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

A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

outsideonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 428 posts

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#331

Post by wildmanx »

lurquer wrote: post #323
acdha wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, we have that process at multiple levels from peer-review and the many stages of government approval and it's rigorous to the point that people have questioned whether it's causing problems due to delays and costs preventing development of vaccines for less widespread diseases and increasing costs. COVID-19 has provided a great example of how well this process works: even the emergency use authorizations…

If the system is susceptible to anti-vax propaganda thwarting approval of a good vaccine, doesn’t it also follow that the system is susceptible to big pharma lobbying for the approval of a bad vaccine? If this wondrously robust multi-layered process buckles in the face of a few hysterical anti-vax groups, you should ask yourself how robust it remains in the face of a billion-dollar pharmaceutical conglomerate with po…

Oh the law firms doing all those class actions are not doing this for free either..

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#332

Post by lurquer »

acdha wrote: post #327
lurquer wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the system is susceptible to anti-vax propaganda thwarting approval of a good vaccine, doesn’t it also follow that the system is susceptible to big pharma lobbying for the approval of a bad vaccine? If this wondrously robust multi-layered process buckles in the face of a few hysterical anti-vax groups, you should ask yourself how robust it remains in the face of a billion-dollar pharmaceutical conglomerate with po…

I think you're confused on several points: the vaccine was approved following extensive safety tests but the lawsuits caused the manufacturer to decide it was not worth manufacturing. The U.S. regulators consistently found no connection between the vaccine and the complaints, so the _scientific_ side worked but the legal / business side let public safety down. Similarly, it's no secret that companies have a vested in…

In regard to the Lyme disease vaccine issue, you are glossing over a very important component of the story.

Due to public pressure, the FDA reconvened to take another look.

While the FDA did not change its opinion (except for requesting some additional labeling and studies) the effect was disastrous for marketing. Sales plummeted. And, it was no longer worthwhile to pursue. The ‘official act’ of the FDA reconvening arose solely due to pressure.

That’s my point.

If anti-vax groups can cause the FDA to “take another look” at a drug that has already passed muster, it is obvious and not fairly deniable that the agency is not immune to political pressure.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#333

Post by bluGill »

imwillofficial wrote: post #298
bluGill wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I bet you also said “3 weeks to flatten the curve!” No, if you check my comment history you will see that I said something along the lines of don't flatten the curve, kill it with longer, harsher lockdowns. Just search for my top downvoted posts. I still maintain that stance, two months of harsh worldwide lockdowns would have killed the spread completely and we would have been completely opened by the middle of las…

China did exactly this. It worked decently for them.

The more of the world that does it, the better it works for everyone.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#334

Post by wildmanx »

_huayra_ wrote: post #318
wildmanx wrote: post #236

What shocks me most with this story is that there is a vaccine (Lymerix), and it's pretty effective (76-92 percent after three injections) but apparently some anti-vax propaganda and a class-action lawsuit essentially removed it from the market. Based on a very rare side effect. Wtf? How can that be? Just tell people the risks of side effects, and if they are ok with that risk then the manufacturer is off the hook. I…

Don't worry pal I gotcha here: 1. Form The High Church of Vaccination 2. Claim vaccination as a sacrament 3. Watch the craven fascist majority of the US supreme court (i.e. all of the ones that fashion themselves as lil Scalias, but have terrible writing that reeks of double standards, if any at all, and dog whistles to their base) try to somehow toss the case for not having standing while trying to not undo any of t…

No, thank you. I've learned what science is. It's pretty cool, you should look it up.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#335

Post by tcoff91 »

vimy wrote: post #145
Whitespace wrote: post #62

I caught Lyme earlier this year. Recently moved to upstate NY (20 miles from Lyme, CT) and tick checks are a daily thing. Found an adult embedded in my side. Developed a 103ºF fever and fatigue. Dr. took blood for the Lyme test but didn't wait for a positive and prescribed 2 weeks of Doxycycline. A few days later I found a bullseye rash on my leg (not near the bite area) which pretty much confirmed it. I felt 100% ar…

The tests look for antibodies which only are measurable after weeks so a test immediately after a tick bite is useless.

If you collect the tick itself, is there a way to check the tick instead of checking the person that's bit?

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#336

Post by computer23 »

inter_netuser wrote: post #57
yodsanklai wrote: post #46

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_Lyme_disease > Chronic Lyme disease (CLD) is the name used by some people with "a broad array of illnesses or symptom complexes for which there is no reproducible or convincing scientific evidence of any relationship to Borrelia burgdorferi infection" to describe their condition and their beliefs about its cause. (TLDR; lot of misinformation about Lyme disease)

Take a look: https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/628045/fneur-12-6... These are spirochetes in the brain/spine of a dead patient who had proven lyme diagnosis, has been given the standard treatment in the past, never recovered, developed dementia, died. Full study: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.6280... The wikipedia article you are quoting is outdated misinformation, please stop sprea…

Inter_netuser: That Frontiers paper is about as reliable as Big Foot hunters claiming they finally found him. The authors Brian Fallon and Monica Embers have been trying to prove chronic Lyme beliefs for many years.

