Universal Flu Vaccine May Be Available Within Two Years, Says Scientist (theguardian.com) 283
A universal flu vaccine that protects against all strains of the virus could be available in the next two years, according to a leading scientist. From a report: An experimental vaccine based on the same mRNA technology used in the highly successful Covid jabs was found to protect mice and ferrets against severe influenza, paving the way for clinical trials in humans. Prof John Oxford, a neurologist at Queen Mary University in London, who was not involved in the work, said the vaccine developed at the University of Pennsylvania could be ready for use the winter after next.
"I cannot emphasise enough what a breakthrough this paper is," Oxford told the BBC's Radio 4 Today programme. "The potential is huge, and I think sometimes we underestimate these big respiratory viruses." Researchers have been working on universal flu vaccines for more than a decade, but the latest breakthrough, published in Science, is seen as a major step towards a jab that could help protect humans from a potentially devastating flu pandemic. Seasonal flu vaccines, which protect against up to four strains of the virus, are updated every year to ensure they are a good match for flu viruses in circulation. The new vaccine is designed to prime the immune system against all 20 subtypes of influenza A and B, potentially arming the body to tackle any flu virus that arises.
"I cannot emphasise enough what a breakthrough this paper is," Oxford told the BBC's Radio 4 Today programme. "The potential is huge, and I think sometimes we underestimate these big respiratory viruses." Researchers have been working on universal flu vaccines for more than a decade, but the latest breakthrough, published in Science, is seen as a major step towards a jab that could help protect humans from a potentially devastating flu pandemic. Seasonal flu vaccines, which protect against up to four strains of the virus, are updated every year to ensure they are a good match for flu viruses in circulation. The new vaccine is designed to prime the immune system against all 20 subtypes of influenza A and B, potentially arming the body to tackle any flu virus that arises.
how universal? (Score:2)
Universal as in a mix of all previous flu viruses that we identified so far, or universal as in common to all influenza viruses, so hopefully including future ones too?
I mean, is this a vaccine with 20 sub-types compared to the 4 that current vaccines have, or is it something with more potential towards future protection against viruses such as H18N11?
Re:how universal? (Score:4, Informative)
Universal as in common to all influenza viruses, possibly including future ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Universal as in common to all influenza viruses, possibly including future ones.
Not all parts of a virus are as easy to change as all others. Some, if altered sufficiently, would require fairly massive changes to the virus itself to keep living and reproducing. For example, something with an important function which is common to the family of virus. Find a vulnerability there and it tends to be more difficult to evolve around than say small details with little or no dependencies of their own.
Re: (Score:2)
Then again, there are very few vaccines that can give 100% immunity, because plenty of people fuck up their immune systems doing stupid things like injecting with dirty needles, having unprotected sex with strangers, porcupines and raccoons [eturbonews.com], etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Then again, there are very few vaccines that can give 100% immunity
Guess again. The MMR vaccine has been around for decades and has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that it works. Have you seen a major measles outbreak? Nope. Mumps? Nope. Whooping cough? Nope. I'd call that pretty damn effective.
COVID shot? Yeah, the effectiveness of that is not even close to the effectiveness of the MMR shot.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you seen a major measles outbreak?
Yes, because you moron anti-vaxxer's are selfish pricks.
It must take real effort to be this misinformed.
Re: (Score:2)
Where the fuck did you get that from asshole?! I said to take the fucking MMR vaccine you stupid fucking asshole. That by the very definition makes me PRO-VACCINE you fucking asshole. Shut the fuck up!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Covid shots are around 70-80% effective. If 95% of the population was immunised, R should (in theory) be below 1, which is all you really need.
Selective pressure, again (Score:4, Insightful)
I get my flu shot every year and I'll gladly roll up my sleeve for a more effective flu shot than the crapshoots they're giving out now.
But:
All this does is buy a little time. Flu has a lot of animal reservoirs, meaning that attenuating human transmission of the 20 subtypes or whatever that we care about know will serve to create an eventual opening for the 21st subtype which now circulates freely among critters and will now have an opportunity to leak into human circulation again.
Binary thinking is everyone's enemy. Humans and our ancestors have been living with and co-evolving with viruses for hundreds of millions of years. It's silly to think artificially induced immunity will eradicate them any better than naturally acquired immunity. It's not a case of new shot equals cure all forever. A new shot buys you time until you need the next one. Just like a new antibiotic buys you time until it doesn't work so good no more.
