Coronavirus 2019-nCoV

[1972Shocker]

I think there might be a way to accelerate the vaccine hesitant to get vaccinated. Give them an alternative to the new mRNA technology that Pfizer, Moderna and J&J offer that, while these vaccines are seemingly effective, the long term impact these vaccines or this mRNA technology might have is unknown.

Apparently Novavax is very close to having their Covid vaccine ready to go.

The basic technology behind NVX-CoV2373 has been used since the mid-1980s, The Atlantic reported, in vaccines for hepatitis B and whooping cough using actual bits of viral material to trigger antibodies. "Protein-subunit vaccines are considered the safest form of vaccines, based on a widely used technology," University of California Berkeley head of infectious diseases Lee Riley said in June.

Pfizer and Moderna's vaccine uses a new type of vaccine technology called mRNA - the first to have made it out of the trial phase. Their vaccines don't contain any viral material at all, instead using a piece of code which teaches our cells how to make the spike proteins themselves.

In its trials, NVX-CoV2373 performed very well - it offered 90 percent protection against symptomatic infection and not a single person amongst those who received it in the phase 3 trial developed severe disease.

It also worked well against the Alpha variant, which was dominant in the US and Mexico at the time the trial took place. It didn't do so well against Beta in South Africa when it came to stopping infection, but it still successfully prevented serious illness.

Real-world data on its efficacy against Delta isn't available yet, but Novavax's latest lab tests suggest it offers some protection - whether it's more or less than the reduced efficacy of the already widely used vaccines remains to be seen.

The Novavax vaccine appeared to trigger fewer mild-to-moderate side effects in its trials than Pfizer.

The known side effects to date are typical of any vaccine - headaches, muscle pain and tiredness amongst them.

Perhaps the vaccine hesitant would not be so hesitant if the had a more traditional vaccine available to them. I think there has been more than enough testing that the FDA could grant an EUA for this vaccine. I guess the question I have is why has this not happened yet. I know, follow the money. BTW, the CDC announced recently that Novavax trial participants can be considered fully vaccinated two weeks after completing their two-dose vaccine regimen.

While anecdotal, I have had a number of unvaccinated people tell that if the vaccine was available to them they would take it in a heartbeat.

As always do your own research. I would be interested in what others thing about the Novavax vaccine.

By the way my daughter asked her doctor about this vaccine and I asked one of my doctors about this vaccine. We received identical answers. "Never heard of it". That was pretty surprising to me.

[wufan]

I think there might be a way to accelerate the vaccine hesitant to get vaccinated. Give them an alternative to the new mRNA technology that Pfizer, Moderna and J&J offer that, while these vaccines are seemingly effective, the long term impact these vaccines or this mRNA technology might have is unknown.

Apparently Novavax is very close to having their Covid vaccine ready to go.

The basic technology behind NVX-CoV2373 has been used since the mid-1980s, The Atlantic reported, in vaccines for hepatitis B and whooping cough using actual bits of viral material to trigger antibodies. "Protein-subunit vaccines are considered the safest form of vaccines, based on a widely used technology," University of California Berkeley head of infectious diseases Lee Riley said in June.

Pfizer and Moderna's vaccine uses a new type of vaccine technology called mRNA - the first to have made it out of the trial phase. Their vaccines don't contain any viral material at all, instead using a piece of code which teaches our cells how to make the spike proteins themselves.

In its trials, NVX-CoV2373 performed very well - it offered 90 percent protection against symptomatic infection and not a single person amongst those who received it in the phase 3 trial developed severe disease.

It also worked well against the Alpha variant, which was dominant in the US and Mexico at the time the trial took place. It didn't do so well against Beta in South Africa when it came to stopping infection, but it still successfully prevented serious illness.

Real-world data on its efficacy against Delta isn't available yet, but Novavax's latest lab tests suggest it offers some protection - whether it's more or less than the reduced efficacy of the already widely used vaccines remains to be seen.

The Novavax vaccine appeared to trigger fewer mild-to-moderate side effects in its trials than Pfizer.

The known side effects to date are typical of any vaccine - headaches, muscle pain and tiredness amongst them.

Perhaps the vaccine hesitant would not be so hesitant if the had a more traditional vaccine available to them. I think there has been more than enough testing that the FDA could grant an EUA for this vaccine. I guess the question I have is why has this not happened yet. I know, follow the money. BTW, the CDC announced recently that Novavax trial participants can be considered fully vaccinated two weeks after completing their two-dose vaccine regimen.

While anecdotal, I have had a number of unvaccinated people tell that if the vaccine was available to them they would take it in a heartbeat.

As always do your own research. I would be interested in what others thing about the Novavax vaccine.

By the way my daughter asked her doctor about this vaccine and I asked one of my doctors about this vaccine. We received identical answers. "Never heard of it". That was pretty surprising to me.

J&J is a traditional attenuated virus vaccine.

[1972Shocker]

J&J is a traditional attenuated virus vaccine.

