Pages

Tuesday, February 25, 2020

A coronavirus vaccine on the horizon?

Just yesterday news broke about a company called Moderna (working in conjunction with our government) that's rapidly developing a novel coronavirus vaccine. My thoughts:

1. The fact that Moderna is going to phase 1 trials in approximately 3 months of obtaining the coronavirus' genetic sequence is super fast. Perhaps a record. By contrast, SARS took around 20 months before it got to this point.

2. It looks like the phase 1 trials are set to begin in April. They'll occur at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) facilities in Bethesda, MD. This will involve around 20+ volunteers.

If these trials are successful, they'll move onto phase 2 trials. This would involve hundreds of participants.

Phase 3 trials would involve hundreds to thousands of participants.

Given the coronavirus epidemic, which is already verging on a pandemic, it's quite possible the gov't will fast track the trials.

3. In any case, I think it would still take at least half a year from April (and that'd be fast!) before a vaccine could be publicly available. So, even if (big if at this point) the trials are successful, that could still mean a vaccine won't be out until late 2020 or early 2021 at best.

And most likely health care professionals will get it before the general public.

4. How do vaccines work? Let's consider what normally happens. This will be simplified, but I can get into technical details if needed. Scientists will take a weakened or dead virus, inject it into our bodies so that it provokes an immune response from our immune system. That is, our immune system will take the virus, flag it, then produce antibodies against it. That's what normally happens.

However, Moderna is trying something different. Scientists at Moderna are instead injecting a sequence of foreign genetic material (mRNA) directly into certain immune system cells of our body. This (eventually) should provoke these immune cells to develop antibodies. It's a more direct approach because it bypasses the initial events.

5. Will it work? Who knows. It's never been done before. There could be significant side effects. The clinical trials will tell us in time.

6. By the way, the government (like the NIAID) often asks for the help of and even contracts with private companies (like Moderna) to help with vaccines in epidemics. They can't do it themselves. This is for vaccine development as well as vaccine production if development is successful. Something to keep in mind when you hear about the evils of private capitalist companies and so on.

9 comments:

  1. Fast, probiotics, and stay away from sugar and refined carbs to build up antibodies and new stem cells.

    This is reason enough not to take the vaccine —> instead injecting a sequence of foreign genetic material (mRNA) directly into certain immune system cells of our body.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Fast, probiotics, and stay away from sugar and refined carbs"

      I guess I can agree that's more or less good general health advice.

      "to build up antibodies and new stem cells."

      But that's not how antibodies and stem cells work. They're not the direct causal result of (say) fasting or avoiding sugar.

      Of course, eating well is a good thing that will keep us healthy in general, which would include a healthy immune system.

      "This is reason enough not to take the vaccine —> instead injecting a sequence of foreign genetic material (mRNA) directly into certain immune system cells of our body."

      Well, this is how Moderna is developing their vaccine. It's not applicable to all vaccines.

      And even with Moderna's vaccine, as I said, it's still in clinical trials. It remains to be seen whether Moderna's vaccine is even successful.

      Delete
    2. It might be easy to refuse vaccination if there's no risk or danger of being infected with a deadly disease. However, it's more difficult to refuse vaccination if there's significant risk or danger of being infected with a deadly disease.

      Suppose a city is hit hard with the bubonic plague. I think it'd be fairly easy to refuse a plague vaccine or antibiotics if a person lived on the other side of the world from this city and is quite safe. However, I imagine it'd be quite difficult to refuse a plague vaccine or antibiotics if a family lives in the city and sees their neighbors succumbing to the bubonic plague.

      Likewise it's often easy for Westerners to take vaccines and other treatments (e.g. antibiotics) for granted because we live in relative safety from disease, we're protected by herd immunity, and so on.

      Delete
    3. We should ban pharmaceuticals in general. Stop ingesting or injecting those artificial chemicals into the body. Medicine is bad. Stick with aroma therapy, reiki, reflexology, cupping, ear candling, and crystal power.

      Delete
    4. Or as I like to put it on the flip side: Cobra venom is 100% organic produce.

      Delete
  2. "I guess I can agree that's more or less good general health advice."

    I would argue it is the best advice.

    "But that's not how antibodies and stem cells work. They're not the direct causal result of (say) fasting or avoiding sugar."

