1. Report this comment

    Joseph Symond said:

    Here is the issue I see with this, as has already been proven with the previously touted vaccine ‘Mosquirix’.

    1) P. falciparum, while only a parasite, is incredibly adaptive and intelligent (if that term can be used), and has proven this to us over it’s +100 million years of existence.

    2) Adrian HIll states: “There’s no precedent for anything like an intravenous vaccine being used or manufactured,” Really? Let’s look back at history: Before ‘Europeans’ (i.e. the English) entered into Africa to expand the Empire, the population of the African continent were mostly already resistant to the malaria parasite via the very same means which are being applauded here today. Immunity was established by being exposed to the parasite itself ‘intravenously’ (albeit the needle was a mosquitoes’ proboscis). Those who survived, were immune and it was recorded that even newborn babies were born with resistance to Malaria. VOILA! However, the Europeans did not have this immunity, and died by the boatload upon arrival (because the locals were physically tougher than they were, AND immune to Malaria) so they developed ‘quinine’ to protect themselves. Believing in their wisdom that everyone needed it, they gave it to the Africans, and completely removed their immunity to Malaria. Thus began the problem we face to this day.

    3) + 200-years later, after causing the devastation that we see today that has cost the world trillions of dollars in every way, we now decide that exposing those same people to the parasite so as to build resistance is something new and noteworthy? It may work. It may not. But it is hardly revolutionary.

    4) As has been proven over and again, the more time that passes between discovery, approval and implementation, the less effective any vaccine will be. The more testing that is done, the more widespread the ability for the parasite to adapt will be. By the time a drug is approved for use, it is largely ineffective. Research refund anyone? Doubt it. Do NGO’s like the Gates Foundation care? Clearly not. Ea$y come, ea$y go.

    5) Ultimately, failure means billion$ more will be pumped into the scientific community to find yet another vaccine to repeat the process. This cycle will go on forever until someone runs out of money (and it won’t ever be the researchers – they’re like hedge fund managers, win or lose, they get paid). So what is the motivation to ever succeed?

    Just my two cents worth. I’ve been in this business for over 13-years and haven’t seen a substantial, long-term breakthrough yet. And really don’t ever expect one. But I’m sure the people behind this are far smarter than I and have thought all of this through. Just as they thought through the ramifications of DDT, DEET, and the LLTN’s that no longer work, yet are STILL being paid for with our donations and rolled out by the tens of millions by the Mosquito Net Mafia (Malaria No More/Nothing But Nets/Exxon et al).

    A cynic I may be, but history supports my statements, and nothing will ever change while everyone is getting paid to fail.