10 ms·

Coronavirus Vaccine Prospects

141 points by hprotagonist 7y ago

whoisjuan 7y ago
I might be wrong, but I thought any human trial needs at least a full one-year follow-up to make sure that the vaccine didn't cause any damage, side effects, reactions, etc, and that indeed created long term immunity. It seems to me that rushing the timelines potentially opens up a lot of risks for post-vaccine side effects. Doesn't it?
- technotony 7y ago
  That's what the article says, human trials in fall this year and then a regulatory filing a year later. There is basically no chance of a vaccine for this being widely available before 2022. That assumes that one of these vaccines works, despite no vaccine for a coronavirus ever passing regulatory approval (hence this is a hard problem, and plenty of incentive to vaccinate against things like common cold which would be a nice money earner for a someone).
  - Bombthecat 7y ago
    I laugh every time someone telling me we will have something by winter... We will live with quarantine and social distincing for quit for a while.
    - ignoramous 7y ago
      We might yet have a vaccine in 6 months (optimistically) [0] though 12 to 18 months is much more realistic. Different categories of vaccines have different manufacturing and safety profiles [1] depending on which we a vaccine candidate might be approved sooner than expected, especially since 3 novel, previously untested platforms have made it to clinical trials, already. [0] Even if shortcuts ... can be found, it is unlikely that a vaccine would be available earlier than 6 months after the initiation of clinical trials. Realistically, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines will not be available for another 12–18 months. From: https://www.cell.com/immunity/fulltext/S1074-7613(20)30120-5#%20 https://www.cell.com/immunity/fulltext/S1074-7613(20)30120-5... [1] https://www.cell.com/action/showFullTableHTML?isHtml=true&tableId=tbl1&pii=S1074-7613%2820%2930120-5 https://www.cell.com/action/showFullTableHTML?isHtml=true&ta...
  - danieltillett 7y ago
    There are animal vaccines for coronaviruses that have regulatory approval, just none for humans. There is zero incentive to make a vaccine for the common cold. Let me introduce you to the multi-tens of billion dollar OTC common cold treatment market.
- deelowe 7y ago
  Yes it does. Vaccines can and do cause serious side effects and some can take quite some time to manifest.
- nokcha 7y ago
  >I thought any human trial needs at least a full one-year follow-up to make sure ... Depends what you mean by "need". If you're talking about a risk/benefit calculation for getting a vaccination, I expect it will play out very differently for high-risk elderly folks vs low-risk young adults.
LyndsySimon 7y ago
As a lay person, I found this to be a very informative article. One thing I didn't see mentioned was a recent article that caught my attention - apparently, tobacco may be used as means of production for a potential vaccine [0]. Given that the linked article was published on April 1, I initially thought it to be satire. Upon further consideration, though, it not only seems to be genuine but it makes sense: tobacco is likely one of the best understood plants from a genetic standpoint, with a long history of successful genetic modification using both traditional and modern approaches. It's certainly one of the best understood that also has large-scale production capabilities, and I would imagine that the tobacco industry has more incentive than most to seek the positive PR that this could bring. Finally, setting aside the greater political context, it seems to me that the FDA under the Trump administration is more flexible and risk-tolerant than any point in my lifetime (and perhaps in living memory). There are certainly many challenges that will have to be overcome before we get to the point that we're able to widely roll out an effective vaccine, but I strongly suspect that this flexibility will result in a speed of development and approval that will surprise many of us. Of course, that speed will come with associated risks, but that's just the nature of things. I would not be surprised to see widespread voluntary human testing of promising vaccine candidates in the next six months - perhaps even sooner if a promising candidate ends up being derived from the past few years' work in creating a vaccine for SARS-CoV-1. 0: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8175855/BAT-claims-Covid-19-vaccine-breakthrough-using-tobacco-plants.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8175855/BAT-claims-...
- avgDev 7y ago
  I am really concerned about the fact that the FDA is trying to fast track stuff. I just want to offer a perspective of why this is dangerous. We are having some serious issues with flouroquinolone antibiotics. The side-effects of the medication are insane and under-reported. 9 years ago I was given the antibiotic for an infection, my body went into shock, I was released the next day with some odd neurological issues. None of it reported to the FDA, few months later I got tendon pain. I go to mayo clinic, they disagree the antibiotic caused it. Seen 30+ physicians in the span of 2 years, 2 agreed that it is possible. One of them said to wait it out, and refused to actually put it in my chart. The antibiotics carry a 'black label' and clearly state side effects may occur up to 1 year. I reported it to the FDA, then I found groups of people suffering from chronic fatigue, tendon raptures, weird neurological symptoms, some had diagnosis of 'fibromyalgia', some had chronic tendinitis, yet after reviewing their medical information they found they took a flouroquinolone antibiotic but nobody ever even suggested that it could be that. This bring me to Tamiflu fiasco. Governments have spent billions of dollars to purchase Tamiflu to fight the flu. Later reports came out about issues with the studies, the maker picking positive studies and withholding neutral or negative information. It has not proven much better than the drugs we already use to treat the flu. Fast tracking a medication can have terrible results, cost billions of dollars, and cripple hundreds of people. Doing any scientific research with panic in the back of your mind and high pressure from politicians and people is dangerous IMO. Especially, in a profit driven healthcare system.
