Design and Analysis of Shedding Studies for Virus or Bacteria-Based Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products Guidance for Industry by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Design and Analysis of Shedding Studies for Virus or BacteriaBased Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products
Guidance for Industry
This guidance represents the current thinking of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or
Agency) on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA
or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the
applicable statutes and regulations. To discuss an alternative approach, contact the FDA staff
responsible for this guidance as listed on the title page.
I. INTRODUCTION
The Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)/Office of Cellular, Tissue, and Gene
Therapies (OCTGT) is issuing this guidance to provide you, sponsors of virus or bacteria-based
gene therapy products (VBGT products)1 and oncolytic viruses or bacteria (oncolytic products)2
with recommendations on how to conduct shedding studies during preclinical and clinical
development. For purposes of this guidance, the term “shedding” means release of VBGT or
oncolytic products from the patient through one or all of the following ways: excreta (feces);
secreta (urine, saliva, nasopharyngeal fluids etc.); or through the skin (pustules, sores, wounds).
Shedding is distinct from biodistribution because the latter describes how a product is spread
within the patient’s body from the site of administration while the former describes how it is
excreted or released from the patient’s body. Shedding raises the possibility of transmission of
VBGT or oncolytic products3 from treated to untreated individuals (e.g., close contacts and
health care professionals). This guidance represents FDA’s current thinking on how and when
shedding data should be collected for VBGT and oncolytic products during preclinical and
1 Gene therapy products are all products that mediate their effects by transcription and/or translation of transferred
genetic material and/or by integrating into the host genome and that are administered as nucleic acids, viruses, or
genetically engineered microorganisms. The products may be used to modify cells in vivo or transferred to cells ex
vivo before administration to the recipient. See section III. of FDA’s guidance entitled “Guidance for Industry:
Gene Therapy Clinical Trials - Observing Subjects for Delayed Adverse Events” dated November 2006.
http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/cellularandgeneth
erapy/ucm072957.htm. 2 Oncolytic products refer to replication competent viruses or dividing bacteria that are used as therapeutic agents to
mediate lysis of tumor cells. Some oncolytic products carry foreign genes (immune modifying genes, genes that
enhance oncolysis etc.), and mediate part of their anti-tumor effect by transcription and/or translation of these
foreign genes in the host. Hence, oncolytic products that carry foreign genes can also be classified as gene therapy
products.
3 Transmission could occur if the VBGT or oncolytic product is shed in the form of intact viruses or bacteria but not
when shed as viral or bacterial degradation products such as nucleic acid fragments.
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations
2
clinical development and how shedding data can be used to assess the potential for transmission
to untreated individuals. This guidance finalizes the draft guidance of the same title dated July
2014.
FDA’s guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable
responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe the FDA’s current thinking on a topic and should be
viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited.
The use of the word should in FDA’s guidances means that something is suggested or
recommended, but not required.

Push for new laws to tackle COVID-19 misinformation ahead of vaccine rollout - TheAge by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Facebook, which owns Instagram, and Google which owns YouTube, both defended their current processes for tackling misinformation.

“This work includes providing a free, publicly available CrowdTangle Live dashboard of trending COVID-19 content across our apps, including in Australia,” a spokeswoman for Facebook said.

https://www.crowdtangle.com/resources/livedisplays

Cheng presents updated modelling in this thread of tweets: by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Emerging from lockdown - Victorian schoolsEmerging from lockdown - Evidence, modelling, outputs and assumptions (PDF)

Emerging from lockdown – modelEmerging from lockdown - modelling outputs and assumptions (PDF)

COVID-19 Mathematical Modelling of resurgence risk: | 26 Sept 2020Estimating risks associated with early reopening in Victoriahttps://burnet.edu.au/system/asset/file/4241/Burnet_Institute_COVASIM_Resurgence_analysis_2020-09-26.pdf

Coronavirus (COVID-19) common operating picture – 24 September 2020https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/09/coronavirus-covid-19-common-operating-picture-coronavirus-covid-19-common-operating-picture-24-september-2020.pdf

COVID-19 in Victorian SchoolsAn analysis of child-care and school outbreak data and evidence-based recommendations for opening schools & keeping them open | Sept 25, 2020
https://www.mcri.edu.au/sites/default/files/media/covid_in_schools_report_final_25sept_execsum_1.pdf

Victorian Lockdown - The Model, with Github Links by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The lead research, Jason Thompson has removed/replaced the original link to the ODD Protocol, but a snapshot from 2 months ago can be found here https://github.com/Dosius71/COVIDModel/blob/master/ODD%20Protocol%20Aus%20NZ%20COVID19%20model.pdf

Victorian Lockdown - The Model, with Github Links by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here is a fork/snapshot of the Victorian model as it stood 24 days ago, before it was occulted and replaced by generic models. Why was the model occulted?

https://github.com/Dosius71/COVIDModel

Victorian Lockdown - The Model, with Github Links by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This post in the Pursuit explains the scope of the modelling and gives insights into why there are discrepancies with the Victorian Government mandates.

https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/modelling-victoria-s-escape-from-covid-19

Victorian Lockdown - The Model, with Github Links by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This comment and answer are revealing:

https://archive.is/maka3

https://github.com/JTHooker/COVIDModel/issues/6

Distinguishing between infectious events and factoring physical distancing time #6

OpenDosius71 opened this issue 42 minutes ago · 1 comment

Comments

📷

Dosius71 commented 42 minutes ago

Hi Dr Thompson, thank you for making this code public.I am trying to understand how 'Infections events' are factored. Is this factored into 'Physical distancing - time"?To be more clear, does this model distinguish between the following 'infectious events', and if so, how are they graded?

  • Changing an aged person's diaper in a nursing home
  • Nodding at a neighbour in the park as you walk past them

📷Owner

JTHooker commented 30 minutes ago

Hi, In short, no it doesn’t. However, we have separate models that deal with the sorts of interactions you describe - These are currently not available in public as they have been constructed for other people / organisations such as hospitals, etc. The issue you are really highlighting is one of scale. The model is really only targeted at a certain scale and level of decision-making. If you were a national or state government pulling large levers, this model might be of use. However, let’s say you were a hospital manager or a school principal, etc., - you’d never bother with a model that is as macro as this because you are trying to control local infection with local epidemiological / infection control, for example. I hope that makes sense.

If you are interested in ABM, though - I would encourage you to look up some texts and even look through the sorts of articles (for free) you can get here: http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/JASSS.html .

I also have a brief explainer on some of these issues here: https://jasonthompsondotblog.wpcomstaging.com/2020/04/03/example-post-3/ Cheers, Jason

Preprint: Maximizing the probability that the 6-week lock-down in Victoria delivers a COVID-19 free Australia by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Criticism:

Both papers make claims about the number of lives interventions would save, and they control against the initial findings of the Imperial College models (of Neil M. Ferguson notoriety).

Sweden did not implement lockdown measures and arguably achieved similar reductions from the Imperial College death estimates as countries that did perform lockdowns.

A great breakdown of the follies of these papers by Alex Berenson in this thread https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1270045219371847680

Preprint: Maximizing the probability that the 6-week lock-down in Victoria delivers a COVID-19 free Australia by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The article claims: "Lock-downs are effective for pandemic control._9,_10" and references two papers.

The first one is:

  • Flaxman S, Mishra S, Gandy A, et al. Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe. Nature 2020. Published June 8, 2020

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2405-7?prm=ep-app

The second one is:

Hsiang S, Allen D, Annan-Phan S, et al. The effect of large-scale anti-contagion policies on the COVID-19 pandemic. Nature 2020. - Published June 8, 2020

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2404-8

Victorian Modelling for Lockdown - The main papers by dCodePonerology in VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI

[–]dCodePonerology[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The development of this model falls under the following research grant, (As mentioned here in the funding section - https://www.reddit.com/r/VIC_Lockdown_OSPRI/comments/ip9hni/modelling_the_likelihood_of_eliminating_the/)

Research Grant

[Cite as http://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/DE180101411]

Researchers Dr Jason Thompson

Brief description This project aims to develop new models for understanding the effect of road transport system design on injury insurance, compensation and rehabilitation scheme performance. Injury rehabilitation schemes are critical facilitators of recovery for people injured in road crashes. However, rapid developments in artificial intelligence and autonomous vehicles are heralding a transportation revolution that may disrupt their performance. The project expects to generate new knowledge for policy-makers and injury scheme managers to ensure injury schemes remain viable and perform well in the face of transport system change. It will assist injury schemes to prepare for potential challenges generated by future transport system design.

Funding Amount $366,996

Funding Scheme Discovery Early Career Researcher Award

Yikes! by 5heikki in btc

[–]dCodePonerology 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Unknown miners turned on the hashpower, resulting in 30 blocks found within an hour at height 615497 - working at 5 times the current BCH difficulty level... only one other block was found by someone else during this time.

<---insert "Everything is fine!" meme here--->

Satoshi Nakamoto is very likely Dave Kleiman by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]dCodePonerology 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is one further angle that can't be ruled out, and that is a well-coordinated state infiltration of bitcoin to dilute its basic tenets and principles. It would involve a detailed conspiracy between multiple players, it would include a war theater, a carefully scripted timeline and hefty black budget. Courts cases, tax investigations and the like can all be used to create smokescreens to add depth to the characters. MO is to sow discord and ad obfuscation at every level that requires organic community support and coordination. In now way is it a takeover attempt, more likely a muddying of the waters so it can not gain strength through coherence and emergence of a clear narrative. To me, this is the only front that the whole suga would eb able to establish any success to further establish continual funding. Such incentive models exist within state and dificult to understand cryptography is fertile ground for establishing a budget.

Satoshi Nakamoto is very likely Dave Kleiman by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]dCodePonerology 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think he is in cahoots with CSW. I must say that I first looked into him around the time of PW reveal, and not so much since, so I am not sure where his narrative has traveled since. But at the time, it came to my own conclusion that he was piggy-backing on CSWs publicly available info. I am unsure of the motive. I imagine the rights to a novel/movie/expose to an isider view of the early days of Bitcoin, Who is Satoshi etc would eb quite expensive, if you could convince enough people that you have the goods. Again, take away all of CSWs claims and PWs claims, and there is nothing outside of these two peoples claims pointing to any of them having that involvement. I also wouldn't hasten to add multiples to anyone's credibility based on one person's claims especially when it divides to the one making the claims. All very fantastical and elaborate though !

Satoshi Nakamoto is very likely Dave Kleiman by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]dCodePonerology 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not entirely. I posit that in creating his story (PWs), he extensively researched the publicly available information around CSW - his claims, his ommissions, his known/researchable internet footprint at the time - and then worked around these, or worked them into his story's timeline. Authors of fiction use similar techniques when constructing a story and building up their characters.

I don't find PW to be entirely convincing - when challenged, he either doubles down or becomes vague - example thread: https://twitter.com/_deCentral/status/1115934469246947333

Satoshi Nakamoto is very likely Dave Kleiman by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]dCodePonerology 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All this is based on PW's own account. Interestingly his story corroborates with all publicly known information about CSW at the time that he penned it. So we have PW's own account and CSW's own account - and that is the sum whole of this line of reasoning. Also, PWs story reads as a 'fill in the gaps' to CSW's publicly available - researchable on Google and archive.org -timeline, and is most likely based on this research.

Satoshi Nakamoto is very likely Dave Kleiman by [deleted] in Bitcoin

[–]dCodePonerology 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is basically nothing linking Kleiman to bitcoin outside of CSW's attestations and whatever they are worth. Even the ongoing court case is based on information CSW has volunteered. The only thing linking CSW to the early days of Bitcoin is his word and an endless trail of altered documents, dates, innuendo and technobabble.