181–190 of 197 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean a vaccine?
I meant that in a future where you never have to fight viruses your immune system will be weakened.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://khn.org/morning-breakout/biontech-reports-breakthrou...
I work in a pharma company, and I have been working with the animal model they use for this paper regularly for the past 4 or 5 years. I am not an mRNA therapy expert by any means, so I'll only comment on the results from the MOG35-55 and PLP EAE models. They have good disease induction in their control groups, their targeted mRNA therapy shows pretty remarkable efficacy, and they show they can diversify a little bit…
They do bring up the multiple target problem. The glint of hope for that involves "bystander suppression", which they found some evidence for happening, but I don't really understand what that is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking about this very subject this morning, and I realised the mRNA stuff actually isn’t the exciting part. It’s the packaging in lipid particles that is much more interesting. We can get away with this approach for vaccines because we (largely) don’t care where we deliver the payload to, just as long as we get mRNA to a cell where it can make the protein. Not sure about current formulation, but I read most…
An alternative approach would be to learn enough to make mRNA “programs” that once inside a cell could determine cancerous vs healthy cells. There’s been research on computations using DNA, and many natural pathways do similar “calculations”, that it seems feasible to create a “if specific xyz protein/carbohydrate/etc in cell exceeds threshold trigger cell death pathways”. Then injection in a tumor mass should be suf…
At least then if something goes wrong, you could still be put on immunosupressants
Many cancers exhibit immunosuppressive qualities that allow them to co-exist in a healthy immune system. It seems possible that mRNA-based therapies could be used to interfere with those mechanisms (eg binding to PD-L1, etc). The delivery mechanism for the mRNA appears to be the primary innovation and I wonder if it would be possible to target it at specific cells. In the cancer context if you could differentially ta…
Possibly naive question: if you can differentially target any particular thing to cancer cells specifically, why not just deliver poison to kill the cells directly? I.e. chemotherapy but without any of the nasty side effects.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure it would pay for itself even in 100 years if you use that metric. $20 (likely current retail cost of a flu shot) x the 46 million older adults in the US is a hair less than a billion a year. Making 131 or so effective flu vaccines and getting them through the process with the prior known and effective process? (including all the failed attempts) Hopefully we’d get some economies of scale, estimates [ https:/…
I believe they’d make one shot that would handle 131 flus.
We'd need try to find out, which I personally think would be way better for everyone involved than many other things we spend money on. So take that as my vote for trying?
Do the concerns raised here have any merit? https://osf.io/epr24/
“The most worrisome part, he said, is that antibodies also can make subsequent infections worse, creating so-called antibody-dependent enhancement. Two vaccines — one against a coronavirus in cats and another against dengue, a flavivirus that affects humans — had to be withdrawn because the antibodies they induced caused potentially fatal reactions. If an antibody binds weakly against these viruses or falls to low levels, it can fail to “neutralize” the virus, but instead help it get into cells.”
https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/09/09/for-an-effective-covid-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is precisely what BioNTech has been doing with melanoma. Not in a few decades, they already had living patients with personalized vaccination against their own melanomas in 2019: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03072-8 If this immunotherapy gets developed further, the next generations of humanity may look at cancer in the same way that we look upon bacterial diseases: unpleasant, the threat of…
Although given how we've squandered (and continue to squander) antibiotics, future generations may view bacterial diseases the way past generations did.
in such 3world country, misuse/overuse of antibiotic are make for development of resistant. then poor sanatation are make for it easy for to spread to other persons. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/5/1/99-0103_article
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although given how we've squandered (and continue to squander) antibiotics, future generations may view bacterial diseases the way past generations did.
i think necesity here is for to block third world from acquisition of new antibiotic drug. there is where new superbug are arise. maybe it kill many there, but it also save many American here in longer term. in such 3world country, misuse/overuse of antibiotic are make for development of resistant. then poor sanatation are make for it easy for to spread to other persons. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/5/1/99-0103_…
"Developing Nations" or "Developing World" is better.
"Third world" contributes to exactly the kinds of stereotypes that this comment reinforces — the backwardness of poor countries, where doctors don't know better, science is ignored, etc. It's just not accurate; medical knowledge and competence is on the rise all over the world, among both professionals and volunteers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I meant that in a future where you never have to fight viruses your immune system will be weakened.
this are theory on case of allergy rising, no? child in early times exposed to more, played in dirt, strong immune system. child today play with i pad, use school antibacteria soap, weak immune system, allergy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i think necesity here is for to block third world from acquisition of new antibiotic drug. there is where new superbug are arise. maybe it kill many there, but it also save many American here in longer term. in such 3world country, misuse/overuse of antibiotic are make for development of resistant. then poor sanatation are make for it easy for to spread to other persons. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/5/1/99-0103_…
Please stop using "Third World" as a term — it is no longer accurate, the AP has eliminated it from its stylebook, and is widely considered offensive: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/01/08/9548203... "Developing Nations" or "Developing World" is better. "Third world" contributes to exactly the kinds of stereotypes that this comment reinforces — the backwardness of poor countries, where doctors don't kn…
i have not in previous heard it "offensive" and am not changing because some person sayes it. i have been to many nation, those i call "third world" are backward. improvement you describe make them moving away from third world, not make term wrong, this is move to second then to first. i will not call different word because somebody say so.