Wizaard
Well-known member
"New COVID-19 antibodies study in Spain adds evidence against herd immunity" https://twitter.com/i/events/1280194458722562049
Looks like we'll need a vaccine
Looks like we'll need a vaccine
I support your posts normally Lytham but I know there are lots of highly educated, highly skilled people putting their everything into the vaccine thing. Please be less flippant - no offence.I think the main policy now is hoping it dies out of it's own accord, a vaccine is a pipe dream.
It's not flippancy, it took Salk and others a decade to get a safe flu vaccine, six months or a year is a pipe dream.I support your posts normally Lytham but I know there are lots of highly educated, highly skilled people putting their everything into the vaccine thing. Please be less flippant - no offence.
I would imagine that limitless resource will be thrown at this, so it might speed up the timeline.It's not flippancy, it took Salk and others a decade to get a safe flu vaccine, six months or a year is a pipe dream.
Apparently some who tested CV+ have now been shown to have negligible antibody count afterwards. If the body does not create antibodies to fight off the CV but, instead, uses T-cells, then how is a vaccine going to work?
Hopefully but we also can't use the 'methods' they used then.I would imagine that limitless resource will be thrown at this, so it might speed up the timeline.
"New COVID-19 antibodies study in Spain adds evidence against herd immunity" https://twitter.com/i/events/1280194458722562049
Obviously in the context of COVID.That doesn't quite tie up with the title of your thread, there is such a thing as herd immunity but were nowhere near acquiring it from Covid (without a vaccine).
Obviously in the context of COVID.
"New COVID-19 antibodies study in Spain adds evidence against herd immunity" https://twitter.com/i/events/1280194458722562049
Looks like we'll need a vaccine
Apparently some who tested CV+ have now been shown to have negligible antibody count afterwards. If the body does not create antibodies to fight off the CV but, instead, uses T-cells, then how is a vaccine going to work? Not my field, but seems an obvious question.
Herd immunity was quoted by your man Dominic as an option with deaths on the way as collateral damage.It's an important distinction since "herd immunity" is one of the phrases used to attack the government.
Herd immunity was quoted by your man Dominic as an option with deaths on the way as collateral damage.
It's not flippancy, it took Salk and others a decade to get a safe flu vaccine, six months or a year is a pipe dream.
OK, I'm not naive but I had thought that the Oxford experiments were seemingly well advanced.It's not flippancy, it took Salk and others a decade to get a safe flu vaccine, six months or a year is a pipe dream.
Very true Mac, I suspect I maybe a home worker for a long long time.
OK, I'm not naive but I had thought that the Oxford experiments were seemingly well advanced.
Salk was involved in the flu virus as well, don't forget that they didn't have quite the same testing standards back then which negated the time lost elsewhere.Unless I'm mistaken @Lytham_fy8 is talking about Dr Jonas Salk, who was the man behind the polio vaccine (a bit more serious than flu), but this was in 1955.
65 years later there's a fair to middling chance we know a bit more about the field and can probably move a bit faster than Salk could, also everyday things such as computers and telecommunications vastly change the picture.
Edit to add:
Another point worth bearing in mind is that these vaccines are already going into clinical trials (Oxford getting close to completion) so the vaccines have already been developed, they just need to find out if they work or not.
A very fair point.As an aside.
Leap forward 100 years. How many 'new 'COVID'S' will there have been.
Can humanity survive them all?
Eventually one will do huge human damage, logical.
Salk was involved in the flu virus as well, don't forget that they didn't have quite the same testing standards back then which negated the time lost elsewhere.
don't forget that they didn't have quite the same testing standards back then which negated the time lost elsewhere.
Salk's vaccine was pretty dangerous and expensive, it needed three shots and a booster, used a nasty dead strain, was tested on unwitting orphanage kids and was rushed in to production leading to the 'Cutter Incident' where the dead virus in the shot was reactivated and killed a few people due to dodgy production.Ah so he was, in the 1940's, I hadn't realised that flu vaccines went back that far.
Do you have a source for that? I mean the standards are "does it work" and "is it safe" and I don't see how those are likely to have changed much over the years.
The polio trials invovled about 1,000,000 volunteers, can you imagine how long it's going to take to analyse that using pen and paper, even collecting the data would be considerably harder without modern communications.
In any event professors of medicine seem to think otherwise so I'll go with them.
Salk's vaccine was pretty dangerous and expensive, it needed three shots and a booster, used a nasty dead strain, was tested on unwitting orphanage kids and was rushed in to production leading to the 'Cutter Incident' where the dead virus in the shot was reactivated and killed a few people due to dodgy production.
It'd take six more years until a cheaper more effective virus was licensed using a live virus.
The science is the same though.65 years of progress.
Maybe someone should adopt "progress" as a motto.
Well is this not basically saying not as many people have it as they thought and so herd immunity is a long way off, not that hard immunity can't somewhat work once a population has enough exposure in the future, all depends how long that immunity lasts or if maybe once had it it doesn't come back as bad...
On the bright side of not as many as thought maybe it's not spreading as quick as some thought?
Apparently some who tested CV+ have now been shown to have negligible antibody count afterwards. If the body does not create antibodies to fight off the CV but, instead, uses T-cells, then how is a vaccine going to work? Not my field, but seems an obvious question.
Where is this info from?