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

It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

theness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 339 posts

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#91

Post by tehjoker »

phreeza wrote: post #75
tehjoker wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably not since January, but maybe after the phase 1 trials and the dosing schedule was figured out. To be honest, if it doesn't come out that they were using it off the books, either they're suckers or we are.

> if it doesn't come out that they were using it off the books, either they're suckers or we are. Or it doesn't come out because they are good at keeping it secret.

It could be a good thing to leak it to the press. The press would feign a scandal but it would actually have the effect of showing people that they believe in their product and only a slap on the wrist would actually happen (if anything).

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#92

Post by ahepp »

brodie wrote: post #78
fat-chunk wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes me wonder how the world would cope today with a Bubonic Plague or Spanish Flu, those two I reckon would probably be more similar to your hypothetical Sci-Fi disease.

There's a sci-fi example of this in the TV show Counterpart. Kind of surreal watching it and then becoming a part of a real life pandemic.

What does "non-hypothetical sci-fi" mean? Surely all sci-fi is hypothetical, in that "fi" stands for "fiction"?

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#93

Post by Rochus »

feross wrote: post #11

Key quote: > The question ultimately comes down to risk vs benefit. We need to get over our evolved but suboptimal instinct to avoid directly causing harm preferentially over passively allowing harm to occur. In the end, the amount of harm is all that matters. In a situation like this, delivering a vaccine as quickly as possible while maintaining sufficient safety and efficacy, there is a sweet spot somewhere that mi…

Looking at various safety standards, risk/benefit analysis is well established in the medical environment (and only there); e.g. ISO 14971 states "If the residual risk is not judged acceptable using the criteria established in the risk management plan and further risk control is not practicable, the manufacturer may gather and review data and literature to determine if the medical benefits of the intended use outweigh the residual risk."

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#94

Post by jayrot »

mrits wrote: post #71
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #47

I’m glad to see this and we need to concentrate on speeding this process up. This isn’t the last pandemic and all things considered this one was a pretty benign one to have to fight. The next one might not just kill mainly the old and weak and might need much more than a mask (that we still can’t get people to wear!) to prevent its spread. Hopefully before then, we can work to get everyone more on the same page and h…

To get worse than COVID you'd need a virus that takes a long time to develop symptoms and then has a high death rate. In that scenario there would be a lot more public fear and we'd have an easier time keeping people at home. So I'm still of the opinion it's harder to have a worse situation than COVID.

Yeah this pandemic has been described as the perfect middle ground for politicization, denialism, and just laissez-faire attitudes.

Any more deadly (like Ebola) it becomes incredibly scary and people likely do whatever it takes when they see people around them dropping like flies (especially in horrific ways).

Any less deadly (basically the yearly flu) and it becomes easy to ignore and just becomes part of the background process.

COVID is somewhere in between. Deadly enough that hundreds of thousands of people are dying unnecessarily. But can still feel a million miles away for so many people.

This was not a good "training pandemic".

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#95

Post by jayrot »

fnord77 wrote: post #81
jeofken wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the death rate of COVID-19 compared to for example common flu for working age people (30s, 40s)?

everyone talks about the death rate, but for survivors there's evidence of severe permanent damage in some cases.

Also the death rate as a catchall metric completely ignores people who here in absolutely critical, life-or-death condition but were only saved from death by incredible medical intervention and/or just pure luck.

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#96

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

mrits wrote: post #71
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #47

I’m glad to see this and we need to concentrate on speeding this process up. This isn’t the last pandemic and all things considered this one was a pretty benign one to have to fight. The next one might not just kill mainly the old and weak and might need much more than a mask (that we still can’t get people to wear!) to prevent its spread. Hopefully before then, we can work to get everyone more on the same page and h…

To get worse than COVID you'd need a virus that takes a long time to develop symptoms and then has a high death rate. In that scenario there would be a lot more public fear and we'd have an easier time keeping people at home. So I'm still of the opinion it's harder to have a worse situation than COVID.

options:

1) massive mutation rate, altering exterior structure making a single vaccine impossible (e.g. influenza)

2) touch-based transmission, with 72 hour surface viability

3) incredibly "ugly" death process (e.g. ebola) with huge risks for health care providers

4) high death rate but very slow deaths

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#97

Post by adventured »

jiveturkey wrote: post #64
seafoam wrote: post #8

I could write Twitter in a weekend.

why is this being downvoted? completely on point.

> completely on point.

It's not. They can't. Not even remotely close.

They're so far off the claim it's embarrassing they even said it. They couldn't write 1% of Twitter in a weekend.

Twitter circa 2006, they could clone the basics of it. And only because someone else already showed them what to do so they don't have to burn much time thinking very much or go through many learning iterations.

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#98

Post by tinus_hn »

mrits wrote: post #71
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #47

I’m glad to see this and we need to concentrate on speeding this process up. This isn’t the last pandemic and all things considered this one was a pretty benign one to have to fight. The next one might not just kill mainly the old and weak and might need much more than a mask (that we still can’t get people to wear!) to prevent its spread. Hopefully before then, we can work to get everyone more on the same page and h…

To get worse than COVID you'd need a virus that takes a long time to develop symptoms and then has a high death rate. In that scenario there would be a lot more public fear and we'd have an easier time keeping people at home. So I'm still of the opinion it's harder to have a worse situation than COVID.

Like HIV/AIDS. We were lucky that doesn’t spread as easily.

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#99

Post by eej71 »

jeofken wrote: post #76
causality0 wrote: post #6

I wonder if any, or if many, Moderna employees have been walking around off-the-books immunized since January. I know I would've been tempted.

What’s the death rate of COVID-19 compared to for example common flu for working age people (30s, 40s)?

One perspective to take is this.

1) CDC reports 5101 deaths for the 35-44 years ago group. I assume YTD with "Date" being "recent".

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

2) My reading of the 2018 (best I found sorry) mortality table for 35-44 age group would put death by covid as the 5th leading cause of death. Just between suicide (7521) and homicide (3304).

https://www.cdc.gov/injury/images/lc-charts/leading_causes_o...

Note that "flu and pneumonia" for that age group was just 956 - putting it at #9 for leading cause of death in the 35-44 age group.

So I think covid is a bit more than "just the flu".

Re: It took two days to develop Moderna’s vaccine

#100

Post by zamfi »

jancsika wrote: post #89
btilly wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are more correct than you probably realize. As http://cis471.blogspot.com/2012/08/seeding-internet-cost-gov... lays out, the government spent $25 million on ARPAnet, the first packet switched network and the granddaddy of our current Internet. So it was actually the same figure as this grant. (There were followup investments from the government, but the whole thing was around $125 million.)

So $25 million on a decentralized system to spread the idea not to wear a mask or social distance during a pandemic, and another $25 million on a vaccine.

You’re being downvoted presumably for snark, which as a lover of snark I can’t support.

However, your point is also mislaid: there were plenty of anti-maskers at the time of the 1918 Influenza pandemic.

Ignoring or selectively using facts to support the narrative you wish were true did not start with the internet!

Post reply on HN