
Covid vaccine passes phase 1 human trial - rntz
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31208-3/fulltext
======
gok
...which, to reiterate, just means it's not extremely dangerous to healthy
people.

------
ineedasername
This does not say that the vaccine is actually _effective_ in preventing
infection. That is not the point of phase 1 trials, and there was no statement
to that effect.

What they have demonstrated is preliminary _safety_ of a possible vaccine
through no severe adverse effects, and also that it did produce some type of
immune system response.

Phase 2 trials will begin to determine the actual effectiveness of the
vaccine.

------
lbeltrame
Compared to the other vaccines in study, this one has a significant
limitation: a lot of the population has antibodies against the Ad5 vector used
to deliver the antigen, which significantly lowers the efficacy. High doses to
contrast this effect were met with adverse events, so this means that Phase 2
and 3 protocols will need to be adjusted.

~~~
toufka
Would the use of the Adenovirus vector used here foreclose future gene
therapies delivered with a similar vector? If so, that could devastate in one
go a lot of people’s ability to get specific therapies as they start to come
online in the next decade.

~~~
lbeltrame
It is actually a very known problem for gene therapies. IIRC, similar vectors
were used in the past, with the same problem, of course.

------
LockAndLol
> Our findings suggest that the Ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine warrants further
> investigation.

It's good that they aren't expressing this like a "Eureka, we did it". At
least we have one candidate. Let's see what else comes our way.

------
tqi
Is The Lancet considered a good/unbiased journal? As someone who is not a
medical researcher, my awareness of it comes mainly from their various
controversies (link between vaccines and autism, Iraq war deaths, letter for
Gaza, etc).

~~~
Veen
It is generally well-regarded. Its editors have a political position that is
occasionally exhibited in the publication of agenda-based content, but for the
most part and with all the usual caveats it is trustworthy where scientific
papers are concerned.

------
Awtem
At n=109, and the multitude of reported observed side effects, I would still
much prefer the virus over this supposed vaccine...

------
schoolornot
Zero chance the American public are going to tolerate wide distribution of a
vaccine from a Chinese company. And with the side effects, I can't imagine how
it will be presented. Plus the study is only 18-60 which excludes the high
risk population.

~~~
blackrock
The thought experiment is fascinating.

Say, the United States votes Trump in for a 2nd term. And he goes on a media
blitz to convince people to not take the China vaccine.

Meanwhile, the rest of the world takes it. The vaccine is ultimately
successful, and Covid-19 is effectively eliminated.

What will happen to the United States? Will the virus continue to ravage the
country and the economy? Meanwhile, the rest of the world begins their
economic recovery.

Never could I imagine that this idea would even be a probability. But yet,
here we are.

~~~
djsumdog
> Trump in for a 2nd term. And he goes on a media blitz to convince people to
> not take the China vaccine.

Why would he do that? He's in the pockets of big pharma. The president is
pretty much a puppet. Both Biden and Trump will push any vaccine presented to
them by the big pharma giants (Gavi/Gates/GSK/Bayer/etc.) because that's the
base that supports them. Biden and Trump may promote different vaccines from
different companies, but it's just depends on which one gets elected and which
particular giants are backing that candidate.