yread 7y ago
The numbers involved are just so hard to imagine. Even if we create a vaccine as safe as flu shot it will kill on the order of 1000 people worldwide (1:10m). We have to hope that they will be randomly distributed and not the first volunteers who take it...
- jobseeker990 7y ago
  There's also a good chance we might force this on people against their will (If the current panic is any indication.)
  - nick_kline 7y ago
    Look at the current death rates. Requiring a tested vaccine is a reasonable response. Requiring an untested vaccination is not something I see happening. I guess we could get to "you can't do certain things like go to large gatherings" if you don't have the vaccine or evidence of having had it. Meanwhile, In the US 12.x k people at a minimum died of this in the last 7 days, doubling the previous total deaths. There's also a much higher death rate overall than in the past, many of those must be related to covid-19 [1]. If current trends follw, In another week the 25,000 total current deaths will double, in other words, 25,000 are on track to die of covid in a week. It's not just new york; from that same site, in the last 7 days new york's total went from 7k to 15k total cumulative deaths - new york is still doubling every week, even though they look to slow down. The deadly statistics are fantastically interesting. NY itself had about 8k net new deaths the last week, the rest of the us had about 10k. Both are doubling on a weekly basis. 1. https://covidtracking.com/data/us-daily https://covidtracking.com/data/us-daily
btilly 7y ago
For those who don't recognize the author, he is a well-known biochemist working in pharmaceuticals whose blogs are generally very well informed and well worth the read. Also sometimes extremely funny. Read https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/category/things-i-wont-work-with https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/category/thin... for good examples of that.
- dmix 7y ago
  One of the people he linked to seems to have excellent coverage of the vaccine progress and updates from the biotech companies: https://twitter.com/bio_clouseau https://twitter.com/bio_clouseau
- dmoy 7y ago
  Ohhh he's that guy! The one with the amazingly hilarious/terrifying article about FOOF. https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_with_dioxygen_difluoride https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/th...
- danieltillett 7y ago
  I think Derek might object to being called a biochemist - he is actually an organic chemist by training.
  - btilly 7y ago
    Ah. Thanks for the correction.
sjg007 7y ago
I worry that the vaccine won't be effective. To stop this coronavirus we basically have to quarantine and stop human activity for a few months. We are already down that rabbit hole so we just need to stay the course and really isolate as much as we can. The govt is going to have to help people to get through the next 6 months.
- 12elephant 7y ago
  So what happens when we end quarantine in 6 months? We'll just have a COVID epidemic 6 months from now. Isolation does not stop the spead, it only slows the spread. As soon as isolation is lifted, whether that be in a month or 10 years, the spread will resume. Unless of course either a) herd immunity is developed or b) a vaccine is developed. We've only ever eradicated one infectious disease in all of human history (smallpox) and we had a vaccine for that. See: https://www.historyofvaccines.org/index.php/content/articles/disease-eradication https://www.historyofvaccines.org/index.php/content/articles...
  - sjg007 7y ago
    Well, no, if you have enough isolation then the virus runs out of hosts. It goes extinct unless it can survive latently or in some other host species. If we are getting infected by bats consistently then we are in trouble.
    - 12elephant 7y ago
      That's wishful thinking. The virus will survive in Africa, or India, or many of the other places that are incapable or unwilling to enforcing a complete lockdown (many of these places are in the US itself). As I mentioned above, we have only ever erradicated _one_ infectious disease in all of human history. The chances of COVID, with its highly infectious nature, being the second are quite slim. Just like the first outbreak, all it takes is one person with the virus to start the whole process over again.
      - sjg007 7y ago
Leary 7y ago
On the off chance that China develops a working vaccine first, how could America ensure its safety?
- phyrex 7y ago
  The exact same way as with every other vaccine from any other country.
  - sean2 7y ago
    I don't know what inspired GP's question, but I think he's getting at the fact that China is known to be faking their numbers from the beginning of the outbreak to show how effective the leaders are in combating the virus. So, in reality, we have no idea whether their methods are successful or not. Same with a vaccine, if China reports an extremely effective vaccine, available immediately, invented thanks to Xi's vision and leadership; Then do we just start using it here in the US, or do we have another year of hiding in our houses while we run trials while the rest of the credulous world gets back to work?
    - perl4ever 7y ago
      "China is known to be faking their numbers" I haven't seen an explanation of South Korea then. Are they faking their statistics too? If not, then China's reported stats don't seem so incredible.
      - TeMPOraL 7y ago
        Personally I haven't even seen a more detailed accusation than "China is faking their numbers [because they obviously are, they're China]" - that is, other than flat-Earth level "oh look at the mobile phone number cancellation data that's definitely trustworthy and definitely indicates people being erased". Not to mention any attempts at quantifying what's the level of the alleged manipulation of the data. Is it suspected to be undercounted by an order of magnitude? Two orders? Three orders? Why?
truantbuick 7y ago
I'd like to believe we will start mass manufacturing all promising candidates long before testing is complete. The stakes are so high this time that it's important _as soon as_ testing results are deemed adequate, they can start distributing them, even if it means manufacturing stuff that doesn't ultimately pan out.
- bolasanibk 7y ago
  Bill Gates thinks the same. https://www.wsj.com/articles/bill-gates-to-spend-billions-on-coronavirus-vaccine-development-11586124716 https://www.wsj.com/articles/bill-gates-to-spend-billions-on...
  - pacomerh 7y ago
    (unrelated to this but related to Bill), why are there so many people hating on Bill Gates when he talks about this virus and any prospects etc.? It's not like he's a plain celebrity, I mean he's in philanthropy etc, he's known for helping people with these kinds of issues. Just boggles my mind
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - ardit33 7y ago
      Probably same people/crowd that sent death threats to Fauci... Unfortunately we live in a country where anywhere between 18% and 31% (depending on the question/pool) of the population doesn't believe in evolution at all. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/how-many-creationists-are-there-in-america/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/how-many-c...
    - djhaskin987 7y ago
      I haven't heard of anybody hating on Bill Gates lately. Do you have a link perhaps to show me some example of this because I don't know what you're talking about
jdsully 7y ago
The history of rushed vaccines is not good. The first attempt at a polio vaccine was rushed through with inadequate safety measures and resulted in 40,000 children getting sick, some with permanent paralysis. There are good reasons vaccines take years to be approved. I’m very worried we’ll see a repeat of historical mistakes in the current rush. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutter_Laboratories#The_Cutter_incident https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutter_Laboratories#The_Cutt...
- Jommi 7y ago
  Not to mention the social stigma if the 1st attempt goes wrong, potentially reducing people's inclination to get the vaccine.
- danieltillett 7y ago
  No that it matters, but it wasn’t a safety issue with the vaccine, but a manufacturing issue. The vaccine was perfectly safe, it just wasn’t manufactured to the correct specification.
  - jdsully 7y ago
    The method of manufacture is part of the FDA approval
    - danieltillett 7y ago
      Yes it is, but if it isn’t followed then you can’t blame the vaccine. Many other companies made the same vaccine using the same processes without issue. The Salk vaccine is very safe if manufactured to specification.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
guidedlight 7y ago
I do wonder how effective and safe an old-fashioned inoculation could be in the absence of a vaccine. A small quantity of the virus could be introduced to your leg where it is away from your lungs and bloodstream. Your body could fight the virus there.
- vikramkr 7y ago
  That's a type of vaccine. If you want to figure out how safe and effective it is, you need to run a clinical trial. Same as amy other vaccine. If you got started now, you'd be running behind some of the other approaches that are already in clinical trials, so, um, get started fast?
- danieltillett 7y ago
  Most likely very effective especially if you were to find a strain that didn’t make you seriously ill. Pity nobody seems interested in actually finding such a strain.
- unionpivo 7y ago
  He discuses that in his blog. There are 2 types of such vaccines. Live ones, that are exactly like you said, low infectious strain, and dead ones, where they kill the virus and it sometimes still produces correct antibodies. there are several of such types of vaccines in development
ignoramous 7y ago
I want to point out that 5 vaccines (out of 78) are in phase 1 trials (4 of those actively looking for volunteers, visit clinicaltrials.gov links below to see if you qualify): 1. mRNA-1273 (lipid nanoparticle encapsulated mRNA vaccine encoding S protein) by Moderna: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04283461 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04283461 2. Ad5-nCoV (Adenovirus type 5 vector that expresses S protein) by CanSino Biologicals: NCT04313127. 3. INO-4800 (DNA plasmid encoding S protein delivered by electroporation) by Inovio Pharmaceuticals: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04336410 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04336410 4. LV-SMENP-DC (Dendritic cell modified with lentiviral vector expressing synthetic minigene based on domains of selected viral proteins; administered with antigen-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte) by Shenzhen Geno-Immune Medical Institute: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04276896 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04276896 5. Pathogen-specific artificial antigen-presenting cell (aAPCs modified with lentiviral vector expressing synthetic minigene based on domains of selected viral proteins) by Shenzhen Geno-Immune Medical Institute: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04299724 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04299724 Ref: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41573-020-00073-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41573-020-00073-5
3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
> Roughly estimated, even a seasonal flu vaccine might kill about one out of every ten million recipients though such a reaction – we give it to everyone possible, though, because far more people will die if we don’t. Yeah that’s frightening, but really true? I’ve never heard of a single person dying from the flu vaccine locally.

