A Pfizer-funded, peer-reviewed paper authored by Pfizer scientists reveals that the company's antiviral COVID medication Paxlovid completely sucks, confirming what everyone's known since it came out.
In a randomized phase 2-3 trial of the drug conducted between Aug. 25, 2021 through July 25, 2022, 654 out of 1,296 patients were dosed with at least one 300mg dose of Paxlovid + 100mg of protease inhibitor ritonavir vs. a placebo group. The results showed that the median time until COVID-19 symptoms ended through day 28 was 12 days in the treatment group vs. 13 days in the placebo group.
According to the authors, the result of the drug, which is also known as nirmatrelvir, "was not significant."
"Similar results were observed in the high-risk subgroup (i.e., participants who had been vaccinated and had at least one risk factor for severe illness) and in the standard-risk subgroup (i.e., those who had no risk factors for severe illness and had never been vaccinated or had not been vaccinated within the previous 12 months)," the authors added.
And while 0.8% of the Paxlovid group suffered 'hospitalization or death' vs. 1.6% of placebo recipients, the authors also concluded that it was not statistically significant, however placebo recipients had longer average hospital stays and were more likely to be admitted to intensive care units.
According to the authors, "the usefulness of nirmatrelvir–ritonavir in patients who are not at high risk for severe COVID-19 has not been established."
The trial included adults who had tested positive for COVID-19 and shown at least one symptom, had previously received the COVID-19 vaccine, and had at least one risk factor - such as being a cigarette smoker.
Pfizer had previously announced that they were halting enrollment in the trial over "a very low rate of hospitalization or death observed in the standard-risk patient population."
Paxlovid was previously found not to reduce the risk of long COVID either.
As the Epoch Times notes, Dr. Vinay Prasad, an epidemiology professor at the University of California, San Francisco, who was not involved with the research, said on social media platform X that the trial showed Paxlovid "doesn’t work in vaccinated people."
"It was embarrassing to watch the administration and many ID doctors recommend this without any credible data," he continued - criticizing the government for spending upwards of $12 billion for Paxlovid "without much trial data."
A previous Pfizer trial, which was run to assess Paxlovid’s efficacy and safety among the unvaccinated, found that Paxlovid shortened the time to sustained symptoms alleviation and reduced the severity of COVID-19 symptoms. The trial enrolled people with COVID-19, with symptoms, and who had a risk factor for progression to severe disease or were 60 years of age or older.
Based on the results from that trial, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2023 authorized the drug for both unvaccinated and vaccinated adults with mild to moderate COVID-19 who were deemed at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19. -Epoch Times
"The benefit observed among unvaccinated high-risk persons does not extend to those at lower risk for severe COVID-19," wrote Drs. Rajesh Gandhi and Martin Hirsch in an editorial about the new paper. That said, they also concluded that "it still appears reasonable to recommend the drug to older people and people with substantial underlying conditions."
What?
A Pfizer-funded, peer-reviewed paper authored by Pfizer scientists reveals that the company’s antiviral COVID medication Paxlovid completely sucks, confirming what everyone’s known since it came out.
In a randomized phase 2-3 trial of the drug conducted between Aug. 25, 2021 through July 25, 2022, 654 out of 1,296 patients were dosed with at least one 300mg dose of Paxlovid + 100mg of protease inhibitor ritonavir vs. a placebo group. The results showed that the median time until COVID-19 symptoms ended through day 28 was 12 days in the treatment group vs. 13 days in the placebo group.
According to the authors, the result of the drug, which is also known as nirmatrelvir, “was not significant.”
“Similar results were observed in the high-risk subgroup (i.e., participants who had been vaccinated and had at least one risk factor for severe illness) and in the standard-risk subgroup (i.e., those who had no risk factors for severe illness and had never been vaccinated or had not been vaccinated within the previous 12 months),” the authors added.
And while 0.8% of the Paxlovid group suffered ‘hospitalization or death’ vs. 1.6% of placebo recipients, the authors also concluded that it was not statistically significant, however placebo recipients had longer average hospital stays and were more likely to be admitted to intensive care units.
According to the authors, “the usefulness of nirmatrelvir–ritonavir in patients who are not at high risk for severe COVID-19 has not been established.“
The trial included adults who had tested positive for COVID-19 and shown at least one symptom, had previously received the COVID-19 vaccine, and had at least one risk factor – such as being a cigarette smoker.
Pfizer had previously announced that they were halting enrollment in the trial over “a very low rate of hospitalization or death observed in the standard-risk patient population.”
Paxlovid was previously found not to reduce the risk of long COVID either.
As the Epoch Times notes, Dr. Vinay Prasad, an epidemiology professor at the University of California, San Francisco, who was not involved with the research, said on social media platform X that the trial showed Paxlovid “doesn’t work in vaccinated people.”
“It was embarrassing to watch the administration and many ID doctors recommend this without any credible data,” he continued – criticizing the government for spending upwards of $12 billion for Paxlovid “without much trial data.”
A previous Pfizer trial, which was run to assess Paxlovid’s efficacy and safety among the unvaccinated, found that Paxlovid shortened the time to sustained symptoms alleviation and reduced the severity of COVID-19 symptoms. The trial enrolled people with COVID-19, with symptoms, and who had a risk factor for progression to severe disease or were 60 years of age or older.
Based on the results from that trial, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2023 authorized the drug for both unvaccinated and vaccinated adults with mild to moderate COVID-19 who were deemed at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19. -Epoch Times
“The benefit observed among unvaccinated high-risk persons does not extend to those at lower risk for severe COVID-19,” wrote Drs. Rajesh Gandhi and Martin Hirsch in an editorial about the new paper. That said, they also concluded that “it still appears reasonable to recommend the drug to older people and people with substantial underlying conditions.”
What?
Loading…
