Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021 • Hacker News Board

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#51

Post by ethanbond » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:32 PM UTC

bacro wrote: post #41

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.

Funnily enough, Egas Moniz was given the nobel prize in medicine for the lobotomy procedure. He claimed it helped the mentally ill. How scientific was that? XD

Lobotomy is still used and it is still “scientific”…

We luckily have better treatments available for almost every scenario, but it’s definitely still a tool in the toolbox. Same with electroshock therapy. We can be thankful for advancements without being dismissive of some of the less ideal steps along the way.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#52

Post by bacro » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:33 PM UTC

silvester23 wrote: post #43

bacro wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

What I fail to understand is how you seem to think that you can can assess the risks associated with contracting the virus better than the risks associated with getting the vaccine. At this point, so many more people have received the vaccine than have contracted the virus that I think it's fairly safe to say that we know much more about how people react to the vaccine than the virus (which also keeps mutating unlike…

> What I fail to understand is how you seem to think that you can can assess the risks associated with contracting the virus better than the risks associated with getting the vaccine.

As I said, I cannot. Actually, nobody can. What I do know is:

- A vast majority of who gets the virus does not die or get any effects. - A lot of people who die of Covid-19 has a comorbidity factor of 4 (Which means suffers from 4 comorbidities). - I am 40 years old and no other comorbidities than a very light asthma. I eat well and try to do some exercise (but not as much as I would like, for sure). - There are no studies of long-term effects of getting the vaccines or getting the virus. - Anyone who took the vaccine can be infected and spread the virus just as someone who is not vaccinated. - Things that are made under political/financial pressure rarely get right the first time.

So, with this data, for me it is logical for people to wait if they can. If they have comorbidities or are old, then it is another story.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#53

Post by cinntaile » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:39 PM UTC

ramraj07 wrote: post #48

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.

What exactly have this years Nobel research been significant for? Like in real terms?

Check out the image in their scientific motivation to see where this has played a role. https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2021/10/press-medicine202...

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#54

Post by bacro » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:40 PM UTC

ethanbond wrote: post #51

bacro wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funnily enough, Egas Moniz was given the nobel prize in medicine for the lobotomy procedure. He claimed it helped the mentally ill. How scientific was that? XD

Lobotomy is still used and it is still “scientific”… We luckily have better treatments available for almost every scenario, but it’s definitely still a tool in the toolbox. Same with electroshock therapy. We can be thankful for advancements without being dismissive of some of the less ideal steps along the way.

Saying that lobotomy was good for mentally-ill people seems not very good science to me. Some people agree that he should be de-Nobelized (which I agree): https://www.theguardian.com/education/2004/aug/02/highereduc...

Disclaimer: I am portuguese.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#55

Post by mongol » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:44 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.

I think it is very likely that it will be rewarded, just not this year. Some time need to pass, and even though the discovery should be rewarded, it also needs to be figured out who to reward it to. Probably there are more than 3 contenders.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#56

Post by chucky » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:44 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 is handed out by a different committee compared to the other prizes, so how its handled should generally not be seen as an indicator for the other Nobel prizes.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#57

Post by rmu09 » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:46 PM UTC

bacro wrote: post #40

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 is vector based, not mRNA like Pfizer Comirnaty or Moderna.

Although vaccinated people can be infected and even spread the virus, the disease is usually mild, amount of infectious virus and the time they are infectious is much smaller. And that is no speciality of covid immunizations, other vaccines like measles or influenza also don't prevent infection, but aim to prevent the disease.

The "not fully tested" meme is nonsense, many hundred million people have been vaccinated in the meantime, the safety profile is known.

Regarding long time effects beside immunity of vaccines, this interview https://lexfridman.com/vincent-racaniello/ goes into some detail. TLDL: there is nothing to expect/fear.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#58

Post by bacro » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:46 PM UTC

xattt wrote: post #45

bacro wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

You may be conflating the mRNA vaccine with viral vector ones.

Not at all. Here is the news of a woman who died after getting the Pfizer's vaccine: (In Portuguese) https://politica.estadao.com.br/blogs/estadao-verifica/gover...

The news say that it was unrelated to the vaccine and it was a heart attack. However, I do not believe in coincidences and am very skeptical that the vaccine has not had some effect on this. Note that she died 1 day after getting the vaccine.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#59

Post by chucky » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:48 PM UTC

satisfice wrote: post #46

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.

I can only assume they are waiting until next year to be sure how the vaccine picture shakes out. MRNA vaccines are clearly safe and effective, and have saved countless lives, but with the dopey politics in Sweden about Covid, I am not really that surprised.

As a Swede, I feel like I need to point out that this comment seems misinformed on so many levels:

- the Nobel prize in medicine is not handed out by the Swedish government, so any dopey politics would not influence the Nobel prize. Rather, it is handed out by Karolinska Institutet (https://www.nobelprize.org/about/the-nobel-assembly-at-karol...)

- Sweden's handling of Covid has not been particularly influenced by politics, it's been run by the government-appointed experts (that were appointed before Covid broke out), so the "dopey politics" referred to have never really been politically motivated.

I don't think there's any reason for connecting Sweden's Covid response with who got the Nobel prize in Medicine this year.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#60

Post by siva7 » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:48 PM UTC

ethanbond wrote: post #51

bacro wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funnily enough, Egas Moniz was given the nobel prize in medicine for the lobotomy procedure. He claimed it helped the mentally ill. How scientific was that? XD

Lobotomy is still used and it is still “scientific”… We luckily have better treatments available for almost every scenario, but it’s definitely still a tool in the toolbox. Same with electroshock therapy. We can be thankful for advancements without being dismissive of some of the less ideal steps along the way.

There is a great quote from Norbert Wiener about the procedure:

"[P]refrontal lobotomy ... has recently been having a certain vogue, probably not unconnected with the fact that it makes the custodial care of many patients easier. Let me remark in passing that killing them makes their custodial care still easier."

I've studied medicine but i'm not aware that it is still taught as a "tool in the toolbox" in the modern medical community.