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

Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

them.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 490 posts

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#291

Post by ifyoubuildit »

pixl97 wrote: post #194
ifyoubuildit wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm pretty sure understanding the biology behind it all can help make predictions about the outcome ... Of course it can, that's what you use to write your test plan. But I never (ever) rely on those predictions alone. Everyone who has done this long enough knows that if you don't test your code well enough before you push it out, it will fail. Hell, it'll even fail sometimes when you did thoroughly test it.

Well, in computers our test plans generally run in seconds. If you had to push code and wait a year for feedback then how you tested and pushed code would change dramatically. Now imagine the environment you were pushing code to was 1. Always changing in very small ways that could sometimes have huge affects due to completely random variable changes you had no control over. 2. Every host your ran your software on 'co…

Well said. But some people take this as "well we can't realistically do the exhaustive test, and we really want this thing, so let's assume the outcome will be positive". That's fine when it's your own choice, but it's not when you're forcing it on other people.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#292

Post by hashimotonomora »

baq wrote: post #172
hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't know this. Could you explain the reason?

No detectable virus means no transmissible virus.

False. Detectable is an experimental limitation of a given measurement system. Even one single virion can infect a host.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#293

Post by ifyoubuildit »

copo233 wrote: post #190
ifyoubuildit wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm pretty sure understanding the biology behind it all can help make predictions about the outcome ... Of course it can, that's what you use to write your test plan. But I never (ever) rely on those predictions alone. Everyone who has done this long enough knows that if you don't test your code well enough before you push it out, it will fail. Hell, it'll even fail sometimes when you did thoroughly test it.

Yeah but you know, as much as you know anything else really, that your code won't break your toaster.

https://www.amazon.com/Tovala-Gen-Multi-Mode-Programmable-St...

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#294

Post by roywiggins »

wan23 wrote: post #171
thebradbain wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not a doctor, but as a gay man: it’s my understanding HIV doesn’t mutate in the same way a disease like Covid does, at least not in the sense that there’s as many opportunities to spread (i.e. not airborne), so while HIV may actually mutate more in theory, it gets less chances to spread, so less completely-different variants become widespread. Also, as part of “stopping the spread” PrEP has existed for years. It’…

Small correction: PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) and PEP (post-exposure prophylaxis) are both protocols for using drugs to prevent infection. You generally take PrEP drugs every day if you think you're in danger of being exposed, or alternatively take PEP if you think you have been exposed to HIV without any kind of protection, sort of like a morning after pill (but every day for a whole month).

Something I learned today: PrEP also works "on demand", so for some people it may not be necessary to take it every day.

https://www.aidsmap.com/news/jul-2020/demand-prep-highly-eff...

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#295

Post by luckydata »

firmnoodle wrote: post #38
luckydata wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because the point he's making is wrong. Vaccines are doing a fantastic job at slowing down the progression of the virus which is key to keep mutations at bay. No vaccine is 100% effective, but even 80% effectiveness radically changes the dynamic of a pandemic, it's so easy to see that I don't understand what can lead someone to deny this fact besides bad faith.

I think you may want to revisit your 80%. The vaccine efficacy for sterilization of the virus ended up dropping more quickly than expected and that's even with pre-Delta variants. Look at the Israel data. When you don't understand, I suspect what you are encountering isn't bad faith actors, but more informed people.

I seriously doubt it. Show me your "israel data" and tell me how that changes the situation, because I don't believe you and you come with nothing but name calling.

Let's see what you got.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#296

Post by hdjjhhvvhga »

_Microft wrote: post #204
JulianMorrison wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Detection means there is enough virus physically present in the sample for the detection technology to identify it. Infection requires virus particles to be physically present in transmission vectors (fluids, droplets, etc). There's generally also a dose-response effect where more particles means more chance of evading the immune system well enough to establish replication in the victim. So a lack of anything to dete…

> So a lack of anything to detect, means a lack of anything to spread an infection. One should add that for that the threshold for detection has to be lower than the threshold for infection. Example: let the detection threshold be 10 particles/ml and the infection threshold be 100 particles/ml (*) -> then undetectable implies that it is very improbable that an infection will take place. (*) This is a very crude descr…

> One should add that for that the threshold for detection has to be lower than the threshold for infection.

This statement is logical and makes perfect sense - but it's narrower than the original one.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#297

Post by tomp »

hashimotonomora wrote: post #289
lixtra wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can’t sample all parts and all fluids of someone’s body all the time. Maybe trace undetectable levels of the virus can be transmitted… You don’t need to be a 100% sure. Once the risk becomes small enough you can spend your time worrying about other risks.

Risks like these are orthogonal and additive. There’s no reason to discard any risk but to hedge them.

Activity-based risks are not additive.

Time spent driving is not time spent having sex (well, hopefully).

So if risk(dying while driving) ~ risk(dying because of sex) ~ 0, you can easily ignore both of those.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#298

Post by scaredginger »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #229
chucksmash wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably the viral load required for transmission is greater than the viral load required for detection.

That seems like a big if? maybe 0.5% of people actually are succeptable to the lowered viral load. Have studies been done that would detect such a population?

People on ART also often (perhaps usually) have undetectable viral loads

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#299

Post by ImaCake »

XorNot wrote: post #269
maxerickson wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The IAVA press release discusses some of this: https://www.iavi.org/news-resources/press-releases/2022/iavi... Sounds like the mRNA platform is being tested as a delivery mechanism for immunological work that was done separately.

Specifically it's advantageous because bnAB development requires 2 separate immune stimulii applied over months. Injecting protein bolus (traditional vaccines) then requires something like 6+ separate, different vaccines - so 6 synthetic paths, production lines etc. mRNA eliminates all of that. The 2 immune pathways can be combined into 1 vaccine, and the multiple vaccines can all be produced with the same synthetic…

Yep. In fact mRNA vaccines are almost trivially easy to produce. I know for a fact that many biology labs around the world bought the reagents needed to make homebrew mRNA vaccines in earl 2020. Just in case big pharma screwed up. It would have only been a few days work for them to produce it for themselves and I wouldn’t be surprised if some American and European labs actually did it.

Re: Moderna’s HIV vaccine has officially begun human trials

#300

Post by ImaCake »

suifbwish wrote: post #284
mikaeluman wrote: post #235

I remember growing up being terrified of HIV/AIDS. The idea of something being permanent and transmissible via sex, and literally dismounting your immune defense to all other diseases on the planet... To this day it still terrifies me, even though the treatments have become so good. Each year it seems there are new stories about HIV research, and progress keeps being made. I pray for positive results and am really am…

Quoted post unavailable.

Just to address this. There is no evidence anyone produced HIV in a lab and then released it, accidentally or not, out into the world. Scientists have established a pretty robust causal chain for where HIV came from. It is plausible that HIV was spreading between humans before we even really had the field of Molecular Biology that would have allowed us to “make” HIV.
Post reply on HN