The CEO of AstraZeneca, a major pharmaceutical company, says the $1Billion investment by the US Government will allow them to gear up to have 100 million doses of a vaccine by this October and another 200 million in December. They are already testing their vaccine on thousands of volunteers in the U.K.
Could he be full of shit ? Sure. But, someone believes enough in this to hand him $1 Billion to set up the manufacturing process.
More clickbait
Clickbait, a form of false advertisement, uses hyperlink text or a thumbnail link that is designed to attract attention and to entice users to follow that link and read, view, or listen to the linked piece of online content, with a defining characteristic of being deceptive, typically sensationalized or misleading.
News: Every major news outlet reporting factually on a billion dollar investment in a critical medicine
Let's hope some of these billions save us a couple of trillion and tens of thousands of lives due to the virus and the associated hardships.
What’s a mere billion dollars to this bunch ? Still clickbait
"You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means"
So, here’s the deal. Setting up a manufacturing process for a new vaccine historically takes 6 to 12 months and only begins after a vaccine is fully tested. That’s why a lot of vaccines take 2-3 years to develop and manufacture. By investing $1 Billion, the manufacturer is willing to set up the manufacturing process before they are certain it works and do it at an accelerated pace. That gets the vaccine to the public 12 months earlier.
We pay $1 billion to get a $ 20 Trillion Economy fully open a year early and save thousands of lives. With that kind of return, we should invest $1 Billion on every viable vaccine in the pipeline.
So, anything that causes people to go to a website is clickbait ? That seems like a broad interpretation.
They already know that the vaccine creates the anti-bodies. They have already exposed those people to the virus to see if they got it. They did not. Now they need to see if any side effects come up. Then they need to see how long those anti-bodies live and are they still protective after several months. They should know all that before October. Get the manufacturing in place and they are in play. But with this being a UK based company, how many of those 100 million shots will go to Europe vs the USA ?
It's really a matter of semantics. Saying they will have millions of doses is a lot different than saying they will have a workable, approved vaccine for use.
All the so called vaccine experts I've seen in the news almost outright scoff at the idea a vaccine will be available this year.
This shit wouldn’t even be newsworthy a few years ago but now that you pro Trump idiots have politicized everything even a simple act of wearing a face mask becomes a nutty statement it’s exactly what I said CLICKBAIT
^. I just reread the article. They know that the Moderna vaccine works. No data has been release on this vaccine. So a billion dollar investment is a risk on something that you don't know works yet. They must have pre-release info on the vaccine.
My understanding of the story is that by investing the money to build the manufacturing the initial investor (USA) will have rights to the first production. Of course there is no reason why other investors couldn’t fund additional facilities next door to this one and they would have claims to that production. So far no one else has announced an initiative like that but talks could be underway.
The UK also put some money into the AstraZeneca vaccine. The US and U.K. have priority. The US gets the first 100 million doses and the U.K. gets 30 million. All these would be in October.
This isn’t news the fact is there is still no vaccine available to save Trumps presidency, that’s all Mark cares about
Perspective time: The first case of H1N1 pandemic (aka swine flu) in the US occurred in April 2009. Phase 1 testing of vaccine began in July 2009, with vaccine available in November 2009. So October 2020 vaccine isn't totally unrealistic, but comes with the universal caveat that past performance can't guarantee future results.
twentyfive is right. The search for a vaccine is not news.
Neither is a presidential candidate telling me whether I'm black or not by who I support at the ballot box.
“Neither is a presidential candidate telling me whether I'm black or not by who I support at the ballot box.”
What do you mean it's not news!!! You mean I’m NOT going to stay this color? AAAAAAAAAAAHHH…
lolololol at that Crazy Uncle Joe. What a buffoon… hahahahaha…idiocracy indeed
^not to be confused with crazyjoe
I thought they were the same person.......
“ now that you pro Trump idiots have politicized everything “
Says the guy who brought a political argument about Trump into a discussion about vaccines.
Phase 2 drugs fail more often than not. Even vaccines, which are easier than most, have a high failure rate in clinical development. 6 months ago no one had heard of this thing. We're going to see months of ups and downs.
This is good info - the whole industrialized world is working on a vaccine and the kitchen $ink is being thrown at it; so one would think/be-hopeful that a workable vaccine(s) can be available sooner than later - as has been mentioned, the influx of $$$ means they can work on the process in parallel vs the usual sequential method thus shaving considerable time from the process (i.e. typically they have to take cost into account when working on a new med but in this case cost/investment is not the concern) -having said all this when won't have have a workable vaccine till we have one, but experts seem hopeful
Time will tell if the virus collaborates and doesn't make it harder than it needs to be w.rt. a workable vaccine
Here’s the story not that crap you’re looking at
Moderna execs dumped nearly $30 million of stock after news of promising coronavirus vaccine
Source please. Otherwise that’s more “info wars” type bullshit.
