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

211–220 of 258 posts

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

#211

Post by Auracle »

jph wrote: post #190
lumb63 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All previous vaccines were aimed at preventing infectious diseases. None of them are (primarily) indicated for preventing recurrence of a non-infectious disease. Whether it meets the technical definition or not, we can probably agree this is fundamentally different to all other vaccines. Also, since no other vaccines are custom to each patient, using the term “vaccine” could cause confusion. Do we really want to give…

> All previous vaccines were aimed at preventing infectious diseases. This is a common misconception, and that's whythe U.S. CDC is now emphasizing that vaccines can do more to help people. The most important recent example is the world's widespread rollout of COVID vaccines. These are primarily aimed at better protection against severe illness, hospitalization, and death; these are not primarily aimed at preventing…

Well that’s just plain revisionist history.

Name another example. The flu vaccine, maybe? But that’s because they don’t know which strains to target.

Both the CDC director at the time and Biden said the vaccine would prevent you from getting COVID.

It’s insane we’re changing the definition of words because the COVID vaccines were kinda crappy and that would be bad politically.

Not that the vaccine discussed here shouldn’t be called one - it absolutely is.

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

#212

Post by ruszki »

cempaka wrote: post #152
lawlessone wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those last two points are why it is was the right thing to do for ostensibly healthy people to get vaccinated. Because there are people we know it doesn't work for and people we don't know it doesn't work for.

How did that make it "the right thing to do" for healthy people to take the COVID shots? Given their extremely poor effectiveness against transmission, the odds of the groups in those last two points eventually being infected with SARS-CoV-2 were no different with vaccine uptake at 60% or 90% or 99%. What, then, is accomplished by forcing healthy adolescents (for example) to take these shots?

I lost track of COVID research in the past two years. Can you please provide me some good articles about bad transmission effectiveness? I’ve seen this mentioned many times here, but my search seems contradict to that: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10073587/

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

#213

Post by neverrroot »

ruszki wrote: post #212
cempaka wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did that make it "the right thing to do" for healthy people to take the COVID shots? Given their extremely poor effectiveness against transmission, the odds of the groups in those last two points eventually being infected with SARS-CoV-2 were no different with vaccine uptake at 60% or 90% or 99%. What, then, is accomplished by forcing healthy adolescents (for example) to take these shots?

I lost track of COVID research in the past two years. Can you please provide me some good articles about bad transmission effectiveness? I’ve seen this mentioned many times here, but my search seems contradict to that: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10073587/

Conflicting papers have been published on transmission effectiveness. Everyone believes whatever they want.

“Similarly, researchers in California observed no major differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in terms of SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in the nasopharynx, even in those with proven asymptomatic infection.

Thus, the current evidence suggests that current mandatory vaccination policies might need to be reconsidered, and that vaccination status should not replace mitigation practices such as mask wearing, physical distancing, and contact-tracing investigations, even within highly vaccinated populations.”

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...

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

#214

Post by ruszki »

neverrroot wrote: post #213
ruszki wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lost track of COVID research in the past two years. Can you please provide me some good articles about bad transmission effectiveness? I’ve seen this mentioned many times here, but my search seems contradict to that: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10073587/

Conflicting papers have been published on transmission effectiveness. Everyone believes whatever they want. “Similarly, researchers in California observed no major differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in terms of SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in the nasopharynx, even in those with proven asymptomatic infection. Thus, the current evidence suggests that current mandatory vaccination policies might need…

I thought that we had some new hard evidence, or revelation. So does this mean we still don’t know, or is there a considerable skew to one side in the statistical meaning, like in the case of eating red meat, or climate change, but as with everything there are contradicting studies?

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

#215

Post by signatoremo »

bugglebeetle wrote: post #196
signatoremo wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your last point is also hysterical because yes, the research needs massive investment, the state provides it, and then allows private companies to run off with it A research is only the beginning. It usually takes many years and lot of investment to bring a drug to the market. There is also high risk that none of the investment will be recouped. That’s the role that private companies can do well. They don’t just “r…

Refer, again, to the example of Cuba’s COVID vaccine.

