The CardBoard
The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-11.html)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine (/thread-19560.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - akiddoc - 04-29-2020

Moderna applying for phase 2 testing. Got $483 million from the US government to develop a vaccine.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/moderna-applies-phase-2-study-145035467.html

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - BostonCard - 04-29-2020

(04-28-2020, 07:28 PM)stupac2 Wrote:  
(04-28-2020, 06:36 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  More on the Oxford vaccine.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/27/world/europe/coronavirus-vaccine-update-oxford.html

Don't get too attached to any one effort, but with enough shots on goal, hopefully one will be successful.

BC

And that's the whole point behind parallel development of manufacturing, hopefully one of these works (we're pretty Fucked-with-a-capital-F if they don't) so you may as well bet on all of them. What do you think the shutdowns cost us, a few hundred billion a month? Every day you gain is worth billions. The ROI here is insane, we should be doing whatever we can to speed it up, if it's at all plausible it should be greenlit.

Almost no matter how you start manufacturing, it will be impossible to have billions of doses ready.  So, there will have to be some way of prioritizing, which usually goes something like:
1) Healthcare workers & emergency responders
2) High risk populations (age > 70, significant co-morbidities)
3) High exposure populations (grocery store clerks, etc.)
4) Moderate risk populations (age > 50, other co-morbidities)
5) Everyone else

BC

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - burger - 04-29-2020

(04-29-2020, 08:21 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Almost no matter how you start manufacturing, it will be impossible to have billions of doses ready. 

Why not pick 5 good candidates and start making billions of doses right now?  I'm not joking.  The only real cost would be wasted money if all of the vaccines fail, and even then we'd be stimulating the economy.  Better to be paying construction workers, etc. to build and operate vaccine manufacturing facilities than to pay them unemployment.

At the very least, we should be building a bunch of new factories for vaccines, like Bill Gates suggested.  If we had any White house officials with a triple-digit IQ (we don't), this would've started already.  The states don't have the money to do this, but the feds can.  If Trump can declare an "emergency" and shift billions of dollars from the pentagon to build the border wall, then he can do the same to build vaccine making facilities.  This needs to happen yesterday.

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - BostonCard - 04-29-2020

https://www.fiercepharma.com/manufacturing/johnson-johnson-sets-stage-for-covid-19-vaccine-rollout-emergent-manufacturing-tie-up

Several vaccine manufacturers have started to make plans to manufacture "at risk".  But even if you pick five vaccine candidates to do so, and you are lucky enough that they all provide protection against COVID-19, they won't all have results at the same time.  If you have to build new manufacturing facilities from scratch, there is no way the physical plants are even ready to manufacture; your best bet is to take existing manufacturing facilities and have them focus on covid-19.

In addition, even if you somehow magically had billions of doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, you can't snap your fingers and have them deployed instantaneously.  You are still going to want to prioritize offering protection to the individuals at highest risk of getting and spreading COVID-19 and to the individuals most at risk of dying from it.

BC

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - oldalum - 04-29-2020

(04-29-2020, 08:21 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Almost no matter how you start manufacturing, it will be impossible to have billions of doses ready.  So, there will have to be some way of prioritizing, which usually goes something like:
1) Healthcare workers & emergency responders
2) High risk populations (age > 70, significant co-morbidities)
3) High exposure populations (grocery store clerks, etc.)
4) Moderate risk populations (age > 50, other co-morbidities)
5) Everyone else

I think you left out at the very top: 
0) Very rich and "important" people, including celebrities, NBA basketball players, members of Congress, etc.

and at the very bottom: 
6) vaccine and virus deniers
(well, one can hope) 

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - Mick - 04-29-2020

(04-29-2020, 10:32 AM)oldalum Wrote:  
(04-29-2020, 08:21 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Almost no matter how you start manufacturing, it will be impossible to have billions of doses ready.  So, there will have to be some way of prioritizing, which usually goes something like:
1) Healthcare workers & emergency responders
2) High risk populations (age > 70, significant co-morbidities)
3) High exposure populations (grocery store clerks, etc.)
4) Moderate risk populations (age > 50, other co-morbidities)
5) Everyone else

I think you left out at the very top: 
0) Very rich and "important" people, including celebrities, NBA basketball players, members of Congress, etc.

