Vaccines take like 5 to 10 years.

We're in month 5 so whatever we get with normal procedural waivers will be like a Windows 95 update the day it comes out

It takes years or decades to develop a reliably consistent vaccine for just about anything. How could we seriously produce one in 6 months or a year?

Oh yeah... These are unprecedented times

What is soon? 1 year, 5 years?

When the 2009 H1N1 pandemic hit, they had vaccines for it within a year I believe. Is that because that novel H1N1 strain was genetically close to past known H1N1 strains and that fact, combined with already having influenza vaccines, made the task very easy? And the fact there has never been a Coronavirus vaccine makes this more of a challenge?


What I am worried about is let's say they do say a vaccine is ready but people still think it isn't good enough. I believe the seasonal influence vaccine is only 40-60% effective - not sure if that means preventing altogether or just having any effect - so it's possible you can still get the virus and in theory, still die of it. So with this ongoing panic people may STILL feel things should be shut down or changed in some way even with a vaccine. Maybe I'm just. Ring paranoid, but I'm not sure what ends the worry for some of the more concerned individuals.

In4TheHuddle said:

---

It takes years or decades to develop a reliably consistent vaccine for just about anything. How could we seriously produce one in 6 months or a year?

Oh yeah... These are unprecedented times

---

We do have more advanced techniques than we did a few years ago: genetic engineering, for example.

It is possible that the time to test and evaluate a new vaccine may exceed the time to develop the vaccine with the more advanced techniques available now.

I think one of the inhibitors for vaccine lead times is the amount of available test subjects for phase 3 testing. To me, this is a "glass half-full" bright spot of the rampant community spread that we have right now. With the amount of spread in the US, it should not be difficult for the pharma companies to find plenty of good test candidates right now.

Given this, I think there will be a viable vaccine by end of year.

Pfizer is estimating they will have 100 million vaccine doses by the end of the year. They are in clinical trial phase. That's just one company. Moderna is still on track for something similar. So are a ton of others.

There's also been a mass funding effort for a vaccine in China.

By the end of the year we will have multiple vaccines from multiple companies with many hundreds of millions of doses available. How effective they are at establishing long-term immunity is still obviously up in the air. I don't see major safety problems in terms of birth defects etc. due to the the vast experience in developing previous vaccines.

I'm also very excited about the antibody treatments, but those are incredibly expensive and slow to produce. In all likelihood the availability of that treatment will still be very low by the time we have a vaccine available, but hopefully not.

AggieYankee1 said:

---

There has never been this much in terms of resources or capital put into a vaccine before.
Never, ever.

Most companies and market watchers are expecting some by November.

In fact - there was a successful vaccination in a Maryland man - a couple weeks ago.

Personally based on all I'm seeing - somewhere between October and December.

For health care workers And at risk populations

January February for the rest.

---

How do you define "successful vaccination"?

Have they already determine that there are no major side affects and that it does protect him from getting covid-19?

The problem will be getting people to take it. I have no plans to sign up for a rushed thru vaccine that is marginally effective. Would rather take HCQ + Zinc as prophylaxis.

Don't really care. I'll take it, my kids will take it, and then we'll go back to normal life. If your job or school doesn't require it, then just do what you think is best for you.

JimInBCS said:

---

If you are a young healthy adult, would you voluntarily take the vaccine...especially one "rushed" into production? Especially for a disease that most likely will have little or no symptoms to you?

I'm by no means an anti-vaxxer, but I'd be a little cautious about this particular one. If I were over 65 or had underlying conditions I suppose that would make the decision much easier.

---

Have there ever been serious complications from a vaccine (specifically in adults)? Not being an arse, genuinely curious.

MaxPower said:

---

JimInBCS said:

---

If you are a young healthy adult, would you voluntarily take the vaccine...especially one "rushed" into production? Especially for a disease that most likely will have little or no symptoms to you?

I'm by no means an anti-vaxxer, but I'd be a little cautious about this particular one. If I were over 65 or had underlying conditions I suppose that would make the decision much easier.

---

Have there ever been serious complications from a vaccine (specifically in adults)? Not being an arse, genuinely curious.

---

Hasn't flu vaccines caused some small number of cases of encephalitis?

MaxPower said:

---

JimInBCS said:

---

If you are a young healthy adult, would you voluntarily take the vaccine...especially one "rushed" into production? Especially for a disease that most likely will have little or no symptoms to you?

I'm by no means an anti-vaxxer, but I'd be a little cautious about this particular one. If I were over 65 or had underlying conditions I suppose that would make the decision much easier.

---

Have there ever been serious complications from a vaccine (specifically in adults)? Not being an arse, genuinely curious.

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak

Quote:

---

n 1976, an outbreak of the swine flu, influenza A virus subtype H1N1 at Fort Dix, New Jersey caused one death, hospitalized 13, and led to a mass immunization program. After the program began, the vaccine was associated with an increase in reports of Guillain-Barr Syndrome, which can cause paralysis, respiratory arrest, and death. The immunization program was ended after approximately 25% of the population of the United States had been administered the vaccine.

---

yes....its Inovio.. don't pay attention to the market players on CNBC. Look at the science. Its the only vaccine that does not have adverse SEA.....they are safe, effective (see their MERS data) and easy to distribute....No cold chain requirements. Remember this post....I am not going to debate this.

COVID-19 Vaccine Update: When Can We Really Expect it? What Is a Platform & What Are Their Implications in Vaccine Development?

Per this guy from Johns Hopkins it sounds like next Summer at the earliest but he says he's optimistic that they will have it ready within 2 years.

GIG5 said:

---

yes....its Inovio.. don't pay attention to the market players on CNBC. Look at the science. Its the only vaccine that does not have adverse SEA.....they are safe, effective (see their MERS data) and easy to distribute....No cold chain requirements. Remember this post....I am not going to debate this.

---

here is the deal. Inovio has their vaccines in trial and with countries outside of the US. Its by far the most effective and safe. NIH has a conflict of interest in Moderna, which sucks. that is getting in the way of science. Inovio's vaccines have always been better than MRNA. So that is comical. Did you see CureVac today? 50% response with massive SAEs? "hey, we are happy you felt like crap after taking our vaccine, that means its working." WTF? Again, INO has never had major SAEs......ever on any vaccine. The US may choose a lesser vaccine, but INO will go to other countries that don't have the politics of teh US. they will be the uncontested vaccine. Again......i wont debate this......because it is what it is.

GIG5 said:

---

GIG5 said:

---

yes....its Inovio.. don't pay attention to the market players on CNBC. Look at the science. Its the only vaccine that does not have adverse SEA.....they are safe, effective (see their MERS data) and easy to distribute....No cold chain requirements. Remember this post....I am not going to debate this.

---

here is the deal. Inovio has their vaccines in trial and with countries outside of the US. Its by far the most effective and safe. NIH has a conflict of interest in Moderna, which sucks. that is getting in the way of science. Inovio's vaccines have always been better than MRNA. So that is comical. Did you see CureVac today? 50% response with massive SAEs? "hey, we are happy you felt like crap after taking our vaccine, that means its working." WTF? Again, INO has never had major SAEs......ever on any vaccine. The US may choose a lesser vaccine, but INO will go to other countries that don't have the politics of teh US. they will be the uncontested vaccine. Again......i wont debate this......because it is what it is.

---

As Gary says in Horns Tears......bookmark this

We may have several vaccines by next summer. Several companies are already manufacturing with hopes of theirs being effective. However, we will need 270MM doses for a single vaccine dose in the US. If it's a two dose vaccine, that number doubles and so forth. We currently make about 160MM doses of ALL vaccines, childhood and adults. The 270MM will be on top of what is currently manufactured. My fear is finding a vaccine is just a start. And, we have never developed an effective coronavirus vaccine. However, the price is too high for failure.

JimInBCS said:

---

If you are a young healthy adult, would you voluntarily take the vaccine...especially one "rushed" into production? Especially for a disease that most likely will have little or no symptoms to you?

I'm by no means an anti-vaxxer, but I'd be a little cautious about this particular one. If I were over 65 or had underlying conditions I suppose that would make the decision much easier.

---

I'd rather just get the virus. Seems like the risk to a young healthy person are well known and would be safer than an unknown vaccine.

I'm not trying to be an ass but how can we be expected to trust the vaccine when the medical community constantly changes their views on the virus and how to deal with it?

I think you're talking about two different things. How to treat is vs how to prevent it. The medical community is trying to figure out how to treat it on the fly whereas the medical research community is trying to figure out how to prevent it in a more controlled environment.

75AG said:

---

Seersucker Ag 2011 said:

---

I'm not trying to be an ass but how can we be expected to trust the vaccine when the medical community constantly changes their views on the virus and how to deal with it?

---

Because the medical community has known about this novel virus for only 6 months. The science evolves as they learn more about the virus and "how to deal with it". However, we have known how vaccines work for more than a century. Any vaccine's safety and efficacy will be tested before the vaccine is released to the public, which is why we don't have one today and likely won't for at least another year. And that is why I will gladly line up to get the vaccine when available.

---

Just curious, we may have at least one vaccine by the end of the year. Is there a reason you disregard that possibility?