Check out the list of drugs that Moderna has in the pipeline:

https://www.modernatx.com/research/product-pipeline

Almost all of them are still long way to go before becoming commercial products, if at all. Does it look like they run off with it as you asserted? Or do they have to shoulder the development cost and risk?

One of the drugs is of course their COVID vaccine which is a home run. It’s the potential of such windfall that makes them willing to bet on all of the other drugs in the pipeline.

You cited Cuba’s COVID vaccine. How many other drugs do they have in pipeline? Right, not so many compared to all of the drugs developed by private money. Ask yourself, with regard to their COVID vaccine, how extensive was the testing? can they scale the production? how widely can they distribute the vaccine?

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

#216

Post by throwaway8877 »

bugglebeetle wrote: post #81
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> were invented with publicly-funded research that they’ve now privatized, resulting in large death tolls from vaccine inequity in poor countries This is an odd complaint for this circumstance. Those poor countries didn’t materially fund these vaccines’ development. And production was fundamentally constrained; nations entered into bidding wars to secure them. In the end, geopolitics dictated which vaccines—if any—po…

It’s not at all odd because we learned the disastrous, widespread international consequences, of privatization of HIV/AIDS treatments in the 90s and 2000s. Treatments were developed with publicly-funded research in rich western countries, hoarded for profit at the cost of mass death in the developing world, which led to increased severity of the disease from unchecked spread, which then spread back into the countries…

We saw the same in case with covid too. But, ..., the main issue is that those poor countries have increased their population by many orders of magnitude and this makes large scale support incredibly hard. Imagine if African population was still around 200 million people as it was in 50s instead on 1.5 billion it is today.

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

#217

Post by neverrroot »

ruszki wrote: post #214
neverrroot wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conflicting papers have been published on transmission effectiveness. Everyone believes whatever they want. “Similarly, researchers in California observed no major differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in terms of SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in the nasopharynx, even in those with proven asymptomatic infection. Thus, the current evidence suggests that current mandatory vaccination policies might need…

I thought that we had some new hard evidence, or revelation. So does this mean we still don’t know, or is there a considerable skew to one side in the statistical meaning, like in the case of eating red meat, or climate change, but as with everything there are contradicting studies?

I like to look at the big numbers when it comes to the effectiveness of measures. To me they tell the story. But that requires a lot of work, so I can’t really recommend diving into it.

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

#218

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #210
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oh, it’s very bad, hereabouts.

Long Island is known as a breast cancer hotspot (especially Nassau County), but I have seen many different types.

I moved here, when I was 28. Before coming here, I had never met anyone that had cancer.

Since moving here, I have known at least one person, every year, that has been battling cancer. This year, it has been 3 fairly close acquaintances.

They keep a lid on it, but it’s bad enough, that it’s pretty much an open secret.

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

#219

Post by throwaway8877 »

Auracle wrote: post #211
jph wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All previous vaccines were aimed at preventing infectious diseases. This is a common misconception, and that's whythe U.S. CDC is now emphasizing that vaccines can do more to help people. The most important recent example is the world's widespread rollout of COVID vaccines. These are primarily aimed at better protection against severe illness, hospitalization, and death; these are not primarily aimed at preventing…

Well that’s just plain revisionist history. Name another example. The flu vaccine, maybe? But that’s because they don’t know which strains to target. Both the CDC director at the time and Biden said the vaccine would prevent you from getting COVID. It’s insane we’re changing the definition of words because the COVID vaccines were kinda crappy and that would be bad politically. Not that the vaccine discussed here shou…

No, covid vaccines were not kind of crappy, just the virus itself evolved so rapidly that the virus had evolved enough even before complete rollout of the vaccines. Yet even then the boosted vaccination was highly effective against the delta variant and still effective against omicron on the level par with flu vaccines. Omicron was just infectious on the level of measles and with very short incubation period giving the immune system very little time to ramp up the immune response.

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

#220

Post by [deleted] »

oldgradstudent wrote: post #203
LorenPechtel wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN