COVID-19 Vaccine's mRNA Technology Adapted for First Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria Vaccine (medicalxpress.com) 115
Researchers have created the world's first mRNA-based vaccine against a deadly, antibiotic-resistant bacterium — and they did it using the platform developed for COVID-19 vaccines.
Medical Express publishes their announcement: The vaccine developed by the team from the Institute for Biological Research and Tel Aviv University is an mRNA-based vaccine delivered via lipid nanoparticles, similar to the COVID-19 vaccine. However, mRNA vaccines are typically effective against viruses like COVID-19 — not against bacteria like the plague... In 2023, the researchers developed a unique method for producing the bacterial protein within a human cell in a way that prompts the immune system to recognize it as a genuine bacterial protein and thus learn to defend against it.
The researchers from Tel Aviv University and the Institute for Biological Research proved, for the first time, that it is possible to develop an effective mRNA vaccine against bacteria. They chose Yersinia pestis, the bacterium that causes bubonic plague — a disease responsible for deadly pandemics throughout human history. In animal models, the researchers demonstrated that it is possible to effectively vaccinate against the disease with a single dose.
The team of researchers was led by Professor Dan Peer at Tel Aviv University, a global pioneer in mRNA drug development, who says the success of the current study now "paves the way for a whole world of mRNA-based vaccines against other deadly bacteria."
Medical Express publishes their announcement: The vaccine developed by the team from the Institute for Biological Research and Tel Aviv University is an mRNA-based vaccine delivered via lipid nanoparticles, similar to the COVID-19 vaccine. However, mRNA vaccines are typically effective against viruses like COVID-19 — not against bacteria like the plague... In 2023, the researchers developed a unique method for producing the bacterial protein within a human cell in a way that prompts the immune system to recognize it as a genuine bacterial protein and thus learn to defend against it.
The researchers from Tel Aviv University and the Institute for Biological Research proved, for the first time, that it is possible to develop an effective mRNA vaccine against bacteria. They chose Yersinia pestis, the bacterium that causes bubonic plague — a disease responsible for deadly pandemics throughout human history. In animal models, the researchers demonstrated that it is possible to effectively vaccinate against the disease with a single dose.
The team of researchers was led by Professor Dan Peer at Tel Aviv University, a global pioneer in mRNA drug development, who says the success of the current study now "paves the way for a whole world of mRNA-based vaccines against other deadly bacteria."
Why plague? Nobody gets the plague anymore (Score:2)
Why plague? I'd rather have a vaccine against something I actually have a chance of getting. But the answer is at the end of the article:
"The disease is caused by a bacterium called Yersinia pestis, for which there is no approved vaccine in Western countries. This bacterium is highly contagious and extremely lethal, making it a serious threat. Moreover, this bacterium concerns us as a potential agent of bioterrorism. If one of our enemies tries to use it against us, we want to be prepared with a vaccine."
Grants are probably very available for bio-weapon defense. Or at least normally they would be. I've heard science funding is a bit of a mess.
Re: Why plague? Nobody gets the plague anymore (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/a... [nbcnews.com]
Just because You don't know about it, doesn't make your statement true.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, exactly. If this was a thing, that article would not have made the news.
Proof of concept (Score:5, Interesting)
Why plague?
It's both interesting and distinct which has resulted in a lot of studies of Yersinia pestis. This has yielded a firm understanding of it's mechanisms. When making a proof of concept treatment, you first target a well understood target which makes Yersinia pestis an ideal target. A simple misunderstanding of the target bacteria's function could result in years of wasted efforts or delays.
A similar phenomenon exists for when we want to utilize a mechanism found in biology for our own ends. A good example of this is the use of HIV to design a retroviral vector for a gene therapy. It's been studied so much that we know a great deal of how it works.
I'd rather have a vaccine against something I actually have a chance of getting.
Yersinia pestis is something you can get if you visit a national park because it's carried by rodents. See also: https://science.slashdot.org/s... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for your explanation.