141 points by hprotagonist 7y ago

I might be wrong, but I thought any human trial needs at least a full one-year follow-up to make sure that the vaccine didn't cause any damage, side effects, reactions, etc, and that indeed created long term immunity. It seems to me that rushing the timelines potentially opens up a lot of risks for post-vaccine side effects. Doesn't it?

technotony 7y ago
That's what the article says, human trials in fall this year and then a regulatory filing a year later. There is basically no chance of a vaccine for this being widely available before 2022. That assumes that one of these vaccines works, despite no vaccine for a coronavirus ever passing regulatory approval (hence this is a hard problem, and plenty of incentive to vaccinate against things like common cold which would be a nice money earner for a someone).
- Bombthecat 7y ago
  I laugh every time someone telling me we will have something by winter... We will live with quarantine and social distincing for quit for a while.
  - ignoramous 7y ago
    We might yet have a vaccine in 6 months (optimistically) [0] though 12 to 18 months is much more realistic. Different categories of vaccines have different manufacturing and safety profiles [1] depending on which we a vaccine candidate might be approved sooner than expected, especially since 3 novel, previously untested platforms have made it to clinical trials, already. [0] Even if shortcuts ... can be found, it is unlikely that a vaccine would be available earlier than 6 months after the initiation of clinical trials. Realistically, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines will not be available for another 12–18 months. From: https://www.cell.com/immunity/fulltext/S1074-7613(20)30120-5#%20 https://www.cell.com/immunity/fulltext/S1074-7613(20)30120-5... [1] https://www.cell.com/action/showFullTableHTML?isHtml=true&tableId=tbl1&pii=S1074-7613%2820%2930120-5 https://www.cell.com/action/showFullTableHTML?isHtml=true&ta...
- danieltillett 7y ago
  There are animal vaccines for coronaviruses that have regulatory approval, just none for humans. There is zero incentive to make a vaccine for the common cold. Let me introduce you to the multi-tens of billion dollar OTC common cold treatment market.
deelowe 7y ago
Yes it does. Vaccines can and do cause serious side effects and some can take quite some time to manifest.
nokcha 7y ago
>I thought any human trial needs at least a full one-year follow-up to make sure ... Depends what you mean by "need". If you're talking about a risk/benefit calculation for getting a vaccination, I expect it will play out very differently for high-risk elderly folks vs low-risk young adults.

