Posts: 22,242
Threads: 2,844
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
sekker wrote:
[quote=PeterB]
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
I would consider a daily nasal spray to reduce susceptibility but it would need to either be shelf stable and available everywhere, or an auto-ship option.
The evidence that this virus is mutating so fast is disturbing, and still waiting for China to publish genetic profiles of the Wuhan 2015 Gain of Function research to prove it isn't related (like that is ever gonna happen).
I don't see why the nasal spray couldn't be both shelf-stable AND available everywhere. It's a lipopeptide, which I would guess should be pretty stable in formulation, and hopefully not too hard to mass-produce: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/healt...spray.html
There is a nasal spray-based next generation vaccine now in clinical trials. They just designed the version against the Delta variant. This could be the next step. But it will still be months before we know it works and is generally safe. Still, scientists are still 'sciencing' and trying to get new solutions - even if the politics are a challenge.
To which one are you referring? There are actually now a few nasal sprays in development; the one I linked to from the NYT is a lipoprotein, already tested on ferrets, but there are others in development (and one which is OTC and according to a publication, interferes with corona infection, though I'm not sure I believe their data).
Posts: 31,861
Threads: 708
Joined: Jun 2024
Reputation:
0
Sarcany wrote:
On top of all the other evidence against the whole "THOSE DARK-SKINNED FUNNY-SPEAKING FOREIGNERS ENGINEERED IT" line of BS pushed most notably by Rand Paul at the behest of Donald Trump, there was an international pause on "Gain of Function" research and a moratorium on funding at the time in question.
Just a FYI, I wasn't talking about Senator Nutso's comments. I was talking about the study I previously referenced that was done before the 'agreement' and pause in funding.
Posts: 9,996
Threads: 393
Joined: Apr 2022
Reputation:
0
Filliam H. Muffman wrote:
[quote=Sarcany]
On top of all the other evidence against the whole "THOSE DARK-SKINNED FUNNY-SPEAKING FOREIGNERS ENGINEERED IT" line of BS pushed most notably by Rand Paul at the behest of Donald Trump, there was an international pause on "Gain of Function" research and a moratorium on funding at the time in question.
Just a FYI, I wasn't talking about Senator Nutso's comments. I was talking about the study I previously referenced that was done before the 'agreement' and pause in funding.
The article I cited today makes specific reference to that type of study. Scientists do not consider that type of research to be "Gain of Function."
Rand Paul and other right-wingers have repeatedly tried to spin it as "Gain of Function" research by Chinese government stooges to further their political ends.
Don't swallow the spin. Follow the science.
Posts: 31,861
Threads: 708
Joined: Jun 2024
Reputation:
0
Sarcany wrote:
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
[quote=Sarcany]
On top of all the other evidence against the whole "THOSE DARK-SKINNED FUNNY-SPEAKING FOREIGNERS ENGINEERED IT" line of BS pushed most notably by Rand Paul at the behest of Donald Trump, there was an international pause on "Gain of Function" research and a moratorium on funding at the time in question.
Just a FYI, I wasn't talking about Senator Nutso's comments. I was talking about the study I previously referenced that was done before the 'agreement' and pause in funding.
The article I cited today makes specific reference to that type of study. Scientists do not consider that type of research to be "Gain of Function."
Rand Paul and other right-wingers have repeatedly tried to spin it as "Gain of Function" research by Chinese government stooges to further their political ends.
Don't swallow the spin. Follow the science.
Not swallowing anything, just waiting for China to provide the data the world has been waiting for since Feb., 2020. Again, not consuming any right-wing crap. Don't knee-jerk associate me with them just because it was in a recent news cycle.
Posts: 9,996
Threads: 393
Joined: Apr 2022
Reputation:
0
Filliam H. Muffman wrote:
[quote=Sarcany]
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
[quote=Sarcany]
On top of all the other evidence against the whole "THOSE DARK-SKINNED FUNNY-SPEAKING FOREIGNERS ENGINEERED IT" line of BS pushed most notably by Rand Paul at the behest of Donald Trump, there was an international pause on "Gain of Function" research and a moratorium on funding at the time in question.