Yersinia pestis is something you can get if you visit a national park because it's carried by rodents
That's got to be some kind of statistical sin, but I'm not sure which one. It's probably more numerically accurate to say I could get it because I like urban gardening and so do rats--depending on the rate of yersinia pestis in city rats versus park rats.
Re: (Score:3)
Plague has a very effective vaccine aleady. However, because of its very low incidence, it's safer to not provide everyone with the vaccine - only those who are likely to encounter it with an increased risk (exterminators, for example). At this point for the vast majority of people it's an unnecessary shot so it's better to not have it.
If you do get it and are unvaccinated, antibiotics generally are very effective if caught early. Though there have been a couple of incidents where it's been resistant, so it
Re: (Score:2)
> Plague has a very effective vaccine aleady
Really? What's it called?
=Smidge=
Re: Why plague? Nobody gets the plague anymore (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In the US, yes. This is Israel, and I guess they have reason to worry about bioterrorism. Goes with the territory when you spend your time kicking hornets nests.
Re: (Score:2)
In the US, yes. This is Israel, and I guess they have reason to worry about bioterrorism. Goes with the territory when you spend your time kicking hornets nests.
So it's still funded by the US then.
Re: (Score:1)
Accepting an oppressive colonial power's invitation to colonise a section of the Middle East (there were only 20k Jews in modern Israel before British attempts to colonize European Jews there) where lots of people of a different faith and ethnicity live was always going to be a long term problem for Israel. Decades of them acting like they are not only completely entitled to be there but also entitled to all sorts of other land currently being lived on by Muslims/Arabs instead of trying to ingratiate themse
Re: (Score:3)
the jews of hebron were a community that had been there for centuries. but yeah i could see how you'd think that's totes entitlement, i guess
Re: (Score:2)
Not in meaningfully large numbers.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This is historical fiction dressed up as outrage. First, the idea that only 20,000 Jews lived in what is now Israel before British involvement is wrong. By 1914, before the Balfour Declaration, there were already over 80,000 Jews living there. Many were not "European colonists" but Jews returning from Yemen, Iraq, Persia, Morocco, and other Middle Eastern communities where they had lived for centuries.
Jews did not arrive in Palestine because of some colonial invitation. They came fleeing pogroms, persecutio
Re: (Score:2)
This is historical fiction dressed up as outrage. First, the idea that only 20,000 Jews lived in what is now Israel before British involvement is wrong. By 1914, before the Balfour Declaration, there were already over 80,000 Jews living there. Many were not "European colonists" but Jews returning from Yemen, Iraq, Persia, Morocco, and other Middle Eastern communities where they had lived for centuries
So slightly more Jews then I cited and not all the immigrating Jews were from Europe. Still almost all foreigners though, gotcha.
Jews did not arrive in Palestine because of some colonial invitation. They came fleeing pogroms, persecution, and expulsions from Europe and Arab lands alike. The League of Nations explicitly recognized the Jewish historical connection to the land in 1922, and it wasn’t some British plot. Jewish presence in the region predates Islam by over a thousand years.
Gotcha, so still foreigners colonizing another people's land. Never mind that many were invited there via the Balfour Declaration you mention above and that those fleeing choose modern day Israel to flee to because of the same declaration
In other words because they were invited.
You say Israel was not welcome. By whom? The Arabs who rejected the 1947 UN partition plan, which would have created a Palestinian Arab state alongside a Jewish one? The ones who launched war the moment Israel was declared?
Yes, the native Arabs that weren't happy that the colonial power (Brittian) that had been oppressing the
Re: (Score:2)
acting like they are not only completely entitled to be there but also entitled to all sorts of other land currently being lived on by Muslims/Arabs instead of trying to ingratiate themselves to the locals has only continued this problem.
There is some of that, but there's also a whole lot more of people acting like other countries are entitled to Israel's territory--largely the territory that Jordan ceded by waging war on Israel, losing, and surrendering the territory. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Re: (Score:2)
So the land Israel took because the neighboring countries declared war due to being upset that the departing colonial power set up a country for foreigners on their way out? The land full of people that the Israeli's knew hated them but took anyways and now refuse to do anything about? The land that is the crux of the issue for most modern anti Israeli sentiment in the region and without which Israel would have likely reached some level of peace in the region?
I mean think about it. The Oct 7th attack didnt
So what are the advantages of mRNA? (Score:2)
Why wouldn't this work with a subunit + adjuvant vaccine? Or a viral vector instead of a non biological vector?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The ones I mentioned are all engineered. Subunit puts the proteins in some porous adjuvant, mRNA uses the lipid nanoparticle as an artificial vector to get mRNA into cells and have it reproduce the protein, viral vector does the same though the viral vector can be more selective in what cells to infect. Both mRNA and viral vector can use amplification inside the cell.
The viral vector can be attenuated by pre-existing resistance, but the lipid nanoparticle can have increasing immunogenic reactions with each
Re:So what are the advantages of mRNA? (Score:5, Insightful)
Lipid nanoparticles to me seem the method with the highest odds of unintended consequences
I mean we can think that but where is the evidence, after billions of shots into billions of people for 5 years now? So we have combined how many billions of doses for a 5 year timespan, at a certain point we can stop surmising and start making true statements.
Seriously, I have been hearing the "what if" crowd since Jan 2021 and they have been wrong at every time. It was 1 year, then 2 years, then 3 years, then 5 years. Will the adverse effects show up in 10 years? 20? Can we approve new medicine ever?
I'm sorry but the vaccine skeptic crowd is not interested in medicine, they are interested in political gains and antivax has just become another part of that.
Re: (Score:2)
The existing side effects are unintended consequences and help drive vaccine hesitancy. Take something like whole cell pertussis, the side effects were so bad it caused a huge dip in vaccine acceptance.
Re: (Score:3)
Nah, I still blame the skeptic crowd, even with pertussis the effects were acture and any long term issues were determined to be unrelated to the vaccines but that didn't stop that crowd from perpetuating this idea that "vaccines have zero side effects any any side effects at all is unsafe".
Also the pertussis incident makes the case for more mRNA since that vaccine was a whole virus and mRNA is exactly not that, those types of reactions are eliminated with mRNA.
So why is the skeptic crowd up in arms about v
Re: (Score:2)
Blaming humans for being humans won't change the outcome.
Even nurses got vaccine hesitancy from the severity of the side effects from mRNA vaccines.
Re: (Score:2)
No I do blame humans for their bad logic, bad conclusions and falling into bad faith political conspiracy theories. I blame them, the media who pushes them and people like you who also push it hesitantly and cowardly.
They have no evidence, don't care about science, don't care about medicine. Only what is politically advantaged to their cause which has little to do with science and everything to do with disliking liberals.
I am no longer giving skeptics any benefits of the doubt. They were wrong then and t
Re: (Score:2)
By and large nurses aren't skeptics, they just don't like feeling sick.
Re: (Score:2)
Nurses are not immune to online conspiracy dealers. Do they have evidence or is this about their feelings?
If they are unwilling to research this stuff or have qualms with the science and process that maintain their entire career maybe they should get a new career. You don't have a right to a job as a nurse.
I work in audio visual, if I believed light waves from projectors are a government conspiracy that gives people cancer then maybe I should get a new career because obviously I have no interest in the work
Re: (Score:2)
They weren't hesitant because they believed any theory, they were hesitant about the cost/benefit ratio of an additional dose after the fact they got sick and missed work.
My theory is that mRNA has the wealthiest patent holders behind it and that means it will show up in new medicine, regardless of whether it's truly best suited.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. If you are a nurse then you should know vaccines, of most and many types can make you sick after administration. We all knew this in 2021 it was well known after you get your covid shot that you might feel shitty for a few days. Happens with the flu shot and many other shots, your immune system is getting a boost, it's gonna react. Why do we have this idea that "Vaccines must have no side effects whatsoever or they aren't safe"
If a nurse cant know this or look into it then they are not very goo
Re: (Score:2)
They take flu vaccines each year too, mRNA vaccines were in a class of their own for systemic side effects.
For foundational mRNA medicine patent owners, funding mRNA medicine research instead of subunit/viral-vector makes perfect sense. Got to work with what you have. No company can research or acquire everything, what the richest companies end up with technology wise is a bit of a luck of the draw. Markets are not perfectly efficient.
Re: (Score:2)
95% of the post-shot symptoms are the same. Swelling, soreness, slight fever, fatigue, etc. Even myocarditis has a slight chance with the flu shot, so again, to what degree would a nurse get sick that would give them enough information to say "these vaccines are untested unsafe, ineffective" the answer is zero if they are being honest.
"Different companies have different methods they specialize in". That's your sentence. It offers no evidence for conspiracy you are alleging. Plenty of pharma companies go
Re: (Score:2)
Nurses have to take additional vaccinations all the damn time, because they are exposed to all kinds of shit on a daily basis.
Nurses especially know that many vaccines can make you feel a bit under the weather after administration, because they have both experience with that themselves, as well as the experience of administering lots of vaccines to lots of people. Flu shots, yellow fever shots, COVID shots, and others all have the ability to make you not feel great for a day or two, because they are ACTIVA
Re: (Score:2)
And nurses, of course, are widely known to be expert virologists and molecular chemists to know what side effects are from what.
Do you really think that somehow registered nurses are immune from bad assumptions and incorrect correlation?
Re: (Score:2)
Israel similarly ran a comprehensive cross-sectional survey of patients and found 0.3% of respondents were outright hospitalized, nearly 30% reported life-altering severe events making it hard for them to survive day to day, 25% with pre-existing conditions reported a severe worsening, and 4.5% reported being inflicted with severe neurological disease such as seizures, palsy, and loss of consciousness.
That simply doesn't pass the sniff test. I know hundreds of people who were vaccinated. If anywhere close to 30% of them were experiencing "life-altering severe events", it'd be impossible to miss.
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, don't gish gallop me, it's rude, just give me your best piece of evidence and "a guy said a thing" doesn't mean much.
Those comments from Lauterbach were from 2023, it's 2025 what did the Germans find out in two years?
Sure seems like all the vaccines are still approved in Germany including 3 types of BioNTech and 3 types of Moderna. So, why arent those banned if all this is true.
Let me guess, evil conspiracy?
Re: So what are the advantages of mRNA? (Score:2)
You're confusing and conflating various issues. And no, focus.de isn't a serious website. Neither are the rest of your gossip sources.
1) the number of life-changing adverse events reported was researched. It's nowhere near the numbers claimed if you only account for the ones actually caused by the vaccine. A lot were caused by people already infected and taking the covid effects as vaccine effects.
2) in Germany there is a very profitable and very large "alternative health" industry. They didn't like the vac
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of Covid-19 vaccines, mRNA ones turned out to be clearly superior.
I had one of each, which may have had a slight advantage over a booster of the same, but mRNA had lower rates of complications.
Re: (Score:2)
Evidence is mixed :
https://www.sciencedirect.com/... [sciencedirect.com]
Despite TTS in young women, Jannsen was a huge positive outlier in minor side effects for the major vaccines used in the population wide experiment. Novavax subunit vaccine seems to have been better tolerated than mRNA vaccines too, though it came too late to benefit from the full experiment.
Re: (Score:2)
It kind of does work, but mRNA worked better.
From my reading, the COVID virus line are not easy for our immune system to learn, so the mRNA targeted approach ends up working better because we can tell the immune system 'here: target THIS'. With traditional vaccines, the cells targeted by the virus are not easy for the immune system to travel to and communicate back.
Re: (Score:2)
An mRNA vaccine is just a subunit vaccine with an extra step. The subunit is synthesized in the body. You don't have to protect the subunit for delivery because it's already where it needs to be. And the same mRNA lipid delivery can be used for any subunit rather than specific to the vaccine.
Re:Bad idea (Score:4, Insightful)
"Why do scientists focus on medicine that works instead of medicine that doesn't because one those I have to oppose due to politics so can the researchers please take my hurt feelings into account."
Re: (Score:2)
The narrative will change. Anti-vaxers will vanish for the most part because it was always a political narrative as part of the destruction of the rule of law - Which has been accomplished in spades.
Now that they get to control the rules, science that works under those rules is "good" science.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
gish gallop [wikipedia.org]
Re: Wake. The. Fuck. UP! (Score:2)
You posted a lot of links for someone who doesn't care. Is this your job?
Re: Wake. The. Fuck. UP! (Score:2)
You forgot the "Sheeple!11!1" at the end.
Excellent (Score:5, Insightful)
There was a long stagnation in vaccines and related med-tech. Looks like mRNA finally got through that. Good.
And, as an added benefit, the life-risks of the anti-vax morons just got comparably higher. Also good.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: effective? (Score:3)
We all heard of warp speed. It wasn't his idea and any president would have said yes to it. He then flubbed the COVID response in literally every other way, so no he doesn't deserve any credit. He also refused to pay for any vaccinations up front, while Dolly Parton provided since actual funding for development, so a country singer did more to promote the development of vaccines than the president did.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you think the Trump administration's program for developing a COVID vaccine has anything valid to compare with the Biden administration? Were you expecting Biden to make them start over so he could try to do it faster? That's actually the kind of petty, self-sabotaging, ego-driven thing Trump would have done.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I have heard of Warp Speed, and fully believe it was the reason the vaccine was developed so quickly.
Are you really so dense that you believe complete rubbish that has been quoted to you?
Re:effective? (Score:5, Informative)
la Presidenta did not handle COVID as well or better than Biden. If you recall, he was promoting Hydroxychloroquine for COVID. That's as bad a promoting Vitamin A for measles as the JFK, Jr. was doing. Then la Presidenta had the bright idea of shining fluorescent light inside people, "knocks it right out of there". Then it would magically go away by summer, insinuated it didn't like the heat.
Meanwhile, the cases built up. Finally we got the vaccine. However, his bush-league team left the incoming administration no plan for rollout because that would have required competent planning. Later, he waffled on the vaccine aiming to pull in the anti-vax crowd.
Biden's team put together a rollout plan and then followed through.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
“la Presidenta” lmao :-)
re: hcq, opinions vary: https://c19hcq.org/meta.html [c19hcq.org]
Re:effective? (Score:5, Informative)
Trump did create the vaccine under Operation Warp Speed. But then MAGA brain rot led him to getting booed when he told people to take his wonderful vaccine. https://www.nbcnews.com/politi... [nbcnews.com]
Re: (Score:1)
I think this was the moment where he realized there was no point in trying to help anyone. Just take what you can take and let the masses have the shit world they crave.
Re:effective? (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump did create the vaccine under Operation Warp Speed
Nope. He did not "create the vaccine." He agreed to let the government throw some money around to various companies who wanted to try to make a vaccine with the agreement that the government would get first dibs on any successfully created vaccine. In fact, as a taxpayer who probably paid more in taxes than Trump during those years, I likely had a bigger role in "creating the vaccine" than Trump.
Re: effective? (Score:5, Insightful)
The COVID mRNA vaccines were the culmination of decades of research into genetic vaccines that could be in essence engineered to target a selected antigen without the years of trial and error that are required by the methods we have been using since the 1950s. Within days of the virus genome being published, they had a vaccine design, the months it took to get to the public were taken up with studies of the safety and effectiveness of the heretofore untested technology, ramping up production, and preparing for the distribution of a medicine that required cryogenic storage.
