3 ms·
> Sputnik/AstraZeneca vaccines were released almost at the same time as Moderna/Pfizer Most of the time and cost is associated with the trials - not the actual
by onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
> Sputnik/AstraZeneca vaccines were released almost at the same time as Moderna/Pfizer
Most of the time and cost is associated with the trials - not the actual development AFAIK.
What would be more promising is if MRNA proves to be much more likely to pass trials. I think we need a lot more attempts at different viruses to have an idea here.
Certainly - if this HIV vaccine /does/ work - that's a huge win for MRNA.
> If mRNA vaccine was as magical as it was marketed, we wouldn’t be getting 3-4(and soon 5?) doses of the same vaccine with the emergence of new variants. Rather, there would be delta- and omicron-specific vaccine.
This is nonsense. The traditional vaccines don't work any better. They're worse. This is evidence MRNA is better than traditional vaccines.
- f6v 5y ago> The traditional vaccines don't work any better. Didn’t say they were. Rather that mRNA don’t seem to be approved faster for the new variants. > This is evidence MRNA is better than traditional vaccines. Haven’t been following the field that closely. I only seen one pre-print(probably Hungary?) where Sputnik was on par. Would love to see data if you’re willing to share. Edit: I admit I’m a bit confused since I mixed “traditional vaccines” and Sputnik/AZ together. The latter aren’t traditional since adenovirus-based vaccines haven’t been previously deployed, same as mRNA vaccines.