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

‘AeroNabs’ – Inhalable Protection Against Covid-19

ucsf.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 49 posts

Re: ‘AeroNabs’ – Inhalable Protection Against Covid-19

#32

Post by derefr »

vikramkr wrote: post #28
Duller-Finite wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normally I agree that press releases way oversell the research, but I don't think that was the case here. Their camelid nanobody approach seems to be a fairly novel idea with some nice benefits over traditional antibodies, and most of the linked article actually does a nice job of walking you through the figures in the preprint. Sure there's not any clinical data, but they actively admit that and I'm sure that's some…

Camelid nanobodies aren't that new, but this is still overselling stuff. I don't like reporting on preprint in general, and this article really doesn't explain the complexities of actually getting some early stage technology like this approved and developed. That's where you end up with the constant barrage of "oh look, another biomedical technology we'll never hear about again" comments, and the amount that this art…

If you take it as science reporting, mainly intended to be of interest to scientists or to people who follow the progress of science, then it's sensible. It's similar to the materials-science reporting they do for battery technologies.

These releases coming from University PR departments (this one's from UCSF) aren't really supposed to make it into newspapers for wide consumption. Their target audience is:

1. the people working in the same field—in other Universities, or in industry—who maybe don't have time to read journals, so you've gotta get their attention actively with a "billboard" announcement, rather than putting it in a journal they have to explicitly decide to read;

2. the people who fund the university, who want to see what sorts of neat things their money is being spent on.

Pop-science journalists sometimes glom onto these releases and make them more than they are, "retargeting" them for public consumption. You can certainly object to that. But as originally delivered, these publications are blameless for that.

Re: ‘AeroNabs’ – Inhalable Protection Against Covid-19

#33

Post by djaque »

That's really exciting. It reminds me of PrEP which is a pill you take that can prevent you from contracting HIV with like 99% success rate. It's really a game changer since there isn't an HIV vaccine.

I also don't want to get my hopes up since research like this is bound to be overhyped. I want to see where it goes like a month or two from now.

Re: ‘AeroNabs’ – Inhalable Protection Against Covid-19

#35

Post by klenwell »

eigenvalue wrote: post #7

Won't this take too long to run human trials on for safety/efficacy for it to really matter? My understanding is that a vaccine will likely come out within 6 months or so. They mention that it's an older compound, but sounds like they made some novel changes to it. Since this situation is so much a race against time, we are probably better off focusing on older, better-understood compounds that don't need to be teste…

They offer it as a stopgap, which, I agree with you, seems improbable given the latest reports on vaccines:

Used once a day, AeroNabs could provide powerful, reliable protection against SARS-CoV-2 until a vaccine becomes available.

But maybe that's a signal that these researchers believe much of the vaccine news has been overly optimistic hype. I guess the race is on.

One question I don't think the article addressed: if successful, would this have applications beyond Covid-19? Like against the common cold?

Re: ‘AeroNabs’ – Inhalable Protection Against Covid-19

#37

Post by learc83 »

xmjw wrote: post #31

Anyone remember the Benzites from Star Trek TNG? I guess we know what that gas they breathe in is for...

I know that this is a joke, but the gas they breath is supposed to be chlorine, moisture, and mineral salts to replicate their home world's atmosphere.

Re: ‘AeroNabs’ – Inhalable Protection Against Covid-19

#38

Post by learc83 »

mc32 wrote: post #3

Looks interesting but so far only talks about using it as prophylactic via inhalation; however the virus is known to enter via mouth, eyes and anus as well (breaks in skin probably). Even so inhalation and touching to mouth are likely the most common vectors of infection, so seems promising.

The virus is "known to enter" via the anus? That might be hypothesized by someone, but I haven't heard of any documented cases of anal transmission. Have you?

Re: ‘AeroNabs’ – Inhalable Protection Against Covid-19

#40

Post by mc32 »

learc83 wrote: post #38
mc32 wrote: post #3

Looks interesting but so far only talks about using it as prophylactic via inhalation; however the virus is known to enter via mouth, eyes and anus as well (breaks in skin probably). Even so inhalation and touching to mouth are likely the most common vectors of infection, so seems promising.

The virus is "known to enter" via the anus? That might be hypothesized by someone, but I haven't heard of any documented cases of anal transmission. Have you?

Here is one report[1] although this one is contracting it from the anus. Early in the pandemic I read about acquiring via the anus, but not sure if that was confirmed.

[1] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/02/studies-...

Post reply on HN