It would be unreasonable not to give the Trump administration credit for not mucking up this process. But the unprecedented speed of development wasnâ(TM)t due to Trump employing some kind of magical Fuhrermojo. It was a stroke good fortune that when the global pandemic epidemiologists have been worried about arrived, mRNA technology was just at the point where you could use it. Had it arrived a decade earlier the consequences would have been far worse, no matter who was president.
The lesson isnâ(TM)t that Trump is some kind of divine figure who willed a vaccine into existence, itâ(TM)s that basic research that is decades from practical application is important.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly I'd be fully converted to Trump's Fuhrermojo if he managed to get a German company to develop the vaccine under operation warp speed... which ultimately is precisely what did happen. He can be credited for providing a lot of monetary incentive for production, but many people don't realise (or refuse to realise) the most popular vaccine given in America wasn't created by Americans.
Be thankful COVID happened first time, I wonder what Trump's mental gymnastics would be like having to simultaneously sp
Re: (Score:2)
but many people don't realise (or refuse to realise) the most popular vaccine given in America wasn't created by Americans.
I assume you mean that the Pfizer vaccine was developed by BioNTech, which is a German company; Pfizer (a U.S. company) just did the clinical trials, logistics, and manufacturing. Development of that vaccine was largely funded by the German government, and got no funding from Operation Warp Speed [fortune.com] at all, though, so I wouldn't say that this is ultimately what happened. They developed it in spite of U.S. funding for a rival. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it so important to you that he gets credit for the vaccine when he was more than happy to disavow his administration's botching of other aspects of the pandemic response like testing. His exact words were "I don't take responsibility at all" and blamed (of course) Obama of all people. He only takes credit for successes and blames anyone but himself for failures. Our country is screwed because millions of people like you cannot acknowledge that, let alone call it a character flaw.
Re:effective? (Score:5, Informative)
Thanks to propaganda promulgated by idiots like you, we ended up with a real-world A / B trial of the Covid-19 vaccines. A lot more Republicans ended up dead because they didn't get the shot:
https://www.pewresearch.org/po... [pewresearch.org]
Yes, it was effective.
And here's an actual study about deaths from the vaccine itself (tl;dr - your claims are bullshit):
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/a... [nih.gov]
Re:effective? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:effective? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't Russian troll farms want the stupid ones to survive? It's the intelligent Americans that they would be opposed to.
I think it's just an effort to cause general division and conflict, as well as worsening America's health overall.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:effective? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's worse than that. People should have learned from the pandemic. When we collectively get together to push development of these things forward, the results are hugely beneficial. Governments acting on our behalf to get mRNA vaccines funded and released in record time is going to have long term positive effects for all sorts of conditions.
The same thing happened during WW2. Massive advances in technology. In the UK after the war, the new socialist government ran on a platform of continuing those big national collaborative projects, and the benefits were huge. Lots of infrastructure, affordable housing, socialized healthcare, a state pension... The US did some similar things with the GI Act, and also back in the 1930s with the New Deal, and again with Apollo.
What makes it worse than just rejection of science is rejection of the kind of collaboration and national projects that reap huge rewards.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:effective? (Score:4, Insightful)
VAERS != robust data or evidence
Look, everyone, another clueless fartkwit pushing FuD as if it were fact!
Chuckledinks. Chuckledinks all the way down.
Re: effective? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
And Covid killed over 1 million Americans and many more world-wide.
"they have not to date been effectively controlled by licensed or experimental vaccines".
I suppose you can call them experimental, but they've been developed starting with research since the beginning of the Bush, Jr. admin. The reason they were able to field them so quickly, about a year from when cases appeared in the U.S., was that the drug companies had been preparing them. That is, they had already extensively tested them. And you can c
Re: effective? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And Covid killed over 1 million Americans and many more world-wide.