I'm good with that. I absolutely think those people should be in the placebo portion of the trials...

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - Snorlax94 - 04-29-2020

(04-29-2020, 10:32 AM)oldalum Wrote:  I think you left out at the very top: 
0) Very rich and "important" people, including celebrities, NBA basketball players, members of Congress, etc.
Yes, this, and not by a little bit.
I think it was the swine flu vaccination program where, to create transparency, the Obama administration published the exact number of vaccines sent to each county, and each delivery date.

I was in a high priority grouping at that time, I think because I had a very young child who was too young to be vaccinated. The elderly were low priority, I think because they had significant existing protection. By my guess, my number should’ve been called after first responders and healthcare workers. How many are there in SCC, maybe 2% of the population? Maybe 5% if you define it generously? Maybe 10% if it’s every possible type of first responder and healthcare worker and many government workers?

As they published massive delivery of vaccines, hundreds of thousands of doses (to Santa Clara county) just disappeared. Are 15% of the population healthcare workers and first responders? If someone is a high priority for the Covid vaccine, don’t hold your breath. The powerful, the connected, their spouses, their buddies, their donors will be first.

Vaccines will be distributed like the PPP small business loans, the PPE supplies, and the testing supplies, except even worse.

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - BostonCard - 04-29-2020

Your wish appears to be the administration's strategy:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-29/trump-s-operation-warp-speed-aims-to-rush-coronavirus-vaccine

Quote:The Trump administration is organizing a Manhattan Project-style effort to drastically cut the time needed to develop a coronavirus vaccine, with a goal of making enough doses for most Americans by year’s end.

Called “Operation Warp Speed,” the program will pull together private pharmaceutical companies, government agencies and the military to try to cut the development time for a vaccine by as much as eight months, according to two people familiar with the matter.

As part of the arrangement, taxpayers will shoulder much of the financial risk that vaccine candidates may fail, instead of drug companies.


This seems to be the exact thing that has been argued for in this thread and in the Vox article.  So, good job by the administration?

BC

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - oldalum - 04-29-2020

(04-29-2020, 03:07 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  So, good job by the administration?

No, can't be, that's an oxymoron by definition.  :)

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - 2006alum - 04-29-2020

(04-29-2020, 03:07 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Your wish appears to be the administration's strategy:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-29/trump-s-operation-warp-speed-aims-to-rush-coronavirus-vaccine

Quote:The Trump administration is organizing a Manhattan Project-style effort to drastically cut the time needed to develop a coronavirus vaccine, with a goal of making enough doses for most Americans by year’s end.

Called “Operation Warp Speed,” the program will pull together private pharmaceutical companies, government agencies and the military to try to cut the development time for a vaccine by as much as eight months, according to two people familiar with the matter.

As part of the arrangement, taxpayers will shoulder much of the financial risk that vaccine candidates may fail, instead of drug companies.


This seems to be the exact thing that has been argued for in this thread and in the Vox article.  So, good job by the administration?

BC

I assume if taxpayers are fronting the financial risk, then whichever company's vaccine goes to market first, that company will not obtain profits from the vaccine's production and administration, right? If so, this seems like the right move.

My only other minor concern is what happens if one of the candidates produced via this project is the first to market globally. Would Trump try to withhold it from foreign nations as negotiating leverage for whatever foreign policy objectives he has? That would be obscene, but not entirely unlikely, given his prior actions.

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - stupac2 - 04-29-2020

(04-29-2020, 03:07 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Your wish appears to be the administration's strategy:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-29/trump-s-operation-warp-speed-aims-to-rush-coronavirus-vaccine

Quote:The Trump administration is organizing a Manhattan Project-style effort to drastically cut the time needed to develop a coronavirus vaccine, with a goal of making enough doses for most Americans by year’s end.

Called “Operation Warp Speed,” the program will pull together private pharmaceutical companies, government agencies and the military to try to cut the development time for a vaccine by as much as eight months, according to two people familiar with the matter.

As part of the arrangement, taxpayers will shoulder much of the financial risk that vaccine candidates may fail, instead of drug companies.


This seems to be the exact thing that has been argued for in this thread and in the Vox article.  So, good job by the administration?

BC

Hurray, they're doing something! I'm sure the devil is in the details, though, and since this is all from leaks we don't really know them. The whole article makes me a bit more optimistic, a vaccine available in September would be amazing.

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - Snorlax94 - 04-30-2020

I’ve seen the September timeframe listed for *initial* doses for less than 1% of the population, assuming one of the first candidates works. But the Warp Speed goal is to get lots of doses by January, which would be amazing.

This looks like exactly what we have been hoping for — a program that recognizes the stakes and tries to accelerate solutions. I guess those polls showing the POTUS losing key battleground states have finally motivated him to do something.

I do worry, based on the administration’s track record, that they will f**k this up worse than a giant can of Lysol. The top candidates need to be chosen carefully, based on science and doctors, and not selected the way hydroxychloroquine was promoted. And if this means investing in the top candidates, it could backfire by starving other approaches — we need a lot of shots on goal, as people have said. Also, the goal isn’t just to vaccinate the USA — to stabilize the world and to get the global economy going, America will need to return to its roots as the leader of the free world. And finally, because many of the top vaccine candidates are not in the US — one is in germany, one is in the UK, some are in Asia — how will the administration handle that? If over time the most promising candidates are based in other countries, will he be able to get over his xenophobic mindset and recognize it if it turns out a foreign vaccine is first to work? What if it’s from China? Would he do what’s right and champion the best vaccine no matter where it’s from, or would he promote only “America first” candidates and end up making things worse for America? Can he be disciplined enough to back science and speak truthfully all the way through, or will he speak mistruths and sabotage the effort somehow via Twitter?

Also, would he speak the truth? If it turns out none of the first vaccines work (which is probably over 50%), would he admit it, or, in order to win an election, would he inject hundreds of millions of Americans with a vaccine he knows does not work? Don’t forget his track record of firing whistleblowers and gaslighting.

I hope the project succeeds! Overall I’m thrilled by the announcement but would be pleasantly surprised if it doesn’t get screwed up.

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - akiddoc - 04-30-2020

(04-30-2020, 02:39 AM)Snorlax94 Wrote:  I’ve seen the September timeframe listed for *initial* doses for less than 1% of the population, assuming one of the first candidates works. But the Warp Speed goal is to get lots of doses by January, which would be amazing.

This looks like exactly what we have been hoping for — a program that recognizes the stakes and tries to accelerate solutions. I guess those polls showing the POTUS losing key battleground states have finally motivated him to do something.

I do worry, based on the administration’s track record, that they will f**k this up worse than a giant can of Lysol. The top candidates need to be chosen carefully, based on science and doctors, and not selected the way hydroxychloroquine was promoted. And if this means investing in the top candidates, it could backfire by starving other approaches — we need a lot of shots on goal, as people have said. Also, the goal isn’t just to vaccinate the USA — to stabilize the world and to get the global economy going, America will need to return to its roots as the leader of the free world. And finally, because many of the top vaccine candidates are not in the US — one is in germany, one is in the UK, some are in Asia — how will the administration handle that? If over time the most promising candidates are based in other countries, will he be able to get over his xenophobic mindset and recognize it if it turns out a foreign vaccine is first to work? What if it’s from China? Would he do what’s right and champion the best vaccine no matter where it’s from, or would he promote only “America first” candidates?

I hope so! Overall I’m thrilled by the announcement but would be pleasantly surprised if it doesn’t get screwed up.

There really is no way to know if any vaccine is safe using our usual standards by the end of the year. And really no way to know if it is efficacious.

