4 ms·
All very promising but I am simply not interested in a brand new vaccine that has been minimally tested. Especially an mRNA vaccine, a technology which is only
by cats_pajamas 7y ago
All very promising but I am simply not interested in a brand new vaccine that has been minimally tested. Especially an mRNA vaccine, a technology which is only a few years old now and comes with side effects like inducing autoimmunity. We're talking about altering your genome, permanently.
The Gates article mentions the mRNA solution needs to be kept at -80C up until delivery. In a controlled environment, a test lab in a first world country this is completely feasible. However the logistical challenges that presents seem impossible when you consider the infrastructure (or lack thereof) of a continent like Africa.
The normal development cycle of a vaccine is 5 years and we're shortening that to 18 months? By having years less human testing? And side stepping government regulators? No thank you.
And really all I get out of it is short term immunity which requires boosters or worse a yearly shot like the flu shot? Honestly it sounds worse and worse the more I research it.
- lbeltrame 7y agoIIRC, while Moderna's solution is RNA based, Inovio's should be DNA based, which means -20C instead of -80C, a definite improvement.
- rotexo 7y agoCan you offer a source on the claim that an mRNA vaccine would permanently alter your genome? I have a PhD in microbiology, and I would be VERY surprised if an mRNA vaccine did that.