I will defer to your far superior knolwedge about these thngs. My understanding is there are differrences between the Pfizer/Moderna mRNA vaccines, the Johnson & Johnson carrier, or virus vector, vaccine and the Novavax vaccine.

The explanations I have found (not necessarily understood) describe the Pfizer/Moderna mRNA vaccines as ones that deliver a tiny piece of genetic code from the SARS-CoV-2 virus to host cells in the body, essentiallly giving those cells instructions for making copies of spike proteins (the spikes you see stickin out pictures of the coronavirus). The spikes do the work of penetrating and infecting host cells which stimulates an immune response, producing antibodies and develping memory cells that will recognize and respoind if the body is infected with the actual virus.

The Johnson and Johnson vaccine is a carrier vaccine which uses a different approach than the mRNA vaccines to instruct human cells to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Scientists engineer a harless adenovirus (a common virus that, when not activated, can cause colds, bronchitis, and other illnesses) as a shell to carry genetic code on the spike proteins to th cells (similar to a Trojan Horse). The shell and tthe code can't make you sick, but once the code is inside the cells, the cells produce a spike protein to train the body's immune system to create antibodies and memory cells to protect against an actual SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The Novavax vaccine is a protein adjuvant (and adjuvant is an ingredient used to strengthen the immune response).. While the mRNA and carrier or vector vaccines trick the body's cells into creating parts of the virus that can trigger an immune response, the Novavax vaccine contains the vaccine of the coronavirus itself, but formulated as a nanoparticle, which cannot cause disease. When injected this stimulates the immune system to produce antibodies and T-cell immune responses. Apparently what is new about this is the adjuvant they have developed.
.
Whether or not these are just differences without much of a distinction I'm not qualifed to say. But since the basis technology of the Novavax vaccine has been around since the mid-80's perhaps that would be an easier sell to a good portion of the vaccine hesitant.

[pinstripers]

David L. Bahnsen @DavidBahnsen

This is the essence of everything. There is no need to protect the vaxxed from the unvaxxed if one believes, AS I DO, in the vax. Everything beyond this simple point is incoherent at best and statism at worst.

[wufan]

I will defer to your far superior knolwedge about these thngs. My understanding is there are differrences between the Pfizer/Moderna mRNA vaccines, the Johnson & Johnson carrier, or virus vector, vaccine and the Novavax vaccine.

The explanations I have found (not necessarily understood) describe the Pfizer/Moderna mRNA vaccines as ones that deliver a tiny piece of genetic code from the SARS-CoV-2 virus to host cells in the body, essentiallly giving those cells instructions for making copies of spike proteins (the spikes you see stickin out pictures of the coronavirus). The spikes do the work of penetrating and infecting host cells which stimulates an immune response, producing antibodies and develping memory cells that will recognize and respoind if the body is infected with the actual virus.

The Johnson and Johnson vaccine is a carrier vaccine which uses a different approach than the mRNA vaccines to instruct human cells to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Scientists engineer a harless adenovirus (a common virus that, when not activated, can cause colds, bronchitis, and other illnesses) as a shell to carry genetic code on the spike proteins to th cells (similar to a Trojan Horse). The shell and tthe code can't make you sick, but once the code is inside the cells, the cells produce a spike protein to train the body's immune system to create antibodies and memory cells to protect against an actual SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The Novavax vaccine is a protein adjuvant (and adjuvant is an ingredient used to strengthen the immune response).. While the mRNA and carrier or vector vaccines trick the body's cells into creating parts of the virus that can trigger an immune response, the Novavax vaccine contains the vaccine of the coronavirus itself, but formulated as a nanoparticle, which cannot cause disease. When injected this stimulates the immune system to produce antibodies and T-cell immune responses. Apparently what is new about this is the adjuvant they have developed.
.
Whether or not these are just differences without much of a distinction I'm not qualifed to say. But since the basis technology of the Novavax vaccine has been around since the mid-80's perhaps that would be an easier sell to a good portion of the vaccine hesitant.

I don’t know about the Novavax vaccine, but the other three are correct. The mRNA MoA is brand new. The J&J tech has been around since the 1970s and is the same tech as most flu vaccine.

So, while the Novavax might be less scary because it’s 40 year old tech, the J&J vaccine is 50 year old tech so should be less scary still.

[Eric]

Get vaxed, don’t get vaxed. Whatever. Just do diligent research. Get info from medical professionals. Don’t get medical advice from your preachers, your politicians, or jagoffs on an internet message board.

[Ted Lasso's Neighbor]

As always do your own research. I would be interested in what others thing about the Novavax vaccine.

I've done research on Novavax because I was looking at buying stock in it. The company itself and their stock have had their ups and downs. Before covid, they were working on getting a flu vaccine to market. Once covid hit though, they received 1.6 billion plus as part of Operation Warp Speed to work on a covid vaccine and went to work on one. One article I read said the government wanted to fund various vaccine types in case one was better, since their vaccine approach was different, they received funding.

From test results they have a good vaccine but they've had a lot of setbacks as far as production and getting approvals. A company in India was going to manufacture the shots but the US had an embargo on some of the raw materials needed, so there was a delay until Biden lifted the embargo. Then one of the plants in Texas that was also going to make shots had issues with meeting FDA guidelines. The delays have hurt getting any government approvals.

They announced a couple days ago they were going to start trials in Australia of a combination flu and covid shot. Basically taking the flu vaccine they were working on before covid and then combining it with their covid shot. This article has more - https://www.news.com.au/finance/busi...488bd73412ad8c I've read too where they were in a trial in the UK to see how their shot would work as a booster for other vaccines and it worked well, so they may be more after the flu/covid shot and as a booster than anything.

The article above mentions how the side effects were suppose to be less than the mRNA ones. An article in the Wichita Eagle yesterday - https://www.kansas.com/news/coronavi...254109143.html - mentioned that 69% of unvaccinated Kansans were worried about shot side effects, so a Novavax shot may help convince them. However, people were allowed to give multiple reasons and 48% said they didn't trust COVID-19 vaccines in general, 44% don’t trust the government, and 42% said they’re waiting to see if the vaccine is safe. According to the article in Australia, the protein approach used by Novavax was first implemented for the hepatitis B vaccine, which has now been administered for over 30 years, so that may convince some people to that the shot is okay. One thing they may have an issue with is people will get confused about how the shot works. I can see some saying they'll get injected with the virus itself and get sick, so the company will need to be able to address that misinformation much like the mRNA ones had to address the claims about DNA being changed with their shots.

So it looks like a good vaccine, but the company seems to stumble a lot. They need to get approval in some countries to be taken seriously.

[SB Shock]

Even then it was wrong. People in OK aren't getting the vax. They are all rubes and heathens.

Wrong example. Oklahoma is at 54%. Much worse states.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

The new mandates will not hold up through the challenges that will be filed. This is such an obvious and blatant over reach and not constitutionally defensible. Biden is simply trying to deflect from his atrocious handling of pretty much everything since he took office. It is hilarious to see him try and be a tough guy though.

[pinstripers]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1436093012522651648

MUST WATCH

[pinstripers]

4 of my friends in this small community got China virus in the last few weeks. Rocky, 72, vaxxed, Ray, 67, vaxxed, and Travis, 67, unvaxxed. Those three all went to hospital for a few days, were on oxygen (not vent) for a few days, then recovered and released. Jon, 62, unvaxxed, began getting sick Tuesday. He phoned a rancher friend and asked to borrow some Ivermectin. It was the liquid form. He splashed a bit on himself at home the next couple days and saw rapid improvement. Could be a coincidence.

[1972Shocker]

4 of my friends in this small community got China virus in the last few weeks. Rocky, 72, vaxxed, Ray, 67, vaxxed, and Travis, 67, unvaxxed. Those three all went to hospital for a few days, were on oxygen (not vent) for a few days, then recovered and released. Jon, 62, unvaxxed, began getting sick Tuesday. He phoned a rancher friend and asked to borrow some Ivermectin. It was the liquid form. He splashed a bit on himself at home the next couple days and saw rapid improvement. Could be a coincidence.

If he literally "splashed" a bit on himself then I don't think the ivermctin had any impact on him getting better.

[WuTheOne]

The new mandates will not hold up through the challenges that will be filed. This is such an obvious and blatant over reach and not constitutionally defensible. Biden is simply trying to deflect from his atrocious handling of pretty much everything since he took office. It is hilarious to see him try and be a tough guy though.

Check out the 1905 Supreme Court ruling over Massachusetts mandating smallpox vaccinations. In a 7-2 ruling, the court ruled that public health took priority over individual liberties and allowed the Massachusetts mandate to stand.

Mandating vaccinations is established law. To disallow mandatory vaccinations would require a Supreme Court ruling to overturn established precedent and law.

Mandates are political hot buttons, but they are legal.

[WuTheOne]

I have a social group of 50 - 80 people I am exposed to. All are fully vaccinated.

We're seeing a significant increase in the number of breakthrough infections. The ability of the vaccines to prevent infection is wearing down. All the infections I'm seeing are either asymptomatic or have only mild symptoms.

One example is a person who traveled in a car from Minnesota to Kansas with someone who tested positive. That did not result in an infection of the uninfected occupant of the car.

Another situation I'm following is a friend of mine. He has an incredibly compromised immune system due to chemo treatments for terminal cancer. He has tested positive and is reporting only mild symptoms.

What I'm seeing in the real world, rather than media reports, is that the vaccines are losing effectiveness at preventing infection, but are still effective against serious complications from infections.

[wufan]

Check out the 1905 Supreme Court ruling over Massachusetts mandating smallpox vaccinations. In a 7-2 ruling, the court ruled that public health took priority over individual liberties and allowed the Massachusetts mandate to stand.

Mandating vaccinations is established law. To disallow mandatory vaccinations would require a Supreme Court ruling to overturn established precedent and law.

Mandates are political hot buttons, but they are legal.

Nice talking point. You want to point out the facts of the case that are relevant?