4 ms·

There's a huge international effort to develop a vaccine or a suppressant, etc. The US doesn't have even close to the necessary number of testing kits or infra

There's a huge international effort to develop a vaccine or a suppressant, etc. The US doesn't have even close to the necessary number of testing kits or infrastructure to test 300 million people. They're working on ramping up production and availability of tests.

forkexec 7y ago
There is no working vaccine. Multiple candidates will take a year and a half if everything works perfectly. It's possible that a vaccine will not be found.
- auspex 7y ago
  They already have a corona virus vaccine for many live stock animals so at least that is promising
arkitaip 7y ago
Historically, a reasonably safe vaccine has taken many years to develop. Rushing a vaccine through the system so it only takes months? Yeah, I not going to stand in line to get vaccinated.
- James_Henry 7y ago
  There are promising treatments though, and these should show results within weeks or months.
  - wy3yebdudu 7y ago
    Failure is a result that can be displayed, number of candidate treatments isn't a real metric for making predictions.
    - James_Henry 7y ago
      I think I don't fully understand what you are saying, but there have been preliminary trials suggesting that some of these candidate treatments are helpful in treating the disease.
- brokensegue 7y ago
  even just vaccinating the people in the high risk groups would be a huge win. and those people are much more likely to get in line.
- capkutay 7y ago
  Historically, we've never seen the world's top researchers, governments, and pharmaceutical companies all racing to come up with a vaccine and treatment at once while sharing data at unprecedented scale. I understand allowing reasonable time to complete trials, but let's not act like this is just a routine drug approval.
  - andrewingram 7y ago
    There are already vaccine trials underway, the 12-18 months is the minimum amount of time we allow for making sure the cure isn't worse than the disease. We're basically talking about giving this vaccine to every at-risk person in the world. If it's not safe, that would be a really bad outcome. The unprecedented scale will allow more parallel efforts, to the point that the odds of a viable vaccine being available next year are much greater, but it won't speed up the minimum time.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - capkutay 7y ago
      My comment didn’t suggest otherwise. I was referring to both treatments and vaccines.
- hilbertseries 7y ago
  The vaccine candidate didn't take very long, because researchers were able to re-use the initial work done for making a SARS vaccine. But it will still take 12-18 months to test the vaccine candidates.
tomerico 7y ago
There is a reason vaccines take a long time to approve - if you are getting the general population vaccinated, you want to make sure the side effects a year down the road don't negate the benefit (if any, vaccines are not 100% effective)

forkexec 7y ago

There is no working vaccine. Multiple candidates will take a year and a half if everything works perfectly. It's possible that a vaccine will not be found.

auspex 7y ago
They already have a corona virus vaccine for many live stock animals so at least that is promising

arkitaip 7y ago

Historically, a reasonably safe vaccine has taken many years to develop. Rushing a vaccine through the system so it only takes months? Yeah, I not going to stand in line to get vaccinated.

James_Henry 7y ago
There are promising treatments though, and these should show results within weeks or months.
- wy3yebdudu 7y ago
  Failure is a result that can be displayed, number of candidate treatments isn't a real metric for making predictions.
  - James_Henry 7y ago
    I think I don't fully understand what you are saying, but there have been preliminary trials suggesting that some of these candidate treatments are helpful in treating the disease.
brokensegue 7y ago
even just vaccinating the people in the high risk groups would be a huge win. and those people are much more likely to get in line.
capkutay 7y ago
Historically, we've never seen the world's top researchers, governments, and pharmaceutical companies all racing to come up with a vaccine and treatment at once while sharing data at unprecedented scale. I understand allowing reasonable time to complete trials, but let's not act like this is just a routine drug approval.
- andrewingram 7y ago
  There are already vaccine trials underway, the 12-18 months is the minimum amount of time we allow for making sure the cure isn't worse than the disease. We're basically talking about giving this vaccine to every at-risk person in the world. If it's not safe, that would be a really bad outcome. The unprecedented scale will allow more parallel efforts, to the point that the odds of a viable vaccine being available next year are much greater, but it won't speed up the minimum time.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - capkutay 7y ago
    My comment didn’t suggest otherwise. I was referring to both treatments and vaccines.
hilbertseries 7y ago
The vaccine candidate didn't take very long, because researchers were able to re-use the initial work done for making a SARS vaccine. But it will still take 12-18 months to test the vaccine candidates.

tomerico 7y ago

There is a reason vaccines take a long time to approve - if you are getting the general population vaccinated, you want to make sure the side effects a year down the road don't negate the benefit (if any, vaccines are not 100% effective)