Vaccine holdouts embrace monoclonal antibodies

Absolutely. Good post. All I know is every time I post about Regeneron the acceptance of or rejection of the information is split right down voting lines. I’ve even had people flabbergasted when I show them Biden bought what they refer to as “snake oil”.

Like you I wish we could just judge things on the data, not on politics.

 

Regeneron, snake oil? LOL. Is this from the same people who think ivermectin is the solution? I guess not. The latter tend to be right wingers... Anyway, it's all so stupid; people should consult with their doctors and follow expert advice, leaving politics outside of the doctor's office, period.

 

Yes, I think there were something like 79 FDA approved monoclonal antibodies in use in the US in 2019. So the technology has been in use under license for 30 years whole mRNA vaccines hadn’t ever been licensed till 2021. Of course I agree both have been researched extensively, but mAbs are much older common use technology.

I have to believe the acceptance is mainly political and based on the fact there has been far less drama and authoritarianism associated with monoclonal antibodies. Most people had never heard of the Regeneron product outside of the Trump treatment a couple months ago. You know I’ve been warning of what authoritarianism will do to vaccine acceptance levels in some demographics since August of 2020. I think that’s part of it. Try mandating monoclonal antibodies as a passive vaccine and acceptance by certain demographics would plummet. And acceptance by other demographics would probably rise. It’s just how things are now and probably always will be.

 

I guess I don’t know if the GSK has some advantage but I can’t think a single monoclonal would be as good from an efficacy or a resistance to variant standpoint as a “cocktail” of two. I really don’t know much about the GSK product.

 

Yes. But it was not a right winger. It’s definitely split down the middle—acceptance by the right, rejected or impugned by the left.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?posts/1072758436/

A lot of “hate” for monoclonal antibodies in that thread.

 

@CenterField, I forgot I actually predicted anti vaxxers would prefer monoclonal antibodies over vaccination back in June.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?posts/1072734617/

Another thread of “distaste” for the product.

(—yes I know many places are still using infusion even though subconscious injection is approved.)

 

Yes, sure, but remember that we don't only have mRNA vaccines (research on them started also in the 1980's), we have Covid-19 vaccines made the traditional way too, such as adenovirus vector (J&J and others), whole virus inactivated vaccines (CoronaVac and others), and protein subunit vaccines (Novavax and others). In this regard the vaccines are older than the mabs. The vaccine mandate can be fulfilled in the US by accepting one dose of J&J and that's an adenovirus vector vaccine, and this platform has existed since the early eighties with research on it starting since the mid-seventies (it is true that they weren't very good and the first one to actually earn approval, the Ebola one, earned it in 2020 - but they had existed without approval and being given to test subjects since a long time ago - someone died of one of them in 1999 and it was a big deal; already, blood clotting issues),. So at least one of the 3 vaccines available to the American public is definitely older than the mabs regarding research and experimental use although not approved use, so the argument about fast development can't apply just to the vaccines and not to the mabs.

Yes, no doubt, the drama is focused on the vaccines. But this is also not unheard of. The antivaxxer movement has existed for decades.

It seems like the word "vaccine" triggers some people. You know, look at the blood clotting controversy. There are plenty of medications and behaviors that are more likely to result in blood clots (menopausal hormone replacement drugs, birth control pills, smoking, riding an airplane) but people have no trouble whatsoever taking those drugs or engaging in those behaviors, but when it's a vaccine causing it although with much smaller frequency, oh my God the sky is falling.

Also, look at the so-called religious exemptions. Some of these claimers state that they don't want the Covid-19 vaccines because lineages of fetal cells are used in their production and testing. Well, there are 30 very common, everyday medications that are also developed and tested using fetal cells, but you don't hear a peep about that. These include Tylenol, albuterol, aspirin, Motrim, Pepto Bismol, Tums, Lipitor, Senokot, Maalox, Ex-Lax, Benadryl, Sudafed, Preparation H, Claritin, Prilosec, and Zoloft. Do you hear any objection to these medications? I bet that 99.999% of the people claiming religious exemptions based on fetal cells for the Covid-19 vaccines, have taken and do take multiple of the above medicines without the smallest concern.

So, part of this is just vaccine hysteria. Add the politics to it and you have an explosive mixture.

 

Subconscious? LOL, very funny Freudian slip, so we're injecting people with monoclonal antibodies behind their backs, huh?
I know you meant subcutaneous.

 

Good prediction. I'm appalled at that guy calling monoclonal antibodies, snake oil. Wow.

 

Oops!

 

As you say it’s all political. Sad state of affairs.

 

I know we’ve been messing with adenovirus vectors a long time. But none were approved until 2019 because they were not proven technology. The original adenovirus strains used as vectors were much worse at inducing clotting issues. We’ve been ironing it all out over the decades. That’s why there was so much concern and putting trials on hold etc. over the issue. Because we knew we weren’t “sure” of their safety.

On the other hand monoclonal antibodies have been more consistently “safe” (it’s a relative term because all adenovirus and antibodies have been statistically “safe”, even the multiple sclerosis monoclonal treatment that was pulled temporarily) over the last decades. I think the evidence is in the fact at the start of the pandemic we had 79 licensed monoclonal antibodies and no licensed mRNA vaccines and one recently licensed AV vaccine. I’m trying not to be biased, but we know if there were 79 licensed mRNA vaccines and no licensed mAbs it would be considered significant.

I don’t think you or I care one way or the other. Trial data is what matters to us. But in the public perception arena I think the history of the two technologies does matter—right or wrong.

Sure both were developed rapidly based on previous research and platforms. I agree with that. But I am against calling adenovirus vector vaccines old or proven technology. I don’t think that’s accurate at all.

Agree on the fetal testing thing. It’s an excuse not a reason. I have a friend who took a job with the Air Force. He doesn’t want to be vaccinated. We discussed the religious exemption at length and he said he won’t misrepresent his beliefs to avoid vaccination. I can respect that. Yes a massive amount of drugs have been tested using cell lines and even dexamethasone is commonly used to manipulate cell lines. Some people claim monoclonal antibodies should be refused by right wingers because they are tested in fetal cell lines. But the same people don’t think you should reject Dex as a Covid treatment for the same reason. It’s all nuts.

Yes an explosive and deadly mixture!

Thanks for the logical fact based dialogue. It’s refreshing. The craziness here on PF is weighing on me. It’s to the point it seems people want to die from Covid—on the left and right.

Back to the incompetence vs. intentional debate. I guess the best argument for the incompetence conclusion may be that the general public level of incompetence is so high perhaps there just isn’t a pool of competent individuals to draw from for public health administration.

 

Yes, sure, but then if we also include the whole virus inactivated vaccines, that's older than Methuselah... LOL (so to speak).

About a pool of competent individuals, hey, if Biden wants to fire Fauci and hire me instead, I'm game... LOL (just kidding; I'm close to retirement and wouldn't want to go into politics; that's a snake pit).

 

Sure. I’ve avoided them in this conversation because none are available in the US. Interesting question, I wonder if acceptance would be higher or not if the first Covid vaccines had been traditional platforms? Or what if we had developed a less efficacious traditional killed virus option for those that are hesitant over new tech? Better a person vaccinated with a 40-50% efficacy vaccine than none at all.

I think that’s the problem. The people qualified are smart enough to know better than to get involved in politics. Also, the most qualified probably prefer the private sector based on income potential. You could do the job for a year and resign!

 

You could do the job for a year and resign![/QUOTE]
Thanks, but no, thanks. Whatever I did, half the country would hate me. This is how bad the division in our country is, right now.