Coronavirus

[TLS Guy]

Here's a report questioning the initial results of the Moderna vaccine trial:

>>>“My guess is that their numbers are marginal or they would say more,” Rose said about the company’s SARS-2 vaccine, echoing a suspicion that others have about some of the company’s other work.<<<

Vaccine experts say Moderna didn’t produce data critical to assessing Covid-19 vaccine

Several vaccine experts told STAT Moderna's Covid-19 vaccine data lacked critical context needed to assess efficacy.

www.statnews.com

I agree we don't know much as they are a private company. I think the technology will be developed by academic and some government agencies. For instance the a biological warfare unit is a perfect fit. This is because if they are any use at all they will have pondered this problem for years. They also have a lot of inter government connections. So the Jenner institute and Porton Down are a perfect combination. Through Porton Down's connections that gives them unique access to the primate lab in Hamilton Montana.

I will say I thought that Moderna saying that it did produce antibody, is a glimmer that their vaccine has some hope. They are a long way from having product though.

If you look at what is known, and where the Oxford group are at, they must be considered as far ahead of the pack for likely success. So you have a world leading university vaccine research center partnering with the worlds oldest chemical and biological warfare unit. As they have demonstrated success of their method against a very similar virus with their method, then that has to add up to good reasons to be hopeful.

 

[Trell]

'racial profiling' ...... LOL, where do they come up with such BS ??

Florida is well known for enacting and enforcing laws without regard to skin color or faith

So, in this time when trust in is needed to slow down the infection rate, trust is not there.

 

[Mr._Clark]

Here's some evidence that antibodies prevent reinfection. I'm curious about the DNA vaccines. Hopefully they will prove to be effective. I'm not an anti-vaxer, but the DNA vaccines make me a little uneasy from what I've read.

>>>A pair of peer-reviewed lab studies conducted by research teams at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston suggest that antibodies created in response to COVID-19 provide immunity from the disease.

The studies suggesting one can't become reinfected with the coronavirus were both published in the journal Science on Wednesday. . . .

In the other study, Barouch and his staff took 35 rhesus macaque monkeys, vaccinating 25 of them with two doses of one of six prototype DNA vaccines created for the study. Where regular vaccines use some dead version of the virus, the created-DNA vaccines used the genetic code of the proteins that researchers believe the coronavirus uses to invade cells.

All of the vaccinated monkeys created antibodies against the virus, with some creating amounts comparable to the monkeys who had recovered from COVID-19 itself in the other study.<<<

Two new studies suggest COVID-19 antibodies provide immunity

A pair of peer-reviewed lab studies conducted by research teams at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston suggest that antibodies created in response to COVID-19 provide immunity fr…

thehill.com

 

[Mikado463]

Florida is well known for enacting and enforcing laws without regard to skin color or faith

So, in this time when trust in is needed to slow down the infection rate, trust is not there.

understood, I was referring to the part of the article about the convicted felons and the gun issue, sounded like good police work to me ........

 

[KEW]

Trump says he is taking hydroxychloroquine though health experts question its effectiveness

President Donald Trump claimed Monday he is taking daily doses of hydroxychloroquine, a drug he's long touted as a potential coronavirus cure even as medical experts and the US Food and Drug Administration question its efficacy and warn of potentially harmful side effects.

www.cnn.com

I'm surprised he hasn't tried Clorox or other disinfectant.

One of the side effects of hydroxychloroquine is that it can cause changes in emotional lability.
Emotional lability means a person may have sudden and exaggerated changes in mood, with poorly controlled strong emotions that may include anger, dysphoria, sadness, or euphoria.

Other psychiatric or nervous system side effects include nervousness, irritability, nightmares, psychosis and suicidal behaviour.

And for those that don't bother to check the links referenced in posts above :

A study posted on April 23 involving 368 patients with confirmed cases of COVID-19 treated at Veterans Health Administration medical centers found there were more deaths among those given hydroxychloroquine than those receiving standard care. In addition, the drug made no difference in the need for ventilators.

This is not a full blown study that meets professional statistical criteria for final conclusion; However, if this drug worked very well for Covid-19, there would not be more deaths among those who took it!

 

[mtrycrafts]

View attachment 36305

Great. We can only hope though.

