Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 712 posts

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#211

Post by overlyresucpp »

tomp wrote: post #184
bufferoverflow wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I care. Just like about the bailouts. Socializing the funding/losses and privatizing the profits is just pure corruption.

If "we" gave you $20B to move a vaccine from proof-of-concept to production, could you do it? I know I couldn't... That's a service, it's worth money, it's worth paying for. Edit: people don't seem to understand that there are several stages in pharma development... (1) research, (2) trials, (3) scaling production. It sounds to me that even if (1) and (2) are "paid for" (with public money), (3) is still non-trivial a…

You’re being overly reductionist and dismissive.

No one is claiming otherwise. And back to normal is still a long ways off.

If you’re admitting we’re giving them money for a thing, it’s paid for. I don’t know why you quote it like that, transfer payments of public money to private institutions is a thing, is it up for debate it happens?

Also cost is emotional. Does it have to be 20 billion or is the government handing out cheddar for consulting jobs later?

There’s more too it than high school capitalist theory. Just because you can’t for $20 billion doesn’t mean someone else couldn’t for $5.

But we hide the work in private accounts. Humanities work, built towards by countless hands and minds.

Yeah ok we get it, Murray Rothbard; You’re only 1 in 7 billion. Why does your theory matter? Roll up them sleeves. What? He’s dead? In the bin with it, no need to carry water for a dead man.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#212

Post by aphextron »

MrAlex94 wrote: post #47
aphextron wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>OK, someone tell me why this isn't the good news it sounds like The AstraZeneca vaccine is based on an adenovirus vector, which has never been approved for use in humans. It uses a weakened live virus that can (and apparently has, in the case of the J&J vaccine, which is using very similar tech) cause serious adverse systemic reactions. From what we've seen so far, the safety profile for these vaccines is far worse…

> It uses a weakened live virus that can (and apparently has, in the case of the J&J vaccine, which is using very similar tech) cause serious adverse systemic reactions. There is no evidence to prove the vaccine has caused any serious adverse effects so far. If that were the case, it is unlikely the Data Safety and Monitoring Board (DSMB) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would recommend resuming the trial.…

>There is no evidence to prove the vaccine has caused any serious adverse effects so far. If that were the case, it is unlikely the Data Safety and Monitoring Board (DSMB) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would recommend resuming the trial.

There's also no evidence to prove that it wasn't. Furthermore, the AstraZeneca vaccine was halted for a case of transverse myelitis, a very common (and serious) adverse reaction seen in DNA/adenovirus based vaccines like ChAdOx1 [0]. These complications have not been seen at all in the mRNA based vaccines, since they do not involve a live virus.

[0] https://medcitynews.com/2020/10/report-fda-takes-closer-look....

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#214

Post by standardUser »

dbetteridge wrote: post #3

OK, someone tell me why this isn't the good news it sounds like

It's great news, though at first I thought they had released Phase 3 results, which would be earth-shattering news. They are still the leading vaccine candidate and the one most likely to get approval this year (though the US press tends to ignore it in favor of covering the various US-originated vaccines that are also in Phase 3 trials).

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#215

Post by leemcalilly »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #143
apexalpha wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who cares. I'd gladly give this company a couple of billion if it means they can get us back to normal. Oxford develops the vaccine with public money. We also, god willing, need to manufacture billions of them and transport them around the globe. For that manufacturing, give me a solid existing multinational with a proven manufacturing record and base please, not some non-profit startup.

I care. Just like about the bailouts. Socializing the funding/losses and privatizing the profits is just pure corruption.

This is not corrupt. It’s money well spent. The benefits to us all are most likely more valuable than anything we’ve spent on vaccine research. Government balance sheets also probably come out ahead on that investment given that the alternative is an economy with a raging pandemic and resulting lower tax base.

Then there is the logistical effort of manufacturing the vaccine at the scale and speed required. There are huge capital investments and risks associated with doing that. If a company wants to do that and seek the profits from that, great. Literally everyone comes out ahead. You, me, the government, the manufacturer, distributor, and every other business or person in the economy.

What is the alternative? We create a government agency that specializes in manufacturing and distributing pharma products?

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#216

Post by standardUser »

nickcotter wrote: post #152

Good news but still a long way to go. How's it going to be rolled out? Here in the UK we have tried and failed to get a regular flu jab (our GPs have run out of a very small supply and the pharmacies don't have any to sell) and I'm not optimistic about our chances of getting this next year or whenever it arrives.

"but still a long way to go"

It's actually an "indeterminate way to go". Assuming it is "long" has no factual basis. Phase 3 results could be released literally any day now, and good results would lead to government approvals in the following weeks.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#217

Post by throwaway4good »

wcoenen wrote: post #96
throwaway4good wrote: post #66

All these hundreds of vaccines that are being developed; are they all triggering the same immune response?

One vaccine doesn't even trigger the same immune response in different people, so it is not entirely clear to me what you mean. The basic principle of a vaccine is that it contains proteins that are the same as (or similar to) some of the protein building blocks of the actual virus. Your body learns an immune response to these proteins, which it can reactivate when it encounters the real thing. Many potential vaccine…

It was in the latter sense.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#219

Post by krona »

tgb wrote: post #177
krona wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As with any vaccine, you'd need about 80% of the population to vaccinate in order for herd immunity to kick in. Wrong. The herd immunity threshold (HIT) for influenza is 33%-44%. HITs are different for every infectious disease. Current estimates for COVID-19 are 60-75%.

Isn't that a different number, though? You have to factor in that vaccines aren't 100% effective at preventing disease. Wikipedia spells it out in the vaccine section here [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

True but you're also not taking in to account that far less than 100% of the population appear susceptible to the virus, especially in e.g. Japan and Germany, for various reasons.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#220

Post by komali2 »

leemcalilly wrote: post #215
bufferoverflow wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I care. Just like about the bailouts. Socializing the funding/losses and privatizing the profits is just pure corruption.

This is not corrupt. It’s money well spent. The benefits to us all are most likely more valuable than anything we’ve spent on vaccine research. Government balance sheets also probably come out ahead on that investment given that the alternative is an economy with a raging pandemic and resulting lower tax base. Then there is the logistical effort of manufacturing the vaccine at the scale and speed required. There are…

> What is the alternative? We create a government agency that specializes in manufacturing and distributing pharma products?

Yes. Why don't you think that would work?

Post reply on HN