Re:Conspiracy theories about Covid-19 vaccines may prevent h...
by jlokier on Saturday August 29, 2020 @01:58PM
(#24318070)
We're trying to rush it because it's so important.
Economic factors play a very significant role in the timescale of developments, not just now, but in those 10 years you mentioned. That's one reason why we can go faster when there is enough motivation.
Another thing is that there are lots of groups working on different vaccines for this disease at the same time. That's unusual too. Usually, there isn't enough money to do all the research, production and testing that fast, for so many at once. And you can assume, because of the circumstances, that the different groups are sharing knowledge more than they normally do.
Obviously there are risks associated with a new vaccine, which is why they are also trying to get on with cautious testing on people as quickly as possible. There have been problems with previous vaccines (such as Pandemrix) so, of course, vaccine makers are trying to learn from those.
The Russian vaccine recently announced has explicitly skipped some safety tests that everyone else thinks are too important to skip. That's one reason for skepticism towards it. Another is that the Russians didn't release enough information about the vaccine. Detailed study information was not available (I don't know if that's still true), so other groups are unable to tell if it actually works.
And a third concern is complex social consequences: If people take a vaccine that turns out to be unsafe to take, or if it has measurable effects (like antibodies) but doesn't really provide actual immunity (not the same thing as antibodies), the consequence is likely to increase the amount of Covid-19 rather than help. That is, it could actually make the pandemic situation worse.
If all the other vaccine candidates would skip the same tests, then we'd see more vaccines getting the same kind of announcements. But the other candidates appear to be doing things more carefully. That's why we expect the others to be "better / more trustworthy": Because they actually are showing how they are doing more careful testing.
Eventually, we hope the Russian vaccine will also meet these standards. Maybe a modified version; proper testing can reveal problems which can sometimes be fixed by altering the vaccine design. Like writing code, you find bugs, you fix them. It's not that nobody is interested. It's actually an interesting vaccine approach, and it might be the one we all end up using. It's that nobody wants to start partying in the streets yet, because nobody who understands these things outside Russia can tell, yet, if it really works, or if it it's just been announced for geo-political point-scoring and would actually make things worse. High quality data would help a lot. But maybe that doesn't exist yet.
I assume you mean hydroxychloroquine (HCL). Yes it's used by millions worldwide, but it has some nasty side effects, although as usual with side effects it varies between individuals. For serious diseases where HCL is an effective treatment, the risk profile with side effects is considered worth it. If you're unlucky it can still ruin your life though. For Covid-19 it has been tested, because we hoped it would work. Unfortunately it was found to be ineffective, so the side effects are not worth it.
Economic factors play a very significant role in the timescale of developments, not just now, but in those 10 years you mentioned. That's one reason why we can go faster when there is enough motivation.
Another thing is that there are lots of groups working on different vaccines for this disease at the same time. That's unusual too. Usually, there isn't enough money to do all the research, production and testing that fast, for so many at once. And you can assume, because of the circumstances, that the different groups are sharing knowledge more than they normally do.
Obviously there are risks associated with a new vaccine, which is why they are also trying to get on with cautious testing on people as quickly as possible. There have been problems with previous vaccines (such as Pandemrix) so, of course, vaccine makers are trying to learn from those.
The Russian vaccine recently announced has explicitly skipped some safety tests that everyone else thinks are too important to skip. That's one reason for skepticism towards it. Another is that the Russians didn't release enough information about the vaccine. Detailed study information was not available (I don't know if that's still true), so other groups are unable to tell if it actually works.
And a third concern is complex social consequences: If people take a vaccine that turns out to be unsafe to take, or if it has measurable effects (like antibodies) but doesn't really provide actual immunity (not the same thing as antibodies), the consequence is likely to increase the amount of Covid-19 rather than help. That is, it could actually make the pandemic situation worse.
If all the other vaccine candidates would skip the same tests, then we'd see more vaccines getting the same kind of announcements. But the other candidates appear to be doing things more carefully. That's why we expect the others to be "better / more trustworthy": Because they actually are showing how they are doing more careful testing.
Eventually, we hope the Russian vaccine will also meet these standards. Maybe a modified version; proper testing can reveal problems which can sometimes be fixed by altering the vaccine design. Like writing code, you find bugs, you fix them. It's not that nobody is interested. It's actually an interesting vaccine approach, and it might be the one we all end up using. It's that nobody wants to start partying in the streets yet, because nobody who understands these things outside Russia can tell, yet, if it really works, or if it it's just been announced for geo-political point-scoring and would actually make things worse. High quality data would help a lot. But maybe that doesn't exist yet.
I assume you mean hydroxychloroquine (HCL). Yes it's used by millions worldwide, but it has some nasty side effects, although as usual with side effects it varies between individuals. For serious diseases where HCL is an effective treatment, the risk profile with side effects is considered worth it. If you're unlucky it can still ruin your life though. For Covid-19 it has been tested, because we hoped it would work. Unfortunately it was found to be ineffective, so the side effects are not worth it.
The Wikipedia article on HCL side effects is pretty good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxychloroquine#Adverse_eff...