Just a FYI, I wasn't talking about Senator Nutso's comments. I was talking about the study I previously referenced that was done before the 'agreement' and pause in funding.
The article I cited today makes specific reference to that type of study. Scientists do not consider that type of research to be "Gain of Function."
Rand Paul and other right-wingers have repeatedly tried to spin it as "Gain of Function" research by Chinese government stooges to further their political ends.
Don't swallow the spin. Follow the science.
Not swallowing anything, just waiting for China to provide the data the world has been waiting for since Feb., 2020. Again, not consuming any right-wing crap. Don't knee-jerk associate me with them just because it was in a recent news cycle.
The paper that you cite examined the adaptability of a mouse-adapted SARS virus to mouse cells in-culture.
How does that turn into SARS-COV2?
Posts: 33,855
Threads: 2,463
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
PeterB wrote:
[quote=sekker]
[quote=PeterB]
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
I would consider a daily nasal spray to reduce susceptibility but it would need to either be shelf stable and available everywhere, or an auto-ship option.
The evidence that this virus is mutating so fast is disturbing, and still waiting for China to publish genetic profiles of the Wuhan 2015 Gain of Function research to prove it isn't related (like that is ever gonna happen).
I don't see why the nasal spray couldn't be both shelf-stable AND available everywhere. It's a lipopeptide, which I would guess should be pretty stable in formulation, and hopefully not too hard to mass-produce: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/healt...spray.html
There is a nasal spray-based next generation vaccine now in clinical trials. They just designed the version against the Delta variant. This could be the next step. But it will still be months before we know it works and is generally safe. Still, scientists are still 'sciencing' and trying to get new solutions - even if the politics are a challenge.
To which one are you referring? There are actually now a few nasal sprays in development; the one I linked to from the NYT is a lipoprotein, already tested on ferrets, but there are others in development (and one which is OTC and according to a publication, interferes with corona infection, though I'm not sure I believe their data).
https://www.postbulletin.com/newsmd/coro...cal-trials
Actual vaccine, nasal delivery. Very cool tech.
Posts: 33,855
Threads: 2,463
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
Sarcany wrote:
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
[quote=Sarcany]
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
[quote=Sarcany]
On top of all the other evidence against the whole "THOSE DARK-SKINNED FUNNY-SPEAKING FOREIGNERS ENGINEERED IT" line of BS pushed most notably by Rand Paul at the behest of Donald Trump, there was an international pause on "Gain of Function" research and a moratorium on funding at the time in question.
Just a FYI, I wasn't talking about Senator Nutso's comments. I was talking about the study I previously referenced that was done before the 'agreement' and pause in funding.
The article I cited today makes specific reference to that type of study. Scientists do not consider that type of research to be "Gain of Function."
Rand Paul and other right-wingers have repeatedly tried to spin it as "Gain of Function" research by Chinese government stooges to further their political ends.
Don't swallow the spin. Follow the science.
Not swallowing anything, just waiting for China to provide the data the world has been waiting for since Feb., 2020. Again, not consuming any right-wing crap. Don't knee-jerk associate me with them just because it was in a recent news cycle.
The paper that you cite examined the adaptability of a mouse-adapted SARS virus to mouse cells in-culture.
How does that turn into SARS-COV2?
Snopes has debunked Dr Nutso’s claims too.
I do not know what will take to end this false story.
Note - I am not saying absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Just that what is being cited is not what they say it is - it’s not proof that the Chinese lab was trying to make a human infectious virus out of something that doesn’t normally infect humans.
Posts: 22,242
Threads: 2,844
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
sekker wrote:
[quote=PeterB]
[quote=sekker]
[quote=PeterB]
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
I would consider a daily nasal spray to reduce susceptibility but it would need to either be shelf stable and available everywhere, or an auto-ship option.
The evidence that this virus is mutating so fast is disturbing, and still waiting for China to publish genetic profiles of the Wuhan 2015 Gain of Function research to prove it isn't related (like that is ever gonna happen).
