Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021 • Hacker News Board

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#71

Post by jeltz » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:11 PM UTC

bacro wrote: post #58

xattt wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you did not confuse them why did you mention the Jansen vaccine which is vector based and uses DNA rather than mRNA?

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#72

Post by jeltz » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:14 PM UTC

OskarS wrote: post #15

jeltz wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that exactly why they should not give a prize for mRNA vaccines. The Norwegian Nobel Committee (the people who hand out the peace prize) has a history of handing out the prize too early (Obama, Arafat, etc) while the Swedish Research Council are much more cautious when handing out prizes.

I don't think it's too early to say that the vaccines deserve it, given what they have already accomplished.

I am sure people said the same for lobotomy back when Moniz won the prize. I am personally all for the mRNA vaccines and am vaccinated with Pfizer myself but I understand why they are cautious when handing out prizes. What harm is there in waiting a few years?

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#73

Post by ethanbond » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

siva7 wrote: post #60

ethanbond wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Yeah, I think we can agree that it should not be used the way that it was historically.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#74

Post by bacro » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:18 PM UTC

bumby wrote: post #65

bacro wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 comor…

> A vast majority of who gets the virus does not die or get any effects. To the OP's point, the same can be said about the vaccine. Their point being, because of the transmissibility of the virus, it's fairly safe to assume that most people leading normal lives will be exposed to the virus at some point so the choice is whether or not to be exposed while vaccinated or not. There seems to be less uncertainty around th…

Both of these scenarios are possible (among others, obviously):

- I take the vaccine and either die or have a side-effect for life because of some unknown related to my body. - I contract the virus and have no symptoms at all.

Nobody knows which one will happen to each individual. That woman that took the vaccine and died one day later? We will never know if she was better off without taking the vaccine and having the virus instead. Our body is too complex to predict that right now.

I find it particularly amusing that people that question the vaccines safety are being treated as idiots that know nothing about science. Like, never the scientists were wrong before or the big pharma/government never had their own interests in their mind. I guess it is easier to attack us than to have a rational conversation.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#75

Post by refurb » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:19 PM UTC

dustintrex wrote: post #70

refurb wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look back it’s usually a decade or more before a discovery gets a Nobel prize. Which makes sense, since it’s relevance isn’t usually immediately apparent.

Yes, but you'd be hard put to argue that there was an invention that got more benefit for humanity than mRNA vaccines in 2021.

Considering we’re about half way through an epidemic with new variants on the horizon I’d argue it’s a little early to start patting ourselves on the back?

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#76

Post by jeltz » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:19 PM UTC

causi wrote: post #19

ACS_Solver wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what I was hoping to see, an award to Karikó and Weissman for their mRNA research. I'm sure they'll get the Nobel within the next few years, but it would have been appropriate to award it now. The Nobel Committee doesn't rush the prizes, and they don't generally go to new research, but mRNA would be a very justified exception. We're currently in the worst pandemic in a century, and over the last ten months we'…

I have to say, awarding it for mRNA research could easily save lives by turning a few of the vaccine-hesitant.

Turning the Nobel Prize political does not seem like a good thing even if the cause is noble this time.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#77

Post by bacro » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:23 PM UTC

jeltz wrote: post #71

bacro wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you did not confuse them why did you mention the Jansen vaccine which is vector based and uses DNA rather than mRNA?

That was only to make a point that it was a vaccine that was developed very fast and had some (nasty) side-effects and that we should be careful not to rush things out. But rest assured that the second example I gave about the woman who died, died after taking the Pfizer vaccine.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#78

Post by dustintrex » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:27 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #75

dustintrex wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but you'd be hard put to argue that there was an invention that got more benefit for humanity than mRNA vaccines in 2021.

Considering we’re about half way through an epidemic with new variants on the horizon I’d argue it’s a little early to start patting ourselves on the back?

It's not a silver bullet, but there are millions of people who are not dead now because they got vaccinated.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#79

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:32 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.

[deleted]

Re: Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2021

#80

Post by rmu09 » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:34 PM UTC

bacro wrote: post #64

rmu09 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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. I confess I haven't watched that video yet, but I believe there are not any studies that claim that "amount of infectious virus and the time they are infectious is much smaller". But I will watch it later and see if something new came up. I c…

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01316-7

I know of one other study (can't find it at the moment though) that specifically looked not for CT value but if they are able to infect cells. The outcome was something like vaccinated people do replicate virus, but the spikes of those viruses are (mostly) deactivated by antibodies and therefore not as infectious as virus obtained from unvaccinated people. In rt-PCR tests you can't really distinguish infectious from deactivated virus.