Unfortunately, we don't know how many people COVID-19 killed. Because of political bullshit and an effort to obtain as much government gravy funding as possible, almost everybody was swabbed for COVID-19. So we have a decent idea of how many people were positive for it, but not of the result. I went in for an emergent heart cath and it was delayed for over an hour and a half because some asshole was waiting for the results of a COVID-19 swab. I was working in an ER and we would have car accident victims come in, and it was policy to test for COVID-19. If positive, COVID-19 was listed as a diagnosis, even though the cause of the injury wasn't COVID-19, it was "rapid unscheduled disassembly of vehicle and ejection of driver through windshield at 75mph."
Posted anonymously for obvious reasons.
Listing it is the right thing to do. That doesn't make it the proximate cause of death if the person dies, though. The folks who crunch the numbers know how to tell the difference between dying with COVID and dying from COVID. That's how we know that COVID caused a huge surge in heart attacks and strokes that, if we were using your approach, would not have been counted, because they don't look like deaths from COVID, and yet the statistics on their timing show that the excess clotting that caused them is
Re: effective? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are talking about experts. Experts are always wrong and Republicans are always right!
Oh, silly me. How could I make that mistake. You are of course correct. Let me fix that for you.
Listing it is the right thing to do. That doesn't make it the proximate cause of death if the person dies, though. The folks who crunch the numbers know how to tell the difference between dying with COVID and dying from COVID. That's how we know that COVID caused a huge surge in strokes and heart attacks that, if we were using your approach, would not have been counted, because they don't look like deaths from
Re:effective? (Score:5, Informative)
No, it didn't. Not even close. As of 2023, there were 9 confirmed deaths [apnews.com] related to the vaccine itself, and those were only related to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.
That fake number you pulled out of your ass was debunked years ago [nih.gov].
After careful review of the reports, there is no enough evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine contributed to those fatalities [16]. Clinical information such as death certificates, autopsy, and medical records establish no causal link to the COVID-19 vaccines according to the CDC. The death of a person following vaccination does not necessarily mean, the vaccine caused health problems and could be coincidental. Research done by the Paul Ehrlich Institute (the body in charge of vaccines in Germany) stated that patients died of their underlying diseases in a coincidental time with vaccination. This came after 10 COVID-19 vaccination deaths were recorded in the country [17]. Early studies conducted by the Norwegian Medicine Agency on reports of 33 deaths in a nursing home following vaccination of residentsâ(TM) revealed death occurred close to these terminally ill patients at the time of vaccination [17]. It does not imply a causal relation to the vaccine [17].
and had 380k adverse reactions,
Once again, stating things which are not true. The VAERS database lists any reaction of any kind after taking medicine, REGARDLESS if there is any casual link. If I take Advil then get a rash three days later, did Advil cause it or it is poison ivy?
Pointing to a conspiracy site does not help your cause.
Pointing to a conspiracy site (Score:2)
The problem is we lost the media war. Psychopaths bought up all the mass media outlets and are using them to promote insanity so that they can seize power by offering Insanity in place of real economic solutions.
So you don't get afforda
Re: Pointing to a conspiracy site (Score:2)
Real fact check: (Score:5, Informative)
Claim:
According to FDA and CDC data, the covid 19 vaccine killed over 4800 people and had 380k adverse reactions, in 6 months.
Fact check: There are hundreds of reports of 4800 people having died within two days of getting a COVID vaccine but that does not necessarily mean the vaccine was the cause. Similarly, 380k adverse reactions were reported but not definitely the caused by the vaccine. Finally, given the breadth of deployment, the mRNA vaccines were the safest vaccines ever made. They aren't perfect because humans are not all identical but they were damn close.
I would also point out there there were about 600 people who died from overdosing on hydroxychloroquine which is not effective at treating or preventing COVID-19.
Re:Real fact check: (Score:5, Interesting)
Correction: like the name of the database says, there are 380k reports of adverse events after people got vaccinated. Study is required to determine whether those were reactions or coincidences (or indirect consequences).
After I got the first two COVID-19 shots, I got a survey that asked whether I had seen a doctor for any illness since then. I truthfully answered: I had a tick bite that ended up with a rash around it, and I went to a doctor to exclude Lyme disease as a cause. When I later doing it about VAERS, I searched and found an entry that signed like mine. I don't know for sure it was about me, but I do know that tick bite and infection had nothing to do with a vaccine.
