the great leader will cure ebola

It is also unlikely that a real Ebola virus was imported into Thailand for study.

Especially considering there is nowhere safe enough to store it. Let alone transport it.

And can you imagine any gov. cabinet being asked to OK importing it for study?

So how did they have more than a computer simulation of Ebola to design an anti-body for it?

And why do they believe a computer simulation and then some genetic tinkering may have designed a cure?

And of course having designed an anti-body, does not equal their statement of having ;

'Created a cure for Ebola.'

WHO is calling their bluff, and partly wishful thinking that they might accidentally have something useful.

They have already said that they never had the whole virus in the press conference. The antibodies are not raised by computer simulations.

It is a very common and routine technique to raise antibodies against small proteins by making the protein you are interested in (in this case likely an Ebola virus coat protein). You can do this if you know the genetic code for the protein , which is information you can just look up. Making the DNA to code for the protein is easy, and making the protein is also routine by putting the DNA into bacteria. If the protein fragment is small you can just write out the amino acid sequence and a commercial company will make it for you.

Once you have the protein you can make antibodies to it by injecting it into mice, or by using a library of thousands of viruses each one of which expresses a single antibody.

You can then make unlimited quantities of the antibody and check whether it binds strongly to the Ebola protein you started with. If it does you have to test next whether it actually binds to the whole Ebola virus as it occurs in Nature (the "real virus"). This is what the WHO will do because they have facilities to work on the real virus. There's nothing suspicious or unlikely about this-it is the next logical step.

The prospect of this being the basis of a 'cure' is very far away, however, because you would then have to test in long and complicated trials whether injecting it into patients cured them. I mean 'cure' here. This is NOT a vaccine, it is an antibody treatment. and therefore the fact that vaccines are being tested does not make this approach irrelevant. Vaccines prevent infection, these treatments would cure the infected (if they worked).

The drug ZMAPP, currently being tested on a handful of patients in the US, is a mix of three antibodies like this.

Won't the WHO be surprised with the suggested Thai cure is an amulet and some betel nut...

yes, especially when Roger Daltrey opens his mail...

Won't the WHO be surprised with the suggested Thai cure is an amulet and some betel nut...

yes, especially when Roger Daltrey opens his mail...

Lol yes that would be the only WHO trying to get something out of Thailand e.g. Royalties for their music and I bet that cheque got lost in the mail too .

I think that the WHO will have to wait until the Patent has been fully registered / accepted before any samples will be forthcoming.

What's a patent or copyright in Thailand mean?

The Thais are desperate to look professional and credible in the world. They are absolutely desperate at all time. Thrashng about, twisting , manipulating, and conning whenever it suits them.

Why would WHO have tp ask Thailand to give it to them? Why didn't Thailand offer it instead? I thought they had announced they would do this earlier this week?

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

They have already said that they never had the whole virus in the press conference. The antibodies are not raised by computer simulations.

Thank you. Your post was very informative and in layman's language that made it understandable for Joe Public. Very good post.

Good on you.

Won't the WHO be surprised with the suggested Thai cure is an amulet and some betel nut...

Don't forget the secret ingredient: Tiger Balm

Would not any person who survived a viral infection have developed anti body's to the virus.

So a blood sample from that person could be the source of a vaccine???

in Africa it would probably be a source of aids as well......oops, not PC.

"He said the WHO wanted to try applying the anti-body with the real Ebola in its Bio-safety Level 4 laboratory in the United States."

Real Ebola?

Live virus trials.

Thailand can work on any virus in its laboratory lavatory.

What i wounder , what is Thailand Goverment do to stopp people, and airlines that fly from Africa to BBK in this Ebola subject ??? can just imagine how wrong that can go if this get foothold in Thailand in Tourist place.

Ahhh.... GREAT! I'm sure soon some high ranking person will say that they have finished 85% of the vaccine, but the final test are still at large. Now all they have to do is to wait 3 days before they can give the vaccine a digital wristband and ask it to pay an entrance fee before it's injected into.... I think I lost it there....

I can't find anything online about WHO's request.

Looks like more hemorrhaging of the mouth, like the Tour de France, which was a flat out lie.

What i wounder , what is Thailand Goverment do to stopp people, and airlines that fly from Africa to BBK in this Ebola subject ??? can just imagine how wrong that can go if this get foothold in Thailand in Tourist place.

Or any popular tourist destination anywhere in the world. Or any city with a population of 10 million plus. This has the potential to become a pandemic, although unlike any of the recent ones which could have been you don't have to be within sneezing distance, it's only transferred by bodily fluid. Having said that, I suppose if Nancy the Nigerian had been sneezing wet ones into her hand instead of a hankie and then put her hand on a hand rail or some suchlike thing and you put your hand onto the same place whilst it was still a little bit wet and you didn't realise it was sticky and then at some stage soon after you put your fingers into your mouth, then you'd be zapped, although that scenario is very unlikely unless in a very highly populated place, where you would imagine everyone would be being overly cautious by wearing masks so as not to absent mindedly put their potentially ebola carrying fingers into their mouths.

What I mean to say is thank goodness it's not an airborne thing, because being infected only by bodily fluids makes it a lot harder to catch. Given the extraordinarily high mortality rate, that is a very, very good thing. Unless mozzies can carry and transfer it person to person like they do with malaria and dengue. <Fingers in ears, La La La La, I'm not listening>

I can't find anything online about WHO's request.

Looks like more hemorrhaging of the mouth, like the Tour de France, which was a flat out lie.

I do find a reference that WHO is conducting tests on two vaccine samples (from the US n Canada) that might work at their level 4 facility in the US.

I think Thailand only has a level 3 facility, which would not permit them to test the vaccine against a live (real) Ebola virus. They can only test the vaccine's reaction to certain proteins associated with Ebola,

It's a step, and I applaud the Thais, for their effort, but the next required step is to have the vaccine tested against a live Ebola virus in a level 4 facility.

Er, uhm, gee, never thought they'd actually ask for a sample …..

Calling their bluff.

They've been testing with synthesized ebola genes. Makes sense, since pretty much everything in Thailand that has to do with hitech is a bad copy.

I can't find anything online about WHO's request.

Looks like more hemorrhaging of the mouth, like the Tour de France, which was a flat out lie.

I do find a reference that WHO is conducting tests on two vaccine samples (from the US n Canada) that might work at their level 4 facility in the US.

I think Thailand only has a level 3 facility, which would not permit them to test the vaccine against a live (real) Ebola virus. They can only test the vaccine's reaction to certain proteins associated with Ebola,

It's a step, and I applaud the Thais, for their effort, but the next required step is to have the vaccine tested against a live Ebola virus in a level 4 facility.

1. This Thai development is NOT A VACCINE, so everything you say about vaccines is not relevant to what the Thais have done.

2. In any case vaccines do not " react to" certain proteins associated with Ebola. Vaccines ARE certain proteins associated with the Ebola virus.

3. Therefore you cannot test vaccines on a live Ebola virus - this is meaningless as they would not do anything with, or to, a live Ebola virus. You can only test a vaccine by injecting people or animals with it and then seeing if they are prevented from catching the disease.

What you've posted shows you don't understand what the Thais have announced they have done (see post #32 for a summary), or what a vaccine is, so you are not in a particularly strong position to evaluate how useful it might be.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

From WHO website...

Two promising candidate vaccines

Given the public health need for safe and effective Ebola interventions, WHO regards the expedited evaluation of all Ebola vaccines with clinical grade material as a high priority.

Two candidate vaccines have clinical-grade vials available for phase 1 pre-licensure clinical trials.

One (cAd3-ZEBOV) has been developed by GlaxoSmithKline in collaboration with the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. It uses a chimpanzee-derived adenovirus vector with an Ebola virus gene inserted.

The second (rVSV-ZEBOV) was developed by the Public Health Agency of Canada in Winnipeg. The license for commercialization of the Canadian vaccine is held by an American company, the NewLink Genetics company, located in Ames, Iowa. The vaccine uses an attenuated or weakened vesicular stomatitis virus, a pathogen found in livestock; one of its genes has been replaced by an Ebola virus gene.

I believe it's the first of these candidate vaccines that the two U.S. caregivers who caught the disease while working in Liberia were given (Dr. Kent Brantly and Nancy Writebol). I'm not sure, but I think it's now going under the name "ZMapp".

Would not any person who survived a viral infection have developed anti body's to the virus.

So a blood sample from that person could be the source of a vaccine???

This is actually being tried on another infected caregiver returning from Liberia (Rick Sacra), who happens to have the same blood type as Kent Brantly (from whom he has received two transfusions).

It also seems that in addition to ZMapp, Dr. Brantly ALSO received a vial of an Ebola survivor's blood before returning from Liberia.

It's apparently regarded as a "worth a try" type of thing.

So we have to prove it works now?

From WHO website...

Two promising candidate vaccines

[...]

One (cAd3-ZEBOV) has been developed by GlaxoSmithKline in collaboration with the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. It uses a chimpanzee-derived adenovirus vector with an Ebola virus gene inserted.

The second (rVSV-ZEBOV) was developed by the Public Health Agency of Canada in Winnipeg. [...] The vaccine uses an attenuated or weakened vesicular stomatitis virus, a pathogen found in livestock; one of its genes has been replaced by an Ebola virus gene.

I believe it's the first of these candidate vaccines that the two U.S. caregivers who caught the disease while working in Liberia were given (Dr. Kent Brantly and Nancy Writebol). I'm not sure, but I think it's now going under the name "ZMapp".

This is futile for me to repeat, as it's clear no-one really reads any posts in a thread, but I will have one last try. You are all getting hopelessly mixed up about what the Thais have done, and what a vaccine is, so what you are saying is mostly just wrong. It is completely irrelevant to what the Thais have done to mention the vaccines that the WHO are in the process of developing, because the Thais have NOT made a VACCINE, they have made an ANTIBODY.

An antibody is the protein your body makes in response to being infected, and binds to the infectious agent (Ebola) to signal its destruction by white blood cells, which are your immune system's killer cells. So, a treatment that consists of antibodies is injected into patients who ALREADY HAVE Ebola, and it cures them by binding to the virus and signalling white cells to destroy it. This is what the Thais have made, an ANTIBODY.

ZMapp is also NOT A VACCINE, it is a mixture of three different antibodies, just like the single antibody the Thais have made. Zmapp is a cure, a drug for treatment of the disease.

The concept of a VACCINE is completely different. It is for immunisation - you inject it into people before they get the disease , say in early infancy, and it protects them from EVER GETTING the disease.

It does this by causing the body to make antibodies against the virus, but without ever having the disease. So a vaccine is in its simplest form is either A DEAD EBOLA VIRUS, or A PROTEIN FROM THE VIRUS.

When you inject it, the body detects it as foreign and makes antibodies to it, but the virus can't give you the disease because it's either a dead virus, or such a small part of the virus it can't do anything harmful. But when you are exposed to the real virus and it infects you, it finds that you already have antibodies, so can't give you the disease because it's instantly destroyed.

But I suppose you will follow this post with further opinions about the so-called Thai "vaccine" that exists nowhere except your imaginations! Good luck.

So we have to prove it works now?

We all known it works but WHO which is control by big EU and US drug companies and they will steal it and claim the stuff from Bangkok's Siriraj doesn't work

This publication had a good piece about two days before the pup and pony show and I see they have updated their story and included the press conference video.

Some very uncomfortable looking doctors when a few foreign journalists starting asking questions and the look on one of the journalists faces after being given the answer is magic.

It's mostly in Thai but they never mention the word vaccine once - as partington has pointed out twice (See, some people do read the entire thread before posting) . It's a "therapeutic antibody treatment" that hasn't been tested on live Ebola, mice or primates yet. It's a long way from being anything.

From what the article says a standard drug cycle from creation to gaining FDA and EU approval is 10 to 15 years.

http://www.establishmentpost.com/thailand-announces-cure-vaccine-for-ebola/

It is also unlikely that a real Ebola virus was imported into Thailand for study.

Especially considering there is nowhere safe enough to store it. Let alone transport it.

And can you imagine any gov. cabinet being asked to OK importing it for study?

So how did they have more than a computer simulation of Ebola to design an anti-body for it?

And why do they believe a computer simulation and then some genetic tinkering may have designed a cure?

And of course having designed an anti-body, does not equal their statement of having ;

'Created a cure for Ebola.'

WHO is calling their bluff, and partly wishful thinking that they might accidentally have something useful.

In theory the thai antibody does have merit.

Similar to what the liberian doctor reasoned. if a known hiv drug works by limiting hiv (rna virus) production in the host then perhaps it could also have an effect on ebola (also an rna virus) the liberian doctors better judgement and humility apparently did not allow him to make a spectacle out of his very significant REAL result. 13 / 15 patients survived.

So we have to prove it works now?

We all known it works but WHO which is control by big EU and US drug companies and they will steal it and claim the stuff from Bangkok's Siriraj doesn't work

Are you trolling or just plain stupid?

This publication had a good piece about two days before the pup and pony show and I see they have updated their story and included the press conference video.

Some very uncomfortable looking doctors when a few foreign journalists starting asking questions and the look on one of the journalists faces after being given the answer is magic.

It's mostly in Thai but they never mention the word vaccine once - as partington has pointed out twice (See, some people do read the entire thread before posting) . It's a "therapeutic antibody treatment" that hasn't been tested on live Ebola, mice or primates yet. It's a long way from being anything.

From what the article says a standard drug cycle from creation to gaining FDA and EU approval is 10 to 15 years.

http://www.establishmentpost.com/thailand-announces-cure-vaccine-for-ebola/

Thank you for the video. Naturally, at 1:40:00 long and mostly in Thai, I have jumped about to find English language content. The main words appear to be "we are confident that we will be able". I recognise the non-exact control of the English language but it would appear that they have nothing and they have called the world's press to discuss concepts and dreams. Can a medical person with more patience and understanding of Thai find anything with more certainty or is this all just evasive language in Thai too?

A quick view of how the world is viewing Thursday's announcements. Bearing in mind that if this was something real it would be EVERYWHERE.

A search of google news only shows 3 media outlets outside of Thailand carrying any news after the press conference. Before quite a number were interested but afterwards we have:

Channel News Asia

Voice of America

Nothing much but then I found a Reuters article sitting in, of all places, the Daily Mail's website. It is 2 paragraphs. The first is quoting Bangkok Post and the 2nd is the summary statement from the press conference. After this is simply says

NOTE: Reuters has not verified this story and does not vouch for its accuracy. (Bangkok Newsroom; Editing by Biju Dwarakanath)

Interestingly searching "New Scientist Ebola Thailand" brings up.....nothing.

It is also unlikely that a real Ebola virus was imported into Thailand for study.

Especially considering there is nowhere safe enough to store it. Let alone transport it.

And can you imagine any gov. cabinet being asked to OK importing it for study?

So how did they have more than a computer simulation of Ebola to design an anti-body for it?

And why do they believe a computer simulation and then some genetic tinkering may have designed a cure?

And of course having designed an anti-body, does not equal their statement of having ;

'Created a cure for Ebola.'

WHO is calling their bluff, and partly wishful thinking that they might accidentally have something useful.

From other News Posts His Majesty has just recently been re-admitted to Siriraj Hospital and is confirmed to be in frail health.

Am I the only one who feels there may be some danger in allowing these people to "showboat" and play with virulent organisms in the same facility, even if it's not the "real" Ebola virus?

Patrick