Fingers, just a quicky on this. Have the bat cave to clean. So many guests last night, and that shat everywhere. Damn freeloaders.
It is mostly like true, as J8 has reminded us above, that Biotron called their HIV results, "vaccine like" because of the immunological response of patients treated with BIT225. That is, the HIV virus in macrophage 'hidden' cells became exposed to the patients immune system, and vaccines work by setting up an immune response to an attenuated foreign virus.
Now let's just stick to basics in pursuing this further in regard to the forthcoming antiviral, which we'll call BIT036, just for arguments sake
. How will it work? From what we already know, it will reduce/prevent viral replication by inhibiting crucial ion channeling across the lipid bilayers of cells that are part of the virus growth cycle. This too is likely to be called 'vaccine-like' because once viral spread is reduced in this prolific reproducing virus, the patients own immune system will have more opportunity to fight it without going into immune overdrive - ARDS.
So the effect will be vaccine-
like. But as it is not given beforehand, and other reasons, it is not a vaccine. But as was asked on the other thread by @180 (who seems to be a medical worker - batgod bless you), can a potential antiviral be given beforehand? The quick answer to this is, most likely yes, but for (at risk) medical workers only.
So there are two questions at hand. The first is on two parts: will a successful antiviral that works against the E Protein have vaccine-like effect?; and can it be given to at risk persons?
Second question is, can a proper vaccine be developed that will work from the E Protein, as apposed to the S Protein that most other vaccine researchers are attempting ig, University of Queensland ? As I began writing about in my previous post, yes, I believe it can.
(20min delay)