5 ms·

Mrna vaccine techniques could be the next leap we needed to actually combat viruses. Pretty amazing. I hope this ends up passing clinical trials soon.

hammock 5y ago
Why wait?
downrightmike 5y ago
Crispr and plucky scientists are getting really close https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/center-news/2020/08/herpes-simplex-gene-therapy.html https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/center-news/2020/08/herpes...
- techdragon 5y ago
  I’m looking forward to seeing progress on things like this and equivalent work on HPV (for the other HPV variants and the massive bulk of the population that either because of age or gender didn’t get the now widespread HPV vaccine) It may not be a cure for HIV but it’s also the sort of thing that would be nice to eliminate from the variables at play in “healthy” that affect basically everything to do with medical science. Taking a few more variables out of the equations will hopefully make other things easier to study.
  - schleck8 5y ago
    > It may not be a cure for HIV CRISPR is most likely the cure for HIV as it can be used to modify embryonic DNA to create permanent immunity. That is actually what the first CRISPR embryo experiment tried to achieve a few years back in China.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - luciusdomitius 5y ago
      I still remember the video with the doctor explaining what he had done. Made me feel in a gattaca-like sci-fi movie. Shame that governments try to stomp over such people instead of embracing innovation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th0vnOmFltc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th0vnOmFltc
    - raducu 5y ago
      I'm not familiar with CRISPR technology, but afik the issue with HIV is you would have to target some deep reservoir cells within adult humans whereas targeting embryo cells would be easier. But I don't know how CRISPR is delivered to edit DNA in live cells.
    - eridan2 5y ago
      CRISPR will not be used to cure HIV (not in the way experimented in China) because the same mutation that confers resistance to HIV makes people more susceptible to infections by influenza and West Nile virus and it is associated with autoimmune conditions like Crohn’s disease and type 1 diabetes
redis_mlc 5y ago
MRNA vaccines could be monstrous - we have no long-term data on them. Most of our vaccine experience is with weakened or dead virii, but MRNA is a different thing. Note that MRNA, RNA and DNA are interchangeable genetic mechanisms and can transcript into each other. (There are recent papers published about this in 2021.) I just hope corona and MRNA vaccines don't turn out to be as dangerous as Zika, which started out as a curiosity in the press, and turned into a deadly threat to newborns. Corona attacks female reproductive tissues, so we'll learn over time.
native_samples 5y ago
How about they actually combat COVID first? Like, without needing to re-take them every few months. Recall that Moderna was failing to progress beyond animal trials as recently as 2017. The reason was their mRNA delivery tech became toxic given multiple doses. They had struggled with this problem for years but found a neat solution: pivot to vaccines, because as everyone knows, vaccines don't need multiple doses. They protect you for life. <facepalm> https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/ https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/ https://www.statnews.com/2017/07/27/moderna-alexion-partnership/ https://www.statnews.com/2017/07/27/moderna-alexion-partners...
- dahfizz 5y ago
  Yeah, this has been yet another PR failure for Fauci. We went from the vaccine being "virtually 100% efficacious" to needing a booster every 6 months, and even then you can still catch, spread, or die from the virus. And yes, I know that this is common for vaccines. No vaccine is 100% effective. Which is why Fauci's testimony to the contrary was so irresponsible.
  - ipspam 5y ago
    No, it's not common for vaccines. That's a myth. Only the flu vaccine. It depends on the complexity of the mechanism of entering human cells. If the complexity is simple, mutations are not likely to screw up that mechanism, and vaccines are quite short lived, like the seasonal flu. When the complexity is high, like measles, mutations have a much higher chance of screwing something up, so evolution is retarded and vaccines are effective for a lifetime. This issue is being so pigheaded as to think that 16 billion vaccines can be created, deployed, and put in arms in a short enough time span to defeat a brand new, somewhat fast evolving virus before it selects to get around the vaccine. It was never going to work.
- tchalla 5y ago
  > How about they actually combat COVID first? Like, without needing to re-take them every few months. I sense some frustration behind that comment. Two points 1) We don't see a decrease in Vaccine Effectiveness for Covid. The headlines you see confuse efficacy with effectiveness. There's no meaningful way to directly measure effectiveness and therefore, some studies use anti-bodies as a proxy. However, it should be noted that just because you do not have anti-bodies doesn't mean the effectiveness is reduced. The human body (T-Cells, B-Cells) are able to produce anti-bodies "on demand" as and when required. 2) The non-mRNA vaccines also reduce efficacy and we don't stop researching their benefits on other viruses. So, both of them are not mutually exclusive.

hammock 5y ago

Why wait?

downrightmike 5y ago

Crispr and plucky scientists are getting really close https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/center-news/2020/08/herpes-simplex-gene-therapy.html https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/center-news/2020/08/herpes...

techdragon 5y ago
I’m looking forward to seeing progress on things like this and equivalent work on HPV (for the other HPV variants and the massive bulk of the population that either because of age or gender didn’t get the now widespread HPV vaccine) It may not be a cure for HIV but it’s also the sort of thing that would be nice to eliminate from the variables at play in “healthy” that affect basically everything to do with medical science. Taking a few more variables out of the equations will hopefully make other things easier to study.
- schleck8 5y ago
  > It may not be a cure for HIV CRISPR is most likely the cure for HIV as it can be used to modify embryonic DNA to create permanent immunity. That is actually what the first CRISPR embryo experiment tried to achieve a few years back in China.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - luciusdomitius 5y ago
    I still remember the video with the doctor explaining what he had done. Made me feel in a gattaca-like sci-fi movie. Shame that governments try to stomp over such people instead of embracing innovation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th0vnOmFltc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th0vnOmFltc
  - raducu 5y ago
    I'm not familiar with CRISPR technology, but afik the issue with HIV is you would have to target some deep reservoir cells within adult humans whereas targeting embryo cells would be easier. But I don't know how CRISPR is delivered to edit DNA in live cells.
  - eridan2 5y ago
    CRISPR will not be used to cure HIV (not in the way experimented in China) because the same mutation that confers resistance to HIV makes people more susceptible to infections by influenza and West Nile virus and it is associated with autoimmune conditions like Crohn’s disease and type 1 diabetes

redis_mlc 5y ago

MRNA vaccines could be monstrous - we have no long-term data on them. Most of our vaccine experience is with weakened or dead virii, but MRNA is a different thing. Note that MRNA, RNA and DNA are interchangeable genetic mechanisms and can transcript into each other. (There are recent papers published about this in 2021.) I just hope corona and MRNA vaccines don't turn out to be as dangerous as Zika, which started out as a curiosity in the press, and turned into a deadly threat to newborns. Corona attacks female reproductive tissues, so we'll learn over time.

native_samples 5y ago

How about they actually combat COVID first? Like, without needing to re-take them every few months. Recall that Moderna was failing to progress beyond animal trials as recently as 2017. The reason was their mRNA delivery tech became toxic given multiple doses. They had struggled with this problem for years but found a neat solution: pivot to vaccines, because as everyone knows, vaccines don't need multiple doses. They protect you for life. <facepalm> https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/ https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/ https://www.statnews.com/2017/07/27/moderna-alexion-partnership/ https://www.statnews.com/2017/07/27/moderna-alexion-partners...

dahfizz 5y ago
Yeah, this has been yet another PR failure for Fauci. We went from the vaccine being "virtually 100% efficacious" to needing a booster every 6 months, and even then you can still catch, spread, or die from the virus. And yes, I know that this is common for vaccines. No vaccine is 100% effective. Which is why Fauci's testimony to the contrary was so irresponsible.
- ipspam 5y ago
  No, it's not common for vaccines. That's a myth. Only the flu vaccine. It depends on the complexity of the mechanism of entering human cells. If the complexity is simple, mutations are not likely to screw up that mechanism, and vaccines are quite short lived, like the seasonal flu. When the complexity is high, like measles, mutations have a much higher chance of screwing something up, so evolution is retarded and vaccines are effective for a lifetime. This issue is being so pigheaded as to think that 16 billion vaccines can be created, deployed, and put in arms in a short enough time span to defeat a brand new, somewhat fast evolving virus before it selects to get around the vaccine. It was never going to work.
tchalla 5y ago
> How about they actually combat COVID first? Like, without needing to re-take them every few months. I sense some frustration behind that comment. Two points 1) We don't see a decrease in Vaccine Effectiveness for Covid. The headlines you see confuse efficacy with effectiveness. There's no meaningful way to directly measure effectiveness and therefore, some studies use anti-bodies as a proxy. However, it should be noted that just because you do not have anti-bodies doesn't mean the effectiveness is reduced. The human body (T-Cells, B-Cells) are able to produce anti-bodies "on demand" as and when required. 2) The non-mRNA vaccines also reduce efficacy and we don't stop researching their benefits on other viruses. So, both of them are not mutually exclusive.