Russia Claims To Have Registered World's First COVID-19 Vaccine (cnbc.com) 165
New submitter Hmmmmmm shares a report from CNBC: Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the registration of what Russia claims to be the first vaccine for the coronavirus in the world and said one of his daughters had already taken it. "Although I know that it works quite effectively, it forms a stable immunity and, I repeat, has passed all the necessary checks," Putin said. Clinical trials of this Russian vaccine have been completed in less than two months and phase three trials are set to begin on Wednesday, despite the vaccine having already been registered. Countries including the United Arab Emirates, the Philippines and Saudi Arabia are taking part in those trials.
"The vaccine developed by Russia is a so-called viral vector vaccine, meaning it employs another virus to carry the DNA encoding of the needed immune response into cells," reports Al Jazeera. "[The Gamaleya research institute's vaccine] is based on the adenovirus, a similar technology to the coronavirus vaccine prototype developed by China's CanSino. The state-run Gamaleya institute came under fire after researchers and its director injected themselves with the prototype several months ago, with specialists criticizing the move as an unorthodox and rushed way of starting human trials.
"The vaccine developed by Russia is a so-called viral vector vaccine, meaning it employs another virus to carry the DNA encoding of the needed immune response into cells," reports Al Jazeera. "[The Gamaleya research institute's vaccine] is based on the adenovirus, a similar technology to the coronavirus vaccine prototype developed by China's CanSino. The state-run Gamaleya institute came under fire after researchers and its director injected themselves with the prototype several months ago, with specialists criticizing the move as an unorthodox and rushed way of starting human trials.
Adenoviral vector (Score:5, Interesting)
We basically only have a few good adenoviral vectors .. when you take a vaccine based on it you might because immune to future vaccines based on that vector. It's a one shot deal. So what? Well adenoviral vectors are one of the best vectors we currently have (granted better ones are being worked on). What's going to happen if a virus worse than this one shows up? We won't have the adenoviral vector to use for that.
I personally would avoid it unless I was old or higher risk of dying from COVID.
Re:Adenoviral vector (Score:5, Informative)
There's a good chance that a virus "worse" than this one won't spread nearly as fast, or as far. The faster a virus kills you, the harder it is to spread. The higher the death rate of a virus, the harder it is to spread.
Corpses don't spread respiratory viruses nearly as well as the breathing. This one basically sits in the sweet spot of being easily transmittable via airborne droplet, while also not showing symptoms in some, and causing irritating-to-severe symptoms in most. It's also the reason Influenza spreads pretty easily and doesn't usually do as much harm, early 1900s notwithstanding.
Re: Adenoviral vector (Score:5, Informative)
Sars-cov-2 has a very large window of time to spread. If it killed in a week and showed extreme symptoms in a day it wouldn't spread so much.
There are obviously some rare diseases that are more deadly and fast spreading, but sars-cov-2 is pretty extreme in the suite spot. Likely the worst in a century, definitely the worst in 50 years.
Extreme flu symptoms for about 20% that get it, with suspected long-term impact on many of those.
There hasn't been a worse (un/barely containable and significant) in my lifetime, and maybe one about equivalent in the living lifetime of my relatives.
Very very few people have loved when one worse was around.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the fast killer doesn't spread as much.
Because the hot dies, not because there is some "secret 'we do not spread' effect"
Re:Adenoviral vector (Score:5, Informative)
Seriously. He's not stupid. In fact he speaks the truth. Viruses tend to become less lethal as they mutate. It's simple evolutionary pressure, that's all. The most lethal strains of viruses die out with their hosts. The mutations that are less lethal get spread. We fully expect that as this coronavirus mutates it will get less and less lethal generally.
Re:Adenoviral vector (Score:4, Insightful)
They don't have any pressure to get less lethal, they just have a pressure to spread more. If there's a strain of covid that remains an asymptotic spreader for 3 weeks (instead of the current 2), and on day 22 causes the person to instantly die, that strain would be favored.
Re: (Score:2)
If there's a strain of covid that remains an asymptotic spreader for 3 weeks (instead of the current 2), and on day 22 causes the person to instantly die, that strain would be favored.
Exactly.
That's all it is, whatever is better-suited to thriving/spreading in the current environment is what is going to succeed in the marketplace of hosts.
Re:Adenoviral vector (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. The issue is that there is NO pressure to become lethal.
Consider these strains:
1) Asymptotic spreader for 2 weeks, then kills
2) Asymptotic spreader for 3 weeks then kills
3) Asymptotic spreader for 100 years then dies when you die of natural causes.
Clearly case 3 is the best spreader. Lethal viruses are always anti-evolutionary. The problem is that energy spent creating virus to spread is bad for the host, so the host fights it. The virus has to fight back or die, and if it fights back too strongly, it kills the host that it very much wishes did not die. Worse, different hosts have different strengths. It has to fight back stronger against a young healthy person than against an asthmatic. Which is really hard to evolve.
Basically, killing the asymptotic spreader is a mistake and ALWAYS bad for the virus.
Re: (Score:2)
If it can mutate to kill those who don't spread asymptotically more rapidly, then there's less life competition for the super spreaders, who will then be in more demand to do stuff that will bring them into contact with more people if it's not known that they're spreading it — because they're healthy, and can work.
Re: (Score:2)
If it can mutate to kill those who don't spread asymptotically more rapidly, then there's less life competition for the super spreaders, who will then be in more demand to do stuff that will bring them into contact with more people if it's not known that they're spreading it — because they're healthy, and can work.
That ignores behavioral adaptation on the part of the hosts, which is particularly powerful in the case of humans (though, sadly, not as powerful as it should be). A virus with high lethality will trigger strong anti-spreading behavioral changes, the more lethal the virus, the bigger the changes.
Re: (Score:3)
Ebola in West Africa would be a notable exception:
Where the custom is to keep dead bodies around in close contact with the living, a virus can spread from dead to live hosts.
Re: (Score:2)
but the question is.
why did putin feel the need to communicate yesterday of a covad vaccine that is daughter has taken just before the democrats v p candidate is announced
Re: (Score:2)
Viruses tend to become less lethal as they mutate.
Some do, some remain just as bad as they ever were, and they have very long infection spans...look at HIV for example.
It can hide for in the body years with no symptoms, all the while infecting other people along the way. A fairly successful virus, just not easily spread. Still lethal without all the right meds, which took decades to develop.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously. He's not stupid. In fact he speaks the truth. Viruses tend to become less lethal as they mutate. It's simple evolutionary pressure, that's all. The most lethal strains of viruses die out with their hosts. The mutations that are less lethal get spread. We fully expect that as this coronavirus mutates it will get less and less lethal generally.
That is generally true, and it's reasonable to hope for this outcome with the novel coronavirus, but there's a catch. It spreads asymptomatically in the majority of cases, and this means there's no selective pressure on it to become less lethal.
Re: (Score:2)
Over a period of thousands of years.
Not in a one or two years "Flu season".
Yes, he is stupid, and you can join his ranks.
We fully expect that as this coronavirus mutates it will get less and less lethal generally. /. idiots expect that. Won't happen in your or my lifetime. Or why is small pox and ebola still so deadly, or the flu in general?
No one except
Seriously, this is not an SF game. "evolutional pressure" is not something you switch on or off.
Re: (Score:3)
Evolution occurs over generations regardless of time. Viruses mutate (read; evolve) incredibly quickly by our standards because our generations are around 20-30 years or so... viruses change subtly with each new host leading to incredibly quick branching of the genetic makeup of the virus. Over time, the most successful of these will tend to remain in the wild, meaning those most able to spread efficiently.
The evolutionary pressure that's being talked about here is that in order to spread most efficiently,
Re: (Score:2)
Spanish flu had 3 mutations over the years. Wave 1 was like COVID-19 and mostly affected the elderly and weak. Wave 2 was less forgiving and took out plenty of healthy non-elderly people. Wave 3 was more tame than wave 1.
Virii can and will mutate in a variety of ways.
Re:Adenoviral vector (Score:5, Informative)
And the virus knows that, and suddenly adjusts it lethality to your logic.
No, this is evolution in action, right before your eyes. A virus that keeps its host alive longer has a better chance of spreading to more hosts, which is pretty much all it exists to do.
The ones that kill their host too quickly don't live as long and as a result don't reproduce as much and so they don't live to spread their family tree, but the ones that keep the host alive longer do.
