new preventative treatment announced , not called a vaccine
Why have sceptics points failed to land has often been asked? Is it because the awkward squad are regarded as a nuisance? AstraZeneca have studiously avoided calling this compound a vaccine, perhaps to deflect the ire of the awkward squad.
In Pharmacology, only a tiny finite number of possible compounds/molecules are discovered and looked at. It is a search in an infinite landscape for rare gold nuggets. That is why we need Big Pharma, big searches need big firms with deep pockets. And that's how it is, scientists and shareholders have to eat.
So we hire doctors to help or treat the majority of people, i.e. those able to take and respond to medicine. Once a effective vaccines are discovered, people regard it as a job done for that segment of the population, who are expected to be willingly vaccinated. Most people willingly act in a benevolent manner.
People rarely seek to cater for the awkward squad, who are regarded as a nuisance.On the other hand doctors seek to help and treat those amongst us who are not able to take vaccine, such people include those who might be predisposed to anaphylactic shock, or elderly or immunocompromised cancer patients, where chemotherapy intentionally suppresses the immune system. The discovery of a vaccine is not regarded as job done for those people, so the search goes on, in a field known as monoclonal antibodies, which is not entirely unrelated to vaccines,.
While treatment is unavailable, for that small but vulnerable segment of the population to whom vaccines do not apply it is necessary for protection to look wider than the level of individual rights, esp. in the period before an emergent virus becomes Endemic in our midst. In that period, the fortunate many are asked to extend their benevolence to protect the vulnerable few . For some, this demand is too great, since it may involve curtailment of certain pleasurable, habitual and activities, a thing known today as lockdown or vaccine certification.
In recent weeks, a different type of preventative medicine, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/18/astrazenecas-new-covid-antibody-treatment-effective-vaccines/
has arisen that uses a different mechanism to vaccine. It will be interesting see too how long it is before sceptics spurn this method of counteracting Coronavirus, as they spurn all other means.
I don't spurn other means: I take IVM, Vit C and D, magnesium and zinc + Vit k and quercetin.
No, I don't rattle - I take them spread over the week, and I have reduced carb intake.
Seems to have worked so far.
My wife works for Astrazeneca, would you care to elaborate on your post?
I had to let her read it because I couldn't grasp what you were getting at, she laughed and called it bollocks, that's what I thought too.
Interesting, but not much to go on from a press release. I hope their trail data is better than what we've seen so far, if we get to see it. I wonder which abs they chose, and weather they measured T-cell response.
It's clear there are no correlates for immunity from SARs CoV2 tho, so without more info it's hard to conclude anything.
A separate trial shows the drug also reduces the risk of severe Covid and death by 88 per cent when given within three days of the onset of symptoms.
Absoloute risk, or relative risk? Past trial results reporting high effectiveness in the press relases used relative risk, which is very misleading.
perhaps I recognise relative risk is useless when they should be following the guidelines for trial pubication in absolute terms.
Perhaps you have no clue about relative Vs absolute risk reduction.