These are comments on a discussion of a new “vaccine” created to deal with Covid found at Instapundit. Lots of money to be made by some of the most unscrupulous people ever landed upon the body politic.
For a virus for which has a “survivability rate” well in excess of 99%, and for younger and healthier persons, approaching 100%, the calculations need to be on relative risk reduction. That means for me, nearly 70, the RRR is well less than 1%. For example, if my infection fatality risk is 1% and the effectiveness of reducing my infection fatality risk is 67% (estimate for J&J by Lancet) then my relative risk reduction is 0.66. Why would I want to assume the risk of an unproven and, based on news reports, potentially risky vaccine (not a vaccine but that’s for another discussion) and take on a risk of adverse affects up to and including death, for a miniscule – and possibly non-existant – benefit? It’s not about medicine. We’re now in the sociological control realm.
Although the mRNA technique is still relatively novel, the vax problems with clotting and heart damage, etc, don’t seem to mRNA related as much as spike protein related (knock on wood), as Astra Seneca and J&J have had similar problems. So before rushing to Novovax, does it target the spike protein by introducing it too. I still say w Pfizer and Moderna, apart from younger people and COVID survivors just not getting vaccinated, dropping the 2nd dose would sidestep most of the horrible reactions, usually triggered by the provocation of the 2nd dose. But none of the goddam “authorities” are even acknowledging that. Rather a few more people die here or there than risk their presumed aura of technocratic infallibility. F*ck ’em all.
NovaVax is “more traditional” only in that it doesn’t cause your own cells to produce the spike protein, which all three existing vaccines do (including the JNJ vaccine). The NovaVax vaccine itself causes the immune system to respond. The NovaVax COVID vaccine is a two-injection (21 days apart) vaccine. OK, so what’s in the NovaVax vaccine? The NovaVax NVX-CoV2373 vaccine is made up of protein sub-units from the SARS-CoV-2 virus already attached to a carrier. The proteins were developed using NovaVax’s recombinant nanoparticle technology. Or, if you’d like more specific information: “We have developed a recombinant nanoparticle vaccine constructed from the full–length, wild-type SARS–CoV-2 spike glycoprotein (GenBank gene sequence MN908947, nucleotides 21563–25384) optimized for the baculovirus-Spodoptera frugiperda (Sf9) insect cell expression system.” The NovaVax “Matrix-M” nanoparticle adjuvant technology is a significant part of how this vaccine achieves its efficacy. The Matrix-M technology will be seen in several other vaccine offerings that NovaVax is bringing to market: A “traditional” vaccine, it is not.
It is different in how it causes the immune system to react. But Dr. Malone was quite indistinct in his description of what he meant by “traditional.” It isn’t a killed/modified/live virus vaccine, which is the vaccine technology that so many people here at IP define as the only technology that can be called “vaccine.”
I’d just like the option NOT TO TAKE A VACCINE FOR A COMMON COLD. Is that really too much to ask?
If you don’t like the mRNA tech, NovaVax looks about the same and is just a protein plus adjuvant (immune boost), similar tech but different adjuvant to the Prevnar pneumonia vaccine.