Opinions about the chickenpox, measles, and rubella vaccines

[Judas Maccabeus]

Vials on Hand
Of the 189 vials produced, 5 were used for testing; 14 were used to derive a new PDL15
distribution bank; 22 have been stored off-site for disaster recovery; 22 have already been
distributed to vaccine manufacturers. There are therefore 126 vials on hand at NIBSC, with a
further 22 in reserve in off-site storage. There is thus a total remaining stock of 148 vials. 140
of the remaining 148 vials would be available for distribution. The remaining 8 would be held
back for potential future side-by-side performance testing of a replacement bank. The 22 vials
assigned for disaster recovery are intended for distribution in the ~2 year period following the
disaster, until a replacement bank becomes available. The replacement bank would not be
derived from the M02 (PDL 13) bank but from the original 1966 PDL 7 cells. There are 83
ampoules of the PDL 7 cells held at NIBSC and another 20 ampoules held off-site. The
current rate of distribution is ~9 vials per year. Therefore, at this rate the M02 bank can be
expected to last 16 years. Taking into account the 103 original PDL 7 ampoules, if the glass
seal of all ampoules remained intact, there would be the potential to maintain MRC-5
supplies for further ~350 years. In reality, it is likely that supplies can be maintained for at
least 50 years.

https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default- ... nload=true

You can work through some production numbers here and consumption rate but 50 years is a far cry from no limit.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 2765902119

I was slightly off, its 50 replications +/- 10.

With emerging bioengineering technology, as long as you have the DNA sequence, you can engineer new cells infinitely. So "extinction" of essential cell lines will likely never happen. The primary barrier at this point is cost. I suspect that these vaccines will all be irrelevant as soon as the irrational fear of MRNA based vaccines goes away.

[barnhart]

... I suspect that these vaccines will all be irrelevant as soon as the irrational fear of MRNA based vaccines goes away.

I didn't realize this technology would bypass cell lines. I think that is hopeful.

[JohnH]

... I suspect that these vaccines will all be irrelevant as soon as the irrational fear of MRNA based vaccines goes away.

I didn't realize this technology would bypass cell lines. I think that is hopeful.

This technology doesn’t exist. There is not currently any technology that can synthesise human tissue from scratch.

[Soloist]

... I suspect that these vaccines will all be irrelevant as soon as the irrational fear of MRNA based vaccines goes away.

I didn't realize this technology would bypass cell lines. I think that is hopeful.

Well not really. It still depends on DNA from fetal sources but that is quite a lot of digging to find and prove.
It doesn’t have to but it seems like the companies are loathe to use an ethical source as it would cost more money to be approved

[Judas Maccabeus]

... I suspect that these vaccines will all be irrelevant as soon as the irrational fear of MRNA based vaccines goes away.

I didn't realize this technology would bypass cell lines. I think that is hopeful.

Well not really. It still depends on DNA from fetal sources but that is quite a lot of digging to find and prove.
It doesn’t have to but it seems like the companies are loathe to use an ethical source as it would cost more money to be approved

From fetal sources, but what comes from the fetal source is really only the DNA sequence. SO unless you regard the genetic information as forever tainted by its source, there is really nothing there but the information.

Developing an MRNA vaccine to replace these would likely be less costly. BTW all of these are years off, but defunding MRNA technology is no place to start.

[Judas Maccabeus]

... I suspect that these vaccines will all be irrelevant as soon as the irrational fear of MRNA based vaccines goes away.

I didn't realize this technology would bypass cell lines. I think that is hopeful.

This technology doesn’t exist. There is not currently any technology that can synthesise human tissue from scratch.

MRNA technology does not use cell lines, except, perhaps for testing.

As to creating cells from "scratch" it is not from scratch. It is moving DNA from the cell lines that you are having problems with replication to other stem cells that would effectively "reset the clock." This technology is not ready yet, but it is coming soon. Remember, it is going to be awhile, predictions vary, before there are real problems start to emerge.

As Soloist has pointed out, there are "ethical" versions of some of these vaccines. The best outcome would be for them to come into general use here in the US.

[Soloist]

I didn't realize this technology would bypass cell lines. I think that is hopeful.

Well not really. It still depends on DNA from fetal sources but that is quite a lot of digging to find and prove.
It doesn’t have to but it seems like the companies are loathe to use an ethical source as it would cost more money to be approved

From fetal sources, but what comes from the fetal source is really only the DNA sequence. SO unless you regard the genetic information as forever tainted by its source, there is really nothing there but the information.

Developing an MRNA vaccine to replace these would likely be less costly. BTW all of these are years off, but defunding MRNA technology is no place to start.

Given that the DNA could be sourced from virtually anywhere ethically, I would say yes it’s not ethical, but I would not be surprised if I stand alone in that.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Well not really. It still depends on DNA from fetal sources but that is quite a lot of digging to find and prove.
It doesn’t have to but it seems like the companies are loathe to use an ethical source as it would cost more money to be approved

From fetal sources, but what comes from the fetal source is really only the DNA sequence. SO unless you regard the genetic information as forever tainted by its source, there is really nothing there but the information.

Developing an MRNA vaccine to replace these would likely be less costly. BTW all of these are years off, but defunding MRNA technology is no place to start.

Given that the DNA could be sourced from virtually anywhere ethically, I would say yes it’s not ethical, but I would not be surprised if I stand alone in that.

If it were just a sequence of bases on a computer, yet it contained the information needed to reconstruct one of those fetal cells, would it still be objectionable?

[Soloist]

If it were just a sequence of bases on a computer, yet it contained the information needed to reconstruct one of those fetal cells, would it still be objectionable?

The ethical compromise is the source, not the data.

If the data could be acquired through ethical means, then it is compromised without excuse. The tech you describe is not used yet and could easily be developed ethically but I doubt it would.

[JohnH]

From fetal sources, but what comes from the fetal source is really only the DNA sequence. SO unless you regard the genetic information as forever tainted by its source, there is really nothing there but the information.

Developing an MRNA vaccine to replace these would likely be less costly. BTW all of these are years off, but defunding MRNA technology is no place to start.

Given that the DNA could be sourced from virtually anywhere ethically, I would say yes it’s not ethical, but I would not be surprised if I stand alone in that.

If it were just a sequence of bases on a computer, yet it contained the information needed to reconstruct one of those fetal cells, would it still be objectionable?

It would seem wiser to focus on the actual problems in front of us than hypotheticals where the technology doesn’t exist yet.

The reality is that live tissue is grown from the remnants of an aborred baby and widely used in medicine, including in newer vaccines. That’s a big problem. I don’t think God’s blessing is on such things.