Scientists at UC Riverside have demonstrated a new, RNA-based vaccine strategy that is effective against any strain of a virus and can be used safely even by babies or the immunocompromised.
Given the position of this statement in the article, I'm guessing they are trying to imply a correlation in rate of aging. Like 1 dog year = 7 human years. They are further implying that if a mouse maintains immunity for 90 days, a human would maintain immunity for 10 years.
It should be clear that it is the reporter stating this, not the original authors of the study.
As it is, the first time this was posted, biologists and pharmacists discussed the merits of the claims and came to the conclusion that this was unlikely to be real.
Specifically the approach would probably be thwarted the second time you attempted to use this method because your immune system would attack the vaccine.
The discussion also pointed out that this was why the second dose of Astrazeneca during the COVID pandemic was less effective.
Disclaimer: I'm not a medical professional and don't pretend to be one online. I'm reciting from memory. YMMV.
As it is, the first time this was posted, biologists and pharmacists discussed the merits of the claims and came to the conclusion that this was unlikely to be real.
Link please? Kinda feel like I shouldn't have had to ask for that based on how you chose to begin your comment but here we are.