When Will A Vaccine Be Available

Politics and religion: two polarizing topics that deserve their own little place
Zoltar
Posts: 2016
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 5:01 pm
Location: Omaha, NE
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: When Will A Vaccine Be Available

Post by Zoltar » September 16th, 2020, 9:17 pm

That is really a great post.
Win the dang day!

SCKSCat
Posts: 2250
Joined: November 10th, 2018, 1:34 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 22 times

Post by SCKSCat » September 16th, 2020, 9:22 pm

What the heck! The guy who runs CDC that looks like a demented Amishman says a mask is better than a vaccine. Old Trump is livid.
https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-chief-says-m ... 26486.html
My answer is if you throw a hog out of a plane, it will fly until it hits the ground.
You may think a mask works fine until get Covid 19 from where some neanderthal sneezes droplet of micro snot into the air that lands on your mask that you tug on and then wipe your eyes.
Oh, i bet his mask isn't one made by his wife from one your old shirts, overalls, or boxer shorts.
Likely a N95 mask that peons can't have.

Zoltar
Posts: 2016
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 5:01 pm
Location: Omaha, NE
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Post by Zoltar » September 16th, 2020, 9:39 pm

Did you read his assumptions or just hate him and he must be wrong because he says something different than Trump?

He is saying that the vaccine will most likely be 70% effective. This is very consistent for most vaccines. For 30% it will do nothing. Masks have been shown to be 90% effective. Numbers game says you are better off with a mask if you can pick just one. The great news is that we should all be able to use both in a few months.

By the way, the hog in your example is not flying. He is falling as there is no lift involved.
Win the dang day!

n2catnip
Posts: 297
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:33 pm
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by n2catnip » September 17th, 2020, 5:36 am

ChemicalKat wrote:
September 16th, 2020, 8:53 pm
n2catnip wrote:
September 16th, 2020, 7:56 pm


My understanding is that all of the vaccines that are being developed are based upon an approach to "trick" your DNA into making virus like proteins to trigger the making of antibodies. See these links: https://futurism.com/neoscope/potential ... d-immunity and https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... an-years1/

Which as led to claims that an individual's DNA is being modified. Of course, the media is saying that is a false claim: https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-fact ... SKBN22U2BZ

I don't trust the media to report things accurately. I don't trust big pharma either. I don't trust doctors with "God complexes". And I sure as hell don't trust anything coming from the WHO.
Oh my god no. Understand that I am not the media nor have I gotten this information from the media. This is me, the kansas state graduate in genetics, trying to educate you so that you can properly protect yourself.

No vaccine has EVER been developed to modify YOUR DNA or RNA. When Scientific America says genetic modification can save us from viruses, it’s referring to reverse engineering viral DNA/RNA.

There’s a very good reason for wanting to do that.

But first there’s 3 ways of creating a vaccine. The first is taking a live virus and cooking it, killing it (viruses don’t really die because they’re technically never living in the first place). The second is cutting off a piece. The third is reverse engineering it. All do exactly the same thing: prime your body to mount an immune response the next time it encounters a virus without killing the you with the vaccine.

The problem with the first two ways of creating a vaccine is that you change the structure of the virus which is vital to mounting a good immune response. It’s sort of like melting a key before opening a lock. Sometimes it works. Most of the time it doesn’t.

By reverse engineering the virus you can maintain the structure without having the lethality of the intact virus.

In no way WHATSOEVER is your DNA/RNA ever changed! Your only other option is to roll the dice and catch the live virus on purpose. In that case, you might as well load a bullet into a 99 chamber revolver and spin. Odds are, you’ll be fine. But it’s irresponsible to do when you have a choice to not do it in the first place.
Appreciate the concise explanation but still wish for more specific knowledge, so any online source would be appreciated.

And, no, btw, I am not an anti-vaxxer. Just not completely comfortable of the work/research in genetic engineering.

