Good video from Dr. Been. Explains the findings of HKU. Video dated December 16.
Coronavirus 2019-2020 thread (no unsubstantiated rumours!)
- Thread starter localizer
- Start date
mRNA or not makes no difference. Sinovac and Sputnik were ready sooner than mRNA were. You only need the protein. There is nothing inherent about mRNA that can possibly make mRNA easier or faster than inactivated and viral vector.
That is what you want prepare a nation by vaccines so people only get a really bad cold or a light fever and don't need to go to a hospital. That was the whole issue at the start of this all hospitals IC capacity getting overburdened.
For this strategy to work the people must be exposed to the virus shortly after vaccination to develop life long immunity without burden on hospital. As the virus mutates more and more away from the configuration the vaccine calibrated, the vaccine becomes less and less effective at inducing effective cellular immunity to prevent hospitalization. Typically I would say no more than a 1 or 2 years lag between vaccination and exposure for this strategy to work because of the quick pace of point mutations and recombinations seen in coronaviruses.
The paper you cited has this as the footer.
Supported by Janssen Vaccines and Prevention; the Ragon Institute of MGH, MIT, and Harvard; the Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness. So, I am going to assume that Corporate interest has had a hand in showing certain results favorably for obvious reasons. Similar studies are pushed by Pfizer, Moderna, Sinopharm, Sinovac etc.
In this case, are you insisting that the whole viral vector can interact positively with the human cells of the blood capillaries in other ways than the spike proteins they use ? Because vector as well as the mRNA essentially introduces the spike proteins that the virus uses to bind and hijack.
I am speaking without a relevant degree here of course, I think you maybe focusing on the magnitude of immune response generated for a time rather than the quality of immune response ( the spike protein activity itself). If one assumes that a viral vector can generate a better drawn out immune response than an mRNA for a time, I don't see how that would absolve any of its issues, like encouraging thrombocyte activity ( which is infact recorded to happen long before Covid 19 since the time when vectors of adenoviruses were used).
If people have some doubts, just search for ' Adenovirus induced thrombocyte activity '. I welcome corrections to my take.
@Tyler is correct, the turnaround time to modify an mRNA for a new variant is quicker than inactivated vaccines, especially at large-scale manufacturing. That is why China is pouring billions into mRNA local tech, partially because it has quick turnaround time to modify against new variants and quicker large-scale production.
By whom? To make such claim you must provide a report that quotes a research paper that has been peer reviewed or undergoing such review. This thread is not rumor mill or misinformation factory.