I don't see why the nasal spray couldn't be both shelf-stable AND available everywhere. It's a lipopeptide, which I would guess should be pretty stable in formulation, and hopefully not too hard to mass-produce: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/healt...spray.html
There is a nasal spray-based next generation vaccine now in clinical trials. They just designed the version against the Delta variant. This could be the next step. But it will still be months before we know it works and is generally safe. Still, scientists are still 'sciencing' and trying to get new solutions - even if the politics are a challenge.
To which one are you referring? There are actually now a few nasal sprays in development; the one I linked to from the NYT is a lipoprotein, already tested on ferrets, but there are others in development (and one which is OTC and according to a publication, interferes with corona infection, though I'm not sure I believe their data).
https://www.postbulletin.com/newsmd/coro...cal-trials
Actual vaccine, nasal delivery. Very cool tech.
Interesting; but I thought the problem with adenoviral nasal-based vaccines is that (ironically) the body doesn't respond well to the adenovirus as a vector when it's applied intranasally rather than bloodstream injected? (That is, the body eliminates it right away...) And what about adjuvant?
I still like the idea of using a lipoprotein. Less complicated and probably easier to mass-produce.
Posts: 31,861
Threads: 708
Joined: Jun 2024
Reputation:
0
Sarcany wrote:
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
[quote=Sarcany]
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
[quote=Sarcany]
On top of all the other evidence against the whole "THOSE DARK-SKINNED FUNNY-SPEAKING FOREIGNERS ENGINEERED IT" line of BS pushed most notably by Rand Paul at the behest of Donald Trump, there was an international pause on "Gain of Function" research and a moratorium on funding at the time in question.
Just a FYI, I wasn't talking about Senator Nutso's comments. I was talking about the study I previously referenced that was done before the 'agreement' and pause in funding.
The article I cited today makes specific reference to that type of study. Scientists do not consider that type of research to be "Gain of Function."
Rand Paul and other right-wingers have repeatedly tried to spin it as "Gain of Function" research by Chinese government stooges to further their political ends.
Don't swallow the spin. Follow the science.
Not swallowing anything, just waiting for China to provide the data the world has been waiting for since Feb., 2020. Again, not consuming any right-wing crap. Don't knee-jerk associate me with them just because it was in a recent news cycle.
The paper that you cite examined the adaptability of a mouse-adapted SARS virus to mouse cells in-culture.
How does that turn into SARS-COV2?
That is just what they admitted to. Release it back into the wild and a couple of years of natural mutation will hide their work.
Posts: 9,996
Threads: 393
Joined: Apr 2022
Reputation:
0
Filliam H. Muffman wrote:
[quote=Sarcany]
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
[quote=Sarcany]
[quote=Filliam H. Muffman]
[quote=Sarcany]
On top of all the other evidence against the whole "THOSE DARK-SKINNED FUNNY-SPEAKING FOREIGNERS ENGINEERED IT" line of BS pushed most notably by Rand Paul at the behest of Donald Trump, there was an international pause on "Gain of Function" research and a moratorium on funding at the time in question.
Just a FYI, I wasn't talking about Senator Nutso's comments. I was talking about the study I previously referenced that was done before the 'agreement' and pause in funding.
The article I cited today makes specific reference to that type of study. Scientists do not consider that type of research to be "Gain of Function."
Rand Paul and other right-wingers have repeatedly tried to spin it as "Gain of Function" research by Chinese government stooges to further their political ends.
Don't swallow the spin. Follow the science.
Not swallowing anything, just waiting for China to provide the data the world has been waiting for since Feb., 2020. Again, not consuming any right-wing crap. Don't knee-jerk associate me with them just because it was in a recent news cycle.
The paper that you cite examined the adaptability of a mouse-adapted SARS virus to mouse cells in-culture.
How does that turn into SARS-COV2?
That is just what they admitted to. Release it back into the wild and a couple of years of natural mutation will hide their work.
I think that ends the discussion right there.
|
