"We've never made a successful vaccine for a coronavirus before. This is why it's so difficult"

[Fieldy409]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus So I think we've know about Corona viruses since the 1930's.

FUCK! So what exactly is this 1 year to a vaccine story the media feeds us based upon? We've never discovered a vaccine in 90 years but we're going to just figure it out any day now? The media and politicians act like its a given....

EDIT:
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/facebook-users-wrongly-tie-dog-vaccine-to-novel-coronavirus/

So apparently a corona virus vaccine for a type of corona virus in dogs exists. So the article I linked should really say 'No sucessful vaccine for a Human Corona Virus'.

 

[JoJo]

Well, they say necessity is the mother of invention. The common cold isn't dangerous to most people and is caused by many different viruses, each of which would require their own vaccine. SARS and MERS were never that widespread. There is, on the other hand, a very strong incentive for someone to create a coronavirus vaccine and quickly. Both from a humanitarian perspective and also a commercial one. Governments and private companies will be pouring resources into this in hope of hitting the jackpot.

 

[Fieldy409]

Maybe, but corona viruses were causing a lot of expense in farming with animals from what I gather so it's not like there was never any incentive plus a lot of clever people were already concerned about a human one appearing for a long time so I doubt it was like nobody was working on vaccines at all.

People are acting like its a given that in a year we'll have the vaccine but there is nothing to indicate that which I have seen except pure blind optimism.

 

[Dalisclock]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus So I think we've know about Corona viruses since the 1930's.

FUCK! So what exactly is this 1 year to a vaccine story the media feeds us based upon? We've never discovered a vaccine in 90 years but we're going to just figure it out any day now? The media and politicians act like its a given....

Because if we hope for a miracle, we don't have to make hard choices.

Like a certain POTUS who literally said it would disappear like a miracle, or that we'd have a vaccine within months.

Kinda like how people keep ignoring Climate Change or acting like science will magically fix it because then we don't have to deal with hard choices until we do.

 

[Fieldy409]

Facebook Users Wrongly Tie Dog Vaccine to Novel Coronavirus - FactCheck.org

A viral image on Facebook falsely suggests a vaccine exists for the novel coronavirus by referencing a photo of a vaccine for a coronavirus that infects dogs. The two viruses are not the same.

www.factcheck.org

So it turns out there is a vaccine that has been created NOT FOR HUMANS but for dogs.

Some idiots think they should inject it into their human bodies which is a bit scary but whatever.

At least it's in the Corona Virus family right and proves the whole family isn't vaccine proof right? But what do I know I'm no scientist.

 

[Agema]

At least it's in the Corona Virus family right and proves the whole family isn't vaccine proof right? But what do I know I'm no scientist.

It's nice as proof of concept that a vaccine might well be feasible. But it's definitely not proof a vaccine is going to arrive specifically against SARS-CoV-2 that will be sufficiently safe for humans to take.

 

[Kyrian007]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus So I think we've know about Corona viruses since the 1930's.

FUCK! So what exactly is this 1 year to a vaccine story the media feeds us based upon? We've never discovered a vaccine in 90 years but we're going to just figure it out any day now? The media and politicians act like its a given....

EDIT:
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/facebook-users-wrongly-tie-dog-vaccine-to-novel-coronavirus/

So apparently a corona virus vaccine for a type of corona virus in dogs exists. So the article I linked should really say 'No sucessful vaccine for a Human Corona Virus'.

Love how all the "media" haters lump us all together. As a journalist, who has run a story on a vaccine trial happening at a hospital in the city where I live, I can report what the doctors I talked to said. The vaccine they were beginning tests on was in its first trial. It was one of 2 vaccines they knew of being tested in U.S. hospitals at the time (there have been more before in other countries and several more since here and abroad.) If the tests were successful then replication studies had to be done and between that and approval for use it would be about 18 months, he guessed probably 12 given the very lax scientific understanding of the current administration and their track record of ignoring regulation if it suits them.

So the story I ran DID mention 1 year, right in there with "if successful" and "one of numerous trials." I can't help what people read into that. If you are reading a piece that specifically says "Next year we will have a vaccine..." my only answer is "get a better source bruh." But at the source level, stories like mine is where that number comes from, again properly cited with "if successful." I certainly never told my listeners "Cure incoming in a year." But I imagine that's what some heard, along with those who heard the same story and said, "so we'll never have a vaccine then." I know it sounds awful, but the sardonic joke in this newsroom (and a few other's I've visited) is every time we get some idiot calling in and complaining about some news story our stock answer between ourselves... "You people don't hear what we are saying, you only hear what you want to hear." From my point of view (one with a specific bias, sure) the problem isn't "the media." The problem is the consumer, the viewer, listener, reader. They only hear what they want to hear. Even if they hate it, because of a persecution complex it IS what they want to hear. And if it doesn't fit in with their specific bias... its "fake news" and they refuse to believe it and invent convoluted conspiracies about why they are being denied "the truth."

And that's why you get pre-biased outlets like Sinclair, Fox, WP, MSNBC, ONN... it is a convenience. The common consumer doesn't want to hear what they don't want to hear. They will patronize only those who tell them exactly what they want to hear, and the market responded. So is there a problem with "the media" sure is... an its your fault. All of you.

 

[Agema]

Love how all the "media" haters lump us all together. As a journalist, who has run a story on a vaccine trial happening at a hospital in the city where I live, I can report what the doctors I talked to said. The vaccine they were beginning tests on was in its first trial. It was one of 2 vaccines they knew of being tested in U.S. hospitals at the time (there have been more before in other countries and several more since here and abroad.) If the tests were successful then replication studies had to be done and between that and approval for use it would be about 18 months, he guessed probably 12 given the very lax scientific understanding of the current administration and their track record of ignoring regulation if it suits them.

Full trials of drugs and vaccines normally take years. However, there have been circumstances where the government has intervened to get them done much faster, but this doesn't necessarily mean lax processes and regulation. A lot of it is simply utilising the resources of government (via bodies like the NIH in the USA), because it can access a huge amount of expertise and capacity to do a lot quickly, and doesn't have the same concerns about blowing a load of money if the vaccine/drug turns out to be a failure.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

"You people don't hear what we are saying, you only hear what you want to hear." From my point of view (one with a specific bias, sure) the problem isn't "the media." The problem is the consumer, the viewer, listener, reader. They only hear what they want to hear. Even if they hate it, because of a persecution complex it IS what they want to hear. And if it doesn't fit in with their specific bias... its "fake news" and they refuse to believe it and invent convoluted conspiracies about why they are being denied "the truth."

And that's why you get pre-biased outlets like Sinclair, Fox, WP, MSNBC, ONN... it is a convenience. The common consumer doesn't want to hear what they don't want to hear. They will patronize only those who tell them exactly what they want to hear, and the market responded. So is there a problem with "the media" sure is... an its your fault. All of you.

But seriously, it's not that hard to fact check stuff even for a regular Joe. I dug up all the information about the hydroxychloroquine claims. The Dr. Zelenko that claimed a 100% success rate with the drug was sketchy as all hell if you actually did some research. The officials of his town told him to stop purporting coronavirus conditions. The village he is a doctor in has less than 2% of the population being 65 or over so all the people he treated were most likely very low risk and would've been fine without any treatment. Not to mention, there were quite a bit of anecdotal posts from people working on the front lines that say it doesn't work. And, when the study came back saying the drug does indeed not work and actually increases the fatality rate, anyone could of saw that coming a mile away if they merely did the research and put 2 & 2 together.

 

[Fieldy409]

Love how all the "media" haters lump us all together. As a journalist, who has run a story on a vaccine trial happening at a hospital in the city where I live, I can report what the doctors I talked to said. The vaccine they were beginning tests on was in its first trial. It was one of 2 vaccines they knew of being tested in U.S. hospitals at the time (there have been more before in other countries and several more since here and abroad.) If the tests were successful then replication studies had to be done and between that and approval for use it would be about 18 months, he guessed probably 12 given the very lax scientific understanding of the current administration and their track record of ignoring regulation if it suits them.

