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

Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

freethink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 258 posts

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#201

Post by LorenPechtel »

mberning wrote: post #37

Should this really be called a “vaccine”? I feel like that is going to give people the wrong impression about what it does. I think labelling it gene therapy, immune therapy, or something like that would be closer to what it actually does. Also really interested to see if people will need and/or benefit from periodic re-treatment. I guess they can figure that part out if it makes it to market.

It primes the immune system to be vigilant for certain patterns. That's a vaccine. It is not altering genes, it's not gene therapy. It is not otherwise boosting the immune system, it's not immune therapy.

The fact that it's target isn't realistically transmissible has no bearing on it's nature. We don't give people rabies vaccine to people to keep them from spreading it, either. In humans the R0 for rabies is exceedingly close to zero in any society that understands what rabies is.

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#202

Post by [deleted] »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #76
lukeck wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the ones for the CV vaccine were listed on many pages of tiny text (both from Pfizer and from Moderna) The size of the pages side effects were written on says absolutely nothing about what the side effects are or their severity. > Then there are the long term consequences, many studies keep coming out with surprises (recent buzzword “Ribosomal frameshift” Ribosomal frameshift is in itself not a “long term consequen…

> The size of the pages side effects were written on says absolutely nothing about what the side effects are or their severity. Naive question: Do they say what the side effects are and their severity in an easily accessible manner somewhere?

[deleted]

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#203

Post by oldgradstudent »

LorenPechtel wrote: post #199
oldgradstudent wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This claim would come as a great surprise to the FDA, as they approved it soley for prevention of COVID.

No vaccine in existence actually prevents infection. Rather, it primes the immune system so the battle is typically a total rout, the invader losing very quickly and the patient never noticing. That's what they got against Covid/Wuhan and the world actually did achieve herd immunity--against Covid/Wuhan. (The Wuhan strain has been extinct for some time.) Unfortunately, it turned out to mutate quite rapidly (like the…

> the invader losing very quickly and the patient never noticing.

That's called preventing Covid. Covid is the disease, not simply an infection.

The problem is that the vast majority of people who got the vaccine did in fact notice very well they've had Covid.

> That's what they got against Covid/Wuhan and the world actually did achieve herd immunity--against Covid/Wuhan. (The Wuhan strain has been extinct for some time.)

The Wuhan strain wasn't that relevant even before the vaccines were widely available.

> Unfortunately, it turned out to mutate quite rapidly (like the flu) and soon the battles weren't always a rout.

Which was predicted and expected all along.

> It still reduces severity, though, and thus is still used.

Only if you take really awful studies seriously.

Nobody bothered to test this hypothesis in a proper trial.

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#204

Post by LorenPechtel »

lawlessone wrote: post #121
preciz wrote: post #94

[flagged]

Yeah but you also fall for fake documentaries about how HPV vaccine is dangerous.

Oh, but it is!

It makes women not so scared of sex, thus making them more likely to end up in the infernal regions. Never mind it if it took them longer to reach their final resting place.

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#205

Post by snowwrestler »

jonhohle wrote: post #180
beowulfey wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the definition of a vaccine. A vaccine is something that registers our active immune system against an antigen, so that our body detects and eradicates it upon detection. The timing doesn't really matter and there are a lot of therapeutic vaccines [1]. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9729511/

I took it as the literal and previously accepted definition was uniformly changed by both government and secular organizations in near unison. As late as January 2021 vaccines were thought of as dead pathogens - https://web.archive.org/web/20210118194713/https://www.merri...

The word “vaccine” comes from the recognition that people could gain immunity against smallpox via infection with the less-deadly (and live) virus cowpox.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccinia

The definition has never been constrained to dead pathogens.

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#206

Post by snowwrestler »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #3

Past mRNA cancer vaccines haven't failed to get through trials because of ineffectiveness. They failed clinical trials in the 2000s and 2010s due to their side effects being too bad. The side effects of mRNA vaccines are getting less and less severe over the years, but the proof of the pudding will come in phase III for this vaccine, as with all the other ones.

I think you might be confusing mRNA vaccines with immunological cancer treatments in general, which have been tried in trials for decades and have occasionally caused horrible side effects in some patients.

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#207

Post by LorenPechtel »

mikewarot wrote: post #176

[flagged]

The reason they got immunity is that the percentage of claims about vaccines that are valid are minuscule. Juries don't do well when faced with an obviously harmed "victim" and a "bad guy" with deep pockets. They see the suffering victim and no evidence to prove yes or no on whether the "bad guy" inflicted the harm and tend to side with the victim.

The only way the vaccine industry can survive in such a legal climate is to get the claims reviewed by medical people rather than juries. Lawyers hate it because they can't woo the jury with the plight of the victim.

Society would work a lot better if more systems worked this way. Locally the lawyers utterly hated the system where to bring a malpractice case you had to go before a board of three lawyers and three doctors first. While you could then go to trial with less than 4 votes from that board your chances were minimal when the jury heard what the board said. Effectively that meant you had to convince one of three doctors your claim was sound--if you can't do that why do you think you have a case?

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#208

Post by [deleted] »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #70
neverrroot wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. My view on vaccines is that they are not a cure but act as prevention agents.

There's multiple vaccines that can also work after you've been exposed to a pathogen. In many such cases risks vs benefits will change by the event. For example rabies vaccines is not given to everyone, however after you get rabies you will be given that vaccine. Vaccine in this case is a less harmful training tool to prepare you for the more harmful pathogen that may still be reaching its peak strength. You can thin…

[deleted]

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#209

Post by squarefoot »

satchlj wrote: post #35
bawolff wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it seemed like it worked pretty well with covid. Vaccine was produced very quickly, and in most countries was free.

If by "free" you mean that taxpayers payed huge amounts of money then sure...

What is wrong in funding everyone's health through taxes? I paid a lot of them for years, although living a quite healthy life, then one day everything changed, and in just a couple years I had to get covid vaccines, a vertebral stabilization after an accident, then two stents after a heart attack. All for free. So far, my healthcare taxes have been the best possible investment.

Re: Moderna's mRNA cancer vaccine works better than thought

#210

Post by stjohnswarts »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #187
bsder wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most of them are awful but only in rare cases do they cause permanent damage beyond what is already happening with the cancer That's simply not true. Chemotherapy, in particular, is ridiculously bad . Chemo brain is a thing. Another example, people have to wear cold packs on their hands and feet in order to minimize the neuropathy that some chemotherapies can cause. Other chemotherapies cause your veins to leak wit…

I agree. I have not been through it, myself (crosses self) , but I live on Long Island, which means that I have watched a lot of people go through it. Most recover nearly completely, but they all suffer some permanent effects, like sun sensitivity, hair loss, digestive problems, anemia, weakened immune system, etc.

Why would living on long island mean you would watch a lot of people go through it? Is there some some kind of cancer hot spot on long island? Genuinely curious.
Post reply on HN