Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Trump said we will soon have a vaccine for the virus. Will you take it?

Poll - Total Votes: 48
Yes. Absolutely ASAP
Nooo. I’m an anti-vaxer person
I’m gonna wait to see if it kills anyone first.
Show Results
You can only vote on one answer.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SW-User
Just looked at current results.

To explain to the 22 of you that voted option 3. All vaccines have to undergo rigorous tests in volunteers before they are licensed. The data gathered will look at how effective the vaccine is and more importantly how safe. Organisations like FDA in USA, EMA in EU & MHRA in UK will then review and question that evidence and data before granting a licence.
About 9 out of 10 vaccines that enter human trials fail on one or both these points.
So you don't need to wait that testing will have already been done
SimplyTracie · 26-30, F
@SW-User I’m one of those who chose the third option. Seems like there’s too much warp speed to create a vaccine for my liking.
Elessar · 26-30, M
@SimplyTracie They're going to accelerate the testing by both administering the vaccine and the (attenuated?) virus itself, rather than waiting for the candidates to get naturally exposed. And by starting the production in advance, potentially throwing away some million euros if the clinical trial fails. At least over here.
SW-User
@SimplyTracie mostly stuff is being done in parallel up to now and they are ramping up, sending money which might be wasted. Normally you'd wait for success in phase 1 before recruiting your phase 2 or 3 volunteers for example. Now they are doing inline so say you get positive phase 1 results you are ready for phase 2 straight away. Normally you'd have a lag. So nothing is being missed just done in a different sequence.

The vaccine released will be safe. Now we hit phase 3 the time will slow there's little you can speed up unless what they call challenge studies are permitted but with covid I'd doubt they would.
SW-User
@Elessar I've not seen a challenge study like this approved by any ethics committee yet. It is in discussion but normally you only do challenge studies where there is a known effective cure readily available. That doesn't exist for Covid-19. If I was on an ethics board where that's asked for I'd be unlikely to vote it through.
Elessar · 26-30, M
@SW-User In fact, [i]going to / aiming to[/i]. This for ChAdOx-1 at least, from what I read, not sure about Moderna's one.

I don't know what I would do if I was on an ethic board myself, there is also to consider that the virus itself spreading uncontrollably could potentially take out (or permanently damage) a lot more lives than the volunteers going through a challenge study, exposed to an attenuated variant of the virus, with a controlled infection dose, in a controlled setting.. :|
SW-User
@Elessar Well thank goodness I'm retired
Elessar · 26-30, M
@SW-User You were in an ethnic committee? :O
SW-User
@Elessar I worked in IT for pretty much all my career (a small period as a management consultant). My last job was as Head of Research IT at a large London research university. The Ethics system was my responsibility from an IT service point of view. I answered to the University Ethics Committee for that one.

I can hear all the "Can it just do x or y or z for Covid-19 trials?" "Oh and can we have that next Tuesday if you don't mind"...

I'll have to drop my successor (she was a protege of mine) a line see how it's going.