Re:Selective pressure, again (Score:5, Insightful)
We will see how it goes. For one thing, to eradicate the flu, we would probably have to forcedly quarantine all the anti-vaxx germ-spreader anyways and contrary to what these morons claim, that is not on the agenda. However with the flu, gaining time is everything. I will gladly do without the strain-roulette one is currently forced to play every year and I do not mind getting vaccinated every year or every two years again.
Re: Selective pressure, again (Score:2)
You would need a more effective vaccination strategy in the third world too. Shots require too much expertise and time.
But of course there is money in them injected mRNA while inhaler research is only profitable for first world chickens.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, shots are not the problem. Cooling and transportation is.
Re: Selective pressure, again (Score:2)
If that were true polio would be gone.
Not to be a naysayer, but.... (Score:3)
The human immune system is really smart. There's got to be a reason why the human body hasn't targeted whatever antigen they designed the mRNA for. I'll be curious to see how the clinical trials for this goes.
This will also put selective pressure on influenza to have virii that have a mutation in that antigen to evade the "universal" vaccine. So, it will be universal for while, until a new, better flu comes along.
Evolution always finds a way (Score:2)
This vaccine would be a great thing, if it works as promised, because it would combat flu infections from all currently known strains. But just as the COVID vaccines quickly became ineffective against new strains of COVID, flu will find ways to resist this new vaccine as well. That's how evolution works. Only those that are resistant to the new vaccine will survive, and those will be the new strains of next year.
Delivered by flying car (Score:2)
Maybe get allergenicity down a bit first? (Score:2)
The allergenicity of mRNA vaccines were acceptable when the world was in a hurry, but a quarter of people needing sick leave after the second shot seems a bit too much for a flu shot.
Re: (Score:2)
The allergenicity of mRNA vaccines were acceptable when the world was in a hurry, but a quarter of people needing sick leave after the second shot seems a bit too much for a flu shot.
Taking a day or two off after a shot or spending a week or more off work from getting the flu.
Decision, decisions.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
At dinner last night my parents told me they read on Fox news that more vaccinated people died from covid than unvaccinated. I rolled my eyes and changed the subject. Fox won’t report that everyone in the studio had to be vaccinated.
Re:Why not release it now? (Score:5, Informative)
At dinner last night my parents told me they read on Fox news that more vaccinated people died from covid than unvaccinated.
That may have even been true at one point, but not a per capita measurement. If you take 100 people, 85 vaccinated at 15 not, and 1 unvaxxed person dies and 2 vaxxed people die, that is twice as many deaths in the vaccinated! OMG!
Of course 2/85 is close to one third the risk of 1/15, but these are mostly mathematically illiterate people watching Fox news, so yeah.
Re: (Score:3)
And math is the evil bogeyman. It's all up to interpretation to that crowd.
Re:Why not release it now? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not hard to twist the statistics to suit whatever narrative one wants.
Yes. How to Lie With Statistics should be required reading in schools.
Re:Why not release it now? (Score:4, Interesting)
The Washington Post had short article on this recently. Here's the link, I am unsure if there's a paywall
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
It sounds like the "issue" is that enough people, especially in vulnerable groups, have received that vaccine that most of them are vaccinated now. So just through statistics and population numbers, there are more vaccinated people than not, so there are more vaccinated people still getting COVID than not. I am sure the Fox team has spun this in some stupid fashion, but the basic data is probably sound.
Of course, the questions are "why are vaccinated people still getting covid?" and "are they just getting head cold-like covid, or pneumonia-like covid that needs hospitalization?" I apologize that I can respond to those properly right now.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We should really be looking at ways to prevent the spread of all viruses, not just relying on vaccines. We don't rely on them for viruses that are transmitted via food, for example. We prepare the food in a way that is safe, e.g. keeping uncooked meat separate and washing our hands after handling it. Same for viruses transmitted by contact, in water, and even some in airborne droplets like Legionnaires' Disease.
Vaccines are useful, but it's always better to kill the virus outside the body where possible.
The
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We should really be looking at ways to prevent the spread of all viruses, not just relying on vaccines.
Why would we want to do that? Viruses are a huge driver of evolution on this planet.
There are some very effective and low cost ways of doing that with viruses like the flu and COVID. Far UV is effective and can be deployed safely in many public spaces. The new 222nm far UV bulbs are safe for human skin and eyes, so are even easier to deploy. Just need to get the cost down because at the moment there aren't any commercially available 222nm LEDs, but once there are we could use them everywhere.
The assertion UV-C is safe is an extraordinary claim. I'll patiently await commensurately extraordinary evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
Viruses are a huge driver of evolution on this planet.
Why do we want that?
The assertion UV-C is safe is an extraordinary claim.
Too lazy to google it yourself? Here's the top 3 results.
https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com]
https://www.boeing.com/confide... [boeing.com]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Why do we want that?
Without it nobody would be around to want anything.
Too lazy to google it yourself? Here's the top 3 results.
I'm aware of numerous studies on the topic. None of them include large scale long term human trials involving direct long term exposure.
Re:Why not release it now? (Score:5, Interesting)
Isn't it funny how, in a story about a flu vaccine, everyone is talking about Covid vaccines? A big rhetorical trick by many anti-vaxxers was "I'm not against all vaccines, just the Covid vaccine" or "just the mRNA vaccines" but most of the reasoning used to reach this conclusion works equally well on all vaccines.
Is anyone aware of someone who fights against the new mRNA technology and therefore recommended AstraZeneca or J&J instead because they didn't use it? Anyone know of an anti-Covid-vaxxer who explicitly acknowledged that there are many different Covid vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, AstraZeneca, Novavax...) and still tried to justify the idea that coincidentally all of them are equally dangerous because [explanation inevitably based on the base rate fallacy] [slashdot.org]?
Me neither. There are arguments against specific vaccine types, but I notice that people who deploy those arguments also use universal arguments that can be used against virtually all vaccines.
Eye of the beholder, right? My Dad would also say something like that, even though his own brother was placed on a ventilator and died "with" Covid. My uncle had two comorbidities I'm aware of: incontinence and a stroke which both "coincidentally" happened at the same time as he caught Covid. Also his favorite antivax televangelist, Marcus Lamb, died of Covid with one comorbidity that I know of (diabetes). But I'm not worried, he told me, I am not at risk of Covid! And presumably his wife who has been bedridden with various comorbidities for the last 40 years is not at risk either! By contrast, he says, Covid vaccines are deadly and killed over 100,000 Americans, though he had already made up his mind after Tucker Carlson mentioned they had killed 3,000 in April 2021.
My dad sent me a 2021 video whose first claim is that "the" Covid vaccine (because there's only the one, right) reduces "your" absolute risk of contracting Covid by less than 1% "even if" the vaccine were over 90% effective. How so? Because less than 1% of the unvaccinated people in the location of the 2020 Pfizer trial got Covid in a two-month period. Now sure, at the time the video came out, 10% of Americans had already tested positive for Covid, and that's just in the official records. But the video said 1%, which makes it a great video to share with his "brainwashed" centrist son.
Now sure, I could argue with that my wife and I got Covid in 2020, his brother got Covid and died, his televangelist got Covid and died, so maybe there is something wrong with his reasoning process given that it that makes him trust sources who say that the chance of getting Covid is 1%.
But that argument would persuade him about as well as the last hundred arguments I tried. Not that he cares anymore, because earlier this year he finally caught Covid, and got so many awesome antibodies that are so much better than vaccine antibodies.
A survey of 600,000 Canadians show side effect statistics that look like this [canvas-covid.ca], but if you know fewer than three people, I believe you.
Re: (Score:2)
At dinner last night my parents told me they read on Fox news that more vaccinated people died from covid than unvaccinated.
I heard that too, although they didn't cite a source. I straight up responded, "That's a lie. Whoever told you that, don't listen to them." I don't know what kind of statistical manipulation they are doing to get that number, but it is something extreme.
Re: (Score:2)
Phantomfive, it IS worth getting the facts before responding. What is going on here, as I shall demonstrate, is truth presented in such a way that false conclusions are drawn.
Here is an article on Fox news on this topic: Vaccinated Americans a majority of COVID deaths for first time in August: analysis [foxnews.com]
This article includes the following factual statement: "Fifty-eight percent of coronavirus deaths in August were people who were vaccinated or boosted," the Post reported."
The article was quoting the Washingt
Re: (Score:2)
It actually probably isn't, but it's most certainly a half truth, and omits critical information.
The number I've seen is that 58% of the people who have died here in Canada were vaccinated. But since about 85% or more of the population is vaccinated, you're comparing radically different populations. If you were to normalize it based on vaccinated vs unvaccinated populations, you wind up with something like 5x more likely to die as unvaccinated than vaccinated.
Re: (Score:2)
It actually probably isn't, but it's most certainly a half truth, and omits critical information.
Intentionally misleading people by omitting critical information is a lie.
Re: (Score:2)
There is both insufficient information and there -can't- be sufficient information because we can't A/B test real people living their lives.
A/B testing isn't the only way to determine things scientifically.
Re: (Score:2)
I straight up responded, "That's a lie. Whoever told you that, don't listen to them."
The only thing dumber than making unsubstantiated claims is to reject them without research or substantiation of your own. If it turns out that something was a truth and you called it a lie, you lose all credibility, and have also lost the ability to continue any fact based discussion on a topic. Instead you need to analyse the misinformation and find where it came from, because quite often it isn't a lie at all.
E.g. The claim that more vaccinated people are dying than unvaccinated could very much be true.
Re: (Score:2)
There are people so disconnected they believe gross lies like that? Fascinating.
Re: (Score:2)
You could mention that Fox News viewers were more likely to die of COVID. So if they watch that stuff it might kill them.
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Re:Why not release it now? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
At dinner last night my parents told me they read on Fox news that more vaccinated people died from covid than unvaccinated. I rolled my eyes and changed the subject. Fox won’t report that everyone in the studio had to be vaccinated.
In a way, they are correct... while at the same time so utterly wrong. In Norway the statistics were the same a year ago - more vaccinated people died from Covid than unvaccinated. If you corrected for the fact that most (90+ %) of the adult population were vaccinated, and there being about the same number of people dying from Covid, the risk with being unvaccinated was about 9x higher.
The main risk factor in the US is that stupidity has been so utterly contagious.
Re: (Score:2)
the key take away is I Got the Jabs and still got sick and still have long term effects from it .
And by "it" I presume you mean COVID, not the vaccine -- which, like any vaccine, is not 100% effective.
Re: (Score:2)
the key take away is I Got the Jabs and still got sick and still have long term effects from it .
And by "it" I presume you mean COVID, not the vaccine -- which, like any vaccine, is not 100% effective.
Correct. The MMR vaccine [businessinsider.com] is arguably the closest to 100% effective.
According to the CDC, "One dose of MMR vaccine is 93% effective against measles, 78% effective against mumps, and 97% effective against rubella."
"Two doses of MMR vaccine are 97% effective against measles and 88% effective against mumps."
And yet, no one whines about this vaccine not being able to fully prevent all three infections.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they didn't complain because herd immunity essentially put an end to all 3 diseases among the general population whereas 5 jabs of mRNA apparently did not.
Why don't you ask what the rate is for mRNA for comparison to see what they're whining about?
Right now you're comparing apples to vacuum.
From the start, the nastiest part of COVID was that it replicated and spread way faster than the vast majority of viruses we've ever seen.
The Delta strain replicated even faster and spread even easier, putting it right up alongside the worst we've seen.
Omicron got even faster and spread easier, way more than anything else we've seen.
You can't completely stop a virus if it can replicate and spread faster than your immune system can ramp up. The issue is not the effectiveness of the vaccines, it's the nastine
Re: (Score:2)
From the start, the nastiest part of COVID was that it replicated and spread way faster than the vast majority of viruses we've ever seen.
The Delta strain replicated even faster and spread even easier, putting it right up alongside the worst we've seen.
Omicron got even faster and spread easier, way more than anything else we've seen.
You can't completely stop a virus if it can replicate and spread faster than your immune system can ramp up. The issue is not the effectiveness of the vaccines, it's the nastiness of COVID.
Again you are confusing viral replication with reproduction rate. Coronaviruses are far slower than other viruses to replicate due to relative size and complexity. There are viruses that can complete an entire replication cycle in the time it takes sars2 to enter a cell.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they didn't complain because herd immunity essentially put an end to all 3 diseases among the general population whereas 5 jabs of mRNA apparently did not.
