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

111–120 of 294 posts

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

#111

Post by gfodor »

yupper32 wrote: post #106
gfodor wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is that: - anti-vaxxers will eagerly take the pill, but believe that Merck covered up Ivermectin's efficacy to get this drug to market. the claim the vaccine's EUA was held up by lack of evidence of such pills will be memory holed - the pro-mandate authoritarians will swallow the pill (figuratively, pun intended) when the powers that be celebrate this as a success and it begins being widely deployed. in othe…

I don't think it's a win that a significant portion of the population will only take a medication if it's wrapped in a conspiracy theory.

Well that ship already sailed. My point about the win is that the memetics of a safe, effective pill imply to me that it will actually be widely adopted by unvaccinated and will also calm a lot of people down who currently are having a bit of a mental crisis over the existence of said unvaccinated people. So we should be happy for several reasons of this news.

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

#112

Post by hunterb123 »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #87
barbinbrad wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In his Nobel-prize lecture, the Merck scientist William Campbell, talks about how Ivermectin was always intended to be used in humans. Two relevant quotes from his speech are, "I had always insisted that our written departmental objectives would include the development of new drugs for control of parasites in humans" and "The end of ivermectin is nowhere in sight." Check it out: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medi…

Ivermectin is useful for control of parasites in humans (1) and other animals such as horses, but the grandparent is also correct, people are "literally buying and ingesting products intended for livestock" - from the veterinary aisle (2), and self-administering random doses not safe for humans, with bad consequences (3). It's sheer lunacy to do that. If it was effective for COVID-19 (a virus, not parasite), then med…

Ivermectin is not just for control of parasites, the anti-viral properties it has is because it's a protease inhibitor. It prevents certain viruses from binding to cells.

How effective it is at inhibiting binding is the question. This pill in the article and Pfizer's prophylactic are most likely more effective since it's not a by product but the intent. Also more profitable because of patents.

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

#113

Post by crooked-v »

hunterb123 wrote: post #94
crooked-v wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about ivermectin itself. I'm talking about how people are literally going to livestock supply stores, buying products that contain ivermectin but come in forms and dosages intended for livestock, and ingesting those (even when intended for topical usage), based entirely on internet advice and without any kind of doctor oversight. That's where "horse paste" mockery comes from.

Maybe they couldn't get a doctor to prescribe them the human pill because of all the politicization so they took the "horse paste" version. You seem to have first hand knowledge of all these people's situations, are you following people to the livestock supply stores or talking out of your ass from stories you read on Reddit? Most people that I know have that have took Ivermectin were taking the human pill. Only on t…

It's been well-documented in the news, including people being hospitalized after overdosing on the stuff:

https://www.mississippifreepress.org/15002/person-hospitaliz...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/08/25/iverme...

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-shoul...

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

#114

Post by hanselot »

wk_end wrote: post #79
kazinator wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> exerts its antiviral action through introduction of copying errors during viral RNA replication How does this target only viral RNA, not the body's own? Copying errors don't sound like something you want in your own RNA. "However, there are inherent risks in this approach. NHC can be metabolized by the host cell to the 20-deoxyribonucleoside form by the ribonucleotide reductase and then incorporated into the host c…

100% agreed on getting vaccinated, but for the elderly or immunocompromised people vaccination isn't enough to necessarily prevent severe outcomes and it might be worth the risk. As a young person, I'd probably stay away, at least in the near term, given how effective vaccines are.

If the metric is lethality, they certainly are very effective.

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

#115

Post by [deleted] »

sudosysgen wrote: post #52
carbocation wrote: post #37

I think it's disappointing that this thread has devolved into a political discussion that is hardly related to the topic. The scientific/medical achievement here seems significant. As an MD, the difference between calling in a script for a pill and arranging for outpatient infusion therapies is vast.

Indeed. The opportunity for prophylaxis with an oral antiviral is also amazing.

[deleted]

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

#116

Post by gfodor »

alistairSH wrote: post #41
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…

I probably fall into the "vaccine maximalist" category, having family who fall into high-risk categories (age, immune-compromised). This doesn't change my feelings. The existence of a treatment doesn't negate the importance of vaccination. It does make me hopeful that a return to normal may come sooner than later, as any new treatments reduce the risk of my family dying should they, despite their best efforts, become…

People who are vaccine maximalists are those who hear news like this pill and primarily are concerned about its effect on vaccinations, as opposed to being happy we now have multiple effective defensive and offensive measures against the virus, which was always going to be necessary for us to return to normal.

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

#117

Post by rich_sasha »

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." >…

> Clearly, this patent should be assigned to the federal government, not to Merck

How about a proportional slice? That would seem fair. IP and products can have fractional ownership.

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

#118

Post by vixen99 »

whateveracct wrote: post #81
dukeofdoom wrote: post #77

[flagged]

Pfizer isn't emergency use

No, that is incorrect. The FDA Only renewed emergency use authorization for Pfizer; Approval was for BioNTech’s Comirnaty with additional safety studies required (until 2027). It's currently not available in the US.

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

#119

Post by gfodor »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #102
hunterb123 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they couldn't get a doctor to prescribe them the human pill because of all the politicization so they took the "horse paste" version. You seem to have first hand knowledge of all these people's situations, are you following people to the livestock supply stores or talking out of your ass from stories you read on Reddit? Most people that I know have that have took Ivermectin were taking the human pill. Only on t…

The only reason that they want an ineffective pill that doctors rightly won't prescribe, but not a safe and effective vaccine, is as you say, "politicization". It's still a bad idea, on multiple levels: taking Ivermectin for COVID in the first place, taking the horse paste version, self-administering, and guessing the dose.

No, your first sentence shows you're lacking an understanding. They genuinely fear the vaccine and believe Ivermectin works. If it was exclusively about politics they'd embrace the vaccine since both Trump and Biden are pro-vaccine.

Taking Ivermectin for COVID from a doctor as an objectively "bad idea" is ridiculous, because it has been widely prescribed around the world for COVID. At best, it is a "marginally pointless idea."

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

#120

Post by Marsymars »

sudosysgen wrote: post #52
carbocation wrote: post #37

I think it's disappointing that this thread has devolved into a political discussion that is hardly related to the topic. The scientific/medical achievement here seems significant. As an MD, the difference between calling in a script for a pill and arranging for outpatient infusion therapies is vast.

Indeed. The opportunity for prophylaxis with an oral antiviral is also amazing.

I definitely would not want to be taking a mutagenic prophylactically.
Post reply on HN