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

171–180 of 294 posts

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

#171

Post by macintux »

LurkingPenguin wrote: post #72
zdragnar wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Healthcare workers have been on the front line, unvaccinated, for going on two years. To mandate it or risk being fired has absolutely pissed off quite a few that I know of... My wife has gotten it, and even she is offended. The hyperbole around this very serious situation just makes all the policies seem even more like theater. To your second point, there was just a new report I saw yesterday that there is no differ…

[flagged]

I’m definitely in the pro-vaccine, pro-mandate column, but both 1 and 3 from your list strike me as dubious given the information to this point. Certainly there’s been conflicting information on both.

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

#172

Post by twofornone »

barbazoo wrote: post #162

Disclaimer: I'm not promoting Ivermectin here, don't get me wrong. I just want to cover my bases as this announcement is definitely going to be used by people to support their conspiracy theory. Earlier this year Merck the manufacturer of Ivermectin issued this [0] statement saying that Ivermectin isn't useful for preventing/treating Covid-19 and people shouldn't take it. Some people explained that with the fact that…

>A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.

This is the part of Merck's statement that really rubs me the wrong way, and suggests to me that this communication was released with an agenda. The implication is that one of our safest, 60+ year old medications is suddenly potentially dangerous, and this press release is all too convenient when you consider that Merck was working on newer and more profitable alternatives.

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

#173

Post by kortex »

OrvalWintermute wrote: post #93
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?

I'm not sure if this is tightly related, but here is Bright's whistleblower complaint [1] because it seems that mutagenic concerns are a different issue? [1] https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6882540/R-Bright-OSC-...

P13-14:

> During the meeting, Dr. Painter and Mr. Clerici presented a drug, EIDD-2801, as a “cure all” for influenza, Ebola, and nearly every other virus.

> They requested that BARDA urgently invest millions of dollars into their “miracle cure.” Emory’s presentation included limited data, and no data at all from human trials. Dr. Bright asked targeted questions to understand the science behind the drug and its potential to safely treat patients. Dr. Bright knew that similar experimental drugs in this class had been shown to cause reproductive toxicity in animals, and offspring from treated animals had been born without teeth and without parts of their skulls. Dr. Bright accordingly asked Dr. Painter and Mr. Clerici about clinical trials, including whether Emory had conducted a reproductive study for toxicity, which they had not.

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

#174

Post by howlong »

frostirosti wrote: post #65
LurkingPenguin wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The vaccine has been approved fully by the FDA and hundreds of millions of people have received it.

Not unlike Red Bull and Cap'n Crunch.

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

#176

Post by skrtskrt »

bshoemaker wrote: post #164
barbazoo wrote: post #162

Disclaimer: I'm not promoting Ivermectin here, don't get me wrong. I just want to cover my bases as this announcement is definitely going to be used by people to support their conspiracy theory. Earlier this year Merck the manufacturer of Ivermectin issued this [0] statement saying that Ivermectin isn't useful for preventing/treating Covid-19 and people shouldn't take it. Some people explained that with the fact that…

Is there any evidence they are? Otherwise, that sounds like a conspiracy theory itself.

I mean I think "some large entity (government, pharma company, facebook, etc) is screwing us over to make a ton of money or enact their agenda" is an idea that most people are pretty happy to subscribe to across the political spectrum, particularly in America.

Part of it is because we can see this shit happening in real time now - Epipen prices getting jacked up by the daughter of the currently-most-consequential senator (Manchin), who is basically refusing to enact even basic Democratic agenda items particularly in regards to healthcare, etc etc.

These theories just take on a different flavor depending where you are on the political spectrum. If you're on the right, Facebook is silencing right wing voices. if you're on the left, Facebook is silencing left wing voices, etc.

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

#177

Post by allturtles »

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." >…

This is a consequence of the Bayh-Dole Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh%E2%80%93Dole_Act).

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

#178

Post by barbazoo »

MisterBastahrd wrote: post #157
rflec028 wrote: post #140

Ivermectin is inexpensive to manufacture, is extremely safe, and is currently being used by many countries to both treat and prevent the spread of covid. Molnupiravir had concerns during its development of the drug having mutagagenic properties. Why not just use the inexpensive, safe, proven effective medication?

There aren't any first-world countries using ivermectin to treat or prevent the spread of COVID. Because ivermectin is roundworm poison, not an antiviral. The countries were desperate to try ANYTHING, and it was the best they could get their hands on at the time. They were prompted to action because ivermectin affected COVID in lab experiments, not in actual cases, and the result of the use in those countries were th…

I'm curious to know if there are studies involving actual Covid-19 cases being treated with Ivermectin. If not, why? If yes, what are the results?

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

#179

Post by photochemsyn »

jrockway wrote: post #107
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." >…

I don't think investing money necessarily transfers the ownership of things bought with that money to the investor. The government could put in their contract "we get all your drugs that you invent" if they wanted that. But this would be like startup VCs getting 100% of your company, or your bank getting the appreciation on your house when you sell it, etc. They could ask for those things, and you could say no... and…

I think a better option is for the pharmaceutical corporations themselves to reduce both their advertising budget and their shareholder dividends and pour those funds into their own independently financed research institutes (see Bell Labs for the model followed in the past).

The best way to encourage them to do this is to eliminate exclusive licensing of inventions financed even in part by the taxpayer, i.e. NIH, NSF funding etc. Under this model, Merck would still be able to produce the drug but any other competitor could also produce the drug, and then you'd have a competitive production process (see steel production etc.) which would, I believe, create the highest quality products at the lowest cost to the consumer.

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

#180

Post by TrevorJ »

admeyer wrote: post #160

Paragraph near the bottom of Reuters article on Molnupiravir states: "Merck has said data shows molnupiravir is not capable of inducing genetic changes in human cells, but men enrolled in its trials had to abstain from heterosexual intercourse or agree to use contraception. Women of child-bearing age in the study could be pregnant and also had to use birth control." Link to said Reuters article: https://www.reuters.c…

I believe that is standard for trials like these.
Post reply on HN