So the story I ran DID mention 1 year, right in there with "if successful" and "one of numerous trials." I can't help what people read into that. If you are reading a piece that specifically says "Next year we will have a vaccine..." my only answer is "get a better source bruh." But at the source level, stories like mine is where that number comes from, again properly cited with "if successful." I certainly never told my listeners "Cure incoming in a year." But I imagine that's what some heard, along with those who heard the same story and said, "so we'll never have a vaccine then." I know it sounds awful, but the sardonic joke in this newsroom (and a few other's I've visited) is every time we get some idiot calling in and complaining about some news story our stock answer between ourselves... "You people don't hear what we are saying, you only hear what you want to hear." From my point of view (one with a specific bias, sure) the problem isn't "the media." The problem is the consumer, the viewer, listener, reader. They only hear what they want to hear. Even if they hate it, because of a persecution complex it IS what they want to hear. And if it doesn't fit in with their specific bias... its "fake news" and they refuse to believe it and invent convoluted conspiracies about why they are being denied "the truth."

And that's why you get pre-biased outlets like Sinclair, Fox, WP, MSNBC, ONN... it is a convenience. The common consumer doesn't want to hear what they don't want to hear. They will patronize only those who tell them exactly what they want to hear, and the market responded. So is there a problem with "the media" sure is... an its your fault. All of you.

Sorry but I really wasn't pointing fingers at you. Can't you just assume I don't mean every member of every media outlet ever created in the history of mankind when I say 'media?' Do I really have to bloat the wordcount on everything I say to put out an entire list of people for exactly who I do and don't mean?

Yes there is responsible balanced media out there and sometimes people hear the wrong thing even when listening to a good source.

 

[BrawlMan]

I just saw the news, and the dumb fucker of a president suggested people inject themselves with disinfectant. I don't need to say anything else do I? If anyone else still choose to vote for this guy, then they're racist, fools in denial and could not care for the fate of their own country. As long as people of difference race or religion is getting screwed over. They don't deserve to call themselves human. No, calling them demons would be insulting to actual demons.

 

[Trunkage]

So a couple of things about vaccines. They take a lot of research. Which means a lot of money. You are not going to be spending heaps of money if there is no return. With previous epidemics, the cure never came before the spread was quashed. Big Pharma isn't really going to help with this until people are super scared and thus wanted like the common flu vaccine is.

Now, that doesn't mean nothing is being done. Smaller research sites are working on it. They had a protentional cure just two days after the first release of information from China in the middle of January. The current range of vaccines are meant to deactivate the spikes on the corona shell, attempting to make it inert. That's not the normal way we do this, as its still leaving the whole deadly disease intact. But breaking up the corona is apparently much harder. So... that might be the long term game plan.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

The common consumer doesn't want to hear what they don't want to hear. They will patronize only those who tell them exactly what they want to hear, and the market responded. So is there a problem with "the media" sure is... an its your fault. All of you.

Something I've been saying for years: The problem with the media is that it gives us exactly what we want.

 

[Agema]

I just saw the news, and the dumb fucker of a presdident suggested people inject themselves with disinfectant. I don't need to say anything else do I? If qnyone else still choose to vote for this guy, than they're racist, fools indenial and could not care for the fate of their own country. Ao long as people of difference race or religion is getting screwed over. They don't deserve to call themselves human. No, calling them demons would be insulting to actual demons.

To be fair, I don't think he meant to say we could try injecting disinfectant to treat covid-19. It's just that he's a dozy blowhard who is burbling off the top of his head about stuff that kind of relates to things he was told, except he's got mixed up because he wasn't paying attention at the time and doesn't know or understand beyond that. He's doing that because he's a colossal narcissist with a desperate need to fill up people's time and attention with himself, is probably some way into old age-related cognitive decline so struggles with his memory, coherence and keeping to a prepared message, and he's too arrogant to accept his considerable limitations.

I am cautiously confident that, unlike the hydroxychloroquine stuff, even Trump is not going to reinforce an error that bad by compelling government to throw resources at it in a childish display of self-justification.

* * *

I think the video is most funny, however, as a display of the art of Trump's pathetic boasting. Note how he says he came up with the idea that UV light could be tried inside the body. (Of course none of his scientific/medical advisors did, because the idea is totally ridiculous.) Then see how he validates himself by speaking for these advisors, and telling everyone that they said they were going to test his idea, as if it was actually a good one.

Now, Trump's such a bullshitter, we don't even know if he did ask them, or whether he just came up with that crap on the spot. And to be fair, if he did ask them, potentially they did tell him they'd look at it: but that's because I think everyone by now knows you flatter Trump to his face, and then go away and ignore him to get things done. Poor Deborah Birx. How must it feel to stand there in public view, as an orange-hued half-wit stream-of-consciousnesses crazy nonsense on her specialist subject area and then effectively uses her to defend it?

 

[BrawlMan]

To be fair, I don't think he meant to say we could try injecting disinfectant to treat covid-19. It's just that he's a dozy blowhard who is burbling off the top of his head about stuff that kind of relates to things he was told, except he's got mixed up because he wasn't paying attention at the time and doesn't know or understand beyond that. He's doing that because he's a colossal narcissist with a desperate need to fill up people's time and attention with himself, is probably some way into old age-related cognitive decline so struggles with his memory, coherence and keeping to a prepared message, and he's too arrogant to accept his considerable limitations.

I am cautiously confident that, unlike the hydroxychloroquine stuff, even Trump is not going to reinforce an error that bad by compelling government to throw resources at it in a childish display of self-justification.

* * *

I think the video is most funny, however, as a display of the art of Trump's pathetic boasting. Note how he says he came up with the idea that UV light could be tried inside the body. (Of course none of his scientific/medical advisors did, because the idea is totally ridiculous.) Then see how he validates himself by speaking for these advisors, and telling everyone that

I'm aware of that, but that doesn't change from him being a dumb mother fucker. Lysol had to put out a statement saying not to do it, but we know there are some people that hang on to Trump's every single word no matter how stupid and ridiculous. As a Scottish preacher once told me, "Don't weep for the stupid, you'll be crying all day.". And you know how some people are just too dumb to live.

 

[Dalisclock]

I'm aware of that, but that doesn't change from him being a dumb ************. Lysol had to put out a statement saying not to do it, but we know there are some people that hang on to Trump's every single word no matter how stupid and ridiculous. As a Scottish preacher once told me, "Don't weep for the stupid, you'll be crying all day.". And you know how some people are just too dumb to live.

You know, the people who are coming up with anti-trump ads for November can probably take a couple months off, because he's doing their job for them right now.

And all those jokes about Joe Biden having Dementia can be easily countered with "We've already been living with a Dementia addled President for 3 years. At least Biden won't suggest we drink bleach". Whatboutism is fun, isn't it?

 

[BrawlMan]

You know, the people who are coming up with anti-trump ads for November can probably take a couple months off, because he's doing their job for them right now.

And all those jokes about Joe Biden having Dementia can be easily countered with "We've already been living with a Dementia addled President for 3 years. At least Biden won't suggest we drink bleach". Whatboutism is fun, isn't it?

Yeah they can probably rest easy, but odds are that ain't going to stop them.

Loads of fffffuuuuunnnnnn.

Speaking of which:


They make a Resident Evil joke, but let's be real here, even the Umbrella corporation wouldn't stand Trump stupidity. They would try to kill him or get rid of him in a heartbeat.

 

[Fieldy409]

Imagine spending decades studying science and becoming one of the top scientists in your field, and now its your job to save your country and perhaps even the world from a deadly virus. Suddenly in the middle of your vital work some offical comes to you and tells you that you need to stop what you're doing and create a report on the merits of injecting bleach into your lungs because the President ordered somebody to look into it and you're going to have to do it properly so its at least a couple of weeks of work.


It's like something out of an absurd comedy novel lol.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Imagine spending decades studying science and becoming one of the top scientists in your field, and now its your job to save your country and perhaps even the world from a deadly virus. Suddenly in the middle of your vital work some offical comes to you and tells you that you need to stop what you're doing and create a report on the merits of injecting bleach into your lungs because the President ordered somebody to look into it and you're going to have to do it properly so its at least a couple of weeks of work.


It's like something out of an absurd comedy novel lol.

 

[Dalisclock]

Imagine spending decades studying science and becoming one of the top scientists in your field, and now its your job to save your country and perhaps even the world from a deadly virus. Suddenly in the middle of your vital work some offical comes to you and tells you that you need to stop what you're doing and create a report on the merits of injecting bleach into your lungs because the President ordered somebody to look into it and you're going to have to do it properly so its at least a couple of weeks of work.


It's like something out of an absurd comedy novel lol.

We're officially at the point Biden could die a week before the election and I'd still vote for him over Trump, because Trump has set the bar that low that a dead man would be a better president.

Hell, as it stands, my 3 year old daughter would be a better president then Trump, if for no other reason that:
-She throws fewer temper tantrums, which pretty much puts her at a higher maturity level already.
-She's never encouraged the drinking of bleach.