Comments 1 - 11 of 11 Search these comments
Wow, tech as old as Louis Pasteur.I think Pasteur used attenuated pathogens. Valneva uses inactivated virus with adjuvant, including the interesting Dynavax CpG adjuvant. Yes, inacitvated whole virus is not as new as mRNA technology, but older sometimes is better. It elicits a broader immune response than the narrow spike protein gene therapies, as you might expect. Time will tell, but it may be a potentially safer option. Maybe. https://valneva.com/research-development/covid-19-vla2001/
I'm sceptical. They've never been able to create a working vaccine for a coronavirus before, and not for lack of trying. Now they're trying to tell us that they've got one, and it's created the old fashioned way, which I cannot believe for a second wasn't the very first method they tried in the past.
I'm sceptical. They've never been able to create a working vaccine for a coronavirus before, and not for lack of trying. Now they're trying to tell us that they've got one, and it's created the old fashioned way, which I cannot believe for a second wasn't the very first method they tried in the past.
So why is their's supposed to work where all prior attempts failed?
they have finally cured the common cold
HeadSet saysWow, tech as old as Louis Pasteur.I think Pasteur used attenuated pathogens. Valneva uses inactivated virus with adjuvant, including the interesting Dynavax CpG adjuvant. Yes, inacitvated whole virus is not as new as mRNA technology, but older sometimes is better.
It is different in that it uses the tried and tested method of taking the whole of the coronavirus and inactivating it so that it can no longer cause illness. It then combines with an adjuvant, a substance that helps it enter human cells effectively.
A similar technique is used to make flu and polio vaccines. The idea is that by introducing a whole coronavirus into the human body, albeit one which has been inactivated and cannot cause illness, the immune system will recognise the whole virus as foreign and not just the spike proteins. This will give a much broader immune response and increase the memory cells that can recognise different parts of the virus should the vaccinated individual become infected with the real coronavirus.
The company say the advantage to this is that should any mutations arise on the spike protein that render it unrecognisable to the vaccine, the Valenva-induced immune response is broad enough to be able to recognise other parts of the virus so the immune reaction will still be effective.
Phase-three trials for the Valneva vaccine were carried out on more than 4,000 patients aged 18 years and older across 26 sites in the United Kingdom. The trials compared the immune response rates with those vaccinated with the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccines and results showed that VLA2001 generated a stronger immune response than the AstraZeneca vaccine – with higher levels of neutralising COVID-19 antibodies in the blood.
Researchers also found no severe cases of COVID-19 among participants receiving the Valneva vaccine, despite the Delta variant being in circulation during the trial.
jab that produces a good immune response and may be able to protect against future mutations of the coronavirus is certainly a welcome addition to our vaccine arsenal. And with the shapeshifting nature of the virus, it is worth investing in vaccines that do not rely on just one part of its structure to generate protection. The Delta variant has taught us not to underestimate the coronavirus and with many poorer countries yet to vaccinate significant parts of their populations, there is a higher chance of new mutations arising.
But it is not without its controversy. The UK, which initially put in an order for 100 million doses, recently cancelled that order over allegations of breach of contract, something the pharmaceutical company strongly denies. The contract Valneva has with the UK government lists a broad range of potential breaches and it is unclear which one the government is referring to, but “supply issues” have been mentioned.
Despite this, the manufacturers have applied to the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) for approval, and expect to receive it by the end of the year. They are also preparing to submit a request with the European Medicines Agency. If they get that European approval, the UK government may well end up regretting their decision to cancel the order as the vaccine is likely to be snapped up by other countries.
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2021/11/9/valneva-covid-19-vaccine-why-it-might-be-a-game-changer