There are definitely some grains of truth here, but if you’ll allow me it’s not quite accurate.
Most vaccines (*in a normal, non-pandemic world) undergo extensive testing from petri dish to animal models. Eventually the vast majority do in fact go through multiple rounds of human trials. The exceptions would be something like Ebola, which has a high likelihood of making you bleed, hemorrhage, and die if they get it too wrong. In this case it would be used as a last resort in certain cases around an outbreak hotspot. It is likely the vast majority of late clinical work in something like that would be done with monkeys instead of humans to try to reduce the risk.
Before clinical stages, development goes through the stage you describe–testing antibody response to various preparations first in tissue culture and then in animals. Afterwards vaccines go through 3 clinical stages–small exploratory, expanded, and widespread. After this they are also subject to ongoing study.
Where it gets a little more interesting is when you have an established vaccine that people are trying to improve on. In this case, certain human testing MIGHT be dropped: if the vaccine is the same, the preparation is the same but say a different solvent system is used, then proof of antibody response in animals might be sufficient. It’s not very common though.
Thanks for the clarification. What sort of human trials do they go through? Do they give the vaccine and then try to infect them to see what the response is?
This is a good question. Typically (to my knowledge) no, they do not try to infect them. I will admit I am not 100% on the clinical protocols since I work primarily in research rather than clinic. They monitor side effects, antibody response levels, and a bunch of other things. They will monitor infection rate “in the wild”–for example, you had the flu vaccine but you got the flu and saw the doctor a month later.
By the time the vaccine has gotten to human trials there should be significant knowledge on antibody levels and effectiveness (EDIT–I mean "what levels of antibody signify an effective immune response and how much does the immune response protect the person) from studying the virus and its patient cases in the wild. So we should have a good idea how long the vaccine is likely to be effective for. Covid-19 is a bit of a break from this because it is brand new and there are lots of unanswered questions. However for most viruses that have vaccines we knew many of the parameters beforehand.
I think every one of them did more than anyone else. They were all heroes. And they definitely wouldn’t have preferred to die rather than be allowed to continue deteriorating while costing their families money.
Think of all the money that could be saved if we just killed people once they couldn’t work anymore. What age do you think would be best to kill people so they don’t hurt the economy or cost their families money?
That Christianity coming out again.
Ooh even worse. Non tax paying leeches who are being cared for with money stolen directly from you. Now I know they can fuck off and die.
My mistake I took the those people only had days to live (not true of many people I nursing homes) and think about how much money they cost as a sign you’d be fine with killing them. Maybe you just meant they will die soon anyways and they are expensive. Plus taking government money.
I guess it wasn’t true of the ones that are now death statistics.
Did I say that?
No, you didn’t.
Both of these are true.
No. I’m sure a great many would prefer their families keep their money instead of spending it on end-of-life care. My grandfather died in a Dementia center during this stuff. We weren’t allowed to visit him for the last 5 weeks or so of his life, and I’m 99.9% sure he was ready to leave this world around the time he lost the ability to remain at home(over a year ago). I’m positive that he would have called us crazy for allowing his money to be spent keeping him alive in that place.
No they aren’t. Some people are in assisted living facilities for a long time, even decades. The idea that people get put in these places and will die quickly isn’t true. Sure some will die soon because they are older.
It is expensive to provide for people with limited income who can’t work. I believe they deserve to be cared for and I don’t mind my tax dollars going to that. I know I know it’s not your job to help anyone else and you’re tired of being robbed at gunpoint.
What are you basing this on? It’s like the new right wing talking point. Old people would rather die than be a financial cost to their family or the country. My grandma is very old and not afraid of death. She’s ok with us taking her to the doctor and stuff still. She isn’t saying “oh no don’t trouble yourself just hold a pillow over my head.”
Fuck outta here with that shit. I’m sure some people feel that way but it’s completely making it up to say most or the whole amount.
Why not respect his wishes (well the wishes you think he would have had) and kill him? Give him what you think he would have wanted and a massive savings.
She’s not in one. But she is old and hasn’t been able to work for almost 25 years.
How do you figure we give all these people what you say they want so we can save money? You’re saying old people want to die and they cost a lot of money. So what do we do about that.
The money part by far the most important issue. Damn people who can’t take care of themselves are expensive.
