it, someone can correct me, they decided to set a higher threshold for number of cases from 32 to 62. One wouldn't need to quit anything to do that.
    That's how I read it too.
    And just to hit the point home, from the article Trausti didn't read, and backs up my cursory interpretation.
    Quote Originally Posted by article
    That study design {32-case number}, as well as those of other drug makers, came under fire from experts who worried that, even if it was statistically valid, these interim analyses would not provide enough data when a vaccine could be given to billions of people.
    So, due to the number of people to be vaccinated, there was consensus in the industry that 32 wasn't high enough. They did pause testing, but come very early November, the number of contractions was just under 100. So the amount of time to make conclusions before the election wasn't really there. The decision to break from the 32-threshold was very sound in light of how widespread the vaccination program would be.

  10. Top | #60
    Cyborg with a Tiara
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Recluse
    Posts
    12,209
    Archived
    9,040
    Total Posts
    21,249
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    And just to hit the point home, from the article Trausti didn't read, and backs up my cursory interpretation.

    […]
    So, due to the number of people to be vaccinated, there was consensus in the industry that 32 wasn't high enough. They did pause testing, but come very early November, the number of contractions was just under 100. So the amount of time to make conclusions before the election wasn't really there. The decision to break from the 32-threshold was very sound in light of how widespread the vaccination program would be.
    But! But! Conspiracy!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •