Has an Mrna vax ever been used on humans before now

So it essentially bought nothing of value then.

Fair enough.


a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

a reply to: nonspecific
Didn't read it in depth yet but I see no mention of Moderna and it capability/history of working in this field in the article but I did find this...

In both trials, immunogenicity was more modest in humans than was expected based on animal models, a phenomenon also observed with DNA-based vaccines171, and the side effects were not trivial.

So, it didn't kick of as great a immune response as in animals and "side effects were not trivial" Wow!

And there is plenty more in the paragraphs preceding it.

a reply to: nonspecific
You are entitled to your opinion, of course.

I for myself think it brought value in the sense of clarifying what "promising results" often mean. Just in case someone likes to play word games again. Count me in, but it's not mandatory for me to have this.

As I said I won't answer all the questions but should give a bit of the history of mRNA vaccines and as it predates the pandemic should not be biased in either direction as it was not a politisied issue when the article was made.

As far as it goes it's new ground all round when it comes to licensed vaccines based on mRNA as far as I'm aware.


a reply to: igloo

I don't think we should keep clogging up threads with this bickering anymore.

Send me a private message if you wish to continue arguing.



a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

a reply to: nonspecific

The article predates it by a year and shows wishy washy results. oh and this

In both trials, immunogenicity was more modest in humans than was expected based on animal models, a phenomenon also observed with DNA-based vaccines171, and the side effects were not trivial.

Your article is a fairly decent piece for showing that mrna vaccines have HUGE potential but also that they were not ready to be rolled out as of 2018. Good job. Is this not the smoking gun for not having used these as an experiment on our species?

I think the huge global effort and out of the norm interaction between the developers managed to bring the research on by what have been many years in a short space of time. At least that's the understanding I have of it.

It's amazing what can be done with enough money and cooperation.



a reply to: igloo

a reply to: nonspecific

It's amazing what can be done with enough money and cooperation.

Remember Pfizer has a sketchy history and moderna no different i find it amusing they chose these two compaines to make vaxs.

I could easily find some drugmarkers with good track history maybe not that good good enough.

There's other vaccines out there, j an j, astrazenica, sputnik and more I can't remember.

I'm assuming the US is using American made ones because money?


a reply to: HawkEyi

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: sciencelol

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: sciencelol

Google (or whatever your favourite search engine is) is your friend

linkypoo

While an mRNA vaccine has never been on the market anywhere in the world, mRNA vaccines have been tested in humans before, for at least four infectious diseases: rabies, influenza, cytomegalovirus, and Zika.

Ok well why were they not approved and it seems we still have all viruses ?

Because they were still in trials (it's in the link).

Not true. They were not approved due to the atrocious outcome of the animal trials.
They were simply deemed too dangerous.
The technology is about 20 years old but previous trials were halted due to bad side effects.
The last one was h1n1 when they started on humans but stopped (as they should) as soon as they noticed narcolepsy was a thing in the very few test subjects.
That's what is done in any humane trials.

This large, global disaster is only allowed because of emergency status.
There is no excusing this. It's a dangerous folly that has killed more or just as many as the elusive covid.

Of course those that had the jab will find anything to make it seem like a good idea. Otherwise the fear of the consequences would drive them insane.

Nobody knows the longterm consequences, you will just have to observe yourself in the coming months and years.

I won't be part of something this stupid. Sorry.

I did not know that about the h1n1 trials?

Any links or is it all hushed up?



a reply to: Hecate666

I know the lab animals died, in past attempts with mRNA and coronavirus, SARS: whatever: miserable, deadly failure. Far as I know, this is the first time the entire human population of the planet has been relegated to lab rats. There have been similar instances of criminal disregard for life, Josef Mengele, before that, stuff like Frankenstein movies. Nobody sane could have possibly taken seriously the latter, a known fact the whole experiment offensive to God, the entire point. People, back when those movies were made, were not such hopeless, evil idiots. Now days, half the population would positively identify with the monster, or will, when the clot shot is done with them, and sure to label the healthy as terrorists, like blaming the gun, if they blew their own brains out.

originally posted by: nonspecific
I think the huge global effort and out of the norm interaction between the developers managed to bring the research on by what have been many years in a short space of time. At least that's the understanding I have of it.

It's amazing what can be done with enough money and cooperation.



a reply to: igloo

I do agree that remarkable advances can, and may have, been made with effort but to my mind that still didn't leave enough time for rigorous human trials before this was launched. Then to make it mandatory as it is where I live... that's the issue not that these have potential.

I'm 100% against these coerced vaccines yet I'd hate to see such a backlash that future development is discouraged or shunned away from entirely. This is what is so frustrating about the wall of people shouting down those who have concerns about the current covid vaccines as being anti vax or anti science. We're not.

The technology has potential but I don't want to be part of the trial having mild autoimmune issues as well as having it run in the family. We have a situation in BC where the top doctor says no exemption even to a man who had clear anaphylactic reaction to his first shot and was warned by doctors not to continue. People are pissed, even some of the vaccinated, at the control being exerted using a health issue.

I was not aware anywhere had mandatory vaccinations yet? Which one did they make you have?



a reply to: igloo

WHO

originally posted by: nonspecific
I was not aware anywhere had mandatory vaccinations yet? Which one did they make you have?



a reply to: igloo

IBritish Columbia, Canada. I haven't gotten one. Deadline is sept. 13th.

Editing to add... mandatory for "non-essential" services; restaurants, gyms, weddings, others. Not the end of the world if it truly is as they say short term but the head doctor also promised some time back that she'd not make anything vax mandatory as did our federal government. Except the feds just sent out billions to the provinces to exact just that, right in lockstep with when the WHO posted this...

WHO

The country is going for mandatory vaccinations for all?

What one or will they let you choose?


a reply to: igloo

originally posted by: nonspecific
The country is going for mandatory vaccinations for all?

What one or will they let you choose?


a reply to: igloo

They let people choose.

But you can't choose to not have one? What about medical exemption or religious beliefs?



a reply to: igloo

a reply to: nonspecific

What about medical exemption or religious beliefs?

In Canada B.C Province you have no choices none. Unless your the elitist.

a reply to: nonspecific

, j an j, astrazenica

Again these same ones that can causes alot more BCs and were suspended for use in other countries?

sputnik is not allowed in some western countries let alone Canada.