5 ms·

(Caveat: amateur opinion based on mainstream broad understanding, not an actual scientist.) This is interesting, but so far a weak first step on flu. Each year

(Caveat: amateur opinion based on mainstream broad understanding, not an actual scientist.) This is interesting, but so far a weak first step on flu. Each year experts stare at numbers and perhaps read some tea leaves to choose 4 strains to cover, often missing somewhat. The innovation I'd like to see: ignore the "choose 4" process, and instead aim to cover all known strains.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/12/innovative-universal-flu-vaccine-shows-promises-it-first-clinical-test https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/12/innovative-universal... (“Innovative universal flu vaccine shows promise in first clinical test”) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1118-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1118-7 (“A chimeric hemagglutinin-based universal influenza virus vaccine approach induces broad and long-lasting immunity in a randomized, placebo-controlled phase I trial”)
wbl 6y ago
Moderna has a much more flexible production process so should be more resistant to misses.
soared 6y ago
>amateur opinion based on mainstream broad understanding I don’t think experts are reading tea leaves and it’s pretty wild to claim that. There are literally billions of dollars at stake. To bring it bag to software, that’s like me claiming I think machine learning people are just using fancy excel formulas.
- pinusc 6y ago
  I mean... it's a lot of excel formulas, but still basically excel formulas!
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- jjcon 6y ago
  > I think machine learning people are just using fancy excel formulas. I mean... you can do it in excel it is just a lot... slower - you can do like anything in excel https://youtu.be/s105jek4WUI https://youtu.be/s105jek4WUI
greg5green 6y ago
Even if we want to see a more innovative flu vaccine, choosing an iterative approach of getting a working one first, and then fine tuning it to protect against more variants is a good plan.
bluGill 6y ago
The experts are not randomly choosing strains. A few years ago it was 3 strains, they recently added a 4th. They could add a 5th next year, or drop back down to 3 depending on what they are seeing actually happen. The real problem they have is the flu mutates. They know what strains they see now and can add them all easily enough. In the few months between deciding on strains and manufacturing them the flu can mutate to some new strain that wasn't even seen before.

toomuchtodo 6y ago

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/12/innovative-universal-flu-vaccine-shows-promises-it-first-clinical-test https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/12/innovative-universal... (“Innovative universal flu vaccine shows promise in first clinical test”) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1118-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1118-7 (“A chimeric hemagglutinin-based universal influenza virus vaccine approach induces broad and long-lasting immunity in a randomized, placebo-controlled phase I trial”)

wbl 6y ago

Moderna has a much more flexible production process so should be more resistant to misses.

soared 6y ago

>amateur opinion based on mainstream broad understanding I don’t think experts are reading tea leaves and it’s pretty wild to claim that. There are literally billions of dollars at stake. To bring it bag to software, that’s like me claiming I think machine learning people are just using fancy excel formulas.

pinusc 6y ago
I mean... it's a lot of excel formulas, but still basically excel formulas!
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
jjcon 6y ago
> I think machine learning people are just using fancy excel formulas. I mean... you can do it in excel it is just a lot... slower - you can do like anything in excel https://youtu.be/s105jek4WUI https://youtu.be/s105jek4WUI

greg5green 6y ago

Even if we want to see a more innovative flu vaccine, choosing an iterative approach of getting a working one first, and then fine tuning it to protect against more variants is a good plan.

bluGill 6y ago

The experts are not randomly choosing strains. A few years ago it was 3 strains, they recently added a 4th. They could add a 5th next year, or drop back down to 3 depending on what they are seeing actually happen. The real problem they have is the flu mutates. They know what strains they see now and can add them all easily enough. In the few months between deciding on strains and manufacturing them the flu can mutate to some new strain that wasn't even seen before.