3 ms·
Recently here on HN, user 'native_samples' said, "anything based on their mRNA tech became toxic after multiple doses. That's why they refocused on vaccines".[1
by diggernet 5y ago
Recently here on HN, user 'native_samples' said, "anything based on their mRNA tech became toxic after multiple doses. That's why they refocused on vaccines".[1]
Now we are talking about more and more frequent vaccine booster doses. Shouldn't that be a concern?
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29306624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29306624
- Reason077 5y agoFuture boosters don't necessarily need to be based on mRNA tech. Novavax, for example, is a protein-subunit vaccine. mRNA may have an advantage in rapid development and fast manufacturing, however.
- diggernet 5y agoThose are good points, thanks. Probably makes sense for people who got mRNA to switch to non-mRNA for ongoing boosters, to be cautious. But the advantages you cite will surely cause pressure to use it more, especially for moving targets like the flu. I hope we have more details soon about the bounds of "multiple doses" and the potential issues associated.