 

[Danzilla31]

Great. We can only hope though.

That would be hilarious and I don't wish Ill on anyone but the irony of that

But how do we know he's really taking it? He could just be talking out of his ass and not taking it at all.

Wouldn't put it past him at this point

 

[JerryLove]

Trump says he is taking hydroxychloroquine though health experts question its effectiveness

President Donald Trump claimed Monday he is taking daily doses of hydroxychloroquine, a drug he's long touted as a potential coronavirus cure even as medical experts and the US Food and Drug Administration question its efficacy and warn of potentially harmful side effects.

www.cnn.com

I'm surprised he hasn't tried Clorox or other disinfectant.

My money says he's not taking it.

My money is that he said that so we stop looking at his firing of the AG that was investigating fraud in his administration (The one he claims he doesn't know).

I'm betting that he said that so we focus on that rather than the rising death toll.

It's a distraction. He's playing the buffoon (a natural talent) because we don't then look at the important stuff.

 

[Danzilla31]

My money says he's not taking it.

My money is that he said that so we stop looking at his firing of the AG that was investigating fraud in his administration (The one he claims he doesn't know).

I'm betting that he said that so we focus on that rather than the rising death toll.

It's a distraction. He's playing the buffoon (a natural talent) because we don't then look at the important stuff.

I double up on that bet Damn u posted the same thing I was thinking at the same time

I'd bet my truck if u did a drug test right now that drug is nowhere in his system

 

[KEW]

I double up on that bet Damn u posted the same thing I was thinking at the same time

I'd bet my truck if u did a drug test right now that drug is nowhere in his system

I agree. Trump is a "me first" kind of guy and he certainly has access to medical professionals to give him the straight story on Hydroxycloroquine. This is a drug with some nasty side effects, but it is approved by FDA because the symptoms are not as bad a Malaria, Lupus, or Rheumatoid Arthritis! It is not a drug to take on a whim!

 

[Swerd]

@Mr._Clark and @TLS Guy, as well as all others who follow this.

Apparently there are more wide spread doubts about the recent press releases from Moderna or The Jenner Institute about the progress of their vaccines.

I read this op-ed column in today's Washington Post. For those who want to read the whole article, I attached a full copy of it below. I added yellow highlighting for several paragraphs that I wanted to focus on.

The author, William Haseltine, a scientist with great experience in cancer and HIV/AIDS research, doesn't pull any punches. He questions the Moderna press release featuring partial results of 8 vaccine recipients among a total of 45. Why was there only partial info from 8 recipients, and why was it only about neutralizing antibodies and not other immune responses, such as T cell based immunity?

Going on, he questioned last month's press release from the NIH about partial clinical results with remdesivir. No primary or supporting data was shown. 20 days after the press release, there is still no further data of any kind. Haseltine mentioned another paper, published the same day as the NIH press release, that showed remdesivir had no measurable effect on patient survival or the amount of virus detectable in nasopharynx and lung secretions. "Without the data, no doctor treating a patient can be sure they are doing the right thing."

Finally, Haseltine focused on a press release by the Jenner Institute at Oxford University, concerning favorable results from a pre-clinical study in monkeys. Data, released as a pre-publication, appeared 2 weeks after the press release. It didn't live up to the earlier claim.

"All of the vaccinated monkeys became infected when introduced to the virus. Though there was some reduction in the amount of viral RNA detected in the lungs, there was no reduction in the nasal secretions in the vaccinated monkeys. So the positive result reported by the Oxford group turned out not to be protection from infection at all, something most would agree is what a successful vaccine would do. Instead, it lowered only the amount of virus recoverable from the vaccinated monkey’s lung."​

So, we must excercise extreme caution when it comes to press releases announced as developments in Covid-19 vaccines or medications. Partial results cannot be evaluated unless full data is shown. And, it looks like there is still quite a lot of work to be done before a successful SARS-CoV-2 vaccine can be announced.

 

[TLS Guy]

Here's some evidence that antibodies prevent reinfection. I'm curious about the DNA vaccines. Hopefully they will prove to be effective. I'm not an anti-vaxer, but the DNA vaccines make me a little uneasy from what I've read.

>>>A pair of peer-reviewed lab studies conducted by research teams at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston suggest that antibodies created in response to COVID-19 provide immunity from the disease.

The studies suggesting one can't become reinfected with the coronavirus were both published in the journal Science on Wednesday. . . .

In the other study, Barouch and his staff took 35 rhesus macaque monkeys, vaccinating 25 of them with two doses of one of six prototype DNA vaccines created for the study. Where regular vaccines use some dead version of the virus, the created-DNA vaccines used the genetic code of the proteins that researchers believe the coronavirus uses to invade cells.

All of the vaccinated monkeys created antibodies against the virus, with some creating amounts comparable to the monkeys who had recovered from COVID-19 itself in the other study.<<<

Two new studies suggest COVID-19 antibodies provide immunity

A pair of peer-reviewed lab studies conducted by research teams at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston suggest that antibodies created in response to COVID-19 provide immunity fr…

thehill.com

Oxford know for certain that if you make antibody to the S-spike protein it is protective. Their vaccine does that. The question becomes how much do you need and how fast' and to an extent how long, but a year is good enough.

I know you have unease about a DNA vaccine, but we just can't let this virus run riot or we will loose years of ground. Traditional vaccine approaches have very little chance of success against this virus. If you don't want it, then be prepared to get denied access to all public transport, planes included and large gatherings. I'm pretty sure certificates of vaccination will be required for many activities we now take for granted.

By the way the Koreans now tell us that virus can be recovered from the noses of humans for over 80 days post infection. So it is not surprising in the light of that some virus was in the noses of those monkeys post exposure.

 

[TLS Guy]

@Mr._Clark and @TLS Guy, as well as all others who follow this.

Apparently there are more wide spread doubts about the recent press releases from Moderna or The Jenner Institute about the progress of their vaccines.

I read this op-ed column in today's Washington Post. For those who want to read the whole article, I attached a full copy of it below. I added yellow highlighting for several paragraphs that I wanted to focus on.

The author, William Haseltine, a scientist with great experience in cancer and HIV/AIDS research, doesn't pull any punches. He questions the Moderna press release featuring partial results of 8 vaccine recipients among a total of 45. Why was there only partial info from 8 recipients, and why was it only about neutralizing antibodies and not other immune responses, such as T cell based immunity?

Going on, he questioned last month's press release from the NIH about partial clinical results with remdesivir. No primary or supporting data was shown. 20 days after the press release, there is still no further data of any kind. Haseltine mentioned another paper, published the same day as the NIH press release, that showed remdesivir had no measurable effect on patient survival or the amount of virus detectable in nasopharynx and lung secretions. "Without the data, no doctor treating a patient can be sure they are doing the right thing."

Finally, Haseltine focused on a press release by the Jenner Institute at Oxford University, concerning favorable results from a pre-clinical study in monkeys. Data, released as a pre-publication, appeared 2 weeks after the press release. It didn't live up to the earlier claim.

"All of the vaccinated monkeys became infected when introduced to the virus. Though there was some reduction in the amount of viral RNA detected in the lungs, there was no reduction in the nasal secretions in the vaccinated monkeys. So the positive result reported by the Oxford group turned out not to be protection from infection at all, something most would agree is what a successful vaccine would do. Instead, it lowered only the amount of virus recoverable from the vaccinated monkey’s lung."​

So, we must excercise extreme caution when it comes to press releases of partial results announced as developments in Covid-19 vaccines or medications. And, it looks like there is still quite a lot of work to be done before a successful SARS-CoV-2 vaccine can be announced.

None of the vaccinated monkeys got pneumonia though. The whole question of how long this virus persists in parts of the airway system after recovery is another big unknown. So recovery of the virus may not mean failure of immunization in this case. We need to follow survivors much more closely now to understand this better.

 

[Swerd]

Oxford know for certain that if you make antibody to the S-spike protein it is protective. Their vaccine does that. The question becomes how much do you need and how fast' and to an extent how long, but a year is good enough.

I disagree. We know their vaccine can generate antibodies against the S protein. We do not yet know if this is enough to provide protection.

I know you have unease about a DNA vaccine, but we just can't let this virus run riot or we will loose years of ground. Traditional vaccine approaches have very little chance of success against this virus. If you don't want it, then be prepared to get denied access to all public transport, planes included and large gatherings. I'm pretty sure certificates of vaccination will be required for many activities we now take for granted.

I agree. Most or all of the public's unease about any medication or food made with recombinant DNA techniques, comes from false or misleading propaganda about the potential dangers of "genetically modified organisms". I can think of nothing more dangerous than potentially fatal viruses. Viruses are simply microscopic genetically modified 'organisms' that have evolved in the wild by Mother Nature, without regard to endangering the infected hosts. When recombinant DNA or RNA methods are used in developing vaccines, there is no comparison to the genuine dangers from naturally occurring viruses.

 

[Swerd]

None of the vaccinated monkeys got pneumonia though. The whole question of how long this virus persists in parts of the airway system after recovery is another big unknown. So recovery of the virus may not mean failure of immunization in this case. We need to follow survivors much more closely now to understand this better.

Right. This was only a short-lived pre-clinical study in 6 monkeys. It wasn't meant to provide definitive answers, only that the vaccine could provide somewhat positive results in a non-human lab animal model of the disease. The only reason these types of animal model studies are done is because the FDA requires them before they approve any clinical trials of humans.

Still, we should all exercise extreme caution when it comes to believing press releases at face value. Moderna increased it's stock value by 20% on the day of the press release. I assume Moderna's CEO was a share holder, and benefited personally from that 20% increase.

 

[mtrycrafts]

That would be hilarious and I don't wish Ill on anyone but the irony of that

But how do we know he's really taking it? He could just be talking out of his ass and not taking it at all.

Wouldn't put it past him at this point

He might as I also suspect the family may have a financial interest in the drug? Brazil and England placed a large order for this pill. Brazil being 4th in # cases.

 

[mtrycrafts]

...

I'd bet my truck if u did a drug test right now that drug is nowhere in his system

Strap him down and force it.

 

[mtrycrafts]

@Mr._Clark and @TLS Guy, as well as all others who follow this.

Apparently there are more wide spread doubts about the recent press releases from Moderna or The Jenner Institute about the progress of their vaccines.

I read this op-ed column in today's Washington Post. For those who want to read the whole article, I attached a full copy of it below. I added yellow highlighting for several paragraphs that I wanted to focus on.

The author, William Haseltine, a scientist with great experience in cancer and HIV/AIDS research, doesn't pull any punches. He questions the Moderna press release featuring partial results of 8 vaccine recipients among a total of 45. Why was there only partial info from 8 recipients, and why was it only about neutralizing antibodies and not other immune responses, such as T cell based immunity?

Going on, he questioned last month's press release from the NIH about partial clinical results with remdesivir. No primary or supporting data was shown. 20 days after the press release, there is still no further data of any kind. Haseltine mentioned another paper, published the same day as the NIH press release, that showed remdesivir had no measurable effect on patient survival or the amount of virus detectable in nasopharynx and lung secretions. "Without the data, no doctor treating a patient can be sure they are doing the right thing."

Finally, Haseltine focused on a press release by the Jenner Institute at Oxford University, concerning favorable results from a pre-clinical study in monkeys. Data, released as a pre-publication, appeared 2 weeks after the press release. It didn't live up to the earlier claim.

"All of the vaccinated monkeys became infected when introduced to the virus. Though there was some reduction in the amount of viral RNA detected in the lungs, there was no reduction in the nasal secretions in the vaccinated monkeys. So the positive result reported by the Oxford group turned out not to be protection from infection at all, something most would agree is what a successful vaccine would do. Instead, it lowered only the amount of virus recoverable from the vaccinated monkey’s lung."​

So, we must excercise extreme caution when it comes to press releases announced as developments in Covid-19 vaccines or medications. Partial results cannot be evaluated unless full data is shown. And, it looks like there is still quite a lot of work to be done before a successful SARS-CoV-2 vaccine can be announced.

Why are you asking such hard questions and being so critical.

 

[mtrycrafts]

... I assume Moderna's CEO was a share holder, and benefited personally from that 20% increase.

Now I am wondering if he is dumping the stocks?

 

[Swerd]

Why are you asking such hard questions and being so critical.

Hey, it's a tough job and somebody has to do it. Besides it was Bill Haseltine who asked the questions. I was only reporting it.

Now I am wondering if he is dumping the stocks?

And, is he buying the stock of his competitors?