They are funded by their antiscience movement: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4489928/

The Frontiers paper is a single case report that admits that the woman's Lyme ELISA (and hence total antibodies to Lyme) was negative when she started experiencing dementia. Without antibodies against Lyme, it would be a mistake to claim that she had "chronic Lyme" (which isn't real regardless.) The paper is consistent with someone who had lyme disease (a not-uncommon illness) and then years later was diagnosed with dementia, but you can't say Lyme caused the dementia.

There is a scientific consensus against chronic Lyme based on decades of research.

It's disturbing that chronic Lyme has become a dangerous social phenomenon based on conspiracy theories, fake diagnoses, and fake treatments.

https://www.thecut.com/2019/07/what-happens-when-lyme-diseas...

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#337

Post by hitpointdrew »

acdha wrote: post #327
lurquer wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the system is susceptible to anti-vax propaganda thwarting approval of a good vaccine, doesn’t it also follow that the system is susceptible to big pharma lobbying for the approval of a bad vaccine? If this wondrously robust multi-layered process buckles in the face of a few hysterical anti-vax groups, you should ask yourself how robust it remains in the face of a billion-dollar pharmaceutical conglomerate with po…

I think you're confused on several points: the vaccine was approved following extensive safety tests but the lawsuits caused the manufacturer to decide it was not worth manufacturing. The U.S. regulators consistently found no connection between the vaccine and the complaints, so the _scientific_ side worked but the legal / business side let public safety down. Similarly, it's no secret that companies have a vested in…

>but it's not like Pfizer says “Trust us, we employ doctors!” and the FDA says “Sounds great, no need to check!” Each step of that process involves peer-reviewed publications, public data releases, and reviews by panels of scientific experts.

All these "steps in the process" are completely meaningless when there is a revolving door with big pharma and FDA. This is nothing more than safety/peer-review theater.

Example: Scott Gottlieb FDA commissioner 2017-2019, currently sits on the board of directors at Pfizer.

Are you really going to put up a stink and fight on an approval if the end goal is cushy job at one of these companies? You can bet if you just "push it through" you will be looked on favorably for one of these jobs, but if you put up resistance and actually want to do due diligence, well then you will never be considered.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#338

Post by Kenji »

notabee wrote: post #312
shockeychap wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you think "co-infection" means, but you just described precisely that. The reactivation of shingles meant that he was simultaneously infected with two different agents. "Co-infection" (for me at least) implies nothing about how or where the secondary infection came from.

That's fair. It's a really commonly implied thing among the quackier side of Lyme treatment that every tick is going to unload a clown car full of pathogens (used to justify even more unvalidated tests). But, by the definition, it's just co-occurring infections regardless of vector.

> that every tick is going to unload a clown car full of pathogens

They mostly are, though. Lyme is not the only horrible disease. There's Tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) and other nasty shit. As a kid, I was in the woods every day. Didn't get a tick for years, despite walking through thick woods in shorts. Then I got stung a few times, didn't think much of it. Then I got Lyme. Had terrible joint pains for months despite immediately taking Doxycycline. Since then I almost never went deeper into the woods again. You're immediately full of ticks. I once picked up a piece of trash that was on the side of the path and immediately had a tick crawling on my hand. What a nasty infestation of our woods. Did you know that Lyme is a sexually transmitted disease (STD)? Yes, if you have intercourse with someone who has Lyme, you may get infected as well. Lyme is a horror show.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#339

Post by scotty79 »

wildmanx wrote: post #236

What shocks me most with this story is that there is a vaccine (Lymerix), and it's pretty effective (76-92 percent after three injections) but apparently some anti-vax propaganda and a class-action lawsuit essentially removed it from the market. Based on a very rare side effect. Wtf? How can that be? Just tell people the risks of side effects, and if they are ok with that risk then the manufacturer is off the hook. I…

Not even proven side effect. Just something that might be theorized to be the effect of the vaccine.

It's really haunting that exactly the same FUD that tanked safe and efficient Lyme vaccine hinders covid vaccines adoption. And people wonder why companies that make covid vaccine wouldn't budge on being exempt from litigation on the basis of percieved side effects.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#340

Post by scotty79 »

irq-1 wrote: post #320
wildmanx wrote: post #236

What shocks me most with this story is that there is a vaccine (Lymerix), and it's pretty effective (76-92 percent after three injections) but apparently some anti-vax propaganda and a class-action lawsuit essentially removed it from the market. Based on a very rare side effect. Wtf? How can that be? Just tell people the risks of side effects, and if they are ok with that risk then the manufacturer is off the hook. I…

> Just tell people the risks of side effects, and if they are ok with that risk then the manufacturer is off the hook. If a for-profit corporation includes a warning in a EULA they're off the hook?? That's definitely not the principle we should use to evaluate new drugs. If the company decided to take it off the market, when there are always lawsuits about new drugs, what should we do? Should we liberate the drug fro…

If the product causes provable harm then company should be prosecuted criminally by the state to determine if the testing done was sufficeint and there was no faul play.

But letting random people sue manufacturer because they have some symptoms at later point in time than the time they took the vaccine is just recipie for what already happened on case of Lyme vaccine. Everybody looses except for lawyers and people loose the most.

Post reply on HN