Re: (Score:1)
To say nothing of the the 2000+ cases of people stripping out their large intestines with ivermectin who now have to have colostomy bags.
Re: (Score:2)
Finally, given the breadth of deployment, the mRNA vaccines were the safest vaccines ever made. They aren't perfect because humans are not all identical but they were damn close.
Ever wonder how many people who harmed or killed themselves with alternative treatments could have been saved if only the mRNA vaccine manufacturers didn’t try and hide every shred of trial evidence proving how safe their vaccine was?
You’re right. They aren’t perfect. And THAT was the fucking honesty every victim citizen was asking for. They got marketing instead.
Re: (Score:2)
THAT was the fucking honesty every victim citizen was asking for.
Bullshit. They wanted something something simple, declarative and especially something aligned with their personal delusions, mostly informed by FuD they absorbed from social media.
Let's quit pretending humans are perfectly rational.
Re: (Score:3)
There is no amount of scientific evidence that will appease that crowd. How many studies of the MMR vaccine did we do after Wakefield's blatant and criminal lies and people still believe that autism and that vaccine are linked.
Not only were there phase 1 2 and 3 trials before approval with groups of tens of thousands but we have the data of billions of people across 5 years and billions of doses. You can't hide the effects people are claiming exist.
They are political actors engaged in political culture wa
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who ever claimed perfection was an idiot. So those assuming perfection based on the claims of idiots get what they choose.
No vaccine is perfect. No vaccine has zero side-effects in 100% of patients. No vaccine is 100% effective in all patients. Why are we trying to hold this specific vaccine up to a standard that no previous vaccine in the history of immunology meets?
Answer: some political hack agenda, ignorance, and stupidity.
Stop being ignorant and stupid. Stop pretending that this vaccine sho
Re: (Score:2)
You’re right. They aren’t perfect. And THAT was the fucking honesty every victim citizen was asking for.
Except nobody ever claimed it was perfect, in fact a great effort went into discussing possible side effects.
Ever wonder how many people who harmed or killed themselves with alternative treatments could have been saved if...
No even for a moment because these "alternative treatments" were absolute horseshit based on zero science. The kind of people who go for these are not interested in facts because they are deep into anti-intellectualism and follow emotional logic rather than rational logic, Frankly, I'm not worried about the ones who died from following magical thinking, I'm worried about the ones who manage to surviv
Re: (Score:3)
So it wa highly successfull with minimal side effects. 270,227,181 people have received a dose and only 4800 died. 1,193,165 confirmed covid deaths in the US. The odds are better to just take the vaccine. So it was highly successful.
Re: (Score:3)
1. 'Effectively controlled' means they were able to vaccinate enough people to establish herd immunity. The vaccine is effective enough to prevent death, but only around 50% at stopping the disease totally. Between that and vaccine deniers, they never got enough people vaccinated to shut down continued transmission.
2. VAERS, which is the source used for the deaths and adverse reaction claims, is an unrestricted reporting source. If you got a headache a day after the vaccination, you can report it as an
Re: effective? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are cherry-picking. If the goal were to just control the spread of the virus, they failed. If the goal was to reduce mortality and morbidity, they succeeded. You don't think the flu shot reduces flu deaths? It's because the "infecting systematically" part does still happen to some and that's the dangerous part.
It is saying that the body doesn't try very hard to fight something in the epithelial tissue of the nose and throat until the virus sets in further. This doesn't matter whether it's a first ex
Re: (Score:2)
this is moronic. the bit you're quoting says that vaccines so far do not provide lifetime immunity as infections by the viruses themselves don't provide lifetime immunity. that doesn't mean the vaccines aren't effective, it just means they don't last forever so it's difficult to establish durable herd immunity with them.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's almost like the virus doesn't have a 100% mortality rate.
You have offered nothing of substance or value here.