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

Antiviral Molnupiravir Reduces Risk of Hospitalization/Death by ~50 Percent

merck.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 294 posts

Re: Antiviral Molnupiravir Reduces Risk of Hospitalization/Death by ~50 Percent

#61

Post by micromacrofoot »

crooked-v wrote: post #36
gfodor wrote: post #25

This is phenomenal news - I'm also curious how the various tribalist memes evolve. Will the vaccine maximalists who ridiculed "horse paste" when the data was still weak in part because a pill-based regime would undermine the message that vaccines ought to be mandatory embrace this much needed second tier therapeutic? Will the anti-vaxxers who will inevitably see this as the goal of a big pharma conspiracy covering up…

The vaccine maximalists ridicule "horse paste" because many people are literally buying and ingesting products intended for livestock.

[dead]

Re: Antiviral Molnupiravir Reduces Risk of Hospitalization/Death by ~50 Percent

#62

Post by sudosysgen »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #34

So an abbreviated trial in 775 people is considered sufficient to move forward with drug approval now?

For a safety trial, likely not, but for an efficacy trial, this is pretty conclusive. In any case full approval will not be granted with even more in the way of trials.

Re: Antiviral Molnupiravir Reduces Risk of Hospitalization/Death by ~50 Percent

#63

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #34

So an abbreviated trial in 775 people is considered sufficient to move forward with drug approval now?

> So an abbreviated trial in 775 people is considered sufficient to move forward with drug approval now?

No. They don't have full approval, and aren't likely to get it in the next few months.

From the article:

> Merck Plans to Seek Emergency Use Authorization in the U.S. as Soon as Possible

Emergency Use Authorization is not full approval, and obviously comes with oversight and data gathering. "as soon as Possible" is not now. But they might get that in the next few months.

Other than that, I don't know what to say about "sufficient to move forward" - any drug at any stage of trials is either abandoned or moving forward? A small trial that meets its goals is sufficient to move forward to the next trial so .. yes? But not to full approval, which they aren't getting anyway.

This is an existing (but fairly new) drug so there there is other data on safety etc, links seem to be about 2019 onwards, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molnupiravir

Re: Antiviral Molnupiravir Reduces Risk of Hospitalization/Death by ~50 Percent

#64

Post by twofornone »

loeg wrote: post #29
_3u10 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies indicate ivermectin works given before hospitalization, doesn't work during hospitalization.

No. Studies on ivermectin are mixed, and it seems like the ones that showed positive effects had falsified data[1]. Additionally, this trial does not demonstrate that Molnupiravir is ineffective after hospitalization. [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-study-s...

No, one of the positive studies about ivermectin had questionable data. There are dozens of studies with positive results. This post and the article you linked are misinformation.

Edit: I don't normally comment on downvotes but the sentiment expressed by the silent downvoters in this thread is pretty gross. We're trying to have a discussion here, but clearly certain perspectives are not allowed, even if supported by data. There is nothing incorrect about what I posted, or what GP posted about studies showing that ivermectin does potentially work (these studies exist, are peer reviewed and published, even if they are weak studies as claimed), yet here we all are sitting at -4 for daring to go against the so called "consensus" by citing published literature. This censoriousness is uncalled for, counterproductive, and, totally ascientific.

Re: Antiviral Molnupiravir Reduces Risk of Hospitalization/Death by ~50 Percent

#65

Post by frostirosti »

LurkingPenguin wrote: post #32
loeg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have vaccine mandates because infected healthcare workers spreading COVID reduce capacity even more. We haven't actually fired many workers, because the vast majority just get the vaccine (mostly before the mandates).

1. You need to account for the fact that some percentage (perhaps large) of healthcare workers already survived COVID and have natural immunity. Since the science is demonstrating that natural immunity is as durable and robust as vaccine immunity (if not more durable and robust), one would have to ask what the rationale is for firing workers who have natural immunity (as verified by a past COVID diagnosis or presence…

> do not want to be vaccinated What's the reason for this? The vaccine has been approved fully by the FDA and hundreds of millions of people have received it.

> 2. ... Sure, and people who have had covid and get it again as well. But why risk sick days, lost productivity, severe illness when there's an effective, safe alternative. The capital cost of caring people who get sick with covid is far higher on a per capita basis for those who are unvaccinated.

Re: Antiviral Molnupiravir Reduces Risk of Hospitalization/Death by ~50 Percent

#66

Post by crooked-v »

This is great news, but I worry that many people are going to take it as a continued excuse to actively avoid vaccination. Halving hospitalization rates would still leave ICUs everywhere filled with COVID patients taking beds away from people with other life-threatening conditions.

Re: Antiviral Molnupiravir Reduces Risk of Hospitalization/Death by ~50 Percent

#69

Post by OrvalWintermute »

photochemsyn wrote: post #55

Some interesting points on the nature of our pharmaceutical patent system... (and while the cohort in this study does seem a bit small, the conclusions appear to be fairly valid): > "Molnupiravir was invented at Drug Innovations at Emory (DRIVE), LLC, a not-for-profit biotechnology company wholly owned by Emory University, and is being developed by Merck & Co., Inc. in collaboration with Ridgeback Biotherapeutics." >…

We would need to examine the research proposals, and the data rights included in them, and if any other institutions providing matching funds, that resulted in this drug.

Having said that, I broadly concur that we need to examine to what extent the federal government, and all of us taxpayers, should own outright some, or all as a % of the IP.

Re: Antiviral Molnupiravir Reduces Risk of Hospitalization/Death by ~50 Percent

#70

Post by WaitWaitWha »

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #56

This is not my field. But if there is a pill that can reduce death by 50% from the virus, I would like to know more about it. > Bright's concerns that similar drugs in its class have mutagenic properties As a layperson, this instantly raises a red flag in my mind. Should I be concerned? Why, or why not? More importantly, where can I find research that elucidates this for me?

>That's the effect of NHC and of molnupiravir. What about the bad side? Well, auxh nucleosides can also be taken up by many other enzymes, including those that handle our own nucleic acids, so some of them are mutagenic. Indeed, that's how NHC was first characterized, as a mutagen in bacteria. They also tend to be cytotoxic, via a number of mechanisms, and nucleoside drug candidates are notorious for wiping out in human trials due to toxicity in the liver, kidneys, and other organs. That was a feature of the 2012 scramble in the hepatitis C area, where Bristol-Myers Squibb paid 2.5 billion for a nucleoside addition to its proposed therapeutic cocktail, only to see it all demolished within a few months when it turned out to have severe problems in human trials. From this story and others you can also conclude that you don't necessarily get a good reading on this stuff in animal trials - another feature of Fun With Nucleosides.[0](Derek Lowe)

[0] https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/molnupiravir-last-...

(edit: this is just a note I found, does not solve why/why not in my mind)

Post reply on HN