LyndsySimon 7y ago

As a lay person, I found this to be a very informative article. One thing I didn't see mentioned was a recent article that caught my attention - apparently, tobacco may be used as means of production for a potential vaccine [0]. Given that the linked article was published on April 1, I initially thought it to be satire. Upon further consideration, though, it not only seems to be genuine but it makes sense: tobacco is likely one of the best understood plants from a genetic standpoint, with a long history of successful genetic modification using both traditional and modern approaches. It's certainly one of the best understood that also has large-scale production capabilities, and I would imagine that the tobacco industry has more incentive than most to seek the positive PR that this could bring. Finally, setting aside the greater political context, it seems to me that the FDA under the Trump administration is more flexible and risk-tolerant than any point in my lifetime (and perhaps in living memory). There are certainly many challenges that will have to be overcome before we get to the point that we're able to widely roll out an effective vaccine, but I strongly suspect that this flexibility will result in a speed of development and approval that will surprise many of us. Of course, that speed will come with associated risks, but that's just the nature of things. I would not be surprised to see widespread voluntary human testing of promising vaccine candidates in the next six months - perhaps even sooner if a promising candidate ends up being derived from the past few years' work in creating a vaccine for SARS-CoV-1. 0: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8175855/BAT-claims-Covid-19-vaccine-breakthrough-using-tobacco-plants.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8175855/BAT-claims-...

avgDev 7y ago
I am really concerned about the fact that the FDA is trying to fast track stuff. I just want to offer a perspective of why this is dangerous. We are having some serious issues with flouroquinolone antibiotics. The side-effects of the medication are insane and under-reported. 9 years ago I was given the antibiotic for an infection, my body went into shock, I was released the next day with some odd neurological issues. None of it reported to the FDA, few months later I got tendon pain. I go to mayo clinic, they disagree the antibiotic caused it. Seen 30+ physicians in the span of 2 years, 2 agreed that it is possible. One of them said to wait it out, and refused to actually put it in my chart. The antibiotics carry a 'black label' and clearly state side effects may occur up to 1 year. I reported it to the FDA, then I found groups of people suffering from chronic fatigue, tendon raptures, weird neurological symptoms, some had diagnosis of 'fibromyalgia', some had chronic tendinitis, yet after reviewing their medical information they found they took a flouroquinolone antibiotic but nobody ever even suggested that it could be that. This bring me to Tamiflu fiasco. Governments have spent billions of dollars to purchase Tamiflu to fight the flu. Later reports came out about issues with the studies, the maker picking positive studies and withholding neutral or negative information. It has not proven much better than the drugs we already use to treat the flu. Fast tracking a medication can have terrible results, cost billions of dollars, and cripple hundreds of people. Doing any scientific research with panic in the back of your mind and high pressure from politicians and people is dangerous IMO. Especially, in a profit driven healthcare system.

yread 7y ago

The numbers involved are just so hard to imagine. Even if we create a vaccine as safe as flu shot it will kill on the order of 1000 people worldwide (1:10m). We have to hope that they will be randomly distributed and not the first volunteers who take it...

jobseeker990 7y ago
There's also a good chance we might force this on people against their will (If the current panic is any indication.)
- nick_kline 7y ago
  Look at the current death rates. Requiring a tested vaccine is a reasonable response. Requiring an untested vaccination is not something I see happening. I guess we could get to "you can't do certain things like go to large gatherings" if you don't have the vaccine or evidence of having had it. Meanwhile, In the US 12.x k people at a minimum died of this in the last 7 days, doubling the previous total deaths. There's also a much higher death rate overall than in the past, many of those must be related to covid-19 [1]. If current trends follw, In another week the 25,000 total current deaths will double, in other words, 25,000 are on track to die of covid in a week. It's not just new york; from that same site, in the last 7 days new york's total went from 7k to 15k total cumulative deaths - new york is still doubling every week, even though they look to slow down. The deadly statistics are fantastically interesting. NY itself had about 8k net new deaths the last week, the rest of the us had about 10k. Both are doubling on a weekly basis. 1. https://covidtracking.com/data/us-daily https://covidtracking.com/data/us-daily

btilly 7y ago

For those who don't recognize the author, he is a well-known biochemist working in pharmaceuticals whose blogs are generally very well informed and well worth the read. Also sometimes extremely funny. Read https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/category/things-i-wont-work-with https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/category/thin... for good examples of that.

