7 ms·

Thanks for the answer, but sadly it is not very convincing >mRNA tech was for a long time believed to be non-essential Please correct me if I am wrong, but th

by forcry 5y ago

Thanks for the answer, but sadly it is not very convincing >mRNA tech was for a long time believed to be non-essential Please correct me if I am wrong, but this is is hard to believe. The mRNA tech provide obvious advantages in terms of production and quality control of the vaccines and reduced overall cost, because you no longer have to maintain this library of attenuated viruses.. Also you say >advantages of mRNA would allow for either a faster development track or for a vaccine that could be changed more rapidly if the virus targeted would mutate. So you agree that there is obvious advantages to mRNA tech, and we knew it is valuable because the mutation of viruses was not a new discovery that COVID provided. Also, it seems unlikely that a Company like Moderna would invest in a tech that is currently considered as non-essential. >The pandemic provided the right circumstances (read: funding) Yes, this is the crux of my questions. What exactly did the funding enabled? What breakthrough did it yielded? We already knew that advantages of mRNA would allow for either a faster development track or for a vaccine that could be changed more rapidly. So research funding did not disclose it, we already knew it. So the questions still stands, sadly. Also, I came across this article, which kind of says that >In fact, right before winning federal funding for COVID vaccine development in March 2020, only 3 of Moderna's projects had made it past Phase 1 testing, and only one of these was a vaccine (a cytomegalovirus vaccine codenamed mRNA-1647). And that kind of refute the claim that it was being blocked because it was seen as non-essential. Or do you think that results of clinical trials are rejected on the basis of how essential the technology is? https://anthonycolpo.com/the-disturbing-truth-about-moderna-and-its-mrna-covid-19-vaccine-part-1/ https://anthonycolpo.com/the-disturbing-truth-about-moderna-...

jacquesm 5y ago
It is not very convincing because likely nothing would convince you, the answer as given is pretty solid and if you are not convinced then maybe you have yet another answer to why people don't bother engaging with you if you keep spamming the same question over and over again.
- forcry 5y ago
  Look, if the following is true >only 3 of Moderna's projects had made it past Phase 1 testing, and only one of these was a vaccine Is it too much if one wonder how these vaccines got past of the trials that were blocking it, by additional funding. Your answer does not make sense because clinical trials are not evaluated based on whether the technology is essential or not. I don't think I am being unfair when I say your answer is not very convincing. On the other hand it is not really fair that I ll have to accept what ever that is supposed to be an answer. It might work in television debates, but not in an online forum.
  - forcry 5y ago
    Ok found something https://anthonycolpo.com/the-junk-science-behind-the-moderna-covid-19-vaccine/ https://anthonycolpo.com/the-junk-science-behind-the-moderna... It says, among other things.. >Using reasoning that could only make sense to a government bureaucrat or drug company-sponsored researcher, it was decided no Phase 2 trials were necessary for a drug that had just been shown to cause local and systemic side effects in the vast majority of healthy subjects who took it.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      This guy and his writing have been debunked pretty solidly, you are bringing a wet paper bag to put your bowling ball in. Just read the bit you quote and try to wrap your head around it: according to him the vast majority of the recipients of the mRNA vaccine had local and systemic side effects, except of course that that never happened... I'll say this again: there is no evidence that will convince you, but every bit of evidence that confirms your preferred position, no matter how far fetched is taken as gospel.
      - forcry 5y ago
        > This guy and his writing have been debunked pretty solidly, Can you show me conclusive evidence that phase 2 trials for these vaccines have NOT been skipped? I have looked and couldn't find it.

by forcry 5y ago

jacquesm 5y ago

It is not very convincing because likely nothing would convince you, the answer as given is pretty solid and if you are not convinced then maybe you have yet another answer to why people don't bother engaging with you if you keep spamming the same question over and over again.

forcry 5y ago
Look, if the following is true >only 3 of Moderna's projects had made it past Phase 1 testing, and only one of these was a vaccine Is it too much if one wonder how these vaccines got past of the trials that were blocking it, by additional funding. Your answer does not make sense because clinical trials are not evaluated based on whether the technology is essential or not. I don't think I am being unfair when I say your answer is not very convincing. On the other hand it is not really fair that I ll have to accept what ever that is supposed to be an answer. It might work in television debates, but not in an online forum.
- forcry 5y ago
  Ok found something https://anthonycolpo.com/the-junk-science-behind-the-moderna-covid-19-vaccine/ https://anthonycolpo.com/the-junk-science-behind-the-moderna... It says, among other things.. >Using reasoning that could only make sense to a government bureaucrat or drug company-sponsored researcher, it was decided no Phase 2 trials were necessary for a drug that had just been shown to cause local and systemic side effects in the vast majority of healthy subjects who took it.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    This guy and his writing have been debunked pretty solidly, you are bringing a wet paper bag to put your bowling ball in. Just read the bit you quote and try to wrap your head around it: according to him the vast majority of the recipients of the mRNA vaccine had local and systemic side effects, except of course that that never happened... I'll say this again: there is no evidence that will convince you, but every bit of evidence that confirms your preferred position, no matter how far fetched is taken as gospel.
    - forcry 5y ago
      > This guy and his writing have been debunked pretty solidly, Can you show me conclusive evidence that phase 2 trials for these vaccines have NOT been skipped? I have looked and couldn't find it.