    I am not talking about "missing breakfast." Prolonged fasting 48-72 hours has shown to stimulate stem cells creating new immune systems.

    "We're protected by herd immunity." Not by vaccines. That is propaganda that the public has come to believe. Herd immunity only comes naturally. See the science here:

    https://truthsnitch.com/tag/arthur-hedrich/#sthash.5RrMjKPP.rM9BBl8F.dpbs

    I am not anti-medicine. I am anti: Americans stuffing their faces with processed food and wonder why they are the sickest in the world yet the most medically advanced?

    I am for safety studies for vaccines for children (e.g. MMR), but the CDC and vaccines companies refuse to do double blind placebos testing. I am for liability for vaccine companies. Why is it the vaccine companies are the only companies to be exempt from law suits? We all know why.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I would argue it is the best advice."

      Okay, where's the argument? :) On second thought, I don't really care, because as I said I already more or less agree, so it's not a point of contention.

      "I am not talking about "missing breakfast.""

      Um, I never talked about "missing breakfast" either.

      "Prolonged fasting 48-72 hours has shown to stimulate stem cells creating new immune systems."

      No idea what you're referring to when you say it has been "shown". Maybe you're referring to Jason Fung and intermittent fasting. If so, I would generally agree with him. However, that's not the point. The point is it's still not a direct causal relationship as you apparently implied in your original statement. Regardless, this isn't a major point of disagreement for me. And more importantly it's a tangent from the main point of my post which was about coronavirus, not fasting.

      "Not by vaccines. That is propaganda that the public has come to believe. Herd immunity only comes naturally. See the science here: https://truthsnitch.com/tag/arthur-hedrich/#sthash.5RrMjKPP.rM9BBl8F.dpbs"

      1. This post has very little (if any) science. At best, you could say it's a string of cherrypicked citations and quotations from scientific articles.

      2. I don't know why the post brings up "evidence" from nearly 100 years ago. It'd be better to look at modern evidence.

      3. The post acts like what it says is something "the medical establishment" has been hiding for years. The post acts as if they've made some new or surprising discovery. For example, it says: "Scientists developed vaccinations based on the natural herd immunity derived from pathogen exposure." But (putting the best spin I can on the sentence) that's not new. In fact, that's just basic immunology 101. Every healthcare professional knows vaccines are "based on" our "natural" "immunity derived from pathogen exposure". That's precisely how vaccines work! I don't know why this is even an issue.

      4. The rest of what's said sounds like they're trying to weave a conspiracy theory.

      Delete
    2. "I am not anti-medicine."

      1. Well, you're an anti-vaxxer.

      2. Besides, my post wasn't even about vaccines in general. Instead it was about developing a vaccine for the coronavirus. A vaccine that doesn't even exist! However, you have an axe to grind, so you decided to make this about vaccines in general.

      3. As I've said, worst case scenario, if there's a deadly disease, many people would be willing to take the risks associated with vaccines and be vaccinated. They'd rather take the risk than be dead.

      "I am anti: Americans stuffing their faces with processed food"

      I think most if not all healthcare professionals would be against "Americans stuffing their faces...".

      "I am for safety studies for vaccines for children (e.g. MMR), but the CDC and vaccines companies refuse to do double blind placebos testing."

      This is a line that anti-vaxxers repeat like a mantra, but the fact is that there have been plenty of "safety studies for vaccines for children" including with the MMR vaccine. Since you brought up the CDC, just take a look here for a start. There are so many examples, but of course it almost always falls on deaf ears when it comes to anti-vaxxers.

      "I am for liability for vaccine companies. Why is it the vaccine companies are the only companies to be exempt from law suits? We all know why."

      1. No, I don't think "we all know why". My guess is you're attempting to suggest vaccine companies profit off vaccines in an immoral manner. I don't know if that's true or false. If it's true, then I could simply say "okay, let's change that".

      2. At any rate, the legal issues are separable from the medical scientific issues in vaccines and vaccination. I'm more interested in what vaccines are, how they work, whether they're safe, and so on. I'm not so interested in the legal issues.

      3. It's not implausible to consider that the anti-vaxx movement (including anti-vaxx physicians like Andrew Wakefield and Russell Blaylock) may be attempting to profit off the public's fears and ignorance regarding vaccines.

      Delete