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

No one who got Moderna's vaccine in trial developed severe Covid-19

sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 436 posts

Re: No one who got Moderna's vaccine in trial developed severe Covid-19

#241

Post by ed25519FUUU »

coffeefirst wrote: post #156
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: I do plan to get the vaccine, but as a software engineer I know beta versions usually have the most “bugs” — and I have the health privilege to be in the back of the line so I will!

This is irresponsible fearmongering, and says more about how lackadaisical software engineering is towards quality control than anything else. On the other hand, if you want to read about how software works when it actually matters, "space shuttle coding style" is fascinating.

What's irresponsible about healthy, low risk individuals waiting until all of the high risk people get the vaccines first?

If there's autoimmune issues that pop up when the scale goes from tens of thousands to hundreds of millions, I'll know about it ahead of time and be able to take the appropriate action, such as choosing a non-mRNA vaccine such as the adenovirus type from Astrazeneca.

Re: No one who got Moderna's vaccine in trial developed severe Covid-19

#242

Post by jimbob45 »

lisper wrote: post #94
jimbob45 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “This is a unique situation where we as a company simply cannot take the risk if in ... four years the vaccine is showing side effects,” Ruud Dobber, a member of Astra’s senior executive team, told Reuters. Seems pretty straightforward to me. It’s an unproven method of vaccine creation and hasn’t been tested by anyone. I really can’t imagine this holding up in courts though.

> I really can’t imagine this holding up in courts though. Why not? Liability waivers are common in other industries.

The law is upheld by the people. If you damage the health of nearly an entire national via vaccine, no one will care to stay true to the letter of the law when it comes time for your retribution.

Same thing with the Nazis. Nuremberg was a kangaroo court but people stop caring about due process when you ruin the lives of everyone in their country.

Re: No one who got Moderna's vaccine in trial developed severe Covid-19

#243

Post by rjsw »

w45673456354 wrote: post #124
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think (from my parents and in-laws) that immunosuppression is normally associated with current cancer treatment. So, for example, it looks like this protocol would exclude people getting chemotherapy. Happy to be proven wrong on this by someone with more information.

And autoimmune conditions, robbing a list from wikipedia: celiac disease, diabetes mellitus type 1, Graves' disease, inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis, psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and systemic lupus erythematosus. I don't know how many people with conditions take immunosuppression medication. I take it for arthritis and alopecia and have come across many people on similar meds for diabetes or other…

There was a suggestion that people with autoimmune conditions were more likely to get "long COVID".

Re: No one who got Moderna's vaccine in trial developed severe Covid-19

#244

Post by mam2 »

jimbob45 wrote: post #242
lisper wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I really can’t imagine this holding up in courts though. Why not? Liability waivers are common in other industries.

The law is upheld by the people. If you damage the health of nearly an entire national via vaccine, no one will care to stay true to the letter of the law when it comes time for your retribution. Same thing with the Nazis. Nuremberg was a kangaroo court but people stop caring about due process when you ruin the lives of everyone in their country.

In that case the negociation is with europe so they are untouchable basically

Re: No one who got Moderna's vaccine in trial developed severe Covid-19

#245

Post by Exmoor »

spullara wrote: post #215

The vaccine was developed in 48 hours (Feb 24th) following China sharing the DNA sequence. How many could we have saved?

The presumption here is that we could have been vaccinating people en masse since sometime in spring. However, I do not believe large-scale production of an mRNA vaccine was possible at that time. This does not seem to be the case. My understanding is that manufacturing this type of vaccine is significantly different than other vaccines previously produced at scale (flu vaccine, etc.) so they needed to build out their factories almost from scratch, to the exacting standards required of medical facilities, which likely took many months.

To the best of my knowledge, vaccine makers have been producing the vaccine as quick as they can, planning for hopefully good results, but knowing they could just trash it in the case of bad results, and they only just now have tens of millions of doses.

Re: No one who got Moderna's vaccine in trial developed severe Covid-19

#248

Post by g4k »

ghostpepper wrote: post #180
blhack wrote: post #48

Does anybody have a good link for a layman's overview of how mRNA vaccines work? Lot's of nervousness from people around this, and would love to be able to help quell some of that.

There is a good article here but unfortunately paywalled https://www.wsj.com/articles/moderna-and-pfizer-are-reinvent...

https://archive.is/aIBV0

Re: No one who got Moderna's vaccine in trial developed severe Covid-19

#249

Post by smt88 »

SomeoneFromCA wrote: post #221
smt88 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have read the paper[1], and its discussion section supports the conclusions drawn by other readers, who are smarter than I am[2][3][4]. Here's one excerpt from the discussion: > "When considering how our results might inform intervention development, recall that models with con-trols for concurrent measures of cognitive skills and behavior reduced the association between delay of gratification and age-15 achievemen…

You absolutely did not pay the attention while reading. At age 15 indeed the association diminishes to almost zero; the original experiment never claimed otherwise. The original claim was that association is strong at early childhood; nonetheless it is pretty stupid to believe that a marshmallow is a sufficient reward for 15 years old person.

Insulting me and assuming I didn't read my links doesn't make your argument stronger. It makes you sound insecure about your argument, which you should be, because you have missed basic facts about the study.

> At age 15 indeed the association diminishes to almost zero; the original experiment never claimed otherwise

The original experiment (and you, based on what you implied about people who fail to take Covid precautions) absolutely did claim an association at age 15 and beyond. That was the whole reason it became famous.

> nonetheless it is pretty stupid to believe that a marshmallow is a sufficient reward for 15 years old person

I can't tell if you're trolling or not, but I'll engage with you as though you're being sincere.

The data for 15 year olds is academic achievement, not a repeat of a marshmallow test.

From the study:

> "Academic achievement was measured using the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery Revised (WJ-R) test (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001), a commonly used measure of cognitive ability and achievement (e.g., Watts, Duncan, Siegler, & Davis-Kean, 2014). For math achievement at Grade 1 and age 15, we used the Applied Problems subtest, which measured chil-dren’s mathematical problem solving."

Re: No one who got Moderna's vaccine in trial developed severe Covid-19

#250

Post by thelean12 »

sterlind wrote: post #126
totony wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>With this being the case, how does it even make sense for companies like Ticketmaster and Quantas to announce that they'll require their customers to be vaccinated? This is such a weird take imo. There is no need to vaccine non-risk people afaik. I thought the whole deal with covid is how mild it is for the general population but deadly for a subset of it.

you can't completely predict who it's going to be mild for. 14-year olds with no known underlying issues have died, 25-year olds have lost their sense of smell and taste permanently or suffer from long covid months later.

Not to take away from the argument that we should vaccinate everyone (we should, at least adults. not sure if this vaccine will be approved for kids, which usually requires more stringent approvals), but your argument isn't a good one.

Covid has killed 42 people from age 5-14 in the US according to the CDC, for example. That alone is really not something we should be making huge policy decisions around. It's sad, of course, but it's extremely isolated. All it does is distract us from making good policy decisions.

If I was making policy decisions I'd order vaccine rollout as follows:

Essential workers => 80+ years old => 70+ => 60+ => etc. as we produce and distribute the vaccines.

At some point we might look at the data and say "that's good enough, we can resume normal activities while we work to vaccinate the rest of the population".

Post reply on HN