^Sorry the link didn’t work it’s on CNN business as well as on Bloomberg s website
It’s also listed on the SEC inside trades register
Before the public places any credibility in a vaccine it should go through a peer-review process. But the Moderna announcement went straight from private industry to news conference.
Article by William Haseltine, former Harvard Med school professor:
"Moderna’s claim of favorable results in its vaccine trial is an example of ‘publication by press release"
"Private companies, governments and research institutes are holding news conferences to report potential breakthroughs that cannot be verified. The results are always favorable, but the full data on which the announcements are based are not immediately available for critical review. This is "publication by press release,” and it’s damaging trust in the fundamental methods of science and medicine at a time when we need it most."
Here's a link to @25's post about Moderna execs dumping company stock:
And I stand by my statement that the pro Trump idiots are politicizing everything There is nothing newsworthy about a pharmaceutical company looking into a vaccine for this coronavirus
Another example of what happens when you circumvent the peer review process: hydoxychloroquine. Earlier the @OP started a thread claiming that chloroquine was a miracle drug and its use was suppressed by the "deep-state" or whatever other tinfoil-hat nonsense. So far it's proven to be no help at all and probably increases risk:
"Antimalaria drugs didn’t help patients fight Covid-19, while raising the risk for heart problems and death, a new study analyzing real-world use of the medicines reported.
Coronavirus patients taking chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine didn’t fare better than patients who received other treatment, according to the study published online Friday by the journal The Lancet. At the same time, use of the pills appeared to raise the risk the heart would beat irregularly and more rapidly than normal—and of dying in the hospital, the study said."
The big laugh is that the drug Trump is supposedly taking are actually prescribed for malaria or lupus which are in reality two diseases that Trump would never be exposed to And I say supposedly because I don’t believe him not one drop that he is actually taking this medication he’s a liar about everything why not this as well
An international poll of more than 6,000 doctors released Thursday found that the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine was the most highly rated treatment for the novel coronavirus.
The survey conducted by Sermo, a global health care polling company, of 6,227 physicians in 30 countries found that 37% of those treating COVID-19 patients rated hydroxychloroquine as the “most effective therapy” from a list of 15 options.
Of the physicians surveyed, 3,308 said they had either ordered a COVID-19 test or been involved in caring for a coronavirus patient, and 2,171 of those responded to the question asking which medications were most effective.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration gave chloroquine and its next-generation derivative, hydroxychloroquine, emergency-use authorization Monday for treating the novel coronavirus, although the drug was already being used off-label by some doctors and hospitals for COVID-19 patients.
The survey also found that the most commonly prescribed treatments are analgesics (56%), azithromycin (41%) and hydroxychloroquine (33%).
Azithromycin, known by the brand name Zithromax or Z-Pak, was rated the second-most effective therapy at 32%, followed by “nothing,” analgesics (including acetaminophen), anti-HIV drugs and cough medicine.
Washington Times - Politics, Breaking News, US and World News logo
Hydroxychloroquine rated 'most effective therapy' by doctors for coronavirus: Global survey Drug known for treating malaria used by U.S. doctors mostly for high-risk COVID-19 patients
Gopesh Patel, RPh, with VLS Pharmacy in Brooklyn, has filled physician prescriptions for more than 70 COVID-19 patients, supplying a compounded formulation with hydroxychloroquine. (Business Wire via Associated Press) FILE Gopesh Patel, RPh, with VLS Pharmacy in Brooklyn, has filled physician prescriptions for more than 70 COVID-19 patients, supplying a compounded formulation with hydroxychloroquine. (Business Wire via Associated Press) FILE By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Thursday, April 2, 2020 An international poll of more than 6,000 doctors released Thursday found that the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine was the most highly rated treatment for the novel coronavirus.
The survey conducted by Sermo, a global health care polling company, of 6,227 physicians in 30 countries found that 37% of those treating COVID-19 patients rated hydroxychloroquine as the “most effective therapy” from a list of 15 options.
Of the physicians surveyed, 3,308 said they had either ordered a COVID-19 test or been involved in caring for a coronavirus patient, and 2,171 of those responded to the question asking which medications were most effective.
TOP ARTICLES 2/5 DHS to permit foreign athletes to enter despite coronavirus travel ban
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration gave chloroquine and its next-generation derivative, hydroxychloroquine, emergency-use authorization Monday for treating the novel coronavirus, although the drug was already being used off-label by some doctors and hospitals for COVID-19 patients.
The survey also found that the most commonly prescribed treatments are analgesics (56%), azithromycin (41%) and hydroxychloroquine (33%).
