4 ms·

The vaccine is new, but the mRNA delivery system has been in the pipeline for decades, with other treatments actively undergoing the normal, slow FDA process[1]

The vaccine is new, but the mRNA delivery system has been in the pipeline for decades, with other treatments actively undergoing the normal, slow FDA process[1]. [1] https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-once-dismissed-idea-became-a-leading-technology-in-the-covid-vaccine-race/ https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-...

aeternum 5y ago
Yes, but why is it okay to approve this mRNA delivery system in a matter of months while the approval for these others require decades of test? There's clearly inconsistency by the FDA here.
- mindslight 5y ago
  Why is it okay to destroy someone's house with axes and water when it's on fire but otherwise it's illegal? There's clearly inconsistency by the fire department here. Seriously, what other course of events do you propose should have happened? Vaccines couldn't have been developed before Covid-19 existed. Should we have just pretended that mRNA technology didn't exist, in favor of traditional approaches of making vaccines, and then rushed approval on those? It seems like that alternative has actually been explored by other countries and they're nowhere near as effective.
  - aeternum 5y ago
    I think the FDA's normal process is extremely flawed and would like to see more expedited trails that allow early-opt-in and continually expanding test groups that ramp up in size as efficacy and safety is proven. It's criminal that the FDA has effectively sat on mRNA tech for decades while watching people who could have benefit from it die. The FDA deemed mRNA tech unsafe to give to much smaller groups of people already directly affected with various mRNA treatable diseases yet now after a few months of testing they have amazingly deemed it safe to give to to the entire world. The risk calculus just isn't consistent.
    - mindslight 5y ago
      I'll agree with you there. The way you worded your proceeding comment made it sound as if you would have preferred the FDA to not approve the Covid mRNA vaccines, as opposed to preferring easier approvals for other mRNA tech in general. To extend my quip, the people who could benefit from it each have their own little fire and are being systematically ignored.
    - omegaworks 5y ago
      Clinical trials take long because they are evaluating long term side effects. They didn't deem it unsafe to give to smaller groups of people, in many cases the company withdrew it from consideration because earlier uses were centered on oncology - taking pieces of patients' cancer cells and attempting to get the body to fight them immunologically - and they weren't able to obtain a clinically significant impact. Running a long term clinical trial is an expensive proposition. 1. https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/comment/evolution-mrna-vaccine-trials-oncology/ https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/comment/evolution-mrna-v...
- petre 5y ago
  Because we don't have decades at our disposal to combat this pandemic.

aeternum 5y ago

Yes, but why is it okay to approve this mRNA delivery system in a matter of months while the approval for these others require decades of test? There's clearly inconsistency by the FDA here.

mindslight 5y ago
Why is it okay to destroy someone's house with axes and water when it's on fire but otherwise it's illegal? There's clearly inconsistency by the fire department here. Seriously, what other course of events do you propose should have happened? Vaccines couldn't have been developed before Covid-19 existed. Should we have just pretended that mRNA technology didn't exist, in favor of traditional approaches of making vaccines, and then rushed approval on those? It seems like that alternative has actually been explored by other countries and they're nowhere near as effective.
- aeternum 5y ago
  I think the FDA's normal process is extremely flawed and would like to see more expedited trails that allow early-opt-in and continually expanding test groups that ramp up in size as efficacy and safety is proven. It's criminal that the FDA has effectively sat on mRNA tech for decades while watching people who could have benefit from it die. The FDA deemed mRNA tech unsafe to give to much smaller groups of people already directly affected with various mRNA treatable diseases yet now after a few months of testing they have amazingly deemed it safe to give to to the entire world. The risk calculus just isn't consistent.
  - mindslight 5y ago
    I'll agree with you there. The way you worded your proceeding comment made it sound as if you would have preferred the FDA to not approve the Covid mRNA vaccines, as opposed to preferring easier approvals for other mRNA tech in general. To extend my quip, the people who could benefit from it each have their own little fire and are being systematically ignored.
  - omegaworks 5y ago
    Clinical trials take long because they are evaluating long term side effects. They didn't deem it unsafe to give to smaller groups of people, in many cases the company withdrew it from consideration because earlier uses were centered on oncology - taking pieces of patients' cancer cells and attempting to get the body to fight them immunologically - and they weren't able to obtain a clinically significant impact. Running a long term clinical trial is an expensive proposition. 1. https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/comment/evolution-mrna-vaccine-trials-oncology/ https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/comment/evolution-mrna-v...
petre 5y ago
Because we don't have decades at our disposal to combat this pandemic.