What you view as a shift in lethality is just the 'better' version of the virus being more successful in the marketplace of hosts. It's not a conscious action, it's just evolution doing what it does- selecting out for the virus that's most successful at spreading.
Seriously? How stupid are ppl here on /. ?
You should get a tattoo that says "Dunning-Kruger Expert".
Re: (Score:2)
Feel free to point out what I said that was incorrect. Exactly what did I say that triggered you?
Or are you an evolution denier in addition to being a fool? Let me guess, your explanation is that "God done it!"
Don't forget to thank your god for this wonderful virus that He has blessed us with.
Re: (Score:2)
For the current pandemic "mutation" of the virus is completely irrelevant.
In 1000 years perhaps it is mutated into "harmless".
What you think any god has to do with it, is beyond me.
Most gods have left the planet millennia ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that's exactly what it's doing. I'm not sure why you're so bound and determined to believe that somehow evolution and genetic drift do not apply to Covid-19 when it applies to every other virus that has ever existed. The genetic code of each generation of virus is different than that before just as our children are not clones of us. A virus can have hundreds or thousands of generations a day while we take decades at it.
What are you holding out for? (Score:3)
What's going to happen if a virus worse than this one shows up?
We haven't had a virus as bad as this one show up for about a century. Assuming that is a typical period then most people getting the vaccine will not be alive when the next bad virus hits....and if they are then clearly medical technology will have seriously advanced and may likely have better or at least different ways to solve the problem.
It's fine to hoard important resources like this for when disaster strikes but it's foolish to continue hoarding them once disaster has struck especially since your
Re: (Score:2)
Also if there is a next time relatively soon we should hopefully be better prepared. That's how South Korea did so well, they had prior experience with SARS and got their act together really fast.
Re: (Score:2)
We haven't had a virus as bad as this one show up for about a century.
Define "as bad". MERS, SARS-COV-1, HIV, Marburg and Ebola are all within the last half or century or so and all more deadly than SARS-COV-2.
But I do also think it's looking very strongly like mRNA vaccines will be successful at which point the next pandemic will probably have an even faster and more flexible vaccine solution regardless if it happens in 10 years from now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What are you holding out for? (Score:4, Insightful)
That and now the world of humans is much more interconnected than 100 yrs ago. So if a naughty virus captured a small hamlet back then, it might have remained there. Not now, think of the airline system as a virus expressway.
Adenoviral vectors, plural. (Score:2)
We basically only have a few good adenoviral vectors .. when you take a vaccine based on it you might because immune to future vaccines based on that vector.
And apparently this immunization uses up TWO of them.
I won't be taking it (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I will take the first one approved here. It might make me ill for a few days but the coronavirus will likely kill me.
Re: (Score:2)
Ditto. 73, hi BP, Type A blood, I get it and I'm dead. The way to get injured is to get between me and the CVS on the 1st day it is offered. You'd get trampled.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Just look at what is going on, 'RUSSIA CLAIMS', any western country and they would have detailed the lab in the west and proclaim vaccine found and lobbyists would immediately be out in force demanding tens of billions of dollars be spend immediately to buy up all the doses in advance, glorious, glorious profit, so fucking what if it does not work. So instead in corporate mainstream media with the big pharmeceuticals paying the advertising bills, 'RUSSIA CLAIMS' and a whole flood of forum posts by cunt PR=B
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Just look at what is going on, 'RUSSIA CLAIMS', any western country and they would have detailed the lab in the west and proclaim vaccine found and lobbyists would immediately be out in force demanding tens of billions of dollars be spend immediately to buy up all the doses in advance, glorious, glorious profit, so fucking what if it does not work. So instead in corporate mainstream media with the big pharmeceuticals paying the advertising bills, 'RUSSIA CLAIMS' and a whole flood of forum posts by cunt PR=B$ corporations about how bad Russian science is, how bad anything that comes out of Russia is and ALL RUSSIANS ARE EVIL.
There's an excellent tracker of where in development the different vaccines are at: https://www.nytimes.com/intera... [nytimes.com] TFA says phase 3 trials of the Russian vaccine begins about now so looking at the tracker there are 8 vaccines already in phase 3 trials and thus ahead of the Russian. With that information I don't see that any of your quoted proposition holds.