Azithromycin, known by the brand name Zithromax or Z-Pak, was rated the second-most effective therapy at 32%, followed by “nothing,” analgesics (including acetaminophen), anti-HIV drugs and cough medicine.
Hydroxychloroquine, which is sold under the brand name Plaquenil, was prescribed mainly in the United States for the most severe cases, but not so in other countries.
“Outside the U.S., hydroxychloroquine was equally used for diagnosed patients with mild to severe symptoms whereas in the U.S. it was most commonly used for high risk diagnosed patients,” the survey found.
The 30 nations surveyed included those in Europe, Asia, North America and South America, as well as Australia. No incentives were provided to participate in the poll, conducted March 25-27, according to Sermo.
ime, the article you posted is from April 2nd which means the data gathered was like from early through mid March. Since then, there have been several small, and some fairly large studies, all showing no benefit from hydroxychloroquine (and at least one small study showing mild benefit). Doubtful we'd get the same results with a poll done today. Remdesivir is currently the only drug that has a large, published, peer-reviewed study behind it, that shows some effectiveness in particular cases. Lots more studies of other drugs on the way
MAY 22, 2020
So far, studies looking at hydroxychloroquine use before or early in infection haven’t produced any of the heart rhythm problems seen in studies of seriously ill patients. “When used alone, we’re not seeing major issues,” says Sarah Lofgren, an infectious disease doctor at the University of Minnesota Medical School in Minneapolis, where researchers are testing hydroxychloroquine’s ability to prevent COVID-19. “Out of our thousands of patients, we’re not seeing things people are quite concerned about, particularly the heart arrhythmias.”
That's an article on side effects, and does not address the issue I raised: that there is no evidence it helps.
Here's the largest study through early May, 1500 patients, showing no impact on intubation or death: nejm.org
Here's the largest study to date, 100,000 patients, published May 22 -- so the sciencenews article you cite did not have access to it at time of publication. This study confirms no efficacy against covid19, but DOES show a positive correlation between hydroxychloroquine and death (that is, it's not only not helpful, it's mildly harmful): thelancet.com
When controlled for confounders, treatment with hydroxychloroquine is associated with increased risk of death, and "independently associated with an increased risk of de-novo ventricular arrhythmia during hospitalisation."
Here's a
You can't convince people that science is real, let them take whatever treatment they want, just keep to the OPs actual topic, pharmacy company searching for a vaccine isn't a newsworthy event, however if the principals of that company get some fake publicity causing their stock to rise, and said principals cash out right as the stock is rising, that sounds like some fraudulent activity is taking place, that's newsworthy.
According to 25, anything that reflects well on Trump is either not newsworthy, fake news, or a Republican talking point. Anything negative that happens in America is Trump’s fault and worthy of 24/7 coverage. Anyone who disagrees with this view is either a complete moron or a Trump stooge who must be silenced.
The beauty of this position is that 25 doesn’t need to understand any of the issues or facts. He just needs to repeat one of his stock answers. Fake news. Talking point. Fucking fat fuck Trump.
Now that I think about it, maybe 25 is a Russian bot. Anywhere that Trump’s name appears, you just insert a random anti-Trump catchphrase.
Wow that's quite a conspiracy theory you got going there, LOL
The point is, if you were a bot, you’d be posting exactly the same way you do now. Insults. Catchphrases. Unsubstantiated claims.
Nothing about your posts suggests any true understanding of the facts or the ability to process those facts.
No I haven't made any unsubstantiated claims, that's all you haven't any catchphrases in my posts, you again, Insults hell you are insulting my intelligence, claiming that a pharma company looking for a vaccine is news, but if I'm so wrong explain to me how do the principals of Moderna justify putting out a press release guaranteed to raise their stock price then cashing in seems like just another version of the old fashioned pump and dump scheme.
Hey mark have you got some skin in this game you are acting like a typical tout that just got caught.
The original post was about AstraZeneca. The core point was that their results ( they have a trial with over 1,000 volunteers ) were positive enough that $1Billion was invested in anticipation of a successful outcome.
Your response had nothing to do with this, other than to claim it wasn’t newsworthy.
Then, you went on a tangent about Moderna ( which has 8 volunteers ) and claims of pump and dump. This may be true, but has nothing to do with my original point about AstraZeneca.
And, you got in some catchphrase zingers about Trump. That was the first political reference in this thread.
I doubt you’ll understand this, but your posts seldom follow a rational pattern. You didn’t address the issues in the original post. I don’t know if this is because you aren’t very bright or have some variation of Tourette’s syndrome where you just type random thoughts from a cardfile of insults.
Thank you, an insult from you is like high praise. I'm so honored !
google.com