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - OutsiderFan - 04-30-2020

I have not a single doubt the vaccine produced by a company Jared Kushner has a financial stake in will be selected. And I have no reason to believe that said vaccine will have the most efficacy of all candidates.

It would be great for my assumptions to be totally incorrect, but nothing I have seen makes me believe any other scenario is likely.

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - burger - 04-30-2020

Excellent article about the specific challenges involved in making a vaccine quickly: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/30/opinion/coronavirus-covid-vaccine.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Weirdly, the article skipped one possibility that could save several months: producing the vaccine before research and regulatory approval are complete.  That could save almost a year on their timeline.  The only real cost would be the money, and as I said above, nobody should be worrying about that right now.

The article talks about bottlenecks in distribution, too.  That also can be eliminated by making the vaccine ahead of time or making improved distributional capacity a part of the Manhattan project thing.

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - BostonCard - 05-01-2020

Just to give you an idea of the challenges faced by the vaccine maker (with a hat tip, I think, to marketplace).  Aparantly, in the entire world, there are 100 million glass vials suitable to store and transport a vaccine before it is given.  Hopefully, between now and the end of the year, manufacturers will be able to churn out the multiple billions of vials that will be needed to get enough doses of the vaccine for everyone who needs it.

BC

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - burger - 05-02-2020

(05-01-2020, 11:37 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Just to give you an idea of the challenges faced by the vaccine maker (with a hat tip, I think, to marketplace).  Aparantly, in the entire world, there are 100 million glass vials suitable to store and transport a vaccine before it is given.  Hopefully, between now and the end of the year, manufacturers will be able to churn out the multiple billions of vials that will be needed to get enough doses of the vaccine for everyone who needs it.



BC

In that case, shouldn't there be a "manhattan project for making glass vials"?  This sort of thing speaks to the ongoing screwups by Trump et al.  They should have identified all of the bottlenecks involved in making a vaccine in January or February, gone to Congress for money to fix those things within a few weeks, and be breaking ground on new facilities or whatever by now.

Instead we got..."hoax", denial, hydroxycholorquine, nothing of use.

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - chrisk - 05-02-2020

What if another country develops a vaccine first?

What if China develops a vaccine first?

Is Trump going to pay an arm and a leg to get the rights to manufacture a foreign-developed vaccine?

How would he assure people that a Chinese vaccine was effective and safe?

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - BostonCard - 05-02-2020

One word of caution.  There is a possibility that a vaccine actually makes COVID-19 worse.  It is something known as "antibody dependent enhancement" (or ADE).  The antibody binds to the virus, but rather than triggering removal of the virus from circulation, it actually helps the virus get into cells.  It's a phenomenon that is most well-described with dengue (someone who has had dengue before is at increased risk of complications if they get it again).

The reason to sound the alarm is that ADE has been described for the original SARS virus (in animals) and other coronaviruses.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6178114/
https://jvi.asm.org/content/94/5/e02015-19

BC

RE: The US needs more urgency on developing a covid vaccine - 76lsjumb - 05-02-2020

(05-02-2020, 07:11 AM)burger Wrote:  In that case, shouldn't there be a "manhattan project for making glass vials"?  This sort of thing speaks to the ongoing screwups by Trump et al.  They should have identified all of the bottlenecks involved in making a vaccine in January or February, gone to Congress for money to fix those things within a few weeks, and be breaking ground on new facilities or whatever by now.

Instead we got..."hoax", denial, hydroxycholorquine, nothing of use.

January? January? Let's see, I think Congress was tied up in January doing something.  What was it?  Oh yeah, I remember now: They were impeaching Trump.  But, hey, nevermind, I'm sure Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff would have been perfectly happy to call all that off so they could help Trump finance a massive program to make glass vials to treat something that even Dr. Fauci, the CDC, and WHO were saying at the time might not turn out to be all that serious.

Remember, Pelosi et al. were telling us over and over that Trump represented an existential threat to the United States; I don't recall her ever saying back then that COVID was an existential threat.

Get real...