Topic: Russia plan to use untested vaccine against the coronavirus (Read 518 times)

Europe will have clinical trials for the vaccine and will study any confounding effects. I would feel safe about a vetted European vaccine or a vaccine made in the states because of higher standards. Even if 40k participants in Russia test out the vaccine, I'm not sure what the standard of their studies are and whether or not they have any oversight agencies -- U.S. has the FDA.

 I think the United States won't get above a 50 percent bench mark in terms of vaccinations, but iirc, the CDC said herd immunity takes place any where from 40-70 percent.

I'll edit the op in a bit because I have more information and they've only started testing it on 40k people in a stage three trial. I think it's been proven that his daugher and the supreme court judge haven't been given doses of the virus.


I hope the european vaccines come with some sort of meta analysis of trials being done. I think most places are working on the same type of vaccine (with similar proteins it's meant to be fighting against on the "spiky" surface part of the virus) so we will hopefully have enough information to at least confirm its safety.

If we can get the first 2 billion doses and then 7 billion, long term immunity might not be necessary to be tested - but I don't think many people are certain for the safety of the vaccine. I think opinion polls were around 40%.

It takes at least 4 years to check for side effects from adjuvants. The very fact that they need adjuvants shows that they are not natural immunity boosters.

Are you sure it's untested?
Because, I pretty much heard over the news two days ago that it was and continues to be tested on some number of voluntary personnels and would be distributed using voluntary personnels as well.

It isn't untested - it is just badly or inadequately tested.

They just test for antibodies against the synthetic virus they used for development. They don't test for damage as a result of adjuvents  that don't show up almost immediately. They don't check for "T" cell immunity in the victims they recruit, so any beneficial results could be from natural immunity. They don't check for adverse reactions as a result of the use of other vaccines or pharmaceuticals. In fact they don't test for very much, and often they weed out test victims that could skew the results against them.

Are you sure it's untested?

Are you sure it's untested?
Because, I pretty much heard over the news two days ago that it was and continues to be tested on some number of voluntary personnels and would be distributed using voluntary personnels as well.

This is going to depend on how the vaccine works. If there's a 99% chance of success the antibodies will be produced within 3 weeks, there's a chance they can wait until symptoms develop since most people don't die in the first two weeks of having symptoms afaik.

Taking a vaccine once infected isn't normally recommended unless it's a booster (for example tetinus can be taken straight after an open wound comes into contact with rust because it forces the immune system to remember the last dose it had).

---

I don't understand the prospective you think vaccines don't work - a lot of them have an 80+% success rate (the flu vaccine arguably doesn't work) but you're better off looking into the process of production for the patent exempt vaccines and looking at the ingredients contained within - most are just a vitus in a pool of amine based salts.

The whole point of a vaccine is that your immune system and blood destroy everything within a few weeks. You probably pick up more dangerous stuff from walking around with a cut on your hand or walking with a blister/cut on your barefoot (something everyone's probably done).

So why not wait until you are infected with the real virus, and not some synthetic variant. That will give you better protection, and avoid the side effects.

I can find no good independent research that proves that vaccines are superior to natural immunity, and they seem to word by an inferior approach to mimic the natural processes.

unless you are a member of the Eton/Oxford elite, it is difficult how one can believe that membership of the failing EU can be beneficial.

I don't have you on ignore.

Although someone might have to quote me in order for Jet Cash to see it, as I think he has me on ignore (I'm pro-vaccine and anti-Brexit)

I thought they had given up on the polio vaccine because it created more cases than it cured.

Polio was once a disease feared worldwide, striking suddenly and paralysing mainly children for life. WHO is a partner in the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, the largest private-public partnership for health, which has reduced polio by 99%. Polio now survives only among the world's poorest and most marginalized communities, where it stalks the most vulnerable children. The Initiative's goal is to reach every last child with polio vaccine and ensure a polio-free world for future generations.

On rare occasions, if a population is seriously under-immunized, an excreted vaccine-virus can continue to circulate for an extended period of time. The longer it is allowed to survive, the more genetic changes it undergoes. In very rare instances, the vaccine-virus can genetically change into a form that can paralyse – this is what is known as a circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV).

It takes a long time for a cVDPV to occur. Generally, the strain will have been allowed to circulate in an un- or under-immunized population for a period of at least 12 months. Circulating VDPVs occur when routine or supplementary immunization activities (SIAs) are poorly conducted and a population is left susceptible to poliovirus, whether from vaccine-derived or wild poliovirus. Hence, the problem is not with the vaccine itself, but low vaccination coverage. If a population is fully immunized, they will be protected against both vaccine-derived and wild polioviruses.

Since 2000, more than 10 billion doses of OPV have been administered to nearly 3 billion children worldwide. As a result, more than 13 million cases of polio have been prevented, and the disease has been reduced by more than 99%. During that time, 24 cVDPV outbreaks occurred in 21 countries, resulting in fewer than 760 VDPV cases.

Until 2015, over 90% of cVDPV cases were due to the type 2 component in OPV. With the transmission of wild poliovirus type 2 already successfully interrupted since 1999, in April 2016 a switch was implemented from trivalent OPV to bivalent OPV in routine immunization programmes. The removal of the type 2 component of OPV is associated with significant public health benefits, including a reduction of the risk of cases of cVDPV2.

The small risk of cVDPVs pales in significance to the tremendous public health benefits associated with OPV. Every year, hundreds of thousands of cases due to wild polio virus are prevented. Well over 10 million cases have been averted since large-scale administration of OPV began 20 years ago.

Circulating VDPVs in the past have been rapidly stopped with 2–3 rounds of high-quality immunization campaigns. The solution is the same for all polio outbreaks: immunize every child several times with the oral vaccine to stop polio transmission, regardless of the origin of the virus.

lockdown not the same as pandemic

pandemic is about the negative health thing hurting people around the world
the virus is the 'negative health thing'
the lockdown is the action to surpress the negative health thing FROM OVERRUNNING hospitals

if there was no risk of a hospital overrun. there would be no lockdown
but it would still be classed as a pandemic if people around the world were getting sick enough to affect their life even if they didnt get sick enough to need hospital

if no one was getting sick. then there would be no pandemic and nothing to need immunisation against