dmix 7y ago
One of the people he linked to seems to have excellent coverage of the vaccine progress and updates from the biotech companies: https://twitter.com/bio_clouseau https://twitter.com/bio_clouseau
dmoy 7y ago
Ohhh he's that guy! The one with the amazingly hilarious/terrifying article about FOOF. https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_with_dioxygen_difluoride https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/th...
danieltillett 7y ago
I think Derek might object to being called a biochemist - he is actually an organic chemist by training.
- btilly 7y ago
  Ah. Thanks for the correction.

sjg007 7y ago

I worry that the vaccine won't be effective. To stop this coronavirus we basically have to quarantine and stop human activity for a few months. We are already down that rabbit hole so we just need to stay the course and really isolate as much as we can. The govt is going to have to help people to get through the next 6 months.

12elephant 7y ago
So what happens when we end quarantine in 6 months? We'll just have a COVID epidemic 6 months from now. Isolation does not stop the spead, it only slows the spread. As soon as isolation is lifted, whether that be in a month or 10 years, the spread will resume. Unless of course either a) herd immunity is developed or b) a vaccine is developed. We've only ever eradicated one infectious disease in all of human history (smallpox) and we had a vaccine for that. See: https://www.historyofvaccines.org/index.php/content/articles/disease-eradication https://www.historyofvaccines.org/index.php/content/articles...
- sjg007 7y ago
  Well, no, if you have enough isolation then the virus runs out of hosts. It goes extinct unless it can survive latently or in some other host species. If we are getting infected by bats consistently then we are in trouble.
  - 12elephant 7y ago
    That's wishful thinking. The virus will survive in Africa, or India, or many of the other places that are incapable or unwilling to enforcing a complete lockdown (many of these places are in the US itself). As I mentioned above, we have only ever erradicated _one_ infectious disease in all of human history. The chances of COVID, with its highly infectious nature, being the second are quite slim. Just like the first outbreak, all it takes is one person with the virus to start the whole process over again.
    - sjg007 7y ago

Leary 7y ago

On the off chance that China develops a working vaccine first, how could America ensure its safety?

phyrex 7y ago
The exact same way as with every other vaccine from any other country.
- sean2 7y ago
  I don't know what inspired GP's question, but I think he's getting at the fact that China is known to be faking their numbers from the beginning of the outbreak to show how effective the leaders are in combating the virus. So, in reality, we have no idea whether their methods are successful or not. Same with a vaccine, if China reports an extremely effective vaccine, available immediately, invented thanks to Xi's vision and leadership; Then do we just start using it here in the US, or do we have another year of hiding in our houses while we run trials while the rest of the credulous world gets back to work?
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    "China is known to be faking their numbers" I haven't seen an explanation of South Korea then. Are they faking their statistics too? If not, then China's reported stats don't seem so incredible.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      Personally I haven't even seen a more detailed accusation than "China is faking their numbers [because they obviously are, they're China]" - that is, other than flat-Earth level "oh look at the mobile phone number cancellation data that's definitely trustworthy and definitely indicates people being erased". Not to mention any attempts at quantifying what's the level of the alleged manipulation of the data. Is it suspected to be undercounted by an order of magnitude? Two orders? Three orders? Why?

truantbuick 7y ago

I'd like to believe we will start mass manufacturing all promising candidates long before testing is complete. The stakes are so high this time that it's important _as soon as_ testing results are deemed adequate, they can start distributing them, even if it means manufacturing stuff that doesn't ultimately pan out.

