3 ms·

This is an antibody, not a vaccine. It's for treating a single infection, not for conferring immunity.

by scatters 4y ago

whoomp12342 4y ago
how likely is it that this leads to some type of universal vaccine?
- throwawaymaths 4y ago
  Not saying it's impossible, but I've never heard of it happening in that direction[0]. The immune system uses natural selection to randomly generate and amplify successful antibodies. It seems that the likelihood of generating exactly that antibody in the immunization process is astronomically low. [0] unless the lab-gnerated antibody is "seeing" a different part of the virus that the current vaccine doesn't see, in which case targeting the new