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

291–300 of 436 posts

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

#291

Post by totony »

thelean12 wrote: post #250
sterlind wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>Not to take away from the argument that we should vaccinate everyone.

I'm not sure if this is a concession for argument's sake, but imo it does take away from it. Why do you think it doesn't?

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

#292

Post by totony »

DanBC wrote: post #289
totony wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That comment was meant to answer two people at once, my bad. I was referring to the proportion of population that was not at risk. That population has an insanely small chance of having long term side effects from data I've seen. Which was the reason I'm not sure why we would force them to get these vaccines. EDIT: To be more precise; Of course we want a vaccine and vulnerable people to get it. You'd rather risk gett…

> I'm more torn about why healthy young people should get it. So they don't infect and kill their older relatives.

But those would get the vaccine first, no?

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

#293

Post by 93po »

JasonFruit wrote: post #277

I was reading about Moderna today, and I found a number of articles from 2017-18 expressing concern about their secretiveness and impatience with both safety precautions and the failures that are inevitable in drug trials, based on the experiences of former employees and science journals. I can't deny that makes me nervous. I didn't see anything about it after that time, however.

Combined with their legal immunity from any liability, that can be concerning.

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

#294

Post by sterlind »

thelean12 wrote: post #250
sterlind wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Oh, I'm with you that vaccines should be triaged by risk factors, and that reopening should be guided both by % of high-risk population vaccinated and case statistics. I was responding to OP's assertion that we shouldn't bother to vaccinate "healthy" people at all.

IIRC the IFR is ~0.2% for people in the 20-39 age bracket. I still find that risky (though I'm risk-averse), but the better argument is the lingering effects of moderate/severe cases, which I'm not sure is counted.

Also, I assume your policy decision would include younger people with risk factors like heart disease and diabetes, rather than going strictly by age. I'm chronically ill and I want my vaccine.

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

#295

Post by duskwuff »

raducu wrote: post #282
shabda wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, Anybody who has received an organ transplant is immunosuppressed. They take immunosuppressive drugs so that the transplanted organ is not rejected.

It would be so nice if those people could have access to a coctail of synthetic antibodies that gave some protection to covid-19, the flu and others. Or perhaps a generic antibody that protects against most viruses(unlikely, given such an atibody does not exist in nature).

Antibodies don't themselves help fight infections; their role is simply to identify dangerous pathogens to white blood cells. In immunosuppressed patients, those cells often aren't present (or aren't responding properly), so adding antibodies wouldn't help.

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

#296

Post by wait_a_minute »

talentedcoin wrote: post #288
wait_a_minute wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why aren't you fond of transhumanism? At some point medicine and technology will advance so much that we can save and improve many lives by replacing bits of ourselves with superior artificial variants. Is that so bad?

You first. More seriously, this is one of those situations where the short-term pluses are plain to see, but the long-term risks are vague. Why not employ the precautionary principle here?

Instead of simply alluding to long-term risks, can you be more specific about what exactly you're concerned about? What kind of precautions are you advocating? At some point medical technology will give us organs that are far superior to biological organs - should we not make these available to people?

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

#297

Post by DanBC »

totony wrote: post #292
DanBC wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm more torn about why healthy young people should get it. So they don't infect and kill their older relatives.

But those would get the vaccine first, no?

Maybe. Not everyone can get the vaccine. We don't know yet if the vaccine is 100% effective (although it does look very good).

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

#298

Post by projektfu »

duskwuff wrote: post #295
raducu wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be so nice if those people could have access to a coctail of synthetic antibodies that gave some protection to covid-19, the flu and others. Or perhaps a generic antibody that protects against most viruses(unlikely, given such an atibody does not exist in nature).

Antibodies don't themselves help fight infections; their role is simply to identify dangerous pathogens to white blood cells. In immunosuppressed patients, those cells often aren't present (or aren't responding properly), so adding antibodies wouldn't help.

Antibodies also initiate the complement cascade and can thus kill cells directly.

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

#299

Post by SomeoneFromCA »

philsnow wrote: post #258
wxnx wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Antisense drugs are the same biological material, but have a very different mechanism of effect. Specifically, mRNA vaccines require an immune response to be effective. The mRNA (vaccine) encodes a viral protein, and the host (human) immune system still has to learn to respond to that protein. Antisense drugs are much simpler, with no immune response required. The mRNA (the drug) itself simply binds to the target mRN…

> Antisense drugs are much simpler, with no immune response required. The mRNA (the drug) itself simply binds to the target mRNA. Does that make them a class of "cures" rather than "immunizations"? If I get infected with the same thing a year later, will I need another dose of the antisense drug?

Yes, they are "cures". Yes, you will.

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

#300

Post by totony »

DanBC wrote: post #297
totony wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But those would get the vaccine first, no?

Maybe. Not everyone can get the vaccine. We don't know yet if the vaccine is 100% effective (although it does look very good).

>Not everyone can get the vaccine.

But the proportion of people who are both at risk and can't get the vaccine (and alternatives) must be small (from intuitive maths, I actually haven't looked into this).

Why would this vaccine be mandatory while plenty of other aren't? E.g. I've never got flu-tested before a concert/the flu shot, even though it could pass to other people/kill people.

I'm wondering where's the line between freedom to one own's body and other people's well being. IMO it's not as clear-cut as people make it out to be.

Post reply on HN