Coronavirus 2019-2020 thread (no unsubstantiated rumours!)


quantumlight

Junior Member
Registered Member
The only hope now for the U.S. is the vaccines.

Looking at the progression of the infection curve, without the vaccines proving to be working and effective, the entire population of the U.S. could be in danger of being infected in a year's time. That is assuming the worst-case scenario where herd immunity is not going to slow down the infection rate.
Vaccines seem promising, likely will put an end to covid by early next spring, but will come too late to help with the current 3rd wave in xmas and newyears etc
 

emblem21

Junior Member
Registered Member
Vaccines seem promising, likely will put an end to covid by early next spring, but will come too late to help with the current 3rd wave in xmas and newyears etc
Unlikely to make much of a difference, the virus would have mutated out of control that so many would be infected that it won’t really help much. Keep in mind that the medicine costs too much and the vaccine is also likely to cost a lot of the majority are unlikely get them in time. Also to note that very little people trust these vaccines in America so I don’t think there is much hope at all.
 

daifo

Junior Member
Registered Member
I don't find much English information about the effectiveness of any of the Chinese vaccines, but here is snippet of one:

"
The vaccine’s recipients include construction workers, diplomats and students who have traveled to more than 150 countries during the pandemic, Sinopharm chairman Liu Jingzhen said. China had managed to largely keep the coronavirus off of its soil since late April, so participants in vaccine trials needed to be sent overseas to find out if the vaccine really worked.

“For example, a transnational company has 99 employees in one of its overseas offices, of whom 81 were vaccinated,” Liu was quoted explaining. “And later, an outbreak broke out in the office, 10 of the 18 people who were not vaccinated were infected and none of those vaccinated were infected.”

"


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Gatekeeper

Major
Registered Member
Another gem from our deranged US official, Ron Vara. (Peter Navarro). He is a piece of work. There really is no hope if top officials actually believed China deliberately go out of her way to spread the Covid 19.

This mind set of putting the blame and confrontation with China is clear. China better prepare for eventual hostilities in dye time.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Trump trade advisor makes wild claim China sent ‘thousands of people around the world’ to spread Covid
Independent Staff
November 20, 2020, 7:26 pm
White House economic adviser Peter Navarro refused to answer CNN reporter Jake Tapper's questions about the president's contradictory remarks about the coronavirus pandemic. (AFP via Getty Images)

White House economic adviser Peter Navarro refused to answer CNN reporter Jake Tapper's questions about the president's contradictory remarks about the coronavirus pandemic. (AFP via Getty Images)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
trade adviser Peter Navarro went full-scale conspiracy theorist during a TV interview on Thursday, accusing “communist”
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of, among other things, deliberately sending their citizens around the world on “gleaming aircraft” to deliberately “seed”
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
Navarro made the baseless claims during an appearance on Eric Bolling’s show, America This Week.

Rest of article:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

quantumlight

Junior Member
Registered Member
Another gem from our deranged US official, Ron Vara. (Peter Navarro). He is a piece of work. There really is no hope if top officials actually believed China deliberately go out of her way to spread the Covid 19.

This mind set of putting the blame and confrontation with China is clear. China better prepare for eventual hostilities in dye time.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Trump trade advisor makes wild claim China sent ‘thousands of people around the world’ to spread Covid
Independent Staff
November 20, 2020, 7:26 pm
White House economic adviser Peter Navarro refused to answer CNN reporter Jake Tapper's questions about the president's contradictory remarks about the coronavirus pandemic. (AFP via Getty Images)

White House economic adviser Peter Navarro refused to answer CNN reporter Jake Tapper's questions about the president's contradictory remarks about the coronavirus pandemic. (AFP via Getty Images)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
trade adviser Peter Navarro went full-scale conspiracy theorist during a TV interview on Thursday, accusing “communist”
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of, among other things, deliberately sending their citizens around the world on “gleaming aircraft” to deliberately “seed”
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
Navarro made the baseless claims during an appearance on Eric Bolling’s show, America This Week.

