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

Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

ox.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 569 posts

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#531

Post by coliveira »

jason0597 wrote: post #523
bumby wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's not as simple a model as "access vs. cost". It's access vs. quality vs. cost. Canada's HAQ index in 2015 was 87.6 vs. 81.3 for the US. However, Canada spent about $27B US on R&D vs. $495B for the US. On a per capita basis, the US outspends most the world on medical R&D. That drives the US total healthcare costs up while helping to drive down the healthcare quality costs elsewhere. To a certain extent, th…

Yes, the US spends much more per-capita on medical R&D than other countries. But how do we know all this money is going into real R&D? How do we know most of it is not going into e.g. me-too drugs?

The important issue is that R&D spending is not a good measure of outcomes. A lot of R&D spending goes to high administrative salaries, equipment, facilities (real estate), and related costs that do not translate into outcomes.

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#532

Post by bumby »

coliveira wrote: post #531
jason0597 wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the US spends much more per-capita on medical R&D than other countries. But how do we know all this money is going into real R&D? How do we know most of it is not going into e.g. me-too drugs?

The important issue is that R&D spending is not a good measure of outcomes. A lot of R&D spending goes to high administrative salaries, equipment, facilities (real estate), and related costs that do not translate into outcomes.

What would you propose as a better metric of innovation?

I don't think there's a single perfect measure but if you put it in broader context of measures like Nobel prizes R&D spending, patents, etc. it does seem to paint the picture that the US disproportionately contributes to medical innovation.

It's very similar to the measure of health. There is no single great metric. Using a single metric like BMI or blood pressure is flawed. However, you can get a clearer picture if you bring together multiple metrics.

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#533

Post by jjeaff »

noneeeed wrote: post #74
mcdowall wrote: post #5

The key differentiator here is the storage requirements (2-8c ‘normal refrigerator’). That’s much more accessible to developing / low GDP countries as opposed the cumbersome and expensive storage requirements of the other two.

Yeah, the fact that this doesn't even need a freezer is great news. The fact that we have three highly effective vaccines in such a short period is amazing and between them we might stand a chance of making and distributing them at the scale necessary to get things under some kind of control by August.

I think the cold storage issues are a bit overblown.

Apparently the pfizer and Moderna vaccines will keep for 30 days at refrigerator temps after thawing out. You can ship in dry ice and then I can't imagine the vaccine sitting around in any doctors office or pharmacy for longer than 30 days.

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#535

Post by strombofulous »

standardUser wrote: post #529
strombofulous wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Literally all the data" that's been collected on the impact of me not picking my nose shows that it prevents covid This does not mean that by not picking your nose you can prevent covid We would need more data to show that conclusively Simiarly, we need more data to show that these vaccines are effective and don't have negative long-term effects

Efficacy has been proven to a high enough degree of certainty that these vaccines are now being submitted for approval. Safety was largely proven in Phase 1/2 trials (before tens of thousands of people were injected with the stuff for Phase 3 trials). And all signs continue to show the vaccine to be safe (and data will continue to be collected for at least a year or two for the various Phase 3 trials). Maybe "you" ne…

If the data we have is sufficient, then why hasn't it been approved yet?

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#536

Post by jason0597 »

bumby wrote: post #530
jason0597 wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the US spends much more per-capita on medical R&D than other countries. But how do we know all this money is going into real R&D? How do we know most of it is not going into e.g. me-too drugs?

That's a potential real problem, but the concern should be across the board (i.e., how do we know other countries aren't funding me-too drugs) so it doesn't really help illuminate any disparity between countries (which is the context of this discussion). I'm not trying to be dismissive, I just don't know how it's germane to the discussion unless we view all the other data through the same lens. The data I linked is p…

I do not know how to objectively measure useful research funding. However, this discussion reminded me of a graph I saw on the wtfhappenedin1971.com site [1]. It's not direct measurement of R&D development, but it sure as hell doesn't paint a good picture for all the spending that's going on. I wouldn't be surprised if a similar allocation of funds was happening in medical R&D as well.

[1] https://wtfhappenedin1971home.files.wordpress.com/2020/05/ey...

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#538

Post by standardUser »

strombofulous wrote: post #535
standardUser wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Efficacy has been proven to a high enough degree of certainty that these vaccines are now being submitted for approval. Safety was largely proven in Phase 1/2 trials (before tens of thousands of people were injected with the stuff for Phase 3 trials). And all signs continue to show the vaccine to be safe (and data will continue to be collected for at least a year or two for the various Phase 3 trials). Maybe "you" ne…

If the data we have is sufficient, then why hasn't it been approved yet?

The data was literally just released.

Moderna and Pfizer submitted for approval shortly after they released their initial Phase 3 results. Approval is expected to be expedited, but will not be instant (I've read a few weeks, assuming no problems). Oxford/AstraZeneca will likely follow the same course now that their results are available (they were waiting for enough people in their trials to become infected, same as the other Phase 3 trials).

It is widely expected that large scale distribution of these vaccines will begin in late December.

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#539

Post by brutus1213 »

te_chris wrote: post #121
brutus1213 wrote: post #115

Does anyone have a pointer on how the mrna vaccine actually works? I understand basic genetics mechanisms and how mrna works inside cells. In shot form, I assume the modified mrna strands are floating through the blood stream. What happens after the injection? Btw .. I think public health needs to start educating people on how these things work in order to get high coverage. I am alarmed at the number of highly educa…

I liked this as a background https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/22/mrna-vaccines-... . This vaccine isn't mRNA though.

Thx for the pointer. Yes, I was talking about mrna in the context of the Moderna and Pfizer+B vaccine. This was a good read on why we shouldn't fear reverse transcription. What I still don't get is how free floating mrna molecules in the bloodstream go through the same protein formation process as mrna inside cells. Will continue to search.

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#540

Post by WalterBright »

CaptainZapp wrote: post #361
WalterBright wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pay them their costs and not one cent more. I prefer a system where it's very worthwhile for people to risk a lot and work hard to save my life. If it was all about altruism, I doubt a vaccine would be developed for many more years.

Regarding vaccines and altruism I suggest you read up on Jonas Salk, who developed one of the first successful polio vaccines[1] Money quote from linked article: "News of the vaccine's success was first made public on April 12, 1955.[7] Salk was immediately hailed as a "miracle worker", and chose to not patent the vaccine or seek any profit from it in order to maximize its global distribution." [1] https://en.wikiped…

I do not dispute that altruistic people exist, and often do great things.

But I also know that my grandmother suffered terribly from rheumatoid arthritis, and it destroyed her life. Long after she died, enbrel was developed for profit which was the first really successful treatment for it.

    No profits => no treatment => misery.
You can sit around waiting for and hoping for someone to step up and sacrifice their time and money for your benefit, but I prefer the much more reliable method of paying them.
Post reply on HN