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

151–160 of 258 posts

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

#151

Post by blackbear_ »

loceng wrote: post #134
blackbear_ wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very unlikely, as the majority of those neoantigens are unique to the patient (that's why the vaccine has to be tailored for each of them).

Ah yes, why patent specifics when you can patent the umbrella which is akin to covering all bases - https://patents.google.com/patent/US10055540B2/en

I'm not sure that patent is worth much to be honest. The general approach has been known and published in research circles for the better part of a decade before the patent was filed, and actually training a machine learning system in that way that gives usable predictions is still an open problem afaik.

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

#152

Post by cempaka »

lawlessone wrote: post #139
oezi wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the sibling comment link I would say, yes: 5 WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS 5.1 Management of Acute Allergic Reactions Appropriate medical treatment to manage immediate allergic reactions must be immediately available in the event an acute anaphylactic reaction occurs following administration of Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine. Monitor Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine recipients for the occurrence of immediate adverse reactions acco…

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?

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

#153

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

loceng wrote: post #64
squarefoot wrote: post #2

If this turns out to work as promised, in a idealistic universe, Moderna gets a big influx of money from all countries in the world and they immediately publish details and surrender any patent allowing the treatment to be produced worldwide and be affordable for everyone.

Free market would automatically cause a big influx of money. A "big influx of money from all countries in the world" - if from governments themselves and not individual citizens buying - would in fact be a proof point against its claimed effectiveness, if forcing the otherwise free market (via easily-commonly captured political-government-institutional channels) is what's required to drive funding towards it, e.g. re…

Very little about medical development is free market.

But otherwise, I always agree with people taking a default being skeptical approach to any medical news.

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

#154

Post by shibopo »

phpisthebest wrote: post #150
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> bar for side effects is much stricter for preventative treatments like vaccines These vaccines are for treatment. They don’t prevent cancer. They treat it. They’re vaccines because they work by arming your immune system versus doing the fighting themselves.

This further redefinition of the term "vaccine" is a huge problem by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment, a vaccine has to be preventative, and further personally I believe only Sterilizing immunity should be considered a "vaccine" This is very important, because a "vaccine" in the US has legal protections other medical drugs, treatments, etc do not get, which is why there is a push to include alot of thes…

I mean the general problem is that the word vaccine has been merged with two meanings of "creating something so your immune system gets prepped to prevent disease".

Moderna here create something so your immune system gets prepper but it doesn't prevent it's used to fight.

I mean this word came from cow, you are right, it's time to redefine some of these terms.

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

#155

Post by beowulfey »

phpisthebest wrote: post #150
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> bar for side effects is much stricter for preventative treatments like vaccines These vaccines are for treatment. They don’t prevent cancer. They treat it. They’re vaccines because they work by arming your immune system versus doing the fighting themselves.

This further redefinition of the term "vaccine" is a huge problem by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment, a vaccine has to be preventative, and further personally I believe only Sterilizing immunity should be considered a "vaccine" This is very important, because a "vaccine" in the US has legal protections other medical drugs, treatments, etc do not get, which is why there is a push to include alot of thes…

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/

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

#156

Post by [deleted] »

bugglebeetle wrote: post #46
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a big influx of money from all countries We don’t know how valuable this tech is. It could be worth trillions. It could be niche. Risk sharing, not cost, is the currency of deal making. > immediately publish details and surrender any patent mRNA vaccine production methods are tough, e.g. Moderna’s encapsulation technology. Add to that the personalisation required for these treatments, and we’re still far from econo…

> mRNA vaccine production methods are tough, e.g. Moderna’s encapsulation technology …and were invented with publicly-funded research that they’ve now privatized, resulting in large death tolls from vaccine inequity in poor countries.

[deleted]

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

#157

Post by fnordpiglet »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #147
lame-robot-hoax wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that the question to ask?

Maybe we found out in 20 years there is an mRNA to DNA long term issue? Maybe it’s good to not just one-path cancer treatments?

You’re aware that mRNA is a fundamental part of DNA based life biology, so there are lots of long term issues, by design of biology. Just probably not the ones you’re thinking of.

I would note there’s billions upon billions upon billions invested in developing cancer treatments across hundreds if not thousands of research labs, not just Moderna. This isn’t an all eggs in one basket thing.

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

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

#158

Post by bawolff »

croes wrote: post #38
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.

It wasn't free, just paid by the government means tax money means money that's now missing for other things in countries like Germany because they still are fixated on the 60% debt ceiling based on an Excel error.

I mean the person i was responding to said "Moderna gets a big influx of money from all countries in the world" - i assume that cash would come from tax revenue. Money doesn't just magically appear.

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

#159

Post by bawolff »

phpisthebest wrote: post #150
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> bar for side effects is much stricter for preventative treatments like vaccines These vaccines are for treatment. They don’t prevent cancer. They treat it. They’re vaccines because they work by arming your immune system versus doing the fighting themselves.

This further redefinition of the term "vaccine" is a huge problem by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment, a vaccine has to be preventative, and further personally I believe only Sterilizing immunity should be considered a "vaccine" This is very important, because a "vaccine" in the US has legal protections other medical drugs, treatments, etc do not get, which is why there is a push to include alot of thes…

> by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment

Umm. You have never heard of rabies or tetnus vaccines?

This is not a change in definition.

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

#160

Post by [deleted] »

bluGill wrote: post #5
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.

The side effects of most cancer treatments are aweful. How do they compare?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN