Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,468 posts, read 12,487,658 times
Reputation: 10439
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p
This is science but also politics because there has been loud voices from a certain political group that say things like, 'If we can go about our normal business with HIV around, why can't we with COVID19?!" or "We have vaccines for the seasonal flu, why can't we just copy that and make some adjustment?"
Hopefully this explains why.
.
And which "certain political group" would that be?
Scientists have been studying the rhinovirus side of the common cold since the 50's. It wasn't until the 90's that they discovered "at least 160 different strains, or serotypes, of rhinovirus". Which is impossible, at this time anyway, to create a vaccine for all of the strains of rhinovirus. Note they have been studying the rhinovirus for a vaccine and not the corona virus.
Summary – Coronavirus vs Rhinovirus
Coronavirus and rhinovirus are two types of single-stranded positive-sense RNA viruses. They are responsible for the common cold in humans. Coronavirus is an enveloped virus and has a nucleocapsid of helical symmetry. Rhinovirus, on the other hand, is a non-enveloped virus and is icosahedral in structure. Therefore, this is the key difference between coronavirus and rhinovirus. Moreover, rhinovirus rarely causes serious illnesses, but coronavirus can cause serious illnesses such as SARS and MERS. Also, rhinovirus is the predominant cause of the common cold, while coronavirus causes about 20% of the cold.
Perhaps the antibody tests they've been doing will be fruitful. Perhaps some of the drugs that they are looking at to lessen the symptoms will work safely, or be able to be tweaked to work more safely, so we can have something that lessens the severity of the virus. At this point, I don't know .. it's not in my payscale.
I've been saying this all along. It's not a matter of when we get a vaccine, but if. It's possible we never find one so keeping civilization locked down until something that may never come is foolish.
I've been saying this all along. It's not a matter of when we get a vaccine, but if. It's possible we never find one so keeping civilization locked down until something that may never come is foolish.
No government official has ever said anything about keeping civilization locked down until a vaccine is found. It is true that a vaccine may never be found, or take years to find. Until then, it is a matter of keeping this under control with testing, keeping people in quarantine who test positive, finding anti-viral drugs to treat hospitalized patients, contact tracing of people who test positive, and anti-body testing to determine if people have had the virus and have immunity.
Does anybody think we could teach people to just stay home when they are sick? That would help check the spread of Corona virus, flu and the common cold. Of course people would need paid sick leave for this to work. And it doesn't cover the cases of asymptomatic transmission. But it could help a lot as we learn to live with this virus.
This is science but also politics because there has been loud voices from a certain political group that say things like, 'If we can go about our normal business with HIV around, why can't we with COVID19?!" or "We have vaccines for the seasonal flu, why can't we just copy that and make some adjustment?"
Hopefully this explains why.
I am having a bit of trouble with the argument that a coronavirus vaccine cannot be developed against viruses that target the nose. That is how we catch flu, too. The obvious thing to do is to make a nasal vaccine, and we do have one for flu. The other thing is that vaccines given by injection reach the immune system no matter how the actual infection is acquired.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bale002
Some people scream testing, testing, testing, and with good reason, but my impression is that a preponderance of scientific and production resources - and they are scarce (not like money which literally grows on electrons) - should be allocated to therapeutic treatment (not necessarily a preventive shot or vaccine).
Right now the best hope is Gilead Sciences' antiviral medicine remdesivir which has been used and is currently undergoing clinical trials whose results may come by the end of this month.
The article makes it sound like Covid has been around for quite some time. How it become so deadly just this year?
It's been around for at least 50 years in different strains. It is "most likely" more contagious this time around because of the engineering the Chinese scientists were doing with it in their lab, in an effort to study it, and then accidentally letting it get out.
Thing is like 4 months old - we still don’t have patient 0 information to see how it was born. Need lots of info, not shared yet.
Patient 0 worked in a lab in China, where they were working with the virus. One of the bats they had injected bit one of the lab workers and that lab worker then left the building and spread it around. Dr Scott Gottlieb was talking about this on CNBC.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
