health

Pfizer says COVID pill 89% effective against severe disease

24 Comments
By Lucie AUBOURG

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2021 AFP

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

24 Comments
Login to comment

Exceedingly good news to start the day. Unlike a certain de-wormer, this seems to actually work against covid infections.

-5 ( +10 / -15 )

Excellent news, new drugs being discovered, antivirals adapted to the fight against COVID, old drugs studied to see if they have usefulness, not to mention very effective non-pharmacological measures that prevent infection. Scientific progress acting extremely fast to control the risk from a newly emerging disease in a matter of a couple of years instead of the 1-2 generations that it would have taken naturally.

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

Trust in Pfizer! They have resources, and they put them all to use to help you, because that's just what they do - help people. Big Pharma doesn't get people addicted to their products and rake in billions. They never lie about the safety of their products.

Skipping past the sarcasm, 2hat percentage of their products do they do this with? 100%? Are there any situations at all in which big pharma can be trusted, or should all medicine be avoided at all costs so as to not support Bit Pharma? If it's not 100% of medicine, can you please explain the processes by which we should determine whether Big Pharma can be trusted or not trusted on a given drug?

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Just like when the vaccines were 90% effective

...Israel are on their fourth booster

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

And what's the planned selling cost for this pill?

Other stories clearly say that this Pfizer pill and the $2000 other normal IV treatment were used together, so even if it is $20 and the other pill is 50% cheaper ($1K), it is still much more than taking annual vaccines.

In 25 yrs, when the patents expire and these pills are $25 for the entire treatment, that will be nice. Until then, I have to ask what the cost is compared to other, working, options.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

This is the equivalent to saying you can't trust the media, therefore, literally everything they say is a lie. That's obviously not what I was saying.

Ok.

What I said was simply that they cannot be trusted.

Wait, you just said you obviously weren't saying, what you then went on to say. So which is it, can they be trusted or not?

Drugs are not always bad, of course. But when you have a blatant conflict of interest, things become sketchier.

But drug companies ALWAYS have this supposed "conflict of interest". They make money off medicines. So by that definition, they can NEVER be trusted. Except that you're saying sometimes they can be trusted. So how do you differentiate when you can or can't trust them?

This is all obvious, of course. Taking a pill to stop your migraine is not analogous to injecting your body with an experimental gene therapy substance

But they make money of those migraine pills. How is this not a conflict of interest that makes it impossible to trust the drug companies on migraine pills? What is the differentiator that makes it ok to trust migraine pills and not other pills?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

if you don't do will result in you being laid off from your job and banned from participating in mainstream society.

Eh? How is Pfizer laying people off of their jobs and banning them from participating in mainstream society? And where are you reading this? It sounds like someone is having a laugh at you behind your back on this one mate.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Eh? People who have had covid can catch and spread it a second time. This is why they need to be isolated. They are willingly diseased.

Not only that. They're also more likely to require hospitalization should they be reinfected than those who get the vaccine and catch the virus.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Pfizer said Friday that a clinical trial of its pill to treat COVID-19 had shown it is highly effective

Sounds promising indeed, though I am a bit skeptical, given the recent BMJ investigation on the Pfizer vaccine trials.

"Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial" https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Modern medicine is truly amazing.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Remdesivir with new name and higher price...

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

OSHA 14 thousand dollar fines will put a dent in vaccines hesitant by employers, it per violation Google OSHA Covid Violation

2 ( +2 / -0 )

YrralToday  03:28 am JST

OSHA 14 thousand dollar fines will put a dent in vaccines hesitant by employers, it per violation Google OSHA Covid Violation

Uhh, OK.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Remdesivir with new name and higher price...

Except for the fact it is a completely different drug, with a completely different mechanism of action and a completely different efficacy in the trials.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Remdesivir with new name and higher price...

No, Merck's drug is basically Remdesivir in pill form, but Remdesivir is much more expensive. As Virusrex said, Pfizer's drug is different.

All we have is a press release from Pfizer, and there are plenty of reasons why we should doubt everything Pfizer claims.

I'll wait for independent studies before ever considering this new drug...

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

No, Merck's drug is basically Remdesivir in pill form

No, it is not, the drugs share nothing in common, nor their mechanism of action, effects, risks, biodisponibility, etc. etc. This is like saying sunblocker is basically "surgery in cream form" just because both can be used to prevent skin cancer deaths.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

No, Merck's drug is basically Remdesivir in pill form

No, it is not...

Remdesivir and Mulnupiravir are both nucleoside analogs....

As far as I now, Pfizer's drug isn't.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Remdesivir and Mulnupiravir are both nucleoside analogs

That does not make them "basically the same" and definitely do not mean they share their mechanism of action, risks, ways to achieve their effects nor the amount of efficacy. Promoting RNA chain termination is in no way the same thing as elevating the rates of lethal viral mutations, even if the final effect is reduction of viable viral titers. If compound group was enough to make two drugs the same then for example Oxycodone would be "basically" just Hydroxyzine because both come as hydrochloride salts,

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

That does not make them "basically the same" and definitely do not mean they share their mechanism of action, risks, ways to achieve their effects nor the amount of efficacy. Promoting RNA chain termination is in no way the same thing as elevating the rates of lethal viral mutations, even if the final effect is reduction of viable viral titers. If compound group was enough to make two drugs the same then for example Oxycodone would be "basically" just Hydroxyzine because both come as hydrochloride salts,

Clueless...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Clueless

Yes, calling two very different drugs "basically the same" just because they belong to the same chemical class, even when extremely important differences are present can easily be characterized as being clueless.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites