Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells • Hacker News Board

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#41

Post by vibrato2 » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:36 PM UTC

orra wrote: post #31

tombert wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been saying for roughly a year now that if nothing else good can come from Covid, we at the very least are dumping a ton of time and resources and research into mRNA vaccines. I know basically nothing about virology, but I remember hearing a podcast a million years ago talking about mRNA vaccines, and I remember after it was over thinking "if this is even half as cool as it sounds to a lay person, the implicatio…

We developed several working vaccines, and in record time. A triumph of scientific engineering. I too am very hopeful for mRNA vaccines, although I don't know how much I should temper my expectations. The idea of curing certain cancers, not just preventing them, is wild.

Except we had to change the definition of “working vaccine” to fit these new therapies.

Traditionally a vaccine has to keep efficacy for a year. We haven’t got a year of data but the efficacy has dropped significantly

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#42

Post by vibrato2 » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:37 PM UTC

raphlinus wrote: post #33

ashtonkem wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mRNA vaccines look extremely promising too. It’s entirely possible that some classes of cancer will be effectively eliminated in our lifetime because of it, along with HIV and/or Malaria. The latter would probably be the biggest reduction in human death and misery since the invention of the Polio vaccine

A really excellent survey on the prospects for mRNA technology from Derek Lowe: https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/what-mrna-good-and...

Biggest pharma shill in media

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#43

Post by SketchySeaBeast » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:41 PM UTC

wongarsu wrote: post #24

gizmo686 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A limiting factor for the effectiveness of anti-virals for Covid is time. Maximum viral load happens often happens before any symptoms are present, and the most severe diseases occurs weeks after infection as a result of the bodies inflammatory response instead of the virus itself. This means that by the time you know that a patient will have severe Covid-19, it is likely too late for any treatment that is based on i…

I imagine the willingness to get tested would also be a lot higher if the result of a positive test was a reasonably quick antiviral treatment instead of weeks of quarantine. Sure, there will always be sceptics, but for large parts of people, organisations and governments having less perverse incentives might improve things a lot.

But you'd need to get tested for every minor sniffle, or if the claim about no symptoms being a time of maximum viral load, you'd have to constantly get tested even without symptoms.

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#44

Post by angelzen » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:41 PM UTC

raphlinus wrote: post #5

I'm starting to get pretty optimistic. There seem to be a bunch of antivirals with very different mechanisms of action - this one blocks entry of the virus to cells, Molnupiravir fucks up accurate replication of the virus (nucleoside analog), others are protease inhibitors, which are very effective against HIV. There's a caveat, most treatments that look promising don't pan out, but there are a lot in the pipeline an…

> Molnupiravir [interferes with] accurate replication of the virus

At first glance this sound like a really bad idea, given that the #1 concern is future covid mutations.

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#45

Post by mywittyname » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:42 PM UTC

wongarsu wrote: post #24

gizmo686 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A limiting factor for the effectiveness of anti-virals for Covid is time. Maximum viral load happens often happens before any symptoms are present, and the most severe diseases occurs weeks after infection as a result of the bodies inflammatory response instead of the virus itself. This means that by the time you know that a patient will have severe Covid-19, it is likely too late for any treatment that is based on i…

I imagine the willingness to get tested would also be a lot higher if the result of a positive test was a reasonably quick antiviral treatment instead of weeks of quarantine. Sure, there will always be sceptics, but for large parts of people, organisations and governments having less perverse incentives might improve things a lot.

I feel like I'm pointing out the obvious, but another, extremely effect and quick "treatment" is vaccination. And it works great without the constant need for testing. I have to imagine that anyone willing to undergo treatment at the very start of getting covid, would have also been willing to be vaccinated.

The vaccine-hesitant aren't going to go for treatment until the outlook is dire.

Additionally, in my experience, physicians aren't terribly concerned about infections in vaccinated individuals. When I was last tested, the physician essentially just assured me that vaccinations have been shown to drastically reduce the likelihood of complications, and not to really worry about it. Granted, I could have had a less rigorous physician, or it could that I'm totally healthy.

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#46

Post by tombert » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:45 PM UTC

vibrato2 wrote: post #41

orra wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We developed several working vaccines, and in record time. A triumph of scientific engineering. I too am very hopeful for mRNA vaccines, although I don't know how much I should temper my expectations. The idea of curing certain cancers, not just preventing them, is wild.

Except we had to change the definition of “working vaccine” to fit these new therapies. Traditionally a vaccine has to keep efficacy for a year. We haven’t got a year of data but the efficacy has dropped significantly

I don't know enough about vaccines to dispute what you're saying (though I feel like I have heard contrary data on this), but even if it's only fully effective for 8-9 months, isn't the fact that we had a vaccine that accomplished at least some of its goals safely designed and tested in record time a really cool thing?

Even if it's only effective for 6 months, that's still 6 months of slowing the spread, and conceivably we can extend the efficacy by administering booster shots.

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#47

Post by SketchySeaBeast » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:46 PM UTC

vibrato2 wrote: post #41

orra wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We developed several working vaccines, and in record time. A triumph of scientific engineering. I too am very hopeful for mRNA vaccines, although I don't know how much I should temper my expectations. The idea of curing certain cancers, not just preventing them, is wild.

Except we had to change the definition of “working vaccine” to fit these new therapies. Traditionally a vaccine has to keep efficacy for a year. We haven’t got a year of data but the efficacy has dropped significantly

It's not as though the concept of a vaccine booster is new, after all we get annual flu shots. It's also a question of efficacy of the vaccine versus the new predominate variant. Delta didn't exist when the vaccines were finalized.

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#48

Post by tombert » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:46 PM UTC

orra wrote: post #31

tombert wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been saying for roughly a year now that if nothing else good can come from Covid, we at the very least are dumping a ton of time and resources and research into mRNA vaccines. I know basically nothing about virology, but I remember hearing a podcast a million years ago talking about mRNA vaccines, and I remember after it was over thinking "if this is even half as cool as it sounds to a lay person, the implicatio…

We developed several working vaccines, and in record time. A triumph of scientific engineering. I too am very hopeful for mRNA vaccines, although I don't know how much I should temper my expectations. The idea of curing certain cancers, not just preventing them, is wild.

I haven't even heard about the curing cancer part, that's awesome if it's true.

I think I'm going to temper my expectations to "faster and more vaccines increasingly exotic diseases" for now. I would absolutely love to be proven wrong though.

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#49

Post by mywittyname » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:48 PM UTC

vibrato2 wrote: post #41

orra wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We developed several working vaccines, and in record time. A triumph of scientific engineering. I too am very hopeful for mRNA vaccines, although I don't know how much I should temper my expectations. The idea of curing certain cancers, not just preventing them, is wild.

Except we had to change the definition of “working vaccine” to fit these new therapies. Traditionally a vaccine has to keep efficacy for a year. We haven’t got a year of data but the efficacy has dropped significantly

My understanding is that all vaccines have similar "effectiveness curves", in that they are highly effective in the first weeks, and effectiveness degrades over time down to some low base level of immunity, where your body is no longer actively producing antibodies, but it has the ability to restart production quickly if necessary.

Re: Antiviral compound blocks SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells

#50

Post by notsureaboutpg » Fri, Oct 15, 2021, 3:51 PM UTC

tombert wrote: post #23

ashtonkem wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mRNA vaccines look extremely promising too. It’s entirely possible that some classes of cancer will be effectively eliminated in our lifetime because of it, along with HIV and/or Malaria. The latter would probably be the biggest reduction in human death and misery since the invention of the Polio vaccine

I've been saying for roughly a year now that if nothing else good can come from Covid, we at the very least are dumping a ton of time and resources and research into mRNA vaccines. I know basically nothing about virology, but I remember hearing a podcast a million years ago talking about mRNA vaccines, and I remember after it was over thinking "if this is even half as cool as it sounds to a lay person, the implicatio…

>I know basically nothing about virology, but I remember hearing a podcast a million years ago talking about mRNA vaccines, and I remember after it was over thinking "if this is even half as cool as it sounds to a lay person, the implications of this are huge".

Sounds like scientism. A guy on a podcast said these are promising and you said for a whole year, without understanding anything about virology, that it was really important and good to pour time and resources into these things?

I mean, maybe you are not wrong, but this is a terrible way to determine priorities for spending and work...