Your "source" was a "news" report. The use of the phrase "Holy Grail" is a dead giveaway this is (low level) general media and not a scientific journal news item.
The ACTUAL source:
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2013 Aug;76(2):210-6. doi: 10.1111/bcp.12146.
Towards a universal influenza vaccine: volunteer virus challenge studies in quarantine to speed the development and subsequent licensing.
Oxford JS.
Source
Blizard Institute of Cell and Molecular Science, Bart's and the London and Retroscreen Virology Ltd, Queen Mary's BioEnterprises, Innovation Centre, London, E1?2AX, UK. j.oxford@retroscreen.com
Abstract
There are now more than 5 experimental vaccine formulations which induce T and B cell immunity towards the internally situated virus proteins matrix (M1 and M2e) and nucleoprotein (NP), and towards stem and stalk regions of the HA which have a shared antigenic structure amongst many [color=red][[NOT "all" but "many". "Universal" is clearly an exaggeration.]][/color] of the 17 influenza A virus sub types. Such 'universal vaccines' could be used, at least in theory, as a prophylactic stockpile vaccine for newly emerged epidemic and novel pandemic influenza A viruses or as a supplement to conventional HA/NA vaccines. My own laboratory has approached the problem from the clinical viewpoint by identifying CD4(+) cells which are present in influenza infected volunteers who resist influenza infection. We have established precisely which peptides in M and NP proteins react with these immune CD4 cells. These experimental vaccines induce immunity in animal models but with a single exception no data have been published on protection against influenza virus infection in humans. The efficacy of the latter vaccine is based on vaccinia virus (MVA) as a carrier and was analyzed in a quarantine unit. Given the absence of induced HI antibody in the new universal vaccines a possible licensing strategy is a virus challenge model in quarantine whereby healthy volunteers can be immunized with the new vaccine and thereafter deliberately infected and clinical signs recorded alongside quantities of virus excreted and compared with unvaccinated controls.
© 2013 The British Pharmacological Society.
===============
The test: (note that subjects were exposed to a live virus AND SOME VACCINATED VOLUNTEERS CAUGHT THE DISEASE AS WELL AS THE UNVACCINATED VOLUNTERS.
". In total, 2 vaccinees and 5 controls developed laboratory-confirmed influenza. Of these, 1 vaccinee and 4 controls experienced moderate to severe symptoms in addition to virus shedding."
This is early work and the vaccine is far from proven. Far below the level of significance, it appears to be moderately effective for one variety of influenza. That's a very long way from demonstrating a "universal" vaccine. (Which isn't even potentially truly universal as some strains of influenza don't carry those epitopes (as mentioned in the article). "Universal", at least the way they used it, is a RELATIVE term.
It's "relatively" universal. And for those strains for which it works (ONE so far and only in very preliminary tests) it is "relatively" protective.
There is no way that that vaccine, even if successful, would eliminate the market for an effective treatment.
AI
