News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Complete protection by single dose skin patch delivered SARS-CoV-2 spike vaccine.

Re:Complete protection by single dose skin patch delivered S... by doubtfuluser on Thursday June 03, 2021 @12:52AM (#27377359)
While I appreciate biotech articles being on hacker news, this one is nothing I would expect on the frontage. Three of the authors have interest in the company that makes HD-map. This in combination with being linked as a preprint without peer review makes me look twice. The wording „complete protection“ does the rest.

Does anyone have information if this was ever peer reviewed?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Complete protection by single dose skin patch delivered S... by Fomite on Thursday June 03, 2021 @02:55AM (#27377989)
Given it was posted May 31st, 2021 it's at best weeks away from completed peer review, and realistically with the timelines of COVID-19 papers these days, months.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Complete protection by single dose skin patch delivered S... by ghotli on Thursday June 03, 2021 @02:02AM (#27377713)
This stuff is important. Thanks for pointing it out.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Complete protection by single dose skin patch delivered S... by vmception on Thursday June 03, 2021 @12:47PM (#27383993)
It has to be posted to get peer reviewed
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Complete protection by single dose skin patch delivered S... by swiley on Thursday June 03, 2021 @05:51AM (#27379030)
In other words: par for covid drugs.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Complete protection by single dose skin patch delivered S... by pepperberg on Thursday June 03, 2021 @03:42AM (#27378273)
BioNTech/Pfizer published a press release regarding 94% efficacy in November 2020 (1 month before publishing any study) and it too landed on the front page:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25135984

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Complete protection by single dose skin patch delivered S... by evandijk70 on Thursday June 03, 2021 @05:29AM (#27378882)
Completely different - They are a large company with a proven track record and a lot to lose if they incorrectly claim efficacy. They were reporting on the results of a registered clinical trial with 30,000 subjects.

This shows results for ~ 48 transgenic mice. I would say that, at the time, the vaccine reported in the press release from Pfizer had a 99% chance of being approved by FDA, while this vaccine has maybe a 10% chance of being approved by the FDA at best.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Complete protection by single dose skin patch delivered S... by pepperberg on Friday June 04, 2021 @05:10AM (#27391905)
You’re right, they completely differ from each other (regarding their relevance) and should therefore face an adjusted amount of scrutiny.

If you’re one of the top pharmaceutical companies in the world, some press releases and study protocols are simply not enough [1] and should be (imo) discarded.

If you’re a new player (Vaxxas) claiming “complete protection” by testing your product on mice, it’s simply not enough and should be (imo) discarded.

[1] https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/11/26/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-...

[ Parent | on HN ]