Posted on 01/06/2022 10:49:39 AM PST by ShadowAce
A vaccine authorized in December for use in India may help solve one of the most vexing problems in global public health: How to supply lower-income countries with a COVID-19 vaccine that is safe, effective and affordable.
The vaccine is called CORBEVAX. It uses old but proven vaccine technology and can be manufactured far more easily than most, if not all, of the COVID-19 vaccines in use today.
"CORBEVAX is a game changer," says Dr. Keith Martin, executive director of the Consortium of Universities for Global Health in Washington, D.C. "It's going to enable countries around the world, particularly low-income countries, to be able to produce these vaccines and distribute them in a way that's going to affordable, effective and safe."
The story of CORBEVAX begins some two decades ago. Peter Hotez and Maria Elena Bottazzi were medical researchers at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., where they worked on vaccines and treatments for what are called neglected tropical diseases, such as schistosomiasis and hookworm.
When a strain of coronavirus known as SARS broke out in 2003, they decided to tackle that disease. After moving to Houston to affiliate with Baylor College of Medicine and the Texas Children's Center for Vaccine Development, they created a vaccine candidate using protein subunit technology. This involves using proteins from a virus or bacterium that can induce an immune response but not cause disease.
"It's the same technology as the hepatitis B vaccine that's been around for decades," Hotez says.
Their SARS vaccine candidate looked promising, but then the SARS outbreak petered out. No evidence of disease, no need for a vaccine.
When a new strain of coronavirus triggered the COVID-19 pandemic, Hotez and Bottazzi figured they could dust off their old technology and modify it for use against COVID-19. After all, the virus causing COVID-19 and the virus causing SARS are quite similar.
Hotez says they tried to interest government officials in the vaccine, but they weren't impressed.
"People were so fixated on innovation that nobody thought, 'Hey, maybe we could use a low-cost, durable, easy-breezy vaccine that can vaccinate the whole world,' " Hotez says.
"We really honestly couldn't get any traction in the U.S., but our mission is always to enable technologies for low- and middle-income countries production and use," Bottazzi recalls.
So they turned to private philanthropies. A major donor early on was the JPB Foundation in New York.
"The rest were all Texas philanthropies: the Kleberg Foundation, the [John S.] Dunn Foundation, Tito's Vodka," Hotez says. The MD Anderson Foundation also chipped in.
"When people say, 'Why did we move [from Washington, D.C.] to Texas?' Well, we knew that this was a great philanthropic environment. So this is really very much a Texas vaccine," although there were other, smaller donors from all over the country.
Hotez says that unlike the mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna, and the viral vector vaccine from Johnson & Johnson, protein subunit vaccines like CORBEVAX have a track record. So he and Bottazzi were relatively certain CORBEVAX would be safe and effective.
"And it's cheap, a dollar, dollar fifty a dose," Hotez says. "You're not going to get less expensive than that."
Clinical trials showed they were right to be confident CORBEVAX would work. An unpublished study conducted in India involving 3,000 volunteers found the vaccine to be 90% effective in preventing disease cause by the original COVID-19 virus strain and 80% against the delta variant. It's still being tested against omicron.
But CORBEVAX is already entering the real world. Last month, the vaccine received emergency use authorization from regulators in India. An Indian vaccine manufacturer called Biological E Ltd is now making the vaccine. The company says it is producing 100 million doses per month and has already sold 300 million doses to the Indian government.
"The real beauty of the CORBEVAX vaccine that Drs. Hotez and Bottazzi created is that intellectual property of this vaccine will be available to everybody," Keith Martin says. "So you can get manufacturers in Senegal, and South Africa and Latin America to be able to produce this particular vaccine."
By contrast, the makers of Pfizer and Moderna, for example, are not sharing their recipe.
One drawback to the CORBEVAX technology is that it can't be modified as quickly as mRNA vaccines can to adjust to new variants.
That forces public health officials to make difficult choices.
"Something which can be adapted the fastest versus something that can be adapted relatively quickly, but then more importantly can be manufactured at a large global capacity and at a cost of production which is much lower," says Prashant Yadav, senior fellow at at the Center for Global Development in Washington, D.C. The thought is some protection may better than no protection.
Of course, the ideal vaccine would have both qualities, and Peter Hotez is at work trying to develop technologies that can do that.
"There's no issue with pushing innovation," he says. "I think that's one of the really positive features of the U.S. vaccination program for COVID. The problem was it wasn't balanced with a portfolio or oldies but goodies."
Hotez is hoping his oldie but goodie will usher in a brighter future for the world.
RE: An unpublished study conducted in India involving 3,000 volunteers found the vaccine to be 90% effective in preventing disease cause by the original COVID-19 virus strain and 80% against the delta variant. It’s still being tested against omicron.
A few things come to mind:
1. This protein subunit technology used for this Indian vaccine sounds similar to the Novavax Vaccine which still hasn’t been given EUA by the US FDA.
2. The above 90% effectivity is also similar to Novavax’s vaccine.
3. The difference — Novavax was tested on over ten times more people in different countries compared to this Indian vaccine.
4. An Australian molecule biologist named Nikolai Petrovsky also developed a vaccine with similar technology. Sadly, his own country never gave him full support. It ended up being tested in of all places — IRAN!
RE: It still has the spike protein which causes damage. No thx. A hard pass.
If you get infected with Covid, don’t you also get the spike protein anyway? What’s the difference?
The Novavax jab is also protein subunit type, and has been approved for use in 30 countries, but not the USSA. You all know the reason why...big pharma and big bucks only want to control the market for their products to actually MAKE people sick. From day one it was obvious these protein subunit types were the only way to go. Everything that was predicted to be a problem with the mRNA and Viral Vector types has been proven true.
>>If nothing else, it would provide an “out” for those of us unwilling to take the mRNA shots.<<
Yep. If this is a traditionally developed vaccine like the deactivated protein-based influenza vaccines, I’d be willing to receive it.
mRNA is dangerous.
LOL, so quickly. How many variants have we had and they're still giving the same mRNA vaccine that was several variants ago.
>>It’s still injecting you with a spike protein,<<
I read this of Novavax but not this one...do you have a link?
just another spike-protein vax with added adjuvant to hyper-stimulate the immune system because it won’t work as just a simple antigen-only vax ...
Guess Bill Gates wasn't interested in a safe and effective vaccine.
“How does this differ from the Novavax vaccine?”
probably mostly just a different adjuvant ... maybe a tweak of the spike protein used too ...
If it works, forget about it. The ruling elite will never allow it because it will derail their efforts to depopulate and control this planet.
I’ll never take another vaccine ever again.
Choice
I agree with you about choice.
No one should be forced to take the vaccine against their will.
However, It’s the science behind fear of using the spike protein as a way of stimulating immune response that I question
Regarding concerns over using the virus’ spike protein to stimulate immune response...
If you get infected with Covid, don’t you also get the spike protein anyway? What’s the difference?
As explained by Dr. McCollough (matching my previous understanding of the issue) is that the body is much more resilient when dealing with viruses that come through the normal channels into the body, such as the mouth, nose, or eyes. Our bodies are designed to not only block them, but to limit their damage should they be exposed.
A direct injection, conversely, is a “Hotline” I believe he called it direct into the body, where you body is not designed to deal with it. NOTHING should ever be injected into anyone, unless it is critical, actually. It bypasses the body’s normal function, and exposes your bloodstream directly to possible infection. Exact reason why many drugs are injected by addicts directly into the bloodstream, as the effects are multiplied. Thanks.
If that explanation is correct, maybe someone should design a vaccine that goes through the mouth or nose...
Oral or Nasal vaccine... just saying.
Are these guys going to go up against the DC cartel because, they ARE a cartel...mob...whatever you call organized crime these days.
One is naturally aquired. The other is synthetically put in the body. I’d believe the body processes them differently Plus, there’s documentation that the injected spike lingers in organs. They even show how it’s dangerous to inject in the blood vs muscle. So, that alone can indicate how the body aquires it - makes a difference.
Exactly. Here is what I use. Works for both prevention, and treatment, available on the shelf at any drug store.
The most recent study by Oxford University (randomized control trial) showed a 90% reduction in hospitalization for people with COVID.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.