4 ms·
I get that everyone like to put "we're the first" in their press release but there are already a number of trials, eg house the day before a German company was
by notechback 6y ago
I get that everyone like to put "we're the first" in their press release but there are already a number of trials, eg house the day before a German company was reportedly starting trials
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/04/22/world/europe/22reuters-health-coronavirus-vaccine-biontech.html https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/04/22/world/europe/22re...
- punnerud 6y agoAnd trials started weeks ago in Norway as well: https://www.regjeringen.no/en/aktuelt/who-global-corona-study-starts-in-norway/id2695532/ https://www.regjeringen.no/en/aktuelt/who-global-corona-stud...
- egao1980 6y agoOr Russia - https://ria.ru/20200411/1569898745.html https://ria.ru/20200411/1569898745.html
- remarkEon 6y ago(I don't speak Russian, yet) Given how politicized this has gotten, in general for treatment of this virus, I'm not optimistic that we'll be sharing information. Praying I'm wrong.
- egao1980 6y agoBasically on 11 of April they started a trial. Up to today WHO approved for trial 9 potential vaccines made in Russia.
- egao1980 6y agoThe new vaccine is good but arcticle title is not.
- tallanvor 6y agoThe trials in Norway are about treatment, not vaccines.
- JProthero 6y agoThe news reported in the BBC article is that the first patients have been injected in a UK vaccine trial, and that they are the first such patients in Europe. The New York Times article discusses vaccine trials that have been approved, or which are planned pending regulatory approval, in Germany, China and the US. If a vaccine in the German trial has already been administered to patients, then the claim in the BBC article about the Oxford trial being the first to inject patients in Europe would be incorrect, but the New York Times article doesn't state whether or not patients have been injected in the German trial — it only states that the trial has been given the 'green-light', and that it 'will be initially conducted on 200 healthy people'. Another comment here contains a link to an article discussing a World Health Organisation trial, in which the first patient will be Norwegian. That trial will test non-vaccine treatments (specifically hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, lopinavir and interferon-β 1a), and at the time of publication, the participants had not yet received treatment. It doesn't seem to me that any of the statements in these articles are in conflict with the BBC piece. The author of the BBC article is Fergus Walsh; he's a senior medical correspondent for the BBC who will be familiar to anyone who has been watching UK television news during the pandemic. He is one of the most measured and scientifically literate voices on the BBC, and he is not prone to sensationalism or exaggeration. Anything he has written for the BBC's website is very likely to have been worded carefully, and to be reliably-sourced and well-researched, but if there are any errors, either he or the BBC should be contacted so the piece can be corrected. The BBC publishes corrections at https://www.bbc.co.uk/helpandfeedback/corrections_clarifications https://www.bbc.co.uk/helpandfeedback/corrections_clarificat... I have no connection to Walsh or the BBC, but I thought this should be noted.