• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

Preston said:
See my post on the last page.



The thing about conspiracy theories is that most of the time they're very easy to debunk. You just need to look into it a bit before you spew them. Fact checking really doesn't take long.
Click to expand...
Still waiting for the source. Not saying you're wrong, I'd like to see it.
 
Habsy said:
Then a couple of days later another company with higher efficacy rates steals your thunder? You're thinking in a regular business model, not in a pandemic model. It doesn't matter who announced first. Not in the least. As for rollout? That may benefit the first one more.
Click to expand...
You don't think Pfizer received orders for millions upon millions of doses in the couple days that they had the only vaccine?

Anything is possible I suppose, but this conspiracy theory doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I've been wrong before though.
 
Dominion is going to come down hard on Rudy, Powell, and Trump with civil suits for serious damages once this is all said and done. Destroying American democracy yeah, blah blah blah, but this nonsense is very damaging to Dominion’s business.

That’s where a lot of the money being raised by the Trump campaign right now is going to end up.
 
Habspatrol said:
You don't get why a company would want to be the first to announce possibly the biggest "discovery" in history first? You don't see why they'd want to be the talk of the world?
Click to expand...
First to market on an announcement? There’s some nice PR, but if they’re more interested in a Biden administration, they’ll be happy to forego it and not give Trump any kind of boost.
 
I think you guys can find fuel for (or water to pour on) your theory if you just look up the dates of Pfizer’s phase three trials. If they finished weeks ago, and sat on the data for no apparent reason, OK, maybe there’s something to this. If they made an announcement as soon as the trials were complete, that would suggest the opposite.
 
Benefits to announcing before the election when they supposedly had the data already:

- doing the right thing
- world renown as the first company to produce a vaccine
- curry the favor of a president and half the government which they pay millions of dollars every year in lobbying to try and accomplish
- move to the top of the line for future contracts and approvals and deregulations from the government you just curried favor with
- reap the private sector rewards of being the most cutting edge pharma company in the world


Benefits to holding out until after the election:

- risking legal and financial ruin if found out
- risking ostracization and sanction by the US government in particular
- permanently ruining your reputation as an honest broker
- getting beat to the punch on being the company that saves thr world
- ????

Did I miss anything from this brilliant conspiracy theory?
 
Preston said:

Science | AAAS

www.sciencemag.org www.sciencemag.org
Click to expand...

Initially, Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech suggested they might have preliminary trial results by late October—a timetable Pfizer’s CEO, Albert Bourla, projected as recently as 29 September. The timeline was based on a plan that called for an outside panel to take a first look at the efficacy data for the vaccine when a total of 32 cases of COVID-19 had accumulated in the vaccine and placebo groups. But the companies and FDA later agreed on a protocol change that nearly doubled that number and delayed that review.
Click to expand...

There is no evidence, however, that the decision had anything to do with presidential politics. And the companies flat out reject at Trump’s claims. “What people believe is their business,” Kathrin Jansen, who heads vaccine R&D at Pfizer, told ScienceInsider. “Quite frankly, we had no time and still have no time to deal with politics. We are at this 24/7, thousands of people working diligently to make this work. And for us, it was never about politics, it was always about just the disaster that we were in the middle of, all of us globally, seeing the devastation and the deaths.”
Click to expand...

Did the decision to switch to 62 cases have anything to do with the election?​

Both Pfizer and BioNTech say no. Sahin and Jansen both are emphatic on this point. Sahin says FDA never gave them any hint of concern about the election timing and the companies’ decision to seek the protocol change had nothing to do with politics, either. “This was our decision,” Sahin says. When he read Trump’s tweets, he shrugged. “This is just not true.”
Click to expand...

So what? They're going to say "yeah we slow rolled"? This is your proof? The actual people that may have decided to do so telling you they didn't? Yeah, blind trust happens in the current environment.

When did Pfizer’s CEO stop publicly projecting a possible October success and why?​

On 16 October, Bourla explained in an “open letter” that though the companies might know “whether or not our vaccine is effective by the end of October,” the new FDA guidelines meant they could not file for an EUA until the third week in November at the earliest. To increase confidence in the safety of these vaccines, the FDA revision—which the Trump administration attempted to block—said that before a company applied for an EUA, 2 months must have passed since at least half of the participants in a trial had received their final shot. Most vaccine-related side effects occur within that period.
Click to expand...

We just hit the third week. Did they wait for filing date? No. They announced prior. It could have been announced shortly before the election.

It just said efficacy was greater than 90%, without providing a confidence interval that puts upper and lower bounds around the estimate (say, 60% to 95%). That was enough to meet SEC requirements that companies must report any “material and timely information” that could affect whether investors buy or sell stock; the regulations do not require detailed explanations of data.

Sahin and Jansen said they weren’t even given the exact numbers. “About 2 weeks from now, we’ll most likely have the full recruitment of the cases, and everyone will get the numbers,” Sahin says. “So there is no need to provide specifics.”
Click to expand...

The threshold is 50% efficacy, the announcement did not require specifics, they could have announced it earlier. Even with a caveat of pending FDA approval. Let's also not forget that Trump gutted the FDA regulations, They aren't exactly fans. Do you actually think they will turn over all their employees once he's gone? These are career people. In Washington, that vote at a 90% Dem clip so it's not unreasonable to think they slow rolled approval. I will grant that the FDA is typically slow moving mofos. That said, they could have announced.

All the info you just provided is sourced from the Pharma Companies themselves. You tell me why they would say "yeah we slow rolled"?

Look, what I am saying is the motivation could have easily been there. None of this debunks that and all it would take is a few people to slow roll.
Click to expand...
 
It's debunked because it's a dumb theory. There's a perfectly logical explanation to every single thing that happened. Far better than the conspiracy theory itself.


I'll never understand why humans always find the need to jump through hoops to believe crazy nonsensical shit like this. Is reality that boring?
 
Last edited:
zeke said:
Benefits to announcing before the election when they supposedly had the data already:

- doing the right thing - LOL
- world renown as the first company to produce a vaccine - LOL they are all on similar timelines
- curry the favor of a president and half the government which they pay millions of dollars every year in lobbying to try and accomplish - Oh yeah, curry favor with a guy like Trump that you just spent 4+ years saying will take advantage of anyone
- move to the top of the line for future contracts and approvals and deregulations from the government you just curried favor with - Government contracts are on a bid basis. There is no "moving to the top of the line" by law.
- reap the private sector rewards of being the most cutting edge pharma company in the world - Most cutting edge! Followed by another, then another, then another in short order. Cutting Edge.


Benefits to holding out until after the election:

- risking legal and financial ruin if found out - LOL, dude stop. Financial ruin. Legal what? They could have announced with NO SPECIFICS.
- risking ostracization and sanction by the US government in particular - What in the actual fuck. You like to tell people they're deluded then post this trash? After the guy you slow rolled is out you think the new government will sanction a week delay?
- permanently ruining your reputation as an honest broker - Nope. Only the CEO or COO would pay. Then get a 100 million parachute.
- getting beat to the punch on being the company that saves thr world - In announcing? Fuck this is just stupid. Really stupid. This isn't the rollout. You can announce first and be second in rollout.
- ????

Did I miss anything from this brilliant conspiracy theory?
Click to expand...

Did you miss something? Yeah, a brain and a misunderstanding of American Health laws and procedures. It could have been announced earlier and would have if they were on the Trump train.

Could it have happened? Yes.

Did it? Who knows but no, that's too unconscionable for you.
 
Preston said:
It's debunked because it's a dumb theory. There's a perfectly logical explanation to every single thing that happened. Far better than the conspiracy theory itself.


I'll never understand why humans always find the need to jump through hoops to believe crazy nonsensical shit like this? Is reality that boring?
Click to expand...

Everyone loves to believe they're the only ones in on the secret.
 
Preston said:
It's debunked because it's a dumb theory. There's a perfectly logical explanation to every single thing that happened. Far better than the conspiracy theory itself.


I'll never understand why humans always find the need to jump through hoops to believe crazy nonsensical shit like this? Is reality that boring?
Click to expand...
Nor will I understand why everything that fulfills confirmation bias is accepted as gospel.

Once again, could it have happened? Yes. Did it? Who knows.
 
Again... I'm nowhere near an authority on any of this shit. Let's say that they had a vaccine ready before the election. Instinctively, I think the play for Pfizer would have been...

Announce it and praise Trump for his great leadership in helping to make it happen. That would all but ensure that Trump would do everything he could to make sure that you're the primary source of vaccines in the US.

And if Biden wins, well... he's likely to push for the best vaccine options... no matter when they come out... so it doesn't really matter whther you come out on November 1st or 9th.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top