Canadian Money Forum banner
1 - 20 of 3626 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,559 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
it's shaping up that there appears to be a number of DIFFERENT vaccines that are effective against the covid...This is a little confusing to me.
Can some or you epidemiological experts explain this , to a dum-dum like me?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,246 Posts
it's shaping up that there appears to be a number of DIFFERENT vaccines that are effective against the covid...This is a little confusing to me.
Can some or you epidemiological experts explain this , to a dum-dum like me?
I’m I expert, but is it similar to tylenol, Advil, aspirin.....three different drugs that treat similar symptoms?

I did hear that one of the four promising vaccines is a different type? Three of them are RNA? And the fourth isn’t?

i suppose the next question is......will you accept it once it’s available?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,951 Posts
There are a number of different vaccine technologies, the basic idea is that they trick your body into developing antibodies that are effective against COVID19. Lots of different ways to do this.

There are dozens of vaccines at various stages, but there are only a handful of frontrunners today. They are apparently reasonably effective.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,107 Posts
it's shaping up that there appears to be a number of DIFFERENT vaccines that are effective against the covid...This is a little confusing to me.
Can some or you epidemiological experts explain this , to a dum-dum like me?
Many of the vaccines that were created in the last few months appear to be highly effective. This is a hugely good news .... the vaccines were created in record fast time, and appear to be more effective than most people expected.

Basically it's something like 20 different companies creating 20 different vaccines. Each is a different formula and manufacturing technique. It's looking like several of these, from multiple companies, are effective against COVID.

Clinical trials are ongoing. In these trials, the vaccines are used on real people and the results are tracked. This will give us more data about how effective they are (on different kinds of people such as different age groups) and also tell us if there are any significant side effects.

As more trials happen, we'll know more clearly. But early results look like MANY of these vaccines are working.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,215 Posts
I'm curious as to what criteria was used to winnow the WHO's list of fifty two vaccine candidates in clinical trials down to twenty?

Where one wants to know what's being worked on, another one hundred and sixty plus are in the "pre clinical evaluation" list.


Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,339 Posts
.....i suppose the next question is......will you accept it once it’s available?
The same scenario occurred when the H1N1 vaccine came out 10 years ago. All the conspiracy theorists were against it. It was soon forgotten. Little that they know, H1N1 has been a standard strain in the yearly flu vaccine ever since. My guess is COVID19 will also be added and it too will be soon be forgotten.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,951 Posts
The same scenario occurred when the H1N1 vaccine came out 10 years ago. All the conspiracy theorists were against it. It was soon forgotten. Little that they know, H1N1 has been a standard strain in the yearly flu vaccine ever since. My guess is COVID19 will also be added and it too will be soon be forgotten.
H1N1 is a subtype of Influenza A, it's "always" been around.

FYI, the spanish flu was also a H1N1 virus.

The issue with COVID19 vaccines is
1. They are rushed.
2. Many use new technologies and techniques that are not commonly used on humans.
3. Huge political pressure to get a vaccine approved.

Do you want to be the guy at the FDA saying "Mr Trump, I can't approve this yet"?

There are legitimate concerns with using new technologies.
We don't yet know the long term side effects of these vaccines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,620 Posts
I’m I expert, but is it similar to tylenol, Advil, aspirin.....three different drugs that treat similar symptoms?
... so you're a drug expert here? The only similiar symptom these 3 drugs are for is "pain" or more like a headache.

You should not be taking Aspirin if you're on blood thinner.

Tylenol (plus aspirin) won''t be really effective if you have pain from an infection.

Advil is best for pain from infections.

Tylenol for general pain plus fever and arthrithris

I did hear that one of the four promising vaccines is a different type? Three of them are RNA? And the fourth isn’t?

i suppose the next question is......will you accept it once it’s available?
... that's a good question. Heard it's not mandatory ... this should shut the anti-vaxxers up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,151 Posts
and the mRNA vaccines are fundamentally different than ANY vaccine ever developed before. So long term effcts and how the vaccination affects transmitting the disease to others will not be known this year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,315 Posts
and the mRNA vaccines are fundamentally different than ANY vaccine ever developed before. So long term effcts and how the vaccination affects transmitting the disease to others will not be known this year.
While it's true that we don't know any long-term effects; it should be fundamentally safe unlike the traditional vaccines which use either weakened live virus, or inactive virus.

The mRNA vaccines only provide the portion that encodes the protein antigens of the virus envelope. Short explanation is that the mRNA gets read by the body's cellular machinery and produces the protein of interest. The body will view it as a foreign body and attack it, with the memory kept in the T-cell. So the next time the antigen enters the body, it'll be attacked by the immune system. Obviously if the virus mutates enough that the antigen is no longer recognizable, the immune response will be lessened.

Here's an older paper about the technology: mRNA vaccines — a new era in vaccinology

But since no active/inactive virus is actually injected, I'd think that it is safer and more effective than the traditional vaccines. However, as mRNA is pretty fragile, storage and delivery considerations are the issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,158 Posts
and the mRNA vaccines are fundamentally different than ANY vaccine ever developed before. So long term effcts and how the vaccination affects transmitting the disease to others will not be known this year.
This is a question I have. Suppose a couple are staying safe as they can in their own home. One is over 80, the other not. The over 80 is eligible for the early vaccine roll out, the spouse not. The vaccinated spouse now feels safe to go out and about. If they are exposed to Covid (but protected from it by vaccine), can they still bring it home and infect their spouse?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
This is a question I have. Suppose a couple are staying safe as they can in their own home. One is over 80, the other not. The over 80 is eligible for the early vaccine roll out, the spouse not. The vaccinated spouse now feels safe to go out and about. If they are exposed to Covid (but protected from it by vaccine), can they still bring it home and infect their spouse?
Short answer ... Yes, the other could still get infected.
Remember the the vaccine itself is not proven to be 100% effective so caution is still needed. The real protection (for the overall general public) will come after many incubation periods have passed after most are vaccinated.

Edit: Virus shedding and infectious periods will no doubt be monitored after the rollout. Case numbers should be able to show the impact of the vaccine in as little as a few weeks I would gather.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,315 Posts
The vaccinated spouse now feels safe to go out and about. If they are exposed to Covid (but protected from it by vaccine), can they still bring it home and infect their spouse?
Yes. The point of the vaccine is that your immune system can deal with the virus, but you're still carrying it and can spread it. The point of herd immunity and immunization is that the virus doesn't stick around the body that long and reduce the chances of you infecting someone else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,951 Posts
While it's true that we don't know any long-term effects; it should be fundamentally safe unlike the traditional vaccines which use either weakened live virus, or inactive virus.

The mRNA vaccines only provide the portion that encodes the protein antigens of the virus envelope. Short explanation is that the mRNA gets read by the body's cellular machinery and produces the protein of interest. The body will view it as a foreign body and attack it, with the memory kept in the T-cell. So the next time the antigen enters the body, it'll be attacked by the immune system. Obviously if the virus mutates enough that the antigen is no longer recognizable, the immune response will be lessened.

Here's an older paper about the technology: mRNA vaccines — a new era in vaccinology

But since no active/inactive virus is actually injected, I'd think that it is safer and more effective than the traditional vaccines. However, as mRNA is pretty fragile, storage and delivery considerations are the issue.
Fundamentally safe?
I understand that with mRNA vaccines you have absolutely no risk of catching the diesease. Good.

However the mRNA benefit is that a single spike protein can be used to target a large number of viruses, or potentially cancer cells etc.

Lets say they choose a mRNA that targets something that we want?
What if the mRNA in a particular vaccine targets the immune system on healthy cells, essential bacteria, bone marrow, lung cells?

I think traditional dead virus injections are pretty safe we're telling it to watch for this specific viral strain.

But to active our immune system and say "blast anything that looks like this", is inherently risky.

I agree that the intention is only to target bad things, but the point of unknown side effects is that they're UNKNOWN. It's also why you need large samples and time to see the effects.


I wonder if there was ever another treatment that ended up with unintentional side effects.
Hmm, lets take a cancer drug that was formerly used as an anti-nauseau drug.
Thalidomide
How many years, and how many lives destroyed before they realized... ooops I guess it DOES have side effects.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,315 Posts
it's shaping up that there appears to be a number of DIFFERENT vaccines that are effective against the covid...This is a little confusing to me.
Can some or you epidemiological experts explain this , to a dum-dum like me?
So, I'll use an analogy, think of the virus as a bomb inside a lockbox that can only be opened by a specific key. If you can open the lockbox, you can disable the bomb and all is good, but as time goes on, the bombs duplicate so the longer it goes, the more bombs you need to disable. The immune system can be seen as the bomb squad who is responsible for defeating the bomb. The bomb squad has a collection of keys for different bombs and will try them, but if they don't work, they have to work on developing a specific key.

