Comments by "Theodore Shulman" (@ColonelFredPuntridge) on "'You Sir, Are The One Ignoring Science': Rand Paul Battles Becerra Over COVID-19 Rules" video.

  1.  @eyealter  So can we agree that if the vaccine turns out to be harmful, then the guy who had it approved at "Warp Speed" should pay for all the damages?
    1
  2. The (obvious) right answer to this whole dispute is: we should develop a new vaccine which, instead of only targeting the spike-protein, also targets the other two proteins which are on the surface of the virus, as well as the spike protein. (The two other proteins are called "E" for "envelope" and "M" for "membrane". There's also a protein in the virus called "N" for "nucleocapsid", but that one doesn't appear on the surface of the virus, only in the interior of the virus, so, vaccinating against it would probably not make much difference.) A vaccine which elicits antibodies against all three proteins would almost certainly be just as protective as a previous infection, and unlike an infection, would not risk being passed on to an elderly or immuno-compromised patient who might die of it. Natural immunity is great, but not if the price of waiting to get it is killing grandma, or killing your friend who has HIV, or killing your brother who is getting chemotherapy for cancer.
    1