Rest of article:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Between this guy, and Tom Cotton (who went further and said Covid was a Wuhan BSL4 bioweapon) and Pompeo who stated China was Central Threat of all Times while literally believing in The Rapture, and Steven Bannon who wanted US gov to Takedown Xi and overthrow CCP, topping it all off with an AlphaMale MAGA God Trump who is the self proclaimed Chosen One to Stop China... its clear to me the US gov at the very top is clearly capable of some very evil shit... makes you wonder about the real root cause of the "mystery" Beirut port explosion, the downing of the jet by Iran, and the true nature of the so called ChinaVirus....

 

vesicles

Colonel
No, your statement above is not accurate.

If COVID hadn't come about, an mRNA vaccine would have taken some 10 years to be fully validated.

In comparison, previous adenovirus-based vaccines have been used for decades, so we know it is highly unlikely for there to be any long-term complications.

---

But governments have told the vaccine companies that they will not be liable if there are side effects say 10 years down the road.

That has removed the liability risk out of mRNA vaccines which haven't been used before anywhere.
So from a corporate point of view, Pfizer and Moderna don't have to care about potential side effects in 10 years time.

With 400+ million vaccinations now signed, even a small number of adverse reactions in 10 years time would potentially mean millions of lawsuits. That would be a death sentence bankruptcy for Moderna or Pfizer.

If they were really looking at safety first and accept liability for their vaccines in 10 years time, they would have restricted the number of vaccinations to much lower levels. But of course, that means the established adenovirus vaccines will grab most of the market.

So you can see that profit is being prized over safety by Moderna and Pfizer.
Yes, I am aware of these things. The loosening of government regulation is why these companies include mRNA in their initial screening in the first place. With all the initial safety concerns of mRNA, no one would be stupid enough to include mRNA samples. Even if they find anything, they can’t use it. It would be a complete waste of time and money. They would go entirely with the traditional techs. Now that the mRNA becomes a possibility, they would happily include mRNA samples in their screening. Similar, it would be completely stupid if they narrow their searches to only mRNA. In the initial screening, you want your pool to be as wide as you can afford. Any proposal to screen only mRNA samples would be immediately triaged. The people proposing for such a stupid approach would lose their jobs immediately. No one would tolerate such stupidity. I’m using some strong words here because the idea of a “top-down” approach to limit your searches of a vaccine to only one kind of technology is simply irrational and unacceptable. No one will do it that way.

Again, each company would have multiple teams pulling out all stops and test as many samples and as many techs as they can afford. All the traditional techs will be included automatically because they have been very good at these techs and they are safer bets. Also keep in mind that their experts and their resources (like the facilities, reagents, equipment, and technicians) have been set up optimally for the traditional techs. They will include additional new techs such as mRNA due to less risks because of removal of government restrictions. But when they initially started the screening, their bets were mostly on the older techs. The new tech stuff was simply a risk worth taking, a “why-not” thing, at the beginning. It just turned out that mRNA candidates came out on top in the end. They then sugar coat their findings with fancy stuff like “we pursued the most advanced and state-of-the-art technology and identified amazing candidates with such incredible efficacy.
 

vesicles

Colonel
See, this is something I don't understand. How can you have vastly different screening results for the same virus? What are they screening exactly?
Different people have different pools. Each company most likely have their own libraries of vaccine candidates, each library would contain hundreds of thousands targets isolated from various things. These libraries are likely guarded like a state secret. Depending on the different conditions they use in their screening, they will most definitely come out with different results.

