hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 290 of 319 FirstFirst ... 190240280287288289290291292293300 ... LastLast
Results 5,781 to 5,800 of 6369

Thread: PLAGUE: Not even primates are safe

  1. #5781
    Cosmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2012
    Location
    Event Horizon
    Posts
    7,207
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    Are you sure you actually work in health care?

    That's a lot of uninformed shit you're throwing around. But then I shouldn't be surprised with all the reports I keep hearing of healthcare workers refusing the vaccine.
    Did you actually read what I wrote or are you just in a trolling mood again?
    Guns make the news, science doesn't.

  2. #5782
    NoirAvlaa's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Location
    Portugal, laaaa
    Posts
    5,971
    How short is the development time, exactly?
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Also that didn't sound like abloo bloo to me, PM me and we can agree on a meeting spot and settle this with queensberry rules, that's a serious offer btw. I've been a member of this community since 2005 and i've never met a more toxic individual.

  3. #5783
    The Pube Whisperer Maximillian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,158
    Quote Originally Posted by NoirAvlaa View Post
    How short is the development time, exactly?
    Of a vaccine? It depends how much money and resources you are prepared to throw at the problem. There are a number of different methods using weaken virus, virus fragments, or this new RNA method that need the -70 temperatures to store it.

    Testing time is what is being rushed. You need to go through three stages of testing to prove that it is (a) safe, (b) effective, and (c) to see what the longer term outcomes are. It is stage three that is being rushed by emergency approvals because heaps of nations hospital systems are on the verge of collapse.

  4. #5784
    Movember '12 Best Facial Hair Movember 2012Donor Lallante's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    18,140
    But what if we get DOUBLE AUTISM?

  5. #5785
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    22,797
    Loads of vaccines end up being stuck at early stages of development for years at a time for various reasons (politics, funding etc) which the covid vaccine obviously didn't have to deal with.
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  6. #5786
    Cosmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2012
    Location
    Event Horizon
    Posts
    7,207
    Quote Originally Posted by NoirAvlaa View Post
    How short is the development time, exactly?
    Usually a minimum of 18 months. This is an interesting article showcasing previous vaccines development times.

    It's not just about how much money and resources you throw at the problem. We still don't have a vaccine for the 2002 SARS Coronavirus (SARS-Cov-1) or the 2012 MERS Coronavirus (MERS-Cov) and these two are much more deadlier diseases. Which is exactly why the vaccine for the SARS-Cov-2 virus raises reasonable concerns regarding effectiveness and durability of the immune response.

    Thinking vaccines are only about the money and resources is just wishful thinking. That's not how medicine works. We have a treatment to keep HIV under control but we still don't have a vaccine for it (as another example). Same with hepatitis C.
    Guns make the news, science doesn't.

  7. #5787
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    2,794
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    Are you sure you actually work in health care?

    That's a lot of uninformed shit you're throwing around. But then I shouldn't be surprised with all the reports I keep hearing of healthcare workers refusing the vaccine.
    Obv, you are more informed than practicing proffesional. Please, spare no time to set him straight with your vast amounts of knowledge on the subject.
    The medical profession is notoriously bad at efficacy studies though, historically and present. Not accusing Cosmin here, he's talking sense and is a good egg.




    The British Medical Journal's "Clinical Evidence" analyzed common medical treatments to evaluate which are supported by sufficient reliable evidence (BMJ, 2007). They reviewed approximately 2,500 treatments and found:

    13 percent were found to be beneficial

    23 percent were likely to be beneficial

    Eight percent were as likely to be harmful as beneficial

    Six percent were unlikely to be beneficial

    Four percent were likely to be harmful or ineffective.
    46 percent were unknown whether they were efficacious or harmful

    In the late 1970s, the US government conducted a similar evaluation and found a strikingly similar result. They found that only 10 percent to 20 percent of medical treatment had evidence of efficacy (Office of Technology Assessment, 1978).

  8. #5788

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Pizza delivery van
    Posts
    7,896
    The new mRNA type vacines might be a solution for some of the old viruses without vacines, as that method is easier to target. In theory with modern methods cranking out various mRNA type vacines targetting the functional parts of different viruses should be quite easy...

  9. #5789
    Pegging Specialist Donor indi's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 9, 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NoirAvlaa View Post
    How short is the development time, exactly?
    Usually a minimum of 18 months. This is an interesting article showcasing previous vaccines development times.

    It's not just about how much money and resources you throw at the problem. We still don't have a vaccine for the 2002 SARS Coronavirus (SARS-Cov-1) or the 2012 MERS Coronavirus (MERS-Cov) and these two are much more deadlier diseases. Which is exactly why the vaccine for the SARS-Cov-2 virus raises reasonable concerns regarding effectiveness and durability of the immune response.

    Thinking vaccines are only about the money and resources is just wishful thinking. That's not how medicine works. We have a treatment to keep HIV under control but we still don't have a vaccine for it (as another example). Same with hepatitis C.
    Actually, it is in large part due to the resources and funding (including carrying risk) to a large extent. The other bit is that these researchers have used technology that has been in development for decades. Some of it, as far as I'm aware, is actually based on research done after the emergence of SARS.

  10. #5790

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Pizza delivery van
    Posts
    7,896
    Quote Originally Posted by indi View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NoirAvlaa View Post
    How short is the development time, exactly?
    Usually a minimum of 18 months. This is an interesting article showcasing previous vaccines development times.

    It's not just about how much money and resources you throw at the problem. We still don't have a vaccine for the 2002 SARS Coronavirus (SARS-Cov-1) or the 2012 MERS Coronavirus (MERS-Cov) and these two are much more deadlier diseases. Which is exactly why the vaccine for the SARS-Cov-2 virus raises reasonable concerns regarding effectiveness and durability of the immune response.

