Prestigious medical journal The Lancet publishes findings on Russian Covid vaccine

No Ed, not all of our intelligence agencies said that, but let's say they did - they are the same intelligence agencies that told us there were WMDs in Iraq. They lied. Yes, I believe Putin over them.

Of course, but like with others in Trump's administration, who have since resigned, or have been fired, those fanning the flames of war do not have our interests at heart.

Buddy Blank said...
No Ed, not all of our intelligence agencies said that, but let's say they did - they are the same intelligence agencies that told us there were WMDs in Iraq. They lied. Yes, I believe Putin over them.

so your government can't be trusted and putin can. i'm surprised you don't think coronavirus is a hoax, comrade.

F8 said...
so your government can't be trusted and putin can. i'm surprised you don't think coronavirus is a hoax, comrade.

Hmm, didn't you just say yesterday you don't trust the FDA? Yes, yes you did, and I quote: "If Dr Hahn says the sky is blue i'm afraid i'd have to check. he has NO credibility with me."

Pot meet kettle.

I didn't say you didn't read or understand the article. I think you don't understand how scientific journal publishing works. The Russian Health Care Ministry is mistaken is saying that the results are "recognized by the leading scientific journal." The results were published by a leading journal, but the journal does not vouch for the results. The editors of the Lancet no doubt felt it was important to get the results of the Russian vaccine study out to the scientific community as fast as possible so that the science community can see what the Russion investigators did, and they can evaluate it. Let me just restate my point: The Lancet did not "find" that the Russian vaccine works. The Lancet did not "say" that the vaccine works. They published an article. That's all. The validity of the article's findings are for the rest of the scientific community to evaluate.

Given the importance of Covid-19 vaccine development, I was curious that the Russian studies would be published in the Lancet without an editorial or comment in the same issue, and I was right. We should also look at this comment they published yesterday that adds context:

COVID-19 vaccines: early success and remaining challenges

The two authors, both at Johns Hopkins, discuss four strengths of the Russian studies but go on to say:
"...
Some limitations of the studies by Logunov and colleagues are notable. In the study of the frozen vaccine formulation, the population included young military personnel. Soldiers are likely to be fitter and healthier than the general population. Moreover, in older adults, immune senescence might make vaccines less immunogenic, and this age group was absent from this study. Sex imbalance occurred in the study arms because there was no random allocation. A control arm was conspicuously absent. Two participants were of Asian descent, with the rest of the participants of white European ethnic origin. Clearly, much more remains to be learned from the phase 3 randomised trial planned to include 40 000 civilian volunteers and, hopefully, broadly inclusive of groups at risk.

This COVID-19 vaccine candidate from Russia joins two other adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccine candidates, which have been reported in randomised trials in The Lancet,2, 3 and an mRNA vaccine candidate reported in a non-randomised trial.4 Similar to these studies before it, Logunov and colleagues’ studies are encouraging but small. The immunogenicity bodes well, although nothing can be inferred on immunogenicity in older age groups, and clinical efficacy for any COVID-19 vaccine has not yet been shown. A wide portfolio of early COVID-19 vaccine candidates will hopefully provide more successful vaccines that are broadly protective across risk groups and that increase the global availability of what will be a precious limited commodity.
...
Ultimately, all vaccine candidates will need to show safety and prove durable clinical efficacy (including in groups at greater risk) in large randomised trials before they can be put into widespread use. Equitable access will require multiple vaccine producers and providers in a range of settings. Each of their successes will together lead us towards our collective, longed for, new day."

[All emphasis mine]

I am particularly struck by the statement that "...nothing can be inferred on immunogenicity in older age groups," and that no candidate has shown clinical efficacy. This might put the kibosh on my trip to the black market.

I, and I believe others, are not challenging the claim that the Russians have a vaccine candidate -- even a promising one -- but rather that it is ready for anything other than Phase III trials. For all I know the Russian candidate may turn out to be superior to many others -- or it may not.

Djin

Post Edited (DjinTonic) : 9/5/2020 7:43:45 AM (GMT-6)

Buddy-- on my thread regarding would you take a new Covid vaccine, you said yes if the FDA approved it. Yet this vaccine, if say it was developed in the USA, would be far from slated for approval. It may or may not be ready for Phase 3 trials. So why pick this one? Of course, if our Leader continues to emasculate our agencies, I guess he can push through an approval... just in time for the election.

Mel

I have not yet seen this in the Lancet but I understand that in Canada, where BTW COVID control has been excellent, they are now recommending wearing a mask during sex. Does pretending to be the Lone Ranger count?

Jim

compiler said...
Buddy-- on my thread regarding would you take a new Covid vaccine, you said yes if the FDA approved it. Yet this vaccine, if say it was developed in the USA, would be far from slated for approval. It may or may not be ready for Phase 3 trials. So why pick this one? Of course, if our Leader continues to emasculate our agencies, I guess he can push through an approval... just in time for the election.

Mel

You need to reread my comments, and the other relevant material regarding the Russian vaccine. You obviously haven't. When, and if, you do, and want to discuss it with me, please feel free.

As far as the president's Operation Warp Speed goes, I support it 1000%. As I said elsewhere, it is what is known as a science-driver for medicine, and, as such, is spilling over into other areas of medicine in addition to Covid-19.

compiler said...
Buddy-- on my thread regarding would you take a new Covid vaccine, you said yes if the FDA approved it. Yet this vaccine, if say it was developed in the USA, would be far from slated for approval. It may or may not be ready for Phase 3 trials. So why pick this one? Of course, if our Leader continues to emasculate our agencies, I guess he can push through an approval... just in time for the election.

Mel

it'll backfire bigly too.

Buddy Blank said...
Ed did you trust Nixon about Vietnam Ed? Colin Powell, when he waved his little vial around at the UN, yapping about WMDs that never existed? How about Bush when he said "no new taxes"? Or Obama when he said "you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor"? FOIA releases showed the FBI spied on Martin Luther King. Do you trust the FBI? Let's not even get into all the shady stuff the CIA has done over the years. Brennan was caught red-handed spying on American citizens; see here https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/31/cia-admits-spying-senate-staffers. Ask Ed Snowden about our ever so honest intel agencies.

You're a smart guy Ed, I like you, and enjoy your photos on Instagram, and sense of humor, but you're way off base here.

I think we are straying too far off subject here buddy. and I've said enough about what i believe

Buddy:

You asked Ed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
did you trust Nixon about Vietnam Ed? Colin Powell, when he waved his little vial around at the UN, yapping about WMDs that never existed? How about Bush when he said "no new taxes"? Or Obama when he said "you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor"? FOIA releases showed the FBI spied on Martin Luther King. Do you trust the FBI? L>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'll take a stab at that:
NO, NO, NO,YES, YES.

By the way, I still believe the first 3 were flat out lying. I believe Obama believed it. Why? Just based on a lifetime of living and being able to gauge the honesty/integrity of people. I've been wrong on RARE occasions.


You also said
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

As far as the president's Operation Warp Speed goes, I support it 1000%. As I said elsewhere, it is what is known as a science-driver for medicine, and, as such, is spilling over into other areas of medicine in addition to Covid-19.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>s
Really? Speaking of integrity...
This is the same guy who, on his pulpit (which has tremendous influence, and he knows it) mentioned injecting disinfectant and taking Hydro-Q?? Talk about Operation Warp Speed.

Mel