Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
On Thursday, April 23, 2020 at 7:44:13 PM UTC-4, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
Are there a bunch of monkeys somewhere that are in danger from this virus? Let's ask if they want to enroll in a medical trial? Better than laying in the ICU on a ventilator, right? What have they got to lose?
But can we work on one that will protect humans next?
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Thursday, April 23, 2020 at 8:29:13 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Thursday, April 23, 2020 at 7:44:13 PM UTC-4, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
Are there a bunch of monkeys somewhere that are in danger from this virus? Let's ask if they want to enroll in a medical trial? Better than laying in the ICU on a ventilator, right? What have they got to lose?
But can we work on one that will protect humans next?
The rhesus macaques are the gold standard of animal testing before moving into human trials. The historical record of using these monkeys is very good.
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
Forget all that shit... I'm going to inject myself with some bleach andThis is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
On 24/04/2020 00:44, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned
deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA
vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
Forget all that shit... I'm going to inject myself with some bleach and
cover my body in UV. Mr Trump says I'll be safe against CV19 so it must
work.
Dunno...but if you are already dead who will care about the virus?
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 12:40:49 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 9:44:13 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
There are quite a few fancy-shmansy vaccines in preparation, and at least one has started it's phase-1 trials on humans.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761320301205
The University of Queensland vaccine seems to work in ferrets and has been sent off to the Netherlands for phse1 trials in humans.
Reference reads like a book report written by a high school student, and it's full of very old and sometimes obsolete conjecture.
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 9:44:13 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
There are quite a few fancy-shmansy vaccines in preparation, and at least one has started it's phase-1 trials on humans.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761320301205
The University of Queensland vaccine seems to work in ferrets and has been sent off to the Netherlands for phse1 trials in humans.
--
Bill Sloman Sydney
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 9:50:52 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 12:40:49 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 9:44:13 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
There are quite a few fancy-shmansy vaccines in preparation, and at least one has started it's phase-1 trials on humans.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761320301205
The University of Queensland vaccine seems to work in ferrets and has been sent off to the Netherlands for phse1 trials in humans.
Reference reads like a book report written by a high school student, and it's full of very old and sometimes obsolete conjecture.
Or so Fred Bloggs thinks. He makes enough of his own intellectual pratfalls to suggest that he isn't a particularly reliable critic.
For example, remdesivir is a big flop, it may show promise if they can get it to a person within days of infection, but that's not likely. The HIV protease inhibitors are similar flops. As for the vaccines, no one cares how sophisticated it is if it takes forever to deliver.
And Fred is convinced that they are all going to take forever to deliver. The people developing them are rather more optimistic, and there are enough of them that one might well be right.
New product development is an uncertain process, and everybody who takes it on knows that it may not work at all, and that somebody may come up with something better before you do.
Fred seems to be convinced that the potential cost-benefit ratio is never high enough to let you even start.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 16:44:08 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
They're always trying to cure monkeys and rats and mice. They need to
concentrate on curing humans !
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 8:30:35 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 9:50:52 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 12:40:49 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 9:44:13 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail..com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
There are quite a few fancy-shmansy vaccines in preparation, and at least one has started it's phase-1 trials on humans.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761320301205
The University of Queensland vaccine seems to work in ferrets and has been sent off to the Netherlands for phse1 trials in humans.
Reference reads like a book report written by a high school student, and it's full of very old and sometimes obsolete conjecture.
Or so Fred Bloggs thinks. He makes enough of his own intellectual pratfalls to suggest that he isn't a particularly reliable critic.
For example, remdesivir is a big flop, it may show promise if they can get it to a person within days of infection, but that's not likely. The HIV protease inhibitors are similar flops. As for the vaccines, no one cares how sophisticated it is if it takes forever to deliver.
And Fred is convinced that they are all going to take forever to deliver. The people developing them are rather more optimistic, and there are enough of them that one might well be right.
The people "developing" them are a bunch of hucksters without one single successful vaccine product development to their names.
New product development is an uncertain process, and everybody who takes it on knows that it may not work at all, and that somebody may come up with something better before you do.
Fred seems to be convinced that the potential cost-benefit ratio is never high enough to let you even start.
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 16:44:08 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned
deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar
mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-m
onkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
They're always trying to cure monkeys and rats and mice. They
need to concentrate on curing humans !
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 10:19:25 PM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 8:30:35 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 9:50:52 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail..com wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 12:40:49 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 9:44:13 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
There are quite a few fancy-shmansy vaccines in preparation, and at least one has started it's phase-1 trials on humans.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761320301205
The University of Queensland vaccine seems to work in ferrets and has been sent off to the Netherlands for phse1 trials in humans.
Reference reads like a book report written by a high school student, and it's full of very old and sometimes obsolete conjecture.
Or so Fred Bloggs thinks. He makes enough of his own intellectual pratfalls to suggest that he isn't a particularly reliable critic.
For example, remdesivir is a big flop, it may show promise if they can get it to a person within days of infection, but that's not likely. The HIV protease inhibitors are similar flops. As for the vaccines, no one cares how sophisticated it is if it takes forever to deliver.
And Fred is convinced that they are all going to take forever to deliver. The people developing them are rather more optimistic, and there are enough of them that one might well be right.
The people "developing" them are a bunch of hucksters without one single successful vaccine product development to their names.
Not really a valid objection. Developing vaccines takes ages, and most projects crash along the way.
My opinion is synchronized with those of the more serious players in the industries with many decades of successful vaccine product development.
I'm sure that you think it is. Anybody who talks about their opinion being "sychronised" - rather than perhaps "aligned" - is suggesting that they get told what to think at frequent intervals, rather than thinking anything out for themselves.
But I guess, from your vantage point of a total ignorance of the subject, you know so much more than these people.
Whoever they might be. I'm sure I don't, but I am equally sure that you don't either, no matter how enthusiastically you praise your own imagined expertise.
New product development is an uncertain process, and everybody who takes it on knows that it may not work at all, and that somebody may come up with something better before you do.
Fred seems to be convinced that the potential cost-benefit ratio is never high enough to let you even start.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 10:11:40 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 10:19:25 PM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 8:30:35 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 9:50:52 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 12:40:49 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 9:44:13 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
There are quite a few fancy-shmansy vaccines in preparation, and at least one has started it's phase-1 trials on humans.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761320301205
The University of Queensland vaccine seems to work in ferrets and has been sent off to the Netherlands for phse1 trials in humans.
Reference reads like a book report written by a high school student, and it's full of very old and sometimes obsolete conjecture.
Or so Fred Bloggs thinks. He makes enough of his own intellectual pratfalls to suggest that he isn't a particularly reliable critic.
For example, remdesivir is a big flop, it may show promise if they can get it to a person within days of infection, but that's not likely. The HIV protease inhibitors are similar flops. As for the vaccines, no one cares how sophisticated it is if it takes forever to deliver.
And Fred is convinced that they are all going to take forever to deliver. The people developing them are rather more optimistic, and there are enough of them that one might well be right.
The people "developing" them are a bunch of hucksters without one single successful vaccine product development to their names.
Not really a valid objection. Developing vaccines takes ages, and most projects crash along the way.
My opinion is synchronized with those of the more serious players in the industries with many decades of successful vaccine product development.
I'm sure that you think it is. Anybody who talks about their opinion being "sychronised" - rather than perhaps "aligned" - is suggesting that they get told what to think at frequent intervals, rather than thinking anything out for themselves.
You're using the old fashioned definition, I am using the more modern term as it refers to keeping file data in multiple locations current and identical. [probably something else that's over your head].
But I guess, from your vantage point of a total ignorance of the subject, you know so much more than these people.
Whoever they might be. I'm sure I don't, but I am equally sure that you don't either, no matter how enthusiastically you praise your own imagined expertise.
Chief scientists and CEOs at major pharmaceuticals involved in this kind of work would be start.
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 12:40:49 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 9:44:13 AM UTC+10,
bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned
deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar
mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
There are quite a few fancy-shmansy vaccines in preparation, and at
least one has started it's phase-1 trials on humans.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761320301205
The University of Queensland vaccine seems to work in ferrets and has
been sent off to the Netherlands for phse1 trials in humans.
Reference reads like a book report written by a high school student,
and it's full of very old and sometimes obsolete conjecture. For
example, remdesivir is a big flop, it may show promise if they can
get it to a person within days of infection, but that's not likely.
The HIV protease inhibitors are similar flops. As for the vaccines,
no one cares how sophisticated it is if it takes forever to deliver.
On 25/04/2020 00:50, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 12:40:49 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 9:44:13 AM UTC+10,
bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned
deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar
mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
There are quite a few fancy-shmansy vaccines in preparation, and at
least one has started it's phase-1 trials on humans.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761320301205
The University of Queensland vaccine seems to work in ferrets and has
been sent off to the Netherlands for phse1 trials in humans.
Reference reads like a book report written by a high school student,
and it's full of very old and sometimes obsolete conjecture. For
example, remdesivir is a big flop, it may show promise if they can
get it to a person within days of infection, but that's not likely.
It is if you have effective contact tracing and are serious about
beating the infection down and stopping it from killing people.
The HIV protease inhibitors are similar flops. As for the vaccines,
no one cares how sophisticated it is if it takes forever to deliver.
12 months is a long time but you can't safely speed it up and cutting
corners now could lead to big problems when it is used in bulk.
Oxford group have gone to initial human vaccine trials in volunteers
this week. They want to begin scale up before it is proven too.
In the interim UK seems to be pinning its hopes on a treatment based on
blood plasma from people who have definitely had Covid-19 and recovered.
Trails are underway and preliminary results appear to be "promising".
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 1:55:48 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 10:11:40 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 10:19:25 PM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 8:30:35 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 9:50:52 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 12:40:49 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 9:44:13 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is actually looking very promising. It is the old fashioned deactivated virus approach, no fancy shmansy multi-billion dollar mRNA vaccine with a bunch of unknowns and health concerns.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/covid-19-vaccine-protects-monkeys-new-coronavirus-chinese-biotech-reports
There are quite a few fancy-shmansy vaccines in preparation, and at least one has started it's phase-1 trials on humans.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761320301205
The University of Queensland vaccine seems to work in ferrets and has been sent off to the Netherlands for phse1 trials in humans.
Reference reads like a book report written by a high school student, and it's full of very old and sometimes obsolete conjecture.
Or so Fred Bloggs thinks. He makes enough of his own intellectual pratfalls to suggest that he isn't a particularly reliable critic.
For example, remdesivir is a big flop, it may show promise if they can get it to a person within days of infection, but that's not likely. The HIV protease inhibitors are similar flops. As for the vaccines, no one cares how sophisticated it is if it takes forever to deliver.
And Fred is convinced that they are all going to take forever to deliver. The people developing them are rather more optimistic, and there are enough of them that one might well be right.
The people "developing" them are a bunch of hucksters without one single successful vaccine product development to their names.
Not really a valid objection. Developing vaccines takes ages, and most projects crash along the way.
My opinion is synchronized with those of the more serious players in the industries with many decades of successful vaccine product development..
I'm sure that you think it is. Anybody who talks about their opinion being "sychronised" - rather than perhaps "aligned" - is suggesting that they get told what to think at frequent intervals, rather than thinking anything out for themselves.
You're using the old fashioned definition, I am using the more modern term as it refers to keeping file data in multiple locations current and identical. [probably something else that's over your head].
The last time I sat through a lecture on the problems of keeping multiple copies of a distributed data-base consistent was back around 1981, when the problems and the solutions were already well-understood, but the technology to implement them not all that well developed.
You clearly haven't got access to that kind of data-base.
But I guess, from your vantage point of a total ignorance of the subject, you know so much more than these people.
Whoever they might be. I'm sure I don't, but I am equally sure that you don't either, no matter how enthusiastically you praise your own imagined expertise.
Chief scientists and CEOs at major pharmaceuticals involved in this kind of work would be start.
They may be feeding you snippets of information, but you aren't doing well at making sense of them.
snipped stuff from my earlier post which Fred didn't bother reacting to
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
LOL- and this conclusion coming from someone who sets the record for
being consistently wrong about every last thing you think you know about
immunology.