This is where vaccines come into play:

Traditional: You give the bomb squad a disabled bomb, or weakened one (so instead of an explosion, it just gives a puff of smoke), and they work on producing the key. Obvious side-effect if they don't do it in time, the bomb could reproduce and explode, but the damage is significantly reduced.

Virus analog: You give the bomb squad something that looks like the bomb, and has a similar lock. You won't get an explosion if things go wrong. The drawback is that the key developed by the bomb squad may not fit the real thing; however, it will speed up the process of making the key, so bombs may go off, but not as many as if they didn't have the analog.

mRNA: You give the bomb squad the specifications of the lock, and they build it. They then develop the key to open the lock. So, no chance of explosion, and the key will definitely fit the lock of the real thing. The problem is that the specifications are printed on tissue paper and if not handled correctly, they may not see the plans to build the lock, so they never develop the key.

Of course, variations and mutations can occur which may modify the lock so that the key doesn't fit 100% securely; however, maybe enough to open a few locks, or the keys need slight modification. It may mean a few explosions, but you wouldn't suffer the full effect.

Those are generally the different types of vaccines. There are nuances, but as an overview, I think that would be understandable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,951 Posts
mRNA: You give the bomb squad the specifications of the lock, and they build it. They then develop the key to open the lock. So, no chance of explosion, and the key will definitely fit the lock of the real thing. The problem is that the specifications are printed on tissue paper and if not handled correctly, they may not see the plans to build the lock, so they never develop the key.
No
mRNA is more like.

You tell the bomb squad "this is what a suicide bomber looks like, go kill them" then hope for the best.

Do we have any idea how "accurate" the specification is?
The idea of mRNA is that the specification is broad enough to catch not just the target viral strain, but also similar ones. Which is why it is promising for HIV. It's also why the possibility of dangerous side effects is there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,315 Posts
Lets say they choose a mRNA that targets something that we want?
What if the mRNA in a particular vaccine targets the immune system on healthy cells, essential bacteria, bone marrow, lung cells?
Doesn't work that way. The point is the mRNA doesn't target anything. It provides the blueprint for a protein. If the protein isn't already in the body, then it's viewed as foreign and you have the appropriate immune response. If the mRNA gets translated into an existing protein, then there's nothing new for the immune system because the body already produces that protein.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,315 Posts
No
mRNA is more like.

You tell the bomb squad "this is what a suicide bomber looks like, go kill them" then hope for the best.

Do we have any idea how "accurate" the specification is?
The idea of mRNA is that the specification is broad enough to catch not just the target viral strain, but also similar ones. Which is why it is promising for HIV. It's also why the possibility of dangerous side effects is there.
Yeah, you don't understand biochemistry. Why don't you do some research and understand what an mRNA strand is before posting?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,215 Posts
... The issue with COVID19 vaccines is
1. They are rushed.
2. Many use new technologies and techniques that are not commonly used on humans.
3. Huge political pressure to get a vaccine approved ...

There are legitimate concerns with using new technologies.
We don't yet know the long term side effects of these vaccines.
Sure ... though a lot of the question for the speed aspect is how much is because of the new method (speed is why it was being researched as well as chosen) and how much is political pressure and/or cutting corners?

How much risk is there in a typically fifteen year method being done in a year or two?
How much risk is a method that in thirty years has developed a vaccine for animals but covid will be the first human one?


Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,951 Posts
Sure ... though a lot of the question for the speed aspect is how much is because of the new method (speed is why it was being researched as well as chosen) and how much is political pressure and/or cutting corners?

How much risk is there in a typically fifteen year method being done in a year or two?
How much risk is a method that in thirty years has developed a vaccine for animals but covid will be the first human one?


Cheers
With 30 years on animals, and recent things like SARS, they still didn't get this sorted out.
Now all sorts of companies have developed a vaccine, in less than a year?

Yes technology is better, but it seems kinda fast
 
1 - 20 of 3626 Posts
Top