bolasanibk 7y ago
Bill Gates thinks the same. https://www.wsj.com/articles/bill-gates-to-spend-billions-on-coronavirus-vaccine-development-11586124716 https://www.wsj.com/articles/bill-gates-to-spend-billions-on...
- pacomerh 7y ago
  (unrelated to this but related to Bill), why are there so many people hating on Bill Gates when he talks about this virus and any prospects etc.? It's not like he's a plain celebrity, I mean he's in philanthropy etc, he's known for helping people with these kinds of issues. Just boggles my mind
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - ardit33 7y ago
    Probably same people/crowd that sent death threats to Fauci... Unfortunately we live in a country where anywhere between 18% and 31% (depending on the question/pool) of the population doesn't believe in evolution at all. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/how-many-creationists-are-there-in-america/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/how-many-c...
  - djhaskin987 7y ago
    I haven't heard of anybody hating on Bill Gates lately. Do you have a link perhaps to show me some example of this because I don't know what you're talking about

jdsully 7y ago

The history of rushed vaccines is not good. The first attempt at a polio vaccine was rushed through with inadequate safety measures and resulted in 40,000 children getting sick, some with permanent paralysis. There are good reasons vaccines take years to be approved. I’m very worried we’ll see a repeat of historical mistakes in the current rush. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutter_Laboratories#The_Cutter_incident https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutter_Laboratories#The_Cutt...

Jommi 7y ago
Not to mention the social stigma if the 1st attempt goes wrong, potentially reducing people's inclination to get the vaccine.
danieltillett 7y ago
No that it matters, but it wasn’t a safety issue with the vaccine, but a manufacturing issue. The vaccine was perfectly safe, it just wasn’t manufactured to the correct specification.
- jdsully 7y ago
  The method of manufacture is part of the FDA approval
  - danieltillett 7y ago
    Yes it is, but if it isn’t followed then you can’t blame the vaccine. Many other companies made the same vaccine using the same processes without issue. The Salk vaccine is very safe if manufactured to specification.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

guidedlight 7y ago

I do wonder how effective and safe an old-fashioned inoculation could be in the absence of a vaccine. A small quantity of the virus could be introduced to your leg where it is away from your lungs and bloodstream. Your body could fight the virus there.

vikramkr 7y ago
That's a type of vaccine. If you want to figure out how safe and effective it is, you need to run a clinical trial. Same as amy other vaccine. If you got started now, you'd be running behind some of the other approaches that are already in clinical trials, so, um, get started fast?
danieltillett 7y ago
Most likely very effective especially if you were to find a strain that didn’t make you seriously ill. Pity nobody seems interested in actually finding such a strain.
unionpivo 7y ago
He discuses that in his blog. There are 2 types of such vaccines. Live ones, that are exactly like you said, low infectious strain, and dead ones, where they kill the virus and it sometimes still produces correct antibodies. there are several of such types of vaccines in development

ignoramous 7y ago

I want to point out that 5 vaccines (out of 78) are in phase 1 trials (4 of those actively looking for volunteers, visit clinicaltrials.gov links below to see if you qualify): 1. mRNA-1273 (lipid nanoparticle encapsulated mRNA vaccine encoding S protein) by Moderna: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04283461 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04283461 2. Ad5-nCoV (Adenovirus type 5 vector that expresses S protein) by CanSino Biologicals: NCT04313127. 3. INO-4800 (DNA plasmid encoding S protein delivered by electroporation) by Inovio Pharmaceuticals: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04336410 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04336410 4. LV-SMENP-DC (Dendritic cell modified with lentiviral vector expressing synthetic minigene based on domains of selected viral proteins; administered with antigen-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte) by Shenzhen Geno-Immune Medical Institute: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04276896 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04276896 5. Pathogen-specific artificial antigen-presenting cell (aAPCs modified with lentiviral vector expressing synthetic minigene based on domains of selected viral proteins) by Shenzhen Geno-Immune Medical Institute: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04299724 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04299724 Ref: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41573-020-00073-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41573-020-00073-5

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago

> Roughly estimated, even a seasonal flu vaccine might kill about one out of every ten million recipients though such a reaction – we give it to everyone possible, though, because far more people will die if we don’t. Yeah that’s frightening, but really true? I’ve never heard of a single person dying from the flu vaccine locally.