Live data from Hacker News

Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

them.us

331–340 of 490 posts

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#331
post #174

Since the mRNA covid vaccines seem to only work for 90-180 days, why would a vaccine for anything else be different?

You are wrong. mRNA covid vaccines don't "only work for 90-180 days". First of all, you need 3 shots to get fully vaccinated in the first place. This is one shot more than the original approved plan, but a very common thing about vaccinations. I got 3 measels shots for example. This has to do with how the immune system works, repeated shots cause different effects which lead to improved immunity.

Also, we are facing very different variants. With the original strain and the first variants, the vaccines would have done their job with just 2 shots and we might even have achieved herd immunity. But delta and especially omicron did happen. Still, with 3 shots, the vaccines against the first strain are still excellent in protecting against severe disease and there is no indication yet that this protection is dropping significantly over time.

To stress this: we are talking about effects due to the nature of the human immune system and the virus mutations. There is no indication what so ever, that the mRNA technology produces shorter lasting immune responses. Quite the contrary, the mRNA vaccines are the ones which proved the most efficient against SARS-Cov-2.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#332
post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a lot easier to get folks to agree to one or two shots one time than to convince them to change their sexual practices, one would imagine.

> It's a lot easier to get folks to agree to one or two shots one time Is it gonna be “one or two shots one time” like the Covid vaccine was initially pitched or ...

Why on earth do people get all uppity about the COVID vaccine requiring multiple shots? Basically every vaccine you've ever had (and you've likely had a lot) required 2, 3, 4 or even periodic shots for your entire life.

- Flu. Twice per year until age 9 then one per year, forever.

- Td, one dose every 10 years, forever.

- Tdap, 4 doses.

- Pneumococcal, 2 doses.

- Rotavirus, 2 or 3 doses.

- Meningitis, 2 doses.

- MMR, 2 doses.

- Hepatitis A, 2 doses.

- Hepatitis B, 3 doses.

- HPV, 2 or 3 doses.

- Polio, 2 doses.

- Varicella, 2 doses.

Seriously, we've had vaccines for 300 years. This kind of shocked Pikachu reaction to the very concept of a booster is tiring and adds nothing to the conversation.

Honestly, one dose every 3 months to avoid AIDS? In a heartbeat. How is getting an ouchie once in a while anything other than a remarkable scientific breakthrough in the prevention of one of the most insidious diseases we have?

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to address this. There is no evidence anyone produced HIV in a lab and then released it, accidentally or not, out into the world. Scientists have established a pretty robust causal chain for where HIV came from. It is plausible that HIV was spreading between humans before we even really had the field of Molecular Biology that would have allowed us to “make” HIV.

I didn’t say it was not natural. I simply said it would not surprise me if it were not. It’s interesting how even asking a question about things can become taboo.

But you didn't ask a question, you made a statement. There are only two reasons I can think of for why someone wouldn't be surprised if something that is almost certainly false turned out to be true.

1. That person is wholly ignorant of the subject and so nothing about that subject would surprise them because that individual has no reason to believe anything about it one way or another. As an example, it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out that the Birch-Tate conjecture turned out to be false, because frankly I have no idea what that conjecture even means and so I have no reason to be surprised about it one way or another.

2. That person has expert knowledge about a topic that is not known by either the public at large or even by other experts in the field. Perhaps that person has devoted extensive and specialized research and managed to reveal a strong body of evidence that overturns the best commonly held understanding on that subject.

The reason I suspect you are being downvoted is because most people on HN think you're in category 1, that is you're someone who is not sufficiently informed on this topic to be surprised by it one way or another, and hence your comment comes across as revelling in your own ignorance.

If you're in category 2, then you have my sincere apology and I'd be genuinely interested for you to share your knowledge, but I somehow doubt that will happen.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#334
post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No detectable virus means no transmissible virus.

False. Detectable is an experimental limitation of a given measurement system. Even one single virion can infect a host.

There is no data that supports this assertion whatsoever. There is a lot of evidence going against it. Theoretically it may be possible, but the probability of this is on the order of 0 and so close to 0 it will likely never happen.

Think of it like chemistry. Sure, two covalently bonded hydrogen atoms at STP could have nuclei 1cm from each other due to random chance. However, the probability of this happening is so low that it is effectively 0.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> well actually no it’s pretty obvious If you think they're right you may not understand why the comment is being down voted. > The current Covid-19 vaccines are proven to lose efficacy over time. Will the same thing happen with this one as well? Like with any vaccine: Probably. > It’s a good question It's pretty besides the point. To recycle my car brakes analogy: They also lose efficacy over time, yet are widely co…

I think it's just the speed at which it has happened though. Most children born in developed countries today receive a slew of vaccines which will provide immunity to catching those diseases for decades. It's discouraging that we're looking at shot no. 4 for the mRNA covid vaccines within a year and a half, and despite even that, infection rates are still very strong.

Because corona viruses are a different kind. There have been no vaccines against them so far and we saw how strongly they mutate. Still, the 3-shot regime seems to be very effective against severe disease. They probably deliver as much protection as possible unless you have a vaccine which targets exactly the strain you are fighting. So it will be interesting how the omicron-specific vaccines will do, if they do get used for larger campaigns.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To reiterate the question, why is that?

I'm not a biologist and this is based on general knowledge and some quick google searches but: We're quite good at detecting viruses if we really want to. PCR can amplify DNA so much that we can detect even 50 viruses per milliliter of blood. A milliliter seems like actually a lot of blood to get into someone else and your innate immune system is capable of finding and neutralizing small amounts of contagions relativ…

Well put. We can actually detect well below 50 copies/mL in the laboratory setting as well; we don’t go below this to maintain adequate test specificity and sensitivity in the clinical setting.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#338
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't know this. Could you explain the reason?

CDC backing up this claim. Having an undetectable viral load prevents transmission during sex —- but likely not during needle sharing. The answer to why seems to be an obvious “because there are less virus particles”. I’m linking a couple of scientific studies following couples having condomless sex where one partner is HIV positive, on ART with low viral load. Among the about 2000 couples in these studies there were…

So some other points.

Some Sex lubes can make it easier for infections to get into the body. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_lubricant#Water-based

Thing is I wonder if a higher vitamin A and zinc intake can help because all epithelial cells need retinol (vitamin A), zinc is needed to move retinol around the body as Retinol Binding Protein (RBP) for epithelial cells. Alcohol can reduce fat soluble vitamins stored in the liver which can then reduce the VitA stored in the liver, you see this most easily with alcoholics and hypovitaminosis A, but even short term binge drinking can reduce levels enough to increase risks of transmission which probably explains man flu!

I found a cadaver study where they measured vitA content in the livers of dead people but didnt say how they died, knowing that you can die from ingesting too much vitA in one go like some arctic explorers did when eating polar bear livers decades ago and died. In order to get the highest amounts of vitA seen in some of these cadavers, you'd have to consume 30,000ui of VitA every day for at least a year without your body using any! Thats a lot of Vit A!!!

Anyone who paid attention to the Ebola outbreak in Africa a few years back, may remember that some viruses like Ebola can hide in parts of the body where the immune system can not go, namely the eyes and the testes and sometimes the brain, so they may have remembered that blokes testing negative for Ebola but previously had it, could still be passing it on through semen.

The thing with HIV, its typically passed through anal intercourse, not vaginal where there is sufficient lubrication, but its passed more frequently in Africa because they have a tendancy to have dry vaginal intercourse, because they actually try to reduce the wetness of the vagina which then creates microtears and sores and then its easy for HIV to get into the bloodstream, just like cuts and sores in the mouth also making it easy for HIV to get into the blood.

The whole 80's govt advice/warnings on HIV were directed at everyone because they didnt want to stigmatise those engaging in non vaginal intercourse.

The biggest risk from HIV is getting it into the blood, like most things which are pathogenic.

Now you can still have a highly effective immune system which can lock down viruses, but there is always the risk it gets into those parts of a body where the immune system cant go and I dont know what they test now a days.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#339

As I understand it, the reason an HIV vaccine has been so difficult to create is that HIV mutates so easily. I understand the basics behind how mRNA vaccines are generated, but I don't understand why this approach would be expected to have any more success in evading the high mutation potential of HIV than other vaccine types. After all, it was even a concern with new coronavirus variants that the original Moderna va…

>HIV mutates so easily. I understand the basics behind how mRNA vaccines are generated, but I don't understand why this approach would be expected to have any more success in evading the high mutation potential of HIV than other vaccine types.

you buy not an mRNA vaccine shot, you buy subscription. We already getting a preview of it with the 3rd, 4th, ... Covid boosters. Allowing for cheap and fast vaccine development the mRNA tech is changing the business of vaccination. Add to that that in near future you'll be able to get personally customized mRNA vaccine. You'll just be getting your monthly/weekly vaccine subscription box. And why limit to vaccines? The mRNA can make your cells produce any protein. Imagine a subscription business possible here.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#340
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One single employee at Pfizer created 10 vaccine candidates in one day. > Now, the thing is that you can’t just sequence a virus, do bioinformatics, synthesize mRNA and package it into a nano particle. You can, and that's exactly what was done. However, out of the 10 or so candidates, they selected a few of the more promising ones to continue research. They are fast to develop. However, there are other steps in the p…

I think you underestimate the effort needed to create an immunogenic vaccine candidate that doesn’t have unwanted side effects. That’s one of the reasons CureVac failed: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01661-0 And yes, AlphaFold is a major milestone, but I don’t think we’ve solved protein folding for good.

CureVac did not have any pseudouridine modifications. This is relatively easy to do and I’m not sure why they did not do it.
Post reply on HN