Re: (Score:2)
We have had the same stuff happen with cell phone batteries. Every few weeks, we used to have a new development. Even Dr. Goodenough came out with a new battery. Still, nothing really new on that front.
Dr. Goodenough's battery has been picked up for licensing. You're acting like the lab results immediately produce new products. That's false. It's also completely false that there hasn't been substantial improvement in batteries over time, though. There's been lots of improvements to cell phone batteries, they're just all individually small. They do add up to substantial improvement, though. That's why we can have ever more CPU in our phones, and still have similar battery life to the first full touch scree
Re: (Score:2)
and a whole flood of forum posts by cunt PR=B$ corporations about how bad Russian science is
What if approving the vaccine and claiming it is safe before even starting stage 3 trials... is bad science?
Re:I won't be taking it (Score:5, Informative)
The RNA vaccine is less likely to create off-target or unexpected reactions. And the Lyme vaccine was withdrawn not by FDA or for any clear actually demonstrated scientific safety issue, but excessively exaggerated fears and plaintiff's lawyers.
"The arthritis incidence in the patients receiving Lyme vaccine occurred at the same rate as the background in unvaccinated individuals. In addition, the data did not show a temporal spike in arthritis diagnoses after the second and third vaccine dose expected for an immune-mediated phenomenon. The FDA found no suggestion that the Lyme vaccine caused harm to its recipients."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
"On 9 July 2003 the pharmaceutical giant settled the class action suits with Sheller, Ludwig & Bailey as well as several other smaller law firms. The final agreement included over 1 million dollars in legal fees for the prosecuting lawyers, but provided no financial compensation to the ‘vaccine victims’."
Re: (Score:3)
If I was in the vaccine business, my liability nightmare is the side effect that leaves someone healthy enough to live a long, long life but debilitated enough that they require regular personal care and some kind expensive ongoing therapy.
Even if its 1 in 10 million, if 200 million people get this vaccine, that's probably $1-2 billion in civil payouts combined for 20 people if I don't know about this side effect and can't warn or predict who gets it.
I think these legal liability issues are a major contribu
Re:I won't be taking it (Score:5, Insightful)
Or leave you with a debilitating condition like guillain barre syndrome (flu shots in the 70s)
That 1976 vaccine has a 1-in-100,000 risk of GBS. Multiplied by the current US population gives 3300 cases.
But Covid-19 has already led to 160,000 confirmed deaths in the US, with only a small fraction of the population infected so far.
Rare complications are no reason to avoid a vaccine, given how much worse this is than the 1976 swine flu.
Re:I won't be taking it (Score:4, Interesting)
As long as the complications really are rare, then yes, they're no reason to avoid the disease. Of course, to play devil's advocate, autoimmune responses seem to be a major cause of death in COVID-19 patients, so there's a very small (but nonzero) possibility that those complications won't be rare or minor, and that the same people who would die from the virus will end up dying or being seriously harmed by the vaccine. I very much do *not* expect that to occur, but it *could*.
Re: (Score:3)
But Covid-19 has already led to 160,000 confirmed deaths in the US, with only a small fraction of the population infected so far.
Brah, nobody with any intelligence believes that Covid was the actual cause of death for that many people.
Re: (Score:2)
Brah, nobody with any intelligence believes that Covid was the actual cause of death for that many people.
I'm sad for the US. Not just the deaths, but how health issues have become so politicised , and conspiracy theories displace science. "brah"?
Yes, perhaps we should exclude nursing home data, or use excess mortality there. And the true infection rate is far higher than confirmed, so the true IFR (infection mortality rate) is likely under 1%, perhaps even as low as 0.1% excluding aged care. But this is still orders of magnitude worse than the risk from the 1976 vaccine.
https://www.nationalgeographic... [nationalgeographic.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I am simultaneously in three risk groups, so yes, I will definitely take it.
vaccine 2024: Great idea (not) (Score:3)
When say 2024 rolls around and people are mostly fine. Then I'll get one
Yup, and given the virus' mutation rate, by 2024 SARS-CoV-2 would have had time to mutate enough to turn into something new.
Given the 1:4 slower rate that we observe compared to Influenza, that would be like saying that you'll be taking last year's flu shot now because people who got it last year are mostly fine.
