It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Commercial ebola vaccine 'unlikely' say researchers

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Commercial ebola vaccine 'unlikely' say researchers


www.bbc.co.uk

Scientists researching the lethal ebola virus have told the BBC that a commercial vaccine to prevent the onset of infection may never be developed.

Two companies with leading vaccine candidates have had their funding from the Pentagon suspended in recent weeks.

An expert said it was now "unlikely" a prophylactic vaccine would ever be used to prevent outbreaks of the disease.

Ebola is often described as the most frightening disease on Earth.
(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
SCI/TECH: Ebola vaccine breakthrough
Ebola Vaccine - One Less thing to Worry About

First human receives Ebola vaccine




posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Hmm......several years ago there was great hope and expectatino of a vaccine for this disease (see the old therads I linked to) - but now it seems "money is a problem" - who would havethought that??


All about the money

Gene Olinger, a virologist at the US Army Research Institute of Infectious Disease at Fort Detrick in Maryland, told BBC News: "With the current funding, if it doesn't change, I would say there should be a vaccine in five to seven years. It could double or triple it if the funding goes away."

There is also a big concern over the lack of a large pharmaceutical company which might be willing to develop and market a vaccine for ebola. Since the disease was first discovered in 1976, slightly more than 2,200 people have been infected. And outbreaks have been almost impossible to predict.


Could this be the mechanism by which the NWO will achieve Agenda 21 and the population reduction??

By stymying a vaccine, then releasing the disease in a massive epidemic?

alternatively by having such an epidemic and then "suddenly" discovering that there is a vaccine after all, but lacing the vaccine??

www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Yes that could be.

But I'm putting my bets on the money. 2200 people. Not much of a base of dead people to generate any incentive for a vaccine.

When you get up to 40 million or so, they might start to try to find something.

Or act like it.
edit on 15-8-2012 by lakesidepark because: my post was undead. I fixed it. Now its just dead.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Hmm......several years ago there was great hope and expectatino of a vaccine for this disease (see the old therads I linked to) - but now it seems "money is a problem" - who would havethought that??


It has to do with the very nature of Ebola, really.

Ebola belongs to a class of viruses once known as filoviruses - or thread viruses. They are alarmingly simple viruses, Ebola and Marburg each having only seven proteins.

They simply out-produce the body's ability to counter. Once the cell is infected (only four particles are necessary to trigger lethal infection), the virus reproduces extremely rapidly, packing the cell with crystallized virus until it explodes with -tens of thousands- of virus particles.

Which is why the virus is one of the most scary out there - it literally dissolves your body and turns it into virus soup. Your body turns to a pulpy liquid and many of your internal organs literally die and decay inside of you before simply falling out of your anus.

But with a 90% kill rate for Ebola Zaire and lethality between 8 and 14 days of -exposure- with infection requiring direct fluid-fluid contact - the virus is simply too hot to be a real threat to human beings on a large scale.

Sure - sucks to be you if you get it - but modern countries have little to fear from Ebola. Sterilization procedures for needles as well as better awareness to avoid biocontamination between patients pretty much eliminates the main carrier of Ebola in all cases of African outbreaks (where hospitals served to amplify and commute the disease).

The nature of the virus makes a vaccination very difficult if not impossible (simply because the virus can actually overwhelm the body's ability to produce antibodies that bond to its 'cell sensors') - it's tiny and reproduces at insane rates that literally convert the biomass of human tissue to virus particles. You are actually mostly virus by time you die from it.

And its epidemiology makes vaccination an ineffective and unnecessary containment method.


Could this be the mechanism by which the NWO will achieve Agenda 21 and the population reduction??


No.

If you want to talk biology, though - I'll give you something that will make you # your pants:

www.gorydetails.net...


The engineered virus had wiped out 100% of the naturally resistant mice and 60% of the immunized mice. The Australian scientists had added a single foreign gene, the mouse IL-4 gene, to natural mousepox virus.



The study suggested a paralleled in that engineered IL-4 smallpox might be able to break through people’s immunity, but not if the vaccinations were recent, perhaps only weeks old.


Pox viruses are -very- easy to engineer, and it's quite common to do so in high school biology labs.

www.jyi.org...


At its peak production level, the Soviet Union produced 100 metric tons of variola virus annually with a combined peak yearly production of biowarfare agents (including bubonic plague and anthrax) of 10,000 metric tons.


And just where the hell did it go?


Senior officials in the Clinton administration all but failed a role-playing exercise designed to assess their ability to deal with a sophisticated smallpox attack in March 1998. The scenario involved an outbreak in California and the Southwest of a genetically-engineered strain of variola similar to one the Soviets had been developing. Officials were unable to contain the smallpox outbreak without large numbers of casualties and could not contain secondary outbreak due to the genetic changes in the virus. Critics of the exercise point out that the virus used in the model was "science fiction," although it pointed to weaknesses in the system. Officials realized "they lacked the knowledge, resources, and stamina to contain or treat a secondary outbreak" of any disease.


Mk.1 Smallpox could # our whole gay world up. A large portion of today's population has not been vaccinated and any likely exposure would almost certainly include an international crowd and pass through an international airport. Once a disease like smallpox hits an international airport hub - it's over. It cannot be contained by anything other than an act of God. Maybe - maybe if you were prepared for such a situation and had, literally, an army of millions on standby ready to jump in and start ring containment vaccination multilaterally across the entire planet....

But realistically. No. Once it hits an airport - 30% of this population's planet is going to die given the infection statistics. More so in third and second world countries - but an almost guaranteed body count of 2 billion.



posted on Aug, 16 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 




Well let's hope the ebolapox (ebola chicken pox hybrid) the Russians created never escapes the lab.
Yes, the Russians mixed the two in a weapons lab.

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 16-8-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


While I see it listed, there - I really don't see the two being at all compatible.

Pox viruses are very complex and quite large in viral terms. Pox viruses counter the immune system by jamming it through cytokine release of various forms.

Filoviruses are just plain conversion machines and are some of the smallest viruses in existence.

Mixing the two into a single pathogen doesn't make any sense in terms of plausibility. Further, severe cases of smallpox end in massive hemorrhagic fevers.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...


Poxviridae viral particles (virions) are generally enveloped (external enveloped virion- EEV), though the intracellular mature virion (IMV) form of the virus, which contains different envelope, is also infectious. They vary in their shape depending upon the species but are generally shaped like a brick or as an oval form similar to a rounded brick because they are wrapped by the endoplasmic reticulum. The virion is exceptionally large, its size is around 200 nm in diameter and 300 nm in length and carries its genome in a single, linear, double-stranded segment of DNA.[2] By comparison, Rhinovirus is 1/10 as large as a typical Poxviridae virion.[3]



The replication of poxvirus is unusual for a virus with double-stranded DNA genome (dsDNA) because it occurs in the cytoplasm[4] Poxvirus encodes its own machinery for genome transcription, a DNA dependent RNA polymerase,[5] which makes replication in the cytoplasm possible. Most dsDNA viruses require the host cell's proteins to perform transcription. These host proteins are found in the nucleus, and therefore most dsDNA viruses carry out a part of their infection cycle within the host cell's nucleus.


Compared to:


The virus RdRp partially uncoats the nucleocapsid and transcribes the genes into positive-stranded mRNAs, which are then translated into structural and nonstructural proteins. Filovirus RdRps bind to a single promoter located at the 3' end of the genome. Transcription either terminates after a gene or continues to the next gene downstream. This means that genes close to the 3' end of the genome are transcribed in the greatest abundance, whereas those toward the 5' end are least likely to be transcribed. The gene order is therefore a simple but effective form of transcriptional regulation. The most abundant protein produced is the nucleoprotein, whose concentration in the cell determines when the RdRp switches from gene transcription to genome replication. Replication results in full-length, positive-stranded antigenomes that are in turn transcribed into negative-stranded virus progeny genome copies. Newly synthesized structural proteins and genomes self-assemble and accumulate near the inside of the cell membrane.


It's two completely different means to the same end that makes no sense to try and combine them.

Particularly when you figure that even the most lethal strain of Ebola carries a case fatality rate of 90% compared to human-cytokine-tailored Small Pox (and potentially other pox viruses) having 100% case fatalities in naturally resistant but unvaccinated species.

Though mixing the two separate pathogens into a weapon involving a single exposure might be what is being talked about - which would make more sense, although making Ebola into a weaponized form would prove difficult. There is some evidence that certain strains of Ebola can communicate through the open air (at least where droplets of body fluid can pass in the air from one host to the next); but it is unknown how reliable this means of communication is - nor is it known what mutations would be necessary to make Ebola into an airborne disease.

Which, again, compared to Smallpox, it's inferior (for all but selective attacks). Smallpox viruses are roughly the size of smoke particles and travel nearly identically to smoke. It can infect individuals across several kilometers (or more) of open air space.

And it's endemic to the human species. It evolved -with- us. There's no virus that is better suited to live within our population. Modern society as we know it would not exist without the small pox vaccine - we'd have never achieved these population statistics, as it was a natural check to wanton reproduction and urbanization.



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


Seriously? I see that you posted a lot of information on the two viruses to indicate you know what you are talking about, but after reading "mixing the the two pathogens doesn't make any sense in terms of plausibility" it is obvious you don't and the rest of the post is the equivalent of "fancy words."