    Thinking vaccines are only about the money and resources is just wishful thinking. That's not how medicine works. We have a treatment to keep HIV under control but we still don't have a vaccine for it (as another example). Same with hepatitis C.
    Actually, it is in large part due to the resources and funding (including carrying risk) to a large extent. The other bit is that these researchers have used technology that has been in development for decades. Some of it, as far as I'm aware, is actually based on research done after the emergence of SARS.
    Yeah, the mRNA isn't something that has been invented just now for covid, it has been in development for a long time. According to some sources actually creating the RNA sequence for the vacine took 2 days in itself, the ground work to get to that probably took more than a decade.

    One important trick is to get the vacine RNA past the immune systems into the cells to produce the protein you want to develop antibodies for.

  11. #5791
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    22,797
    Don't the mRNA covid vaccines have the lowest efficacy though?
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  12. #5792
    מלך יהודים Zeekar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,615
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Don't the mRNA covid vaccines have the lowest efficacy though?
    No they have the highest. Around 94 to 95% efficiency.


    

  13. #5793
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    22,797
    Ah yeah, it's the oxford astra zeneca vaccine which is a bit shit.
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  14. #5794

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Pizza delivery van
    Posts
    7,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeekar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Don't the mRNA covid vaccines have the lowest efficacy though?
    No they have the highest. Around 94 to 95% efficiency.
    The mRNA stuff is the snipers of the vacine world, targeting single specific proteins and their princible of operation is quite elegant.

    Basically the vacine contains the instructions to produce the spike protein that makes the big bad virus latch onto target cells, but no other payload of the virus thus it isn't infectious at all. So some spikes get produced and flagged as hostile and antibodies get created, meanwhile the RNA naturally decays away, leaving you with only the antibodies.

    As long as the spike antibodies that get created don't end up targeting anything else the vacine should be way safer than the traditional ones based on weakened or dead viral colonies.

  15. #5795
    מלך יהודים Zeekar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,615
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Ah yeah, it's the oxford astra zeneca vaccine which is a bit shit.
    And even that one is better than regular flu vaccines. Heck with the modified dosage it reaches 90+% efficiency.


    

  16. #5796
    Movember 2012 Stoffl's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The original viennese waffle
    Posts
    23,158
    Quote Originally Posted by depili View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeekar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Don't the mRNA covid vaccines have the lowest efficacy though?
    No they have the highest. Around 94 to 95% efficiency.
    The mRNA stuff is the snipers of the vacine world, targeting single specific proteins and their princible of operation is quite elegant.

    Basically the vacine contains the instructions to produce the spike protein that makes the big bad virus latch onto target cells, but no other payload of the virus thus it isn't infectious at all. So some spikes get produced and flagged as hostile and antibodies get created, meanwhile the RNA naturally decays away, leaving you with only the antibodies.

    As long as the spike antibodies that get created don't end up targeting anything else the vacine should be way safer than the traditional ones based on weakened or dead viral colonies.
    Vaccines 2.0

    Get ready for Autism 2.0 boys. Imagine the absolute posting SCENES.

  17. #5797

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Pizza delivery van
    Posts
    7,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeekar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Ah yeah, it's the oxford astra zeneca vaccine which is a bit shit.
    And even that one is better than regular flu vaccines. Heck with the modified dosage it reaches 90+% efficiency.
    that one is a traditional vacine IIRC, so much cheaper and easier to mass produce and less demanding to store.

  18. #5798
    evil edna's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    5,978
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NoirAvlaa View Post
    How short is the development time, exactly?
    Usually a minimum of 18 months. This is an interesting article showcasing previous vaccines development times.

    It's not just about how much money and resources you throw at the problem. We still don't have a vaccine for the 2002 SARS Coronavirus (SARS-Cov-1) or the 2012 MERS Coronavirus (MERS-Cov) and these two are much more deadlier diseases. Which is exactly why the vaccine for the SARS-Cov-2 virus raises reasonable concerns regarding effectiveness and durability of the immune response.

    Thinking vaccines are only about the money and resources is just wishful thinking. That's not how medicine works. We have a treatment to keep HIV under control but we still don't have a vaccine for it (as another example). Same with hepatitis C.
    Except in this case thats exactly what happened. The vaccines for SARS and MERS were only stopped because there was no longer enough of a need for them to be profitable after the outbreaks were brought under control. That work was piggybacked off to get the current vaccines developed so quickly, combined with unlimited funding and the ability to run testing phases concurrently.

  19. #5799
    Banned
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    5,326
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffl View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by depili View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeekar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Don't the mRNA covid vaccines have the lowest efficacy though?
    No they have the highest. Around 94 to 95% efficiency.
    The mRNA stuff is the snipers of the vacine world, targeting single specific proteins and their princible of operation is quite elegant.

    Basically the vacine contains the instructions to produce the spike protein that makes the big bad virus latch onto target cells, but no other payload of the virus thus it isn't infectious at all. So some spikes get produced and flagged as hostile and antibodies get created, meanwhile the RNA naturally decays away, leaving you with only the antibodies.

    As long as the spike antibodies that get created don't end up targeting anything else the vacine should be way safer than the traditional ones based on weakened or dead viral colonies.
    Vaccines 2.0

    Get ready for Autism 2.0 boys. Imagine the absolute posting SCENES.
    my body is ready

  20. #5800
    Lief Siddhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 15, 2011
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    8,156
    BONESAW IS READYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
    I was somewhere around Old Man Star, on the edge of Essence, when drugs began to take hold.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •