Thanks for this link. I had not realised the prevalence of these completely batshit crazy proposals to create self-spreading vaccines were, other than the DEFUSE project (not funded by DARPA) and the fact that the oral polio vaccines, which have been used for many decades, are self-spreading vaccines among humans.
The page you linked to has a link to the 2022-01-07 Science article by Filippa Lentzos et al. https://www.science.org/stoken/author-tokens/ST-253/full They mention self-spreading vaccines to supposedly stop wild animal populations evolving variants of viruses which could infect and perhaps spread in pandemic fashion among humans:
"One of the purported uses of lab-modified self-spreading viruses is as wildlife vaccines to limit the risk of spillover events generating previously undescribed human pathogens like severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Though an outwardly attractive application, there are notable hurdles that have been glossed over. First, the vast majority of virus species that currently exist are undescribed by science. This makes it very difficult to imagine how the considerable effort necessary to develop and test self-spreading vaccines could identify and then prioritize single viral species circulating in wildlife.
"Second, the dynamic nature of mutation and recombination events in wild global viromes, which are speculated to play a defining role in many spillover events, makes it extraordinarily difficult to mitigate spillover risk using wildlife vaccines. Although a massive increase in viral monitoring in wildlife might in some theoretical circumstances provide a time-limited degree of insight upon which to base preemptive vaccine design, it could only have a very indirect impact on prioritizing what genetic event, in which wildlife species, and at what location might present a substantive risk for the emergence of a new virus.
"In addition, the extraordinary practical complexity of wildlife vaccination, particularly in terms of sustaining and monitoring the immune response in wildlife populations, has not been explicitly addressed by funders or scientists promoting self-spreading vaccines (13). The combination of these concerns in the context of emerging new viral pathogens has led most virologists to consistently advocate for surveillance at the human–animal interface particularly in regions of ecological disturbance, rather than the riskier mass prospective development of self-spreading vaccines (8)."
However, their ref (8) is to a UK newspaper article behind a paywall. I would be surprised if this was sufficient evidence to reliably show that that most virologists favour surveillance of wildlife viruses over the use of self-spreading vaccines.
Their ref (10) is to a now defunct website about the DARPA "PREEMPT" project: "Prediction of Spillover and Interventional En Masse Animal Vaccination to Prevent Emerging Pathogen Threats in Current and Future Zones of US Military Operation". The About page is archived at: https://web.archive.org/web/20230324081211/https://www.preemptproject.org/about .
DEFUSE involved Baric et al. developing a coronavirus which would be self-spreading in wild bat populations, with characteristics intended to match, very broadly, viruses which might naturally evolve in bats and which would also infect and replicate in humans. It seems highly likely that SARS-CoV-2 was created in such research. The plan was to use such a virus in automated spray stations which would spray bats as they emerged from or entered their caves. This was to be self-spreading, and supposedly reduce the risk that such bat populations would host the evolution of current coronaviruses to become something which threatens humans. Never mind the difficulty of maintaining, 24 hours a day, battery operated spray stations at bat caves all over the world, often in tropical areas, with refrigeration for the vaccine fluid until the time it is sprayed. Never mind the bats getting wise to this and moving elsewhere or avoiding the spray. Never mind the chance that this artificial coronavirus would evolve into a form which threatens humans.
I don't have the best set of references regarding polio vaccines but, as best I understand it, the currently used oral vaccines, favoured in third-world countries, can supposedly protect a population against spread of the wild poliovirus. It is easier to administer in these locations than the injected vaccine, which is based on an inactivated virus. The oral vaccine (OPV) is an attenuated virus which multiplies in the vaccinee and can spread to family members and others in the community.
"As at July 2021, only 2 cases of wild poliovirus have been recorded globally this year to date: one each in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"But alongside the success of the OPV comes a disadvantage: continued use of the vaccine poses a risk to wiping out the disease.
"While OPV is safe and effective, in areas where vaccination coverage is low, the weakened vaccine virus originally contained in OPV can begin to circulate in undervaccinated communities.
"When this happens, if it is allowed to circulate for sufficiently long enough time, it may genetically revert to a ‘strong’ virus, able to cause paralysis, resulting in what is known as circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses (cVDPVs).
"If a population is adequately immunized, it will be protected against both wild and vaccine-derived polioviruses."
“There are two types of polio vaccines derived from the wild virus. One type is the killed or inactivated polio vaccine. When inoculated into a child, there is no virus multiplication but the body develops immunity and protection against future infection by the wild virus.
“Another type is the attenuated or weakened wild poliovirus, which has the capability to multiply in the body but does not cause polio disease especially in children who are adequately immunised and protected.
“However, in a child that is under immunised, the vaccine virus will also multiply and causes polio disease because of the low level of immunity in an inadequately vaccinated child. When such a virus is transmitted from child to child or within a community, it is called a circulating Vaccine Derived Polio Virus (cVDPV),”
"The oral polio vaccine (OPV) that has brought the wild poliovirus to the brink of eradication has many benefits: the live attenuated (weakened) vaccine virus provides better immunity in the gut, which is where polio replicates. The vaccine virus is also excreted in the stool, and in communities with low-quality sanitation, this means that it can be spread from person to person and actually help protect the community.
"However, in communities with low immunization rates, as the virus is spread from one unvaccinated child to another over a long period of time (often over the course of about 12-18 months), it can mutate and take on a form that can cause paralysis just like the wild poliovirus. This mutated poliovirus can then spread in communities, leading to cVDPVs.
"How the GPEI Is Working to Stop cVDPVs
"As mentioned above, the cause of cVDPV is low immunization rates. So, the best way to prevent them and stop them when there is an outbreak is to vaccinate children. The polio vaccine protects children whether the kind of polio is wild poliovirus or vaccine-derived poliovirus. Outbreaks (whether WPV or cVDPV) are usually rapidly stopped with 2–3 rounds of high-quality supplementary immunization activities (immunization campaigns)."
When a vaccine does not work properly, vaccinologists do not think of raising everyone's 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels to the 50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L) needed for full immune system function. They recommend more vaccination.
Thanks for this link. I had not realised the prevalence of these completely batshit crazy proposals to create self-spreading vaccines were, other than the DEFUSE project (not funded by DARPA) and the fact that the oral polio vaccines, which have been used for many decades, are self-spreading vaccines among humans.
The page you linked to has a link to the 2022-01-07 Science article by Filippa Lentzos et al. https://www.science.org/stoken/author-tokens/ST-253/full They mention self-spreading vaccines to supposedly stop wild animal populations evolving variants of viruses which could infect and perhaps spread in pandemic fashion among humans:
"One of the purported uses of lab-modified self-spreading viruses is as wildlife vaccines to limit the risk of spillover events generating previously undescribed human pathogens like severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Though an outwardly attractive application, there are notable hurdles that have been glossed over. First, the vast majority of virus species that currently exist are undescribed by science. This makes it very difficult to imagine how the considerable effort necessary to develop and test self-spreading vaccines could identify and then prioritize single viral species circulating in wildlife.
"Second, the dynamic nature of mutation and recombination events in wild global viromes, which are speculated to play a defining role in many spillover events, makes it extraordinarily difficult to mitigate spillover risk using wildlife vaccines. Although a massive increase in viral monitoring in wildlife might in some theoretical circumstances provide a time-limited degree of insight upon which to base preemptive vaccine design, it could only have a very indirect impact on prioritizing what genetic event, in which wildlife species, and at what location might present a substantive risk for the emergence of a new virus.
"In addition, the extraordinary practical complexity of wildlife vaccination, particularly in terms of sustaining and monitoring the immune response in wildlife populations, has not been explicitly addressed by funders or scientists promoting self-spreading vaccines (13). The combination of these concerns in the context of emerging new viral pathogens has led most virologists to consistently advocate for surveillance at the human–animal interface particularly in regions of ecological disturbance, rather than the riskier mass prospective development of self-spreading vaccines (8)."
However, their ref (8) is to a UK newspaper article behind a paywall. I would be surprised if this was sufficient evidence to reliably show that that most virologists favour surveillance of wildlife viruses over the use of self-spreading vaccines.
Their ref (10) is to a now defunct website about the DARPA "PREEMPT" project: "Prediction of Spillover and Interventional En Masse Animal Vaccination to Prevent Emerging Pathogen Threats in Current and Future Zones of US Military Operation". The About page is archived at: https://web.archive.org/web/20230324081211/https://www.preemptproject.org/about .
DEFUSE involved Baric et al. developing a coronavirus which would be self-spreading in wild bat populations, with characteristics intended to match, very broadly, viruses which might naturally evolve in bats and which would also infect and replicate in humans. It seems highly likely that SARS-CoV-2 was created in such research. The plan was to use such a virus in automated spray stations which would spray bats as they emerged from or entered their caves. This was to be self-spreading, and supposedly reduce the risk that such bat populations would host the evolution of current coronaviruses to become something which threatens humans. Never mind the difficulty of maintaining, 24 hours a day, battery operated spray stations at bat caves all over the world, often in tropical areas, with refrigeration for the vaccine fluid until the time it is sprayed. Never mind the bats getting wise to this and moving elsewhere or avoiding the spray. Never mind the chance that this artificial coronavirus would evolve into a form which threatens humans.
I don't have the best set of references regarding polio vaccines but, as best I understand it, the currently used oral vaccines, favoured in third-world countries, can supposedly protect a population against spread of the wild poliovirus. It is easier to administer in these locations than the injected vaccine, which is based on an inactivated virus. The oral vaccine (OPV) is an attenuated virus which multiplies in the vaccinee and can spread to family members and others in the community.
https://www.who.int/news-room/spotlight/history-of-vaccination/history-of-polio-vaccination
"As at July 2021, only 2 cases of wild poliovirus have been recorded globally this year to date: one each in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"But alongside the success of the OPV comes a disadvantage: continued use of the vaccine poses a risk to wiping out the disease.
"While OPV is safe and effective, in areas where vaccination coverage is low, the weakened vaccine virus originally contained in OPV can begin to circulate in undervaccinated communities.
"When this happens, if it is allowed to circulate for sufficiently long enough time, it may genetically revert to a ‘strong’ virus, able to cause paralysis, resulting in what is known as circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses (cVDPVs).
"If a population is adequately immunized, it will be protected against both wild and vaccine-derived polioviruses."
https://dailytrust.com/concerns-as-polio-variant-hits-13-states-fct/
“There are two types of polio vaccines derived from the wild virus. One type is the killed or inactivated polio vaccine. When inoculated into a child, there is no virus multiplication but the body develops immunity and protection against future infection by the wild virus.
“Another type is the attenuated or weakened wild poliovirus, which has the capability to multiply in the body but does not cause polio disease especially in children who are adequately immunised and protected.
“However, in a child that is under immunised, the vaccine virus will also multiply and causes polio disease because of the low level of immunity in an inadequately vaccinated child. When such a virus is transmitted from child to child or within a community, it is called a circulating Vaccine Derived Polio Virus (cVDPV),”
There's lots of material on circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus Type 2: https://www.google.com/search?as_q=cVDPV2 .
https://polioeradication.org/polio-today/polio-prevention/the-virus/variant-poliovirus-cvdpv/
"The oral polio vaccine (OPV) that has brought the wild poliovirus to the brink of eradication has many benefits: the live attenuated (weakened) vaccine virus provides better immunity in the gut, which is where polio replicates. The vaccine virus is also excreted in the stool, and in communities with low-quality sanitation, this means that it can be spread from person to person and actually help protect the community.
"However, in communities with low immunization rates, as the virus is spread from one unvaccinated child to another over a long period of time (often over the course of about 12-18 months), it can mutate and take on a form that can cause paralysis just like the wild poliovirus. This mutated poliovirus can then spread in communities, leading to cVDPVs.
"How the GPEI Is Working to Stop cVDPVs
"As mentioned above, the cause of cVDPV is low immunization rates. So, the best way to prevent them and stop them when there is an outbreak is to vaccinate children. The polio vaccine protects children whether the kind of polio is wild poliovirus or vaccine-derived poliovirus. Outbreaks (whether WPV or cVDPV) are usually rapidly stopped with 2–3 rounds of high-quality supplementary immunization activities (immunization campaigns)."
When a vaccine does not work properly, vaccinologists do not think of raising everyone's 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels to the 50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L) needed for full immune system function. They recommend more vaccination.