Thanks

xtrawildcat
Posts: 6342
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 10:41 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 49 times

Post by xtrawildcat » September 17th, 2020, 7:47 am

n2catnip wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:36 am
ChemicalKat wrote:
September 16th, 2020, 8:53 pm


Oh my god no. Understand that I am not the media nor have I gotten this information from the media. This is me, the kansas state graduate in genetics, trying to educate you so that you can properly protect yourself.

No vaccine has EVER been developed to modify YOUR DNA or RNA. When Scientific America says genetic modification can save us from viruses, it’s referring to reverse engineering viral DNA/RNA.

There’s a very good reason for wanting to do that.

But first there’s 3 ways of creating a vaccine. The first is taking a live virus and cooking it, killing it (viruses don’t really die because they’re technically never living in the first place). The second is cutting off a piece. The third is reverse engineering it. All do exactly the same thing: prime your body to mount an immune response the next time it encounters a virus without killing the you with the vaccine.

The problem with the first two ways of creating a vaccine is that you change the structure of the virus which is vital to mounting a good immune response. It’s sort of like melting a key before opening a lock. Sometimes it works. Most of the time it doesn’t.

By reverse engineering the virus you can maintain the structure without having the lethality of the intact virus.

In no way WHATSOEVER is your DNA/RNA ever changed! Your only other option is to roll the dice and catch the live virus on purpose. In that case, you might as well load a bullet into a 99 chamber revolver and spin. Odds are, you’ll be fine. But it’s irresponsible to do when you have a choice to not do it in the first place.
Appreciate the concise explanation but still wish for more specific knowledge, so any online source would be appreciated.

And, no, btw, I am not an anti-vaxxer. Just not completely comfortable of the work/research in genetic engineering.

Thanks
Will you be willing take a vaccine if Trump says it is safe and effective?

SCKSCat
Posts: 2250
Joined: November 10th, 2018, 1:34 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 22 times

Post by SCKSCat » September 17th, 2020, 7:55 am

Zoltar wrote:
September 16th, 2020, 9:39 pm
Did you read his assumptions or just hate him and he must be wrong because he says something different than Trump?

He is saying that the vaccine will most likely be 70% effective. This is very consistent for most vaccines. For 30% it will do nothing. Masks have been shown to be 90% effective. Numbers game says you are better off with a mask if you can pick just one. The great news is that we should all be able to use both in a few months.

By the way, the hog in your example is not flying. He is falling as there is no lift involved.
My point is that people aren't wearing masks now, or are wearing them properly. Wearing a mask at all times will not happen. A person can bs contagious 48 hours before showing symptoms, and this causes problems when we are in groups where we think no one has covid. My beef with the CDC director is him not factoring in human nature when it comes to wearing a mask. So I believe that the overall aggregate effectiveness of wearing maks in comparison to most people getting vaccinated would be much lower than the herd effectiveness of mass vaccination. It has been proven mass vaccination can eradicate disease. The worst thing that could happen is this thing getting entrenched in the world's population and mutating; it is similar to the cold virus. I have read experts hope mass vaccinations can reduce this to a point where it becomes rare and manageable. It will not go away. So masks may be required even if they are unpleasant.

NealyFan
Posts: 3969
Joined: September 26th, 2017, 9:18 am
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Post by NealyFan » September 17th, 2020, 8:03 am

xtrawildcat wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 7:47 am
n2catnip wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:36 am


Appreciate the concise explanation but still wish for more specific knowledge, so any online source would be appreciated.

And, no, btw, I am not an anti-vaxxer. Just not completely comfortable of the work/research in genetic engineering.

Thanks
Will you be willing take a vaccine if Trump says it is safe and effective?
If it is FDA approved, I will take it.
“It’s a tremendous challenge. The opportunity exists here today... for the greatest turnaround in college football history. And it’s not one to be taken lightly.” —- Bill Snyder

ChemicalKat
Posts: 5492
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:18 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 51 times

Post by ChemicalKat » September 17th, 2020, 8:15 am

n2catnip wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:36 am
ChemicalKat wrote:
September 16th, 2020, 8:53 pm


Oh my god no. Understand that I am not the media nor have I gotten this information from the media. This is me, the kansas state graduate in genetics, trying to educate you so that you can properly protect yourself.

