Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021 • Hacker News Board

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#31

Post by dahfizz » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:39 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #29

refurb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a popularity content. Nobel prizes are typically not given until several years after the work is complete and enough time has passed to fully appreciate the significance of it. I'd say it's a bit early for mRNA vaccines.

On the one side, you are correct and it's only last year / this year that mRNA vaccines have seen widespread adoption. On the other, mRNA research goes back to the 80's, and mRNA vaccine research goes back twenty years; these facts are often overlooked by the "it was developed too fast" crowds. That said, > It's not a popularity content. And yet, they gave Obama the Nobel Peace Prize the year he was elected, without…

The Nobel Peace Prize has been nothing but a meme for a while. The science prizes are still respected, and if they want them to stay that way then they should continue to award them based on science and not politics.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#32

Post by giarc » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:44 PM UTC

sz4kerto wrote: post #10

I believe Nobels for mRNA vaccines will come next year or in the year after. There's no urgency when it comes to awarding Nobel Prizes.

Some urgency since they don't give the award to people that have passed away.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#33

Post by pibechorro » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:46 PM UTC

siva7 wrote: post #3

I would have appreciated this year's one going for mRNA vaccine research as this would have been clearly the one to meet Nobel's will.

They can just take the nobel they censored from ivermectin and attribute it to the mrna shots, no? /S

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#34

Post by Tomte » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:46 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #26

siva7 wrote: post #3

I would have appreciated this year's one going for mRNA vaccine research as this would have been clearly the one to meet Nobel's will.

It's not a popularity content. Nobel prizes are typically not given until several years after the work is complete and enough time has passed to fully appreciate the significance of it. I'd say it's a bit early for mRNA vaccines.

That's the current practice, but siva7 is right in regards to timing and Nobel's will:

"to be distributed annually as prizes to those who, during the preceding year, have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind." (https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/full-text-of-alfred-...)

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#35

Post by parsimony » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:51 PM UTC

The TRPV1 and TRPV8 receptors are fascinating. Genetic variants in these receptors explain why we experience things differently. https://www.geneticlifehacks.com/are-you-a-spicy-food-wimp/

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#36

Post by ChemSpider » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:51 PM UTC

icegreentea2 wrote: post #28

OskarS wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've given it to organizations before (Doctors Without Borders won in 1999). Give it to Pfizer, Moderna and Oxford University then. Or "front line COVID-workers" or something. Exactly who gets it is not the main point, the main point is rewarding this incredible achievement in medicine (both the science of it, but also the work in testing, manufacturing and delivering it to patients).

The Nobel Prize typically rewards basic research, not applied - look up who got the prize with respect polio vaccines if you're curious.

Good point. In this case Katalin Karikó and Weismann are the frontrunners.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#37

Post by dcgudeman » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:53 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #29

refurb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a popularity content. Nobel prizes are typically not given until several years after the work is complete and enough time has passed to fully appreciate the significance of it. I'd say it's a bit early for mRNA vaccines.

On the one side, you are correct and it's only last year / this year that mRNA vaccines have seen widespread adoption. On the other, mRNA research goes back to the 80's, and mRNA vaccine research goes back twenty years; these facts are often overlooked by the "it was developed too fast" crowds. That said, > It's not a popularity content. And yet, they gave Obama the Nobel Peace Prize the year he was elected, without…

The Nobel Peace prize has always had political motivations that have reduced it's credibility. Last year it was awarded to the "World Food Programme" and in 2001 it was awarded to the “United Nations”. It’s best view the peace prize separately.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#38

Post by thecopy » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:54 PM UTC

pibechorro wrote: post #33

siva7 wrote: post #3

I would have appreciated this year's one going for mRNA vaccine research as this would have been clearly the one to meet Nobel's will.

They can just take the nobel they censored from ivermectin and attribute it to the mrna shots, no? /S

Who are they and how did they censor?

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#39

Post by Mindwipe » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:59 PM UTC

Are there useful possibilities opened up by increased understanding of how the touch receptors work? I can imagine that our ability to manipulate those more effectively could have a lot of useful applications.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#40

Post by bacro » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:00 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #29

refurb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a popularity content. Nobel prizes are typically not given until several years after the work is complete and enough time has passed to fully appreciate the significance of it. I'd say it's a bit early for mRNA vaccines.

On the one side, you are correct and it's only last year / this year that mRNA vaccines have seen widespread adoption. On the other, mRNA research goes back to the 80's, and mRNA vaccine research goes back twenty years; these facts are often overlooked by the "it was developed too fast" crowds. That said, > It's not a popularity content. And yet, they gave Obama the Nobel Peace Prize the year he was elected, without…

>On the other, mRNA research goes back to the 80's, and mRNA vaccine research goes back twenty years; these facts are often overlooked by the "it was developed too fast" crowds.

I am on that camp, that it was developed too fast and I do not think people should be mistreated because they think that. After all, there has been some adverse effects for some of the people who took it (like the auto-immune disease for the Janssen vaccine or thrombosis that caused some deaths in women who were taking the pill at the same time). I am not against vaccines in general, I am just worried that, as there is clearly an economic interest in rushing things up, that some bugs may still be on these vaccines that will need to be fixed. We have no idea of the long-term effects these vaccines have, unless someone has invented a time-machine and gone to the future. When concrete, well-made studies have been made that these vaccines are safe long-term and effective, I do not see why should someone not take it. Until then, I will wait at the comfort of my home.

After all, even if I took the vaccine, I would also continue to spread the virus just as someone who did not take it.

Another point is: How deadly is this vaccine to someone who is healthy? Is that value so big that we should rush to take not fully tested vaccines? I would get that criticism if there was a rate of 20, 30% of guaranteed death to someone who contracted the virus. At these current values? I think I will take my chances.