The two British scientists at the forefront of the coronavirus vaccine hunt have clashed over a controversial plan to deliberately infect people with the virus.
Professor Adrian Hill, director of the Jenner Institute at Oxford University, is at an advanced stage of setting up a human trial for one of the most promising drugs.
In this context, he wants to give the vaccine to young healthy volunteers before exposing them to the virus that causes Covid-19.
Professor Adrian Hill, director of the Jenner Institute at the University of Oxford, is at an advanced stage of setting up a human trial for one of the most promising drugs
Sarah Gilbert, professor of vaccinology at the institute, disagrees with her plan due to potential risk to volunteers
However, The Mail on Sunday understands that Sarah Gilbert, professor of vaccinology at the institute, does not agree with her plan due to the potential risk to volunteers.
Indeed, after Professor Hill announced her intentions, she told BBC Radio 4: “This is not something that is going to happen in the short term. “
According to a source, the two scientists are “not particularly happy” with each other at the moment.
Seán: It’s a risk I’m ready to take
Seán McPartlin volunteers to participate in Oxford vaccine trial
The enemy may be invisible, but for Seán McPartlin, volunteering to participate in the Oxford vaccine trial is “like going to war.”
Despite the potential risks, the 22-year-old Oriel College student, pictured, said: “When soldiers, often no older than boys, go to war, they accept death as long as their boots touch foreign soil.
“They accept it because they know what they are doing is right and because it must be done for the safety of those close to them at home. But while many wars are often unjust and fought for the wrong reasons, the same cannot be said of Covid.
“All over the world people are suffering, people are dying and something must be done. The Challenge Trials are a war on Covid. I cannot think of a more just war to be waged.
The master’s student in philosophy, from County Meath, Ireland, decided to enroll as soon as the lawsuit was announced.
“When I told my dad what I wanted to do, he was appalled,” McPartlin said. “I explained to him that the risk to my life was minimal, but it didn’t matter to him. “Why does it have to be you?” he said.
“No one wants their loved ones to sacrifice or take a risk, but I couldn’t be dissuaded.
“In times of crisis, we often ask ourselves, ‘What can I give? Well, I’m not a doctor, so I can’t give my knowledge, but what I can give is my body and my time. This is how I can help rid the world of Covid.
Their dilemma is whether to expose volunteers to the virus, which could reduce the time it takes to make a vaccine widely available, or wait until the potential long-term effects are better understood.
News of the conflict comes as other scientists have told this journal that a vaccine is likely only partially effective and carries a risk of significant side effects.
Downing Street has been told that while there is a 50% chance that an effective vaccine will be given in the UK next year, it is unlikely to provide full protection against the virus.
Instead, the team at the University of Oxford expects the jab to “ease” its worst effects by decreasing the severity of symptoms.
Sources say trials of the vaccine – dubbed ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 – found that two-thirds of recipients developed headaches and one-fifth developed a fever.
The potential limits will probably be with No.10.
A survey found that nearly a third of Britons could refuse a vaccine and so-called ‘herd immunity’ will be difficult to achieve if less than two-thirds of the population accept the offer.
A source said: “It is important to manage expectations regarding the vaccine.
“It’s not ready yet and when it does, it won’t be a complete magic bullet or be without mild but irritating side effects that might put some people off.
“But it looks like it will alleviate the worst effects for the most vulnerable and is a critical piece of the puzzle to tackle this.
Professor Hill and Sir John Bell, Professor Regius of Medicine at Oxford, were among scientists who announced last month that initial trials on 1,077 UK adults show the Oxford vaccine induces strong antibody and lymphocyte responses T, potentially offering a “double defense” against the virus.
Antibodies can turn off the coronavirus, while T lymphocytes, a type of white blood cell, help coordinate the immune system by targeting infected cells.
During testing, 90% were shown to have developed neutralizing antibodies after a dose of the vaccine, prompting ministers to order 190 million doses of the Covid-19 vaccine, of which 100 million are the Oxford version.
Scientists now need to determine whether the vaccine – made from a genetically modified version of a virus that causes the common cold in chimpanzees – prevents those who come into contact with the virus from getting sick or alleviates their symptoms.
This would be done most quickly with a human challenge trial, where patients are deliberately infected with the virus, using people under the age of 30 who are less likely to become seriously ill from Covid-19.
The Jenner Institute began work on the vaccine in January.
Last month, Professor Hill said he had worked with a US campaign group called 1 Day Sooner to obtain medical-grade doses of Sars-CoV2, the virus responsible for Covid-19, which would be needed for testing of provocation in humans.
Professor Hill and Professor Gilbert declined to comment, but the two will have to come to an agreement before the trial proposal goes to an NHS ethics committee.
In a statement, the Jenner Institute said, “We do not plan to test the Oxford vaccine in challenge models at this time. “