4 ms·

I'm surprised we haven't gotten an intranasal vaccine before now. We've been talking about the issues with intramuscular vaccines in regards to mucosal immunity

by Sakos 4y ago

I'm surprised we haven't gotten an intranasal vaccine before now. We've been talking about the issues with intramuscular vaccines in regards to mucosal immunity since the very beginning.

Twirrim 4y ago
There's been a few attempts, but they haven't proven to be effective, e.g. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41591-022-00106-z https://www.nature.com/articles/d41591-022-00106-z
- coredog64 4y ago
  China has been rolling one out in addition to Sinovax.
- superkuh 4y ago
  There have been many attempts. And many of them have proven successful at the ~42 person trial level that failed in this particular study with a common adenovirus as the DNA delivery agent. The one I linked did work in large scale clinical trials which is why it is now being given to the public. Plus intranasal influenza a vaccines have been around since the 1960s. I alternate getting intramuscular and intranasal influenza vaccines for best protection of myself and others. I'm very hopeful for this full scale intranasal roll out of a proven intranasal vaccine for sars-cov-2. I am seriously considering a trip to India to get it as a booster to my 4x mRNA intramusculars from Moderna and BioNTech(Pfizer). I just wish they'd use nebulizers instead of a simple spray. Simple sprays work for the fluid dynamics scales involved in small animal models but as large humans we need nebulizers to get the most complete upper respiratory protection.
Eric_WVGG 4y ago
I believe that the technocratic culture of US medicine is standing in the way of research on intranasal vaccines. What you consistently hear from medical professionals is, "we have this proven technology, it works, the objections to it are irrational, can we please just be sensible?" So far, so good… (I'm a bit of a technocrat myself) But why are people so afraid of vaccines in particular? There are all sorts of arguments about autism and turning frogs gay or whatever, but people are still happy to take whatever pills the doctor prescribes and hormone-enriched fast food… what makes vaccines different? It seems pretty clear that people are just afraid of needles, and from an evolutionary biology perspective, that's not irrational at all! But "maybe we should make vaccines that won't scare people" just won't get you anywhere in the US medical establishment. Frightened patients aren't Serious Medicine.
- Mountain_Skies 4y ago
  People are scared of needles is incredibly dismissive and likely intentionally insulting. People aren't afraid of the needles; they're concerned about the unknown impacts of what's being injected through the needles. While needle phobia exists, it's very small percentage of those who didn't want the mystery chemical cocktail pushed by those who openly told countless "noble" lies. The vast majority of these people have had hundreds of shots over the course of their lives, including many previously well tested and well understood vaccines (none of which required 1984 style rewriting of the dictionary). Can't believe anyone is still pushing what's basically a shame tactic that is typically aimed at pre-adolescents. Do you feel smart or virtuous having posted that dismissive and insulting reductive view of people who don't blindly follow "THE SCIENCE" like you do? It's not the needles! It's the contents! How is that not incredibly obvious?
  - Eisenstein 4y ago
    None of this address his main point of 'why the vaccines when pharma has does the same thing a bunch of times to other things yet people still take tylenol (which is demonstrably toxic and causes serious illness and death all the time)'? The same people who refuse the vaccine take unknown substances in 'supplements' which have no regulation at all. It makes no sense. Explain it.
    - oaktrout 4y ago
      I can explain it. Tylenol has been around since 1955 and is only demonstrably toxic in overdoses. The mrna based vaccines have been only used for the past couple years, hence long term side effects are unknown. Not everyone who refuses the vaccine takes supplements. Your comparison is like saying "why don't you take this research chemical ('molly'), you smoke cannabis already".
      - Eisenstein 4y ago
        You didn't explain it, you explained around it. I didn't ask why specifically about tylenol and supplements, I said explain why the outrage over vaccines and not other things.

by Sakos 4y ago

I'm surprised we haven't gotten an intranasal vaccine before now. We've been talking about the issues with intramuscular vaccines in regards to mucosal immunity since the very beginning.

Twirrim 4y ago

There's been a few attempts, but they haven't proven to be effective, e.g. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41591-022-00106-z https://www.nature.com/articles/d41591-022-00106-z

coredog64 4y ago
China has been rolling one out in addition to Sinovax.
superkuh 4y ago
There have been many attempts. And many of them have proven successful at the ~42 person trial level that failed in this particular study with a common adenovirus as the DNA delivery agent. The one I linked did work in large scale clinical trials which is why it is now being given to the public. Plus intranasal influenza a vaccines have been around since the 1960s. I alternate getting intramuscular and intranasal influenza vaccines for best protection of myself and others. I'm very hopeful for this full scale intranasal roll out of a proven intranasal vaccine for sars-cov-2. I am seriously considering a trip to India to get it as a booster to my 4x mRNA intramusculars from Moderna and BioNTech(Pfizer). I just wish they'd use nebulizers instead of a simple spray. Simple sprays work for the fluid dynamics scales involved in small animal models but as large humans we need nebulizers to get the most complete upper respiratory protection.

Eric_WVGG 4y ago

I believe that the technocratic culture of US medicine is standing in the way of research on intranasal vaccines. What you consistently hear from medical professionals is, "we have this proven technology, it works, the objections to it are irrational, can we please just be sensible?" So far, so good… (I'm a bit of a technocrat myself) But why are people so afraid of vaccines in particular? There are all sorts of arguments about autism and turning frogs gay or whatever, but people are still happy to take whatever pills the doctor prescribes and hormone-enriched fast food… what makes vaccines different? It seems pretty clear that people are just afraid of needles, and from an evolutionary biology perspective, that's not irrational at all! But "maybe we should make vaccines that won't scare people" just won't get you anywhere in the US medical establishment. Frightened patients aren't Serious Medicine.

Mountain_Skies 4y ago
People are scared of needles is incredibly dismissive and likely intentionally insulting. People aren't afraid of the needles; they're concerned about the unknown impacts of what's being injected through the needles. While needle phobia exists, it's very small percentage of those who didn't want the mystery chemical cocktail pushed by those who openly told countless "noble" lies. The vast majority of these people have had hundreds of shots over the course of their lives, including many previously well tested and well understood vaccines (none of which required 1984 style rewriting of the dictionary). Can't believe anyone is still pushing what's basically a shame tactic that is typically aimed at pre-adolescents. Do you feel smart or virtuous having posted that dismissive and insulting reductive view of people who don't blindly follow "THE SCIENCE" like you do? It's not the needles! It's the contents! How is that not incredibly obvious?
- Eisenstein 4y ago
  None of this address his main point of 'why the vaccines when pharma has does the same thing a bunch of times to other things yet people still take tylenol (which is demonstrably toxic and causes serious illness and death all the time)'? The same people who refuse the vaccine take unknown substances in 'supplements' which have no regulation at all. It makes no sense. Explain it.
  - oaktrout 4y ago
    I can explain it. Tylenol has been around since 1955 and is only demonstrably toxic in overdoses. The mrna based vaccines have been only used for the past couple years, hence long term side effects are unknown. Not everyone who refuses the vaccine takes supplements. Your comparison is like saying "why don't you take this research chemical ('molly'), you smoke cannabis already".
    - Eisenstein 4y ago
      You didn't explain it, you explained around it. I didn't ask why specifically about tylenol and supplements, I said explain why the outrage over vaccines and not other things.