At best, you could take in 2024 a vaccine that was produced that same year based on the then dominant strains, but using a proven technology that has repeatedly been used since 2020 and each time pe
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on your individual circumstances.
If you're in a risk group with high age, diabetes, overweight, smoker etc then the first available vaccine might be worth it.
But, when it comes to your healthy kids which run a very small risk for serious covid infections, you should probably wait until the vaccine is well tested. (I will of course vaccinate my kids once the vaccine is well tested and if the appropriate authorities recommend it).
Re: (Score:3)
The thing is: COVID-19 is pretty bad, it has already killed 1/10000 of the world population (1/2000 in the US). I don't know any vaccine, including the ones you mentioned, that come close to a 1/10000 risk of death or debilitating condition.
Even if you are young and healthy, COVID-19 has more chances to kill or debilitate you than a flu shot from the 70s unless you decide to stay at home for as long as the virus is spreading (and without a vaccine, it may be long...). And sure, you can wait for others to ge
Re: (Score:2)
go away and take your crackpot ideas with you
Re: (Score:2)
You are a crank peddling snake oil and this is a crackpot idea. The only way it "works" is the same way homeopathy "works".
Fortunately i am an ocean away from the crazies like you, in a country that manages the epidemic unexpectedly well and hence I do not need to subscribe to whatever the political issue de jour is where you live. Our researchers have tested it with the result that it made things worse, as actually expected.
Taking it as prevention is even more stupid because it temporarily shuts down the i
You're right, you won't be taking it (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The question is whether you will have that option. Can you imagine certain employers requiring you to have that vaccination to be allowed back on the job, with governments backing it for public health concerns? I sure can.
Re: (Score:2)
Ya, but the alleged administration, given their past behavior, is likely to lean on the CDC and FDA to get a vaccine, any vaccine, out there. I wouldn't put it past that idiot to do a deal with his minder, Putin, to make that vaccine here and distribute it. They may not find willing participants in U.S. industry for the manufacture and distribution, but that misses the point. He'll just claim there is a magical cure and he and his genius deal will provide if only he were re-elected.
And if he were re-elected
Many unknowns (Score:5, Interesting)
From what I can tell, this hasn't passed the standard third phase trial. I.e. we don't know if it actually does inoculate people.
That said, Soviets had some incredible biotech that West was decades behind in when Iron Curtain fell, and they're still undisputed world leaders in many of those as much of Western academia attaches a stigma to "those fields that Soviets had a massive lead in". One good example here is phage therapies, i.e. treating bacterial infections with families of viruses that predate on bacteria.
This seems to be a product of this "general" sort of biotech, using viral vectors for payload delivery. Maybe. Details are murky. There's a meaningful non-zero chance that they have done what they claim they have done, but it seems less than likely.
Re:Many unknowns (Score:5, Informative)
There are already many candidate vaccines which could be claimed "the first COVID vaccine". The hard part is testing correctly, which they have not shown they've done.
To compare to a coding test, it would be like the first student to submit their program taking credit for the "first application done" without any grading by the teacher having been done yet. Whether it's an A+ or a steaming pile of bugs, nobody knows yet. (Please, no Microsoft jokes.)
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is that testing correctly in immunology of this sort isn't hard. It's just very time consuming. You need a lot of repetitions and minor adjustments between them.
The thing being done everywhere right now is various attempts to attack the questions of "which stages of testing can we skip and still get a functioning end product" and "what are the novel ways of testing that are much faster". This is a question being addressed in a variety of different ways. Some parts were clearly a low hanging
Re: (Score:3)
I am under the impression that quite a few people world wide have been injected with "covid vaccines", many of them before anybody was injected with this Russian one. In all the cases they still want to see if in fact the vaccine works, so this one is no further along than many others.
Re: (Score:3)
What I meant is that I have certainly heard of human trials of other vaccines, such as the Oxford one. These involve injecting actual humans with something that might as well be called "covid-19 vaccine". And I don't see any claim that the Russian vaccine is any further along than that.
Re:Many unknowns (Score:4, Informative)
Exactly what claim are you disputing? The WHO lists 28 candidate vaccines [who.int] in clinical evaluation, 6 of which are already in phase 3 trials (so ahead of the Russian candidate vaccine).
Re: (Score:2)
All claims. They provide very little of actual information about what they have done, and that's before the fact that we actually don't know which corners we can and can't cut in development.
