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

Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 330 posts

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#151

Post by philsnow »

ashf023 wrote: post #137
senordevnyc wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve always wondered about this. I have fair skin, and I tend to burn somewhat easily in very sunny environments like the beach. However, I’ve never gotten so much as a whisper of sunburn / suntan / anything on an actually cloudy day where sun wasn’t hitting me directly. Is the damage a different type that’s imperceptible? Or is this a public health comms strategy where they assume people will see a single cloud in t…

I think the point is just about temperature. I've experienced this out on lakes in the northern US for example. It's sunny but not like a tropical beach, and maybe even a little chilly. But you'll definitely get burnt without sunscreen

People who are new to skiing/snowboarding are often surprised that their faces get sunburned, because of course it's cold and so how could they get burned

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#152

Post by bell-cot »

kinj28 wrote: post #140

My father has gastric melonama and pretty much last few days left — does someone with knowledge know if this vaccine can be of any help? Or any registry available?

Deepest sympathies, and I'm no oncologist - but I think that'd be like trying to patch the hull of the Titanic after her stern has lifted out of the water. So many cascading failures are in motion by then that saving him really isn't possible.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#153

Post by Arkhaine_kupo »

estearum wrote: post #66
Arkhaine_kupo wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People were assured that COVID vaccine mRNA would disappear within days and the spike protein would short-lived which is still the case, even in the Yale study. > That is a massive gap between what the public was told and what later evidence found. there is an even larger gap between basic epidemiology and what the public understands. Hard science is difficult to communicate on a good day, on a global pandemic with…

+1 the public health apparatuses' actual statements were impressively correct even if you don't account for the underlying uncertainty at the time. Where public health officials "failed" was not having a megaphone loud enough to drown out the game of telephone that most people (as these comment threads consistently show) were actually hearing information through. Simplest example: People will say that public health o…

> : People will say that public health officials told them "masks don't work." But no! Only one person did

I think Fauci might have had a statement early.

But tbh every other scientist said the opposite, every doctor said the opposite.

If I am not wrong he later admitted that he said it to gain time for the goverment to adquire enough for basic needs like hospitals.

And that is the kind of error that erodes public trust and it was bad advice shared because the american public cannot be trusted to prioritise medical professionals being stocked and because the american gov was unprepared.

But one bad statement, in march of 2020, done for the wrong reasons due to an unprepared goverment voted in by selfish people who cannot be trusted to help others does not deny that the UK had great advice the entire time, so did China, and Spain and Italy and most of the other initial hotbeds. They said "we dont have enough n95 for everyone, please social distance until they are availeble" instead of "masks are not needed".

Despite that, he was the face of a pandemic plan in a goverment alergic to facts and led by a dude who recommended injecting bleach so in that situation, he did as much as you can and is still paying for it.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#154

Post by pigeof »

bluGill wrote: post #139
SoftTalker wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure a bad sunburn sucked back then as much as now, and was something one tried to avoid.

Unless you are albino (which is a large set of other problems) being in the sun all day will develop enough of a tan that you won't sunburn. There might be a problem in spring, but by summer time most people will have spent enough time outdoors that they wouldn't sunburn. I've always been the lightest person in town (a tie in Stockholm) and I can spend all day outside without any sunscreen and I won't burn on the par…

It's bizarre that you cite being outside at 60 degrees latitude as evidence related to high UV exposure.

That's like a resident of Porto saying most people don't get frostbite walking around outside in winter...

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#156

Post by moronicles »

GenerWork wrote: post #4

This is great news! I think people forget how anti-skin cancer protocols even as simple as applying suntan lotion weren't as popular as recent as 50-60 years ago. Lots of "sun children" of the 50s and 60s are now feeling the repercussions of only applying baby oil and are getting hit with lots of melanoma.

I knew HN was geriatric, but damn

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#157

Post by pigeof »

bonsai_spool wrote: post #113
addisonl wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misleading comment. From https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.35463 > Cutaneous melanoma (CM) accounted for around 331,700 cancer cases globally in 2022 > An estimated 267,353 (95% uncertainty intervals [UI]: 242,818, 278,638) CM cases were UVR attributable globally in 2022 UVR = Ultraviolet radiation Cutaneous melanoma (CM) is the vast majority of melanoma cases in the US at least: > The percentages of me…

Please be careful and charitable in reading others' words, especially as they relate to scientific topics. OP did not say that melanoma has no sun exposure risk but that it is lower than the risks associated with other cutaneous cancers (e.g., SCC and BCC) and it would seem that's true based on the very short search I performed. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5742376/

The criticism and correction were polite, helpful, and appropriate.

The original comment is misleading. Your reply is bizarre, and seems to deliberately misread the original comment, the reply, and the context.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#158

Post by bluGill »

pigeof wrote: post #154
bluGill wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you are albino (which is a large set of other problems) being in the sun all day will develop enough of a tan that you won't sunburn. There might be a problem in spring, but by summer time most people will have spent enough time outdoors that they wouldn't sunburn. I've always been the lightest person in town (a tie in Stockholm) and I can spend all day outside without any sunscreen and I won't burn on the par…

It's bizarre that you cite being outside at 60 degrees latitude as evidence related to high UV exposure. That's like a resident of Porto saying most people don't get frostbite walking around outside in winter...

I've been outside at lots of different latitudes. I don't live in Stockholm, but I've been there.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#159

Post by kstrauser »

wincy wrote: post #88
GenerWork wrote: post #4

This is great news! I think people forget how anti-skin cancer protocols even as simple as applying suntan lotion weren't as popular as recent as 50-60 years ago. Lots of "sun children" of the 50s and 60s are now feeling the repercussions of only applying baby oil and are getting hit with lots of melanoma.

What’s funny is before the 50s and 60s everyone knew you should cover up and women wore bonnets. That too much sun was bad for you. Laura Ingalls Wilder of Little House fame (I mention this a lot as I read these to my children as an adult, and they’re a fascinating look at 1880s America) has lots of places where her mother says “put on your bonnet! Don’t get too much sun!”. We act like people in the past were ignoran…

I don't think that was because of UV exposure or anything related. Look at Bedouin tribes even today. They wrap up head to toe, man and woman and child alike, not to avoid tanning but because prolonged exposure to direct infrared will fry you like an egg.

I grew up in the same general region as Wilder, and we sought shade not to avoid sunburn. We were all chestnut brown by the end of summer anyway. It's because the direct sunlight on an August afternoon was brutally hot, and you wanted as little of it to hit your skin as possible.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#160

Post by bluGill »

foco_tubi wrote: post #145
bluGill wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you are albino (which is a large set of other problems) being in the sun all day will develop enough of a tan that you won't sunburn. There might be a problem in spring, but by summer time most people will have spent enough time outdoors that they wouldn't sunburn. I've always been the lightest person in town (a tie in Stockholm) and I can spend all day outside without any sunscreen and I won't burn on the par…

I don’t think this is correct, Black people still get sunburns

Black people who spend all their time indoors or covered up will get sunburned if they go outside. If that black person gradually increases their sun exposure they can (in a few weeks) reach the point where they can be outside without sunscreen and they will not get sun burned.

Note that I'm making no claims on how natural sunburn resistant affects skin cancer.

Post reply on HN