Wayne Stollings wrote:
A new direction that just happened to be the SAME new direction of the research involving chimps? The odds of that happening are extraordinarily high.
Are you for real?
"A key feature of the study, is that the Oxford researchers, with colleagues from an Italian biotech company and the University of Birmingham in the UK, departed from a traditional approach and went in a new direction.
The reason they went a different way is because of another feature of HCV: it is always changing its make up, in that respect it is similar to HIV. This makes it difficult to pick a target that will be there for some time and make an effective building block for a vaccine.So the researchers turned to a new idea: they picked a target in the virus that is less likely to change: an internal part, rather than the more traditional approach of picking something on the surface of the virus.
No collaboration, not even a mention in the study, unusual don't you think?
The European trial is connected to the others unless EVERYONE is departing "from a traditional approach and went in a new direction" together.
Why is their study connected, funding, joint research? You would have though the Canadian researcher at least got a mention for a part in it, wouldn't you?
The studies are separate from each other, different groups of people in the race for the hep c vaccine. They aren't the only ones either.
Two different PUBLICATIONS by two different groups on the SAME research and research that is a new and non-traditional direction which makes it very, very unlikely to not be connected.
Is that right? I would love to see you show the link.