Because we never had the case of vaccine being needed as badly as one is needed right now for entirety of the world, its economy and social stability.
Re: (Score:2)
You seem a bit confused about what sort of things can be proven.
Positive claims can be proven. Negative claims cannot be proven.
When you lack information, you can know that. If you do know that you lack information, that refutes the positive claim.
An unsupported claim is a false claim. You need to be able to support it first, before even deciding if it is true; if you state that it is true before you know, then you're lying.
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be significantly confused. Claims are difficult to prove regardless when state secrecy rules are in place. And Russians are nothing if not secretive about details of their national security related research.
Re: (Score:2)
ATM we have 170 (onehundretseventy) candidate for a working vaccine.
FYI.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's safe, then it might be worth releasing to the public so high-risk individuals can get the vaccine, rather than getting the sickness.
Re: (Score:2)
It almost certainly works, the question is how safe it is.
Hogwash, there is a long history of vaccines failing to be effective in practice even when they got to a phase 3 trial.
If you didn't know that, if you thought that phase 3 was only for safety testing, just stop talking.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Many unknowns (Score:2)
This vaccine has nothing to do with phage therapy. Soviets were not pioneers of adenovirus vectors. These vectors were developed in the west.
Re: (Score:3)
They SKIPPED the third stage trial. (Score:2)
From what I can tell, this hasn't passed the standard third phase trial.
They are deploying it without a third-stage trial. That's why they're "first".
Re: (Score:2)
The russian vaccine has not passed the standard third phase trial. They say the registration makes it available for small scale emergency use. Beginning next year it may be available for general use if phase 3 goes well. By then there will be other vaccines ready I think.
So really, this registration news is nothing out of the ordinary. Just that the Russians are doing a fairly decent job , which is a bit surprising .
Re: (Score:2)
That said, Soviets had some incredible biotech that West was decades behind in when Iron Curtain fell, and they're still undisputed world leaders in many of those as much of Western academia attaches a stigma to "those fields that Soviets had a massive lead in". One good example here is phage therapies, i.e. treating bacterial infections with families of viruses that predate on bacteria.
What a load of hooey. They were spending money researching things that the rest of the world hadn't found useful. They also invested heavily in a propaganda effort to be seen as more advanced. It is a neat trick; research stuff that is already known not to work well, and you can claim to be more advanced even while having hospitals that are less capable of saving lives or healing the sick.
It is pathetic that 30+ years after they stopped spending money on the propaganda, you're still falling for it.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it has come to this. There are people so fucking dumb, that they genuinely will attack those they hate even if they have a chance of having done something that will significantly benefit the world if successful, and cause them no harm if they failed.
Honest question (Score:2)
The state-run Gamaleya institute came under fire after researchers and its director injected themselves with the prototype several months ago, with specialists criticizing the move as an unorthodox and rushed way of starting human trials.
Why would this be controversial? I mean there's just a few possible outcomes, right?
Wouldn't the last outcome be immensely more valuable than the risk of losing a couple of researchers / lab workers? Even if the odds of the vac
Re: (Score:2)
Well it is a communicable disease, so by injecting themselves I suppose they could have spread it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Honest question (Score:2)
Something could be worse, but it's been about a century since something definitively was, and about 50 years since something was really even comparable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ya, let's hear it for the honest proclamations of Mr. Putin.
Re: (Score:2)
I call Bullshit that he gave it to his daughter.
Do we know if he likes his daughter?
Re: Honest question (Score:2)
Yeah, this could be like the daughter of one of his mistresses and now he's hoping to get out of supporting her mother.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much this. If he took it himself, I'd be impressed. This doesn't impress me much.
And the price goes to ... (Score:2)
According to the Washington Post did Russia use hackers to steal the data to make the virus.
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
I guess this means... In Russia are vaccines made by hackers.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, to bring it to you: making a vaccine is so easy, it is not worth stealing anything from anyone.
You would need to wait till the other one has some results - take a month, minimum. Then steal them. Then reproduce them, now you are at about 3 month delay.
It is much easier to simply start when you want to start, and don't waste those 3 month delay.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, to bring it to you: making a vaccine is so easy ...
If this was even remotely true would we not have a pandemic.
Re: (Score:2)
The pandemic started before the attempts to make a vaccine against it - seriously, you do not read news?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be stupid.
Putin’s just trolling Trump... (Score:2)
It’s just saline solution. They’re going to start their “program” and talk about how they’re leading the world in vaccinations, infuriating Trump. Putin will offer the vaccine to us. Trump will buy a billion doses for $10B (so not other country can buy more and catch up to us). We’ll all get saline injections, Russia will be $10B richer.
How to know when Putin is lying? (Score:2)
His lips are moving.
This "vaccine" was tested on 38 healthy people and produced 142 adverse effects in them. It's effectiveness against covid-19 is unknown. All we know is that 38 healthy adults got mildly sick from it.
Russian Idiom? (Score:2, Informative)
I know that it works quite effectively, it forms a stable immunity and, I repeat, has passed all the necessary checks.
He didn't say what the "necessary checks" were and didn't actually say it was safe.
Putin also said that one of his daughters had been vaccinated against the coronavirus, commenting, “In this sense, she took part in the experiment.”
I understand that one of the perks of power is hooking up your family and friends, but the daughter in question does not seem to have bee
Putin's propaganda. It's not actually fully done. (Score:5, Informative)
The money quote: "Clinical trials of the Russian vaccine have been completed in less than two months and phase three trials are set to begin Wednesday, despite the vaccine having already been registered"
In other words, the clinical trials have *NOT* been completed in any normal sense. They're starting Phase 3 trials now, after some competing vaccines have already started their Phase 3 trials. Putin simply ordered the decision to be "registered" before it's ready.
In particular the Oxford vaccine, which is also based on an adenovirus vector (and the lab has been working previously on this class well before Sars-CoV-2) started Phase 3 trials some time ago. And that's likely to be a high quality vaccine with good science from a lab with documented history. One important point is that they're using a monkey and not human adenovirus vector---important because human adenoviruses (some common colds) may already induce some immunity to them so they could be less effective in those patients, but virtually none has been previously infected with the monkey adenovirus.
Well, color me surprised. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Surprised that it's not China that claimed to have one by now.
They do in the pretty much the same way that the Russians have it, approved for limited use but hasn't gone thru all the standard testing https://science.slashdot.org/s... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
China's leadership is more cautious than Russia's. They will prefer to do this one right so it doesn't backfire on them.
In Soviet Russia... (Score:2)
There's an immunization reversal joke in there somewhere.
Anybody remember Resident Evil? (Score:2)
The whole thing started for cosmetic reasons, yes?
Probably won't have such a drastic side effect
Probably
Registered with who? Not WHO! (Score:2)
Last I checked the World Health Organization said it hadn't received enough information to register it....and that was earlier today, but after Russia had announced the availability.
(Well, actually the availability is pretty sparse. It's available to medical workers and teachers on an optional basis. They say they'll make it available more widely later. This looks like claiming that a phase 3 test is public availability...only without making medical oversight records available. That's not considered goo
I like the design... (Score:2)
I always said viral vector cures would be to the future, what antibiotics is to the past.
What I dislike is the early registration, *just* to say "first". :)
I swear, Putin is THE real-world troll. All he needs is plastic surgery to look like Trollface.gif.
But at least this is a good thing to all of us, so even if Hitler had brought it, ... I'd take it.
Umbrella Corporation (Score:2)
What is the worst that could happen?
Re:registered but not phase 3 tested (Score:5, Funny)
I'm suddenly hearing Vladimir Putin saying, "That's okay, comrade. You will get shot or you will get shot." :-D
Re: (Score:3)
That isn't how dictatorships work.
He doesn't have to make threats.
Bad things "just happen" to people who disagree. That does not require orders, threats, or policies. Simply add enough fear, and people will do the bad things automatically.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but the reality of totalitarian regimes is not nearly as funny as imagining their leaders as bad movie villains. Plus, the latter approach has the advantage of reducing the fear, which has the effect of making people less likely to do the bad things automatically. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
You are all over anything TDS becausse its what you live for.
We look forward to your sputtering incoherent rage mode when President Trump is re-elected in November.
President Trump isn't a great president, but he's a marvelous excitation source for the likes of you. Hopefully his existence will eventually cause you to melt down to the sputtering blob we know you are capable of becoming.