No vaccine has EVER been developed to modify YOUR DNA or RNA. When Scientific America says genetic modification can save us from viruses, it’s referring to reverse engineering viral DNA/RNA.

There’s a very good reason for wanting to do that.

But first there’s 3 ways of creating a vaccine. The first is taking a live virus and cooking it, killing it (viruses don’t really die because they’re technically never living in the first place). The second is cutting off a piece. The third is reverse engineering it. All do exactly the same thing: prime your body to mount an immune response the next time it encounters a virus without killing the you with the vaccine.

The problem with the first two ways of creating a vaccine is that you change the structure of the virus which is vital to mounting a good immune response. It’s sort of like melting a key before opening a lock. Sometimes it works. Most of the time it doesn’t.

By reverse engineering the virus you can maintain the structure without having the lethality of the intact virus.

In no way WHATSOEVER is your DNA/RNA ever changed! Your only other option is to roll the dice and catch the live virus on purpose. In that case, you might as well load a bullet into a 99 chamber revolver and spin. Odds are, you’ll be fine. But it’s irresponsible to do when you have a choice to not do it in the first place.
Appreciate the concise explanation but still wish for more specific knowledge, so any online source would be appreciated.

And, no, btw, I am not an anti-vaxxer. Just not completely comfortable of the work/research in genetic engineering.

Thanks
Figured a video would work better. I watched several videos to find one that properly explained the immune system and vaccines, was short, and is easy to understand. This one was the best one. It's a bit cheesy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXMc15dA-vw

Now, when it starts talking about vaccines with weakened or dead viruses, substitute that with a genetically reverse engineered portion of a non-active virus and you get modern day vaccines. THAT'S what scientific america is talking about when they wrote that article on genetic engineering.

Hope this helps. When the vaccine data is published, I'll review it, consult my friends who are still in the sciences, and let the board know if it's safe or not. Odds are I will take it. Mainly because I trust the labs that are creating the virus and they have been very transparent with their data thus far. So far, it all looks clear.
These users thanked the author ChemicalKat for the post:
n2catnip

n2catnip
Posts: 297
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:33 pm
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by n2catnip » September 17th, 2020, 8:52 am

xtrawildcat wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 7:47 am
n2catnip wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:36 am


Appreciate the concise explanation but still wish for more specific knowledge, so any online source would be appreciated.

And, no, btw, I am not an anti-vaxxer. Just not completely comfortable of the work/research in genetic engineering.

Thanks
Will you be willing take a vaccine if Trump says it is safe and effective?
Nope

n2catnip
Posts: 297
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:33 pm
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by n2catnip » September 17th, 2020, 8:52 am

ChemicalKat wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:15 am
n2catnip wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:36 am


Appreciate the concise explanation but still wish for more specific knowledge, so any online source would be appreciated.

And, no, btw, I am not an anti-vaxxer. Just not completely comfortable of the work/research in genetic engineering.

Thanks
Figured a video would work better. I watched several videos to find one that properly explained the immune system and vaccines, was short, and is easy to understand. This one was the best one. It's a bit cheesy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXMc15dA-vw

Now, when it starts talking about vaccines with weakened or dead viruses, substitute that with a genetically reverse engineered portion of a non-active virus and you get modern day vaccines. THAT'S what scientific america is talking about when they wrote that article on genetic engineering.

Hope this helps. When the vaccine data is published, I'll review it, consult my friends who are still in the sciences, and let the board know if it's safe or not. Odds are I will take it. Mainly because I trust the labs that are creating the virus and they have been very transparent with their data thus far. So far, it all looks clear.
Thanks. I will watch it when I get a chance.

Post Reply