A number of years ago, my lab and some other labs have done a screening of cancer drugs using a same library that we acquired from NIH. NIH also has tons of these libraries. They give them out for free when you send them a request. As long as you can prove that you have the capability to do the screening, they will send you a whole library. the one we got contained about 200,000 small molecules that were extracted from plants and animals. 3 labs did the screening simultaneously and without any inter-lab communications. In the end, we were pleasantly surprised that half of the final candidates from our labs matched. That’s an amazing consistency. Usually, this kind of massive screening typically give you very confusing data. Even when my lab does a second round of screening, using the exact same library and exactly the same methods by the exactly same technicians, nearly 1/3 of the outcome would be different between the two rounds. Some the most effective drugs identified in one trial completely lose their effects in the second trial. This is the kind of unpredictability that we are dealing with in biology. Because of this kind of unpredictability, no one can guarantee what you will find. That’s why you want to widen your pools as much as you can in your screening. Limiting yourselves to certain technology (new or old) is simply unacceptable.
 

daifo

Junior Member
Registered Member
The problem with vaccines is the amount of people that will take the vaccine. Considering that the west is a new technology mrna, even I am a bit weary about being first in line on taking it. I guess fortunately I am not in the priority group to receive it which will likely stretch till the summer of 2021 and will have time to observe any complications from it. The other issue is these fine folks:

 

AndrewS

Major
Registered Member
Yes, I am aware of these things. The loosening of government regulation is why these companies include mRNA in their initial screening in the first place. With all the initial safety concerns of mRNA, no one would be stupid enough to include mRNA samples. Even if they find anything, they can’t use it. It would be a complete waste of time and money. They would go entirely with the traditional techs. Now that the mRNA becomes a possibility, they would happily include mRNA samples in their screening. Similar, it would be completely stupid if they narrow their searches to only mRNA. In the initial screening, you want your pool to be as wide as you can afford. Any proposal to screen only mRNA samples would be immediately triaged. The people proposing for such a stupid approach would lose their jobs immediately. No one would tolerate such stupidity. I’m using some strong words here because the idea of a “top-down” approach to limit your searches of a vaccine to only one kind of technology is simply irrational and unacceptable. No one will do it that way.
I'm confused about why you're talking about screening?

Realistically, you can't screen until a prototype vaccine has already been developed.

And there are only a handful of different approaches available for vaccine development.


Again, each company would have multiple teams pulling out all stops and test as many samples and as many techs as they can afford. All the traditional techs will be included automatically because they have been very good at these techs and they are safer bets. Also keep in mind that their experts and their resources (like the facilities, reagents, equipment, and technicians) have been set up optimally for the traditional techs. They will include additional new techs such as mRNA due to less risks because of removal of government restrictions. But when they initially started the screening, their bets were mostly on the older techs. The new tech stuff was simply a risk worth taking, a “why-not” thing, at the beginning. It just turned out that mRNA candidates came out on top in the end. They then sugar coat their findings with fancy stuff like “we pursued the most advanced and state-of-the-art technology and identified amazing candidates with such incredible efficacy.
Again, I'm confused about why you're talking about testing as many samples as possible.
There are only a handful of different approaches (mRNA, adenovirus, inactivated virus, etc) you can use to create a vaccine.
And there are no samples until a prototype vaccine has been developed.

---
And you are mistaken in thinking that the mRNA vaccines are the first to obtain full results.

The Guardian is reporting that the Oxford adenovirus vaccine is expected to report full Phase 3 results later this month.
This is expected to beat or equal when Moderna or Pfizer can report their full results.

Reference below
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So what are we to make of the premature announcements by Pfizer and Moderna?

They are pressuring politicians into buying their very expensive and less proven vaccines, in a naked grab for market share and profit.

Because Pfizer and Moderna know that if they have to wait for their full Phase 3 results to be ready, the Oxford Adenovirus vaccine (and presumably the Sinovac vaccine) will ALREADY have annoucement their FULL results.

And those vaccines are like 7x-10x cheaper than the Pfizer/Moderna versions, so why on earth would anyone buy any more vaccines from Pfizer or Moderna?

And remember that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are a nightmare to transport and store, because they have to be deep frozen.
 

Top