And by "herd immunity" you mean having ~90% of the population receiving the vaccine. Unlike with covid where only 2/3 are considered vaccinated and only 1/3 have received a booster [usafacts.org].
Funny how when people think they're smarter than the experts things go awry.
Re: (Score:2)
The vaccine did not have 100% efficacy. VERY few vaccines do, And Covid is a pretty serious virus. It would almost certainly have been much worse if you where unvaccinated
You don't need
Re: (Score:3)
Even a doctor couldn't honestly say that it made your particular case better or worse. The action is statistical. It makes most people less likely to catch COVID. It doesn't make everyone immune. It almost certainly doesn't make all cases that it doesn't prevent milder. And it's not permanently effective.
Despite all the cheering, the current vaccines are not good vaccines. They're the first round, and the reason they should be cheered is that we've got them at all. Normally it takes over 5 years, and
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Hint: some guys blog is not research.
Re: (Score:2)
If you were healthy and under 60, the vax was a net negative from side effects.
I'm under 60 and had no side-effects except the common immediate post-injection reactions, and I've had all five Moderna shots. In fact, *no one* I know, under or over 60, has had any other side-effects from their COVID vaccinations.
Re: (Score:2)
Over 60, and no side-effects. I don't think I know anyone who had any side-effects from the vaccine(s).
Re: (Score:2)
Now if they come out with a more traditional vaccine for COVID, like the kind that we've been using for nearly forty damn years, then I'll take THAT vaccine. But not that mRNA garbage.
Re: (Score:2)
Now if they come out with a more traditional vaccine for COVID, like the kind that we've been using for nearly forty damn years, then I'll take THAT vaccine. But not that mRNA garbage.
So you'd prefer and take the Chinese version instead?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I don't know... something like what we've been using for decades to make the MMR and the traditional flu vaccine. Using an actual inert part of the virus itself to activate the immune system.
Re: (Score:2)
Guess what the mRNA vaccine does? Go on. Guess.
This should be hilarious.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Smartass! I didn't say that at all!
Re: (Score:2)
No, the difference in the mRNA version is that the mRNA version makes your body produce the spike protein instead of delivering a piece of it engineered in a laboratory. We have been doing vaccines like that for fucking years. The flu, MMR, and Polio vaccines were all done just fine without any fancy mRNA shit and yet oh my, it works just fine and with very few side-effects and has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they work as they were intended. You can't say that about the mRNA "vaccine" that w
Re: (Score:2)
Because we all know that the older the medical knowledge, the more safe and effective it is.
I, for one, don't believe in these alleged invisible ghost germs, just like I don't believe in your imaginary friend. Things that are real have evidence. Covid-19 is very obviously just an imbalance of humors. A good bloodletting is all you need.
As a prophylactic, I can recommend drinking urine, preferably from an ovulating woman. My extensive research on the matter has confirmed this. The MSM is, as always, kee
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if you'll get more upmods from people nodding in agreement than funny upmods.
Re: Why not release it now? (Score:2)
Covaxin. Was supposed to be launched in the US, never happened.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny. I actually *know* people who got the jab, at different stages, and everyone had different experiences depending on which booster you got. Most people I know, who are in their 40s-50s who got jabbed and got covid had fairly mild symptoms. A friend's girlfriend who is in her 20s didn't get the 1st booster because the first set of shots sorta knocked her sideway and when she ended up getting covid she had to go to the hospital for a steroid shot. She didn't sleep for three days because she had trouble
Re:Why not release it now? (Score:5, Informative)
58% of the vaccinated have died FALSE. That IS NOT what the Washington Post reported.
The report was "Fifty-eight percent of coronavirus deaths in August were people who were vaccinated or boosted,"
NOT "Fifty-eight percent of people vaccinated, died"
Do you see the difference? The number of people who were vaccinated, and lived, was not included in this 58% statistic. They are ONLY counting the people who died, NOT the people who got vaccinated overall. The actual numbers tell a very different story, on which the Washington Post elaborated, as I explained here. [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Why not release it now? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Why not release it now? (Score:2)
In the US the CDC estimates are as high as 1/3.
In Europe where the public health apparatus is marginally less braindead than here the estimates are on the order of 1%.
Either the US is 30x more morbid or the CDC has its head up its ass. My best honest guess: same pattern as always with covid, namely that any study population the CDC considers is biased toward people who seek medical attention to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
A bad case of the flu knocked out GH Hardy for the count. Dude couldn't be a mathematician anymore after, sunk into a funk, and died less happily than he otherwise might have several years later.
All this talk of long covid being extra special is just the result of media hype coupled with the fact that *all* infections disease can turn into brain fog, limp dick, and all the rest. Infect enough people and a small fraction of a big number can look like the apocalypse when it's really more of the same, but now has a buzzword virus associated with it.
"Long COVID" isn't entirely new. Similar issues certainly exist with other diseases. But Long COVID seems to be happening in 15-20% of patients, but for most diseases, it's probably well under 1%. There is definitely a lot of talk that it might all be related, but these long term problems are just so rare outside of COVID that we don't have much data on it and can't make any conclusions.
Re: Why not release it now? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's not lying with statistics. That would require that he post actual statistics.
For what it's worth, he's not wrong. The evidence is in. The vaccines saves lives.
Now stop spreading bullshit.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Dunning-Kruger in action.
Re: (Score:3)
If rando opinions on the Internet affect your trust in the vaccine, you should probably reconsider how you form that opinion..
There are so many people on the Internet you're bound to find *all* of these variations of groups:
(1) People who are wrong but have a point.
(2) People who are wrong who are just batshit crazy.
(3) People who are right and can justify it.
(4) People who are right but are batshit crazy.
If *encounters* with people in various groups on the Internet sways your opinion per se, that can't po
Re: (Score:2)
That thing works and has been proven to work!
So have the Covid vaccines. Get a fucking clue.
Re: (Score:2)
Not from what I see.
Re: (Score:3)
And it would have required such a tiny shot, you don't even see the needle...
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, maybe some of us would LIKE to have fangs!
Re: the highly successful Covid jabs (Score:2)
Speak for yourself, but I got three shots and covid was a bad cold at best after. Word on the street is it tended to be worse than a bad cold otherwise. Not always, not for everyone, but enough to matter.
Re: (Score:2)
And yet I know people who have been vaxed and double-boosted and yet they said that COVID was just as absolutely miserable to deal with.
Re: (Score:2)
I knew moron anti-vaxxers who are now dead thanks to the same kind of bullshit you're spreading now. Fuck off.
The facts are irrefutable: The vaccines work. The vaccines save lives.
Re: (Score:2)
Your now dead friends likely had comorbidities, and belief that they would still be alive if they had the jab is, well, just that - your belief. You can not say they would still be alive if they had the vaccine, the vaccine wasn't 100%, so they still could have gotten COVID, and their slightly lessened covid, when mixed with their comorbidities might still have killed them.
Why do you want to blame anyone that questioned an experimental vaccine being given at unprecedented numbers to the general public for y
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be a moron.
And yet I know people who have been vaxed and double-boosted and yet they said that COVID was just as absolutely miserable to deal with.
Yeah, and? I'm one of those.
But you know what didn't happen? I didn't die.
People don't die in the millions from nasty colds. People have died in the millions from covid. Having a post-vaccination hit of worse than a nasty cold does not imply the vaccine has not improved outcomes.
Re: (Score:2)
So no one that was vaxxed died from Covid? Really?
As a reminder, the Covid deaths before the vaccine was released were among the most vulnerable populations, the old, the obese, those with respiratory or cardiac disease, etc.we don't know how many of them would have died after being vaccinated, because they were the low-hanging fruit and died before they could get vaccinated.
Vaccinated people died from Covid, not in the numbers that unvaccinated people died after the vaccine was introduced, but they still d
Re: (Score:2)
I'm surprised people aren't ragging on TMSC or this one. Where do you think Bill Gates got his injectable vaccine microchips from???
Re:Well...let's see it... (Score:4, Informative)
mRNA was discovered in the 1960s and plenty of research was done in the 1990s. Only recently has technology and funding made this breakthrough happen. It’s going to be used a lot in the future.
Re:Well...let's see it... (Score:5, Informative)
The first mRNA vaccine given to a human was in a cancer trial in 2008. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Now we have data at large scale about them.
Re: (Score:3)
You're a lying piece of shit. The vaccines were extensively tested.
Do you get off spreading dangerous lies or something? You're sick, you know that?
Re:Well...let's see it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. Schedules were compressed in a way that risked losing more money if something didn't work. That risk was well taken. They still went through animal trials, Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III.
The other thing is that we had a head start after SARS and MERS. One vaccine developer said that as soon as they got the sequence for SARS COV 2 they knew exactly what to do.
Re: (Score:2)
All your bullshit fear-mongering won't change reality.
The vaccines are safe and effective.
You're embarrassing yourself.
Re: (Score:3)
Facebook memes and insane right-wing blogs are not "reports", dumbass.
Re: (Score:3)
In any case it doesn't matter you can still get your regular flu shot.
Re: (Score:3)
It isn't mRNA. That's just a delivery mechanism. The problem was the spike protein it delivered. The spike protein was barely tested and pushed out fast.
Blaming the mRNA technique is like blaming needles.
What sort of testing do you think is needed on the spike protein?
The spike protein approach was developed over a decade ago for SARS-CoV-1. It was tested heavily, but never deployed because SARS-CoV-1 died out on its own before the vaccines were ready. The approach was also tested against MERS-CoV, which also has been dying out on its own.
The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine trials were focused on three things 1) safety 2) efficacy 3) anti-body levels. If the spike protein isn't working working, you're not get
Re: (Score:3)
More or less often than the spike on the covid virus?
"No statistical difference in the incidence rate of both myocarditis (p =1) and pericarditis (p =0.17) was observed between the COVID-19 cohort and the control cohort "
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
I've never had a flu shot
Shocking! An insane anti-vaxxer didn't get a vaccine. Stop the presses!
currently flu shots are not mRNA preparations
They will be very soon. Cry about it all you want, it won't stop scientific progress.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see it go through the old, non-emergency rigorous testing.
I think at that point, most reasonable people will consider it.
I don't want to be first in line for it while still experimental as the article alludes is the current state.
Do you think the main COVID vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) have also gone through enough testing to no longer be considered experimental?
Do you think most reasonable people consider them?
Re: (Score:2)
Better still, do the same standard of testing we did with the covid vaccines, that recieved some of the most extensive trials in medical history.
Not the few hundred participants most vaccines get, but the 40,000 person trials that the Covid vaccines get.
Or we could keep pretending that didn't happen so we can remain illogically angry at a rigorously tested , highly effective and remarkably safe vaccine like people seem to have done with the cov
Re: (Score:2)
Better still, do the same standard of testing we did with the covid vaccines, that recieved some of the most extensive trials in medical history.
There have been numerous P3 trials with far more participants with longer post treatment safety monitoring periods.
Not the few hundred participants most vaccines get, but the 40,000 person trials that the Covid vaccines get.
What matters is statistically significant outcomes. If there is a low background risk of infection and or health outcomes you will need to either wait a lot longer for a higher percentage of treated people to become ill or have a lot more people to achieve statistically useful results over a given period.
To get the same effect over the same period of time you would need a heck of a lot more to
Re: (Score:2)
And in the real world, it is exactly the other way round. But I have no problem seeing a nil-wit like you suffer from something self-inflicted. As the flu is usually not deadly (but can have a massive number of unpleasant and long-term side-effects), I can completely unashamedly laugh about failures like you.
Re: (Score:2)
Rein in. Useful check if you're not sure whether to use "reign" or "rein" - if you can replace the word (rein or reign) with "rule", it's properly "reign", otherwise it's "rein".
That said, I'm not compassionate enough to be really worried about idiots who refuse free immunizations for a common ailment.
And I'm looking forward to this "universal" vaccine. And wondering whether the people who developed it have an office p
Re:Excellent (Score:5, Interesting)
Ordinarily, I would use restraint. But after their constant screaming of the most demented lies during COVID _and_ all the damage they did, I have had enough. I will cheer for any case where their stupidity harms them now. My compassion only goes so far. People have the right to harm themselves by stupidity. They just do not have any reasonable expectation of compassion from me when they do.
Re: (Score:2)
"The supercomputer analyzed 20 million gigabytes of publicly available gene sequence data from 5.7 million biological samples around the world, searching for a specific gene that indicated the presence of an RNA virus. The samples have been collected and freely shared within the world research community over 13 years and include everything from ice-core samples to animal dung. Researchers with the Serratus Project found 132,000 RNA viruses, where just 15,000 were known previously. The discovery included nin