It makes complete and total sense for them to mix the two and it isn't just plausible, it is reality. If you have the understanding of the two viruses that you seem to imply you have than you know that chicken pox in the modern world has a low mortality rate (smallpox is also said to have been used, but of course has been extinguished in nature to our knowledge), but is incredibly contagious, while Ebola has an incredibly high mortality rate, but although contagious it has a speedy incubation period and burns through the infected so quickly that it doesn't often get a chance to spread. Ebola pops up from time to time burns out a couple hundred people and then disappears because people fall ill and die before they can interact and spread the disease. Chickenpox/smallpox on the other hand spreads and spreads.

So mixing the two makes complete sense, and it has occured. Research blackpox and ebolapox. They grafted ebola into smallpox, smallpox being the larger of the two viruses. I also was a bit amused that you had disregard for wiki as my source and then cited it yourself. Either way, it makes sense, it made sense, it's real and I was simply sharing it's reality with other posters, your opinion was incorrect, misinformative, and a bit pretentious.
edit on 17-8-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 



Seriously?


. . .


So mixing the two makes complete sense, and it has occured.


That, simply, is a negative. The two viruses are completely different. It's like suggesting you could mix a cheetah with a great white shark to make a hydrodynamic cat that can comp a zebra in half.

It's an ignorant suggestion if there ever was one.


Research blackpox and ebolapox.


You presume I have not?

It's complete nonsense. "Black Pox" is the hemorrhagic stage of smallpox infection in acute cases and is almost always fatal. It -is- small pox. The difference is that, rather than surface blistering and lesions, the infection progresses so fast in that individual that the entire subcutaneous layer of skin is rapidly destroyed with persistence into internal organs.

en.wikipedia.org...

Ebolapox is nothing more than an urban legend. I've read the documentaries of individuals responsible for interviewing Russian defectors claiming to have been involved in the Russian bioweapons programs, as well as interviews with inspectors to those facilities. There was never any mention of an ebola-smallpox hybrid. There was plenty of mention of a genetically engineered small pox (presumably with the Human IL-4 or other cytokines) and their attempts to obtain optimal dispersion from refrigerated ICBMs (a curious observation made by the CIA that had many guessing until the defectors started bringing the bioweapon program to light).

Similarly - the claim that Russia succeeded (though they may have tried) in creating a nuclear warhead that also released small-pox is an urban legend (I've seen it mentioned before - several times). Not only would the virus not survive re-entry without specialized heat-shielding and refrigeration (that could not also be fit in with a nuclear warhead) - but the nuclear detonation would vaporize the smallpox, anyway (or, presuming you could somehow get it to be ejected far enough away to prevent this, the gamma radiation would damage the DNA within the virus beyond reproductive viability).


They grafted ebola into smallpox, smallpox being the larger of the two viruses.


/facepalm

You've no idea what you're talking about, do you?

Presuming you could, somehow, 'graft' a smaller virus onto another virus... perhaps you could enlighten us all as to how this "ebolapox" would then assemble itself back into an ebola-smallpox hybrid?

The two reproduce in a completely different manner and any "ebola graft" would simply become ebola as it replicates faster than small pox and would suck the resources away from the larger virus.


I also was a bit amused that you had disregard for wiki as my source and then cited it yourself.


Perhaps you need to return to grade school and learn how to read.

I did not disregard wikipedia. I disregarded the mention of "ebolapox" in wikipedia because it lacked a source for the claim and statement.

I cite wikipedia because it's a quick source and because a lot of my sources for information come from books that I read (two of which relevant to this topic are "The Demon In the Freezer" and "The Hot Zone") - which tend to be more difficult to link to in an internet debate (though I could always do classic citations and leave it up to you to decide whether or not to pursue an investigation of the source).


Either way, it makes sense, it made sense, it's real and I was simply sharing it's reality with other posters, your opinion was incorrect, misinformative, and a bit pretentious.


While I can understand your defense of something you -think- you know; your knowledge of biochemistry is lacking. Which is why you were so easily led to believe the urban legend of "ebolapox."

I know that no one likes to be told that they don't know what they are talking about - but it's a fact of life that people can be and often are wrong.

"But Aim, you could be wrong."

First - I make no claim to the title of human. Second - since my sources of understanding come from a range of established sciences as well as the works of people who have genuinely earned the degrees and academic positions they hold... it's not just me that's wrong.

Third - I already accept that my understanding of things is incomplete; so it's somewhat self-ignorant to argue that one is -not- wrong. Certainly - the future will prove many things we hold true to be incorrect or askew.

That doesn't mean you can use that to support ideas that don't work according to known experience.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join