I will let you and the first million guinea pigs try it out and monitor it for 5 years.

This sounds like the plot of a sci-fi post-apolyptic novel or movie adaptation.

Blacksox is a moderna shrill

As a Kung Flu "survivor", putting this shot on my radar.

Thanks OP

blacksox said:

---

Moth dna? No thanks.

---

You have no idea what you are even talking about.

RC_57 said:

---

As a Kung Flu "survivor", putting this shot on my radar.

Thanks OP

---

That's where I'm at.

Sending one off to college next month. She is due for a T-cell test before. If it comes back negative, this will be her excuse on why she hasn't gotten a vaccine yet.

What isle is it in at Tractor Supply?

BusterAg said:

---

RC_57 said:

---

As a Kung Flu "survivor", putting this shot on my radar.

Thanks OP

---

That's where I'm at.

Sending one off to college next month. She is due for a T-cell test before. If it comes back negative, this will be her excuse on why she hasn't gotten a vaccine yet.

---

Where does one get a T cell test?

Start here: https://www.t-detect.com/

Thx

gotsand said:

---

What isle is it in at Tractor Supply?

---

It's in the Bovid isle, right next to the drug that has used the milk glands of gene altered goats to make monoclonal antibodies anti-coagulating drugs since 2009.

You know, ATryn? https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/07/business/07goatdrug.html

Kvetch said:

---

Does it give you an uncontrollable attraction to light fixtures? If so, I'm in.

---

Mondemonium said:

---

Isn't this how Mothra started?

---

Gamera for me or GTFO.

I won't take an mRNA vax. I will get this one when it comes out. Higher risk group (lolfat). There's one data point on vaccine opinions.

This is the one manufactured in B/CS partnered with A&M:

https://www.khou.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/vaccine/novavax-vaccine-ready-mass-manufactured-texas-am-university/285-be3cc806-7544-4ab6-b9e9-3077d32e2f32

Ag CPA said:

---

This is the one manufactured in B/CS partnered with A&M:

https://www.khou.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/vaccine/novavax-vaccine-ready-mass-manufactured-texas-am-university/285-be3cc806-7544-4ab6-b9e9-3077d32e2f32

---

Had no idea.

Thanks for the info.

AgGrad99 said:

---

Ag CPA said:

---

This is the one manufactured in B/CS partnered with A&M:

https://www.khou.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/vaccine/novavax-vaccine-ready-mass-manufactured-texas-am-university/285-be3cc806-7544-4ab6-b9e9-3077d32e2f32

---

Had no idea.

Thanks for the info.

---

Dr. Gale Smith, founder of NovaVax, developed the moth protein factory while he was getting his PhD at A&M in the 1980's

richardag said:

---

blacksox said:

---

Moth dna? No thanks.

---

That has got to be the most ignorant snarky response in the history of this website.

edit for clarity

---

Go look at her post history. It's filled with the same BS.

blacksox said:

---

Moth dna? No thanks.

---

So, you don't want other people to get vaccinated, unless the vaccine is the one that your party is supporting?

Why is that?

Are vaccines about health, or about politics?

For those keeping score, I've been critical of the mRNA vaccines. If approved I will take the NovaVax vaccine, if approved I will still not take the mRNA vaccines.

Why? If they meet the same standards for safety and efficacy, why does method matter? Seems like in your paradigm there's no room for innovation.

Biden admin would fire everyone at the FDA if they refused to approve those at this point. That's the problem - it's much more about politics and narrative rather than actual scientific inquiry. Once they went all-in on these, there's no turning back.

I'd be shocked if they approve the Novavax - they need everyone to take the others so there's no control group.

Zobel said:

---

Why? If they meet the same standards for safety and efficacy, why does method matter? Seems like in your paradigm there's no room for innovation.

---

Because the mRNA vaccines have never been used before and we have no idea if there will be long term issues down the road. NovaVax decided to take the conservative route and use tried and true vaccine technology.

Now, we all know you believe and accept everything coming out of the FDA and CDC, so keep carrying the official narrative all you want.

Zobel said:

---

Why? If they meet the same standards for safety and efficacy, why does method matter? Seems like in your paradigm there's no room for innovation.

---

To keep it short and sweet, I don't believe man is smarter than nature. One vaccine allows nature to work its course, the other thinks it can tamper with nature with no long term implications. There's plenty of room for innovation within the laws of nature.

At one point the subunit vaccine method was never used before. The first subunit vaccine was hep b in the 80s. How long does it take to go from "maybe long term issues down the road" to "tried and true"?

Your second paragraph is both childish and untrue. The world is not black and white, and its easy to believe on the one hand that the FDA does a good job generally but not always, and that they're also probably too conservative on the other. We don't have to worry about most drugs being dangerous or low quality or not working, Aducanumab was probably a mistake, and there are almost certainly good drugs that could save lives that will never come to market because of the 12+ year and $1bn hurdle to get FDA approval. I think the CDC messaging has been bad, I don't think masks are effective NPIs and I don't think children should bear the societal burden to protect the elderly. I do think the vaccines we have are pretty amazing. Are you able to have a discussion without it becoming personal? I bet you can if you try.

Which part is unnatural or smarter than nature?

Using modified virus genes (which have been intentionally altered from the natural virus protein), an insect virus, and moth cells to manufacture proteins outside of the human body, assembling these spike proteins into nanoparticles, and then injecting those along with a chemical derived from tree bark into the human body?

Or using genetic material (mRNA) encased in a manufactured fatty particle to inject into the human body, where they enter human cells which then use ribosomes to 'read' the mRNA and manufacture spike proteins?

Which violates the laws of nature?

The second one

These are genuine questions by the way - so please don't take them as snark. What makes the second one different than the first, to you? Genetic manipulation seems the same level of "unnatural meddling" to me regardless. I mean, neither of these seem remotely natural.

For me....one of them causes your body to attack something your body is producing, one of them causes your body to attack something foreign.

So the thing being attacked or triggering the immune repsonse is the antigen. If the antigen is identical, why does it matter?

(In this case they're not identical, just to be accurate. Both vaccine spikes are modified from the way they are on the actual virus, but in different ways).

Because our bodies don't always work perfectly. I'd rather not have my body creating the thing it's attacking. We typically try to prevent that.

The mRNA might end up being the greatest advance in medical history. Truly. But for now, I'd prefer to stick to the proven method. Rather go with the 'known' than 'unknown'. For that reason, I've been following Novavax for a while now.

C@LAg said:

---

if it also gives me wings and let's me fly , I am in.

---

Just drink a Redbull.

So the concern would be some kind of autoimmune issue. That's fair, I suppose. It seems a bit like an ask to prove a negative, to prove that it won't cause an autoimmune disease.

Researchers have been testing this for a while, they know the relationship between mRNA dosing and "coding" (for lack of a better term) and protein expression.

Here's a good review article from 2017 talking about it.
https://www.nature.com/articles/natrevmats201756

Anyway appreciate your responses. I am also really glad the Novavax results are so promising, if only because of the big advantages it has for distribution. Thanks.

Zobel said:

---

So the concern would be some kind of autoimmune issue. That's fair, I suppose. It seems a bit like an ask to prove a negative, to prove that it won't cause an autoimmune disease.

Researchers have been testing this for a while, they know the relationship between mRNA dosing and "coding" (for lack of a better term) and protein expression.

Here's a good review article from 2017 talking about it.
https://www.nature.com/articles/natrevmats201756

Anyway appreciate your responses. I am also really glad the Novavax results are so promising, if only because of the big advantages it has for distribution. Thanks.

---

Yes sir.

Again, mRNA might be the greatest thing ever. But I'm more comfortable using a long-term proven method for vaccines at the moment. That might, and likely will, change in the future at some point.

BusterAg said:

---

blacksox said:

---

Moth dna? No thanks.

---

You have no idea what you are even talking about.

---

Blacksox is the same one who is all for employers forcing vaccines. Funny how he isn't for this one though. Gotta be a troll or one who is hugely invested in the other ones.