141–150 of 195 posts
Is CureVac still in the race? What other mRNA companies are there that are doing interesting work in the space (beyond COVID)?
They may still play a role, as obviously the world won't be vaccinated within the next months. But they're also unlikely to play a role any time soon.
Anyone knows why they insist on both doses given the limited supply of the vaccine and the marginal increase in effectiveness with the second dose? I would imagine every single day counts. https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Rvzdi8RS9Bda5aLt2/covid-12-1...
From the linked article[0]: “Yes, Moderna’s vaccine prevents transmission. One dose is good for reducing infection by 63%, two by over 90%.” The number of people you need to vaccinate with a 63% effective vaccine versus a 90% effective vaccine is a huge gap. There are two issues with vaccines that staring at these numbers won’t tell you: 1. Not everyone is going to get vaccinated. 2. The number of people who will get…
The argument is that while there is a vaccine shortage, it is better to give as many as possible one dose, instead of giving only half that many people two doses, leaving the rest unprotected.
When available, everyone gets the second shot, which should work just as well 6 months later.
Anyone knows why they insist on both doses given the limited supply of the vaccine and the marginal increase in effectiveness with the second dose? I would imagine every single day counts. https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Rvzdi8RS9Bda5aLt2/covid-12-1...
In this case it may sound like too much nitpicking, but the general principle is that you don't roll out something you haven't tested in a trial. In general this is a good principle. I hope they'll do trials comparing single to double-dose soon.
Glad to hear it! One key advantage of the Moderna one versus the similar Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine is that it doesn't require deep freeze storage, only regular freezing temperatures. (-90º C for Pfizer/BioNTech vs -20º C for Moderna)
Does anyone here know the reason for the difference? They're both mRNA vaccines, right? So why does one need a deep freeze and the other one not?
It may very well be that later on they'll change the freezing requirement later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the linked article[0]: “Yes, Moderna’s vaccine prevents transmission. One dose is good for reducing infection by 63%, two by over 90%.” The number of people you need to vaccinate with a 63% effective vaccine versus a 90% effective vaccine is a huge gap. There are two issues with vaccines that staring at these numbers won’t tell you: 1. Not everyone is going to get vaccinated. 2. The number of people who will get…
The lesswrong quote seems to be misleading. It links to an article that says the vaccine may prevent / reduce transmission but that it hasn't been proven yet. Did I miss something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the linked article[0]: “Yes, Moderna’s vaccine prevents transmission. One dose is good for reducing infection by 63%, two by over 90%.” The number of people you need to vaccinate with a 63% effective vaccine versus a 90% effective vaccine is a huge gap. There are two issues with vaccines that staring at these numbers won’t tell you: 1. Not everyone is going to get vaccinated. 2. The number of people who will get…
Also the “I don’t trust a vaccine approved by the Trump administration” crowd. It was hugely irresponsible to politicise the vaccine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both of the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) require two doses. Don't know if the 2nd dose is the same as the first.
Both the first and second doses of the mRNA vaccines are identical.
Does anyone know how they manage to produce complex microstructures like that, RNA inside a lipid capsule, on such a large scale? Does these vaccines need an adjuvant to work, or is the change to the affected cells large enough to trigger an immune reaction?
This article [1] has a section with several references on that, with the most used technique [2] being depicted in fig. 3 (this is from 2016 so there might be a more recent technique around now). The basic principle is to mix a solution with lipids and one with the mRNA and pump it through a channel with herringbone-shaped incisions that generate turbulence in the fluid. Apparently, the turbulence makes lipids surrou…
I wonder what the rate of lipid-surrounded mRNA is after the process. Say you fire 100 mRNAs through this construct, will 90 of them be surrounded by lipids afterwards? Or 30? Or 100?
Glad to hear it! One key advantage of the Moderna one versus the similar Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine is that it doesn't require deep freeze storage, only regular freezing temperatures. (-90º C for Pfizer/BioNTech vs -20º C for Moderna)
I recall reading an article that mentioned -90C as the "safe shot", meaning they can be 100% certain that the vaccine is stable at this temp but it might be stable at much lower temps.
Also more BNT-XXX vaccines are in development.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, it's definitely a conspiracy, not the fact that the Biontech/Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are RNA based, which are far faster to make, but which also are known to break down at high temperatures while AstraZeneca is a traditional vaccine. Yep, it's definitely not the logical reason but Big Pharma and the US government and Germany at it again.
I wouldn't say far faster. Russia and China have both come up with vaccines in a similar amount of time. We haven't seen any details on how effective they are compared. J&J is making a more traditional vaccine and it should be finishing up the Stage 3 study in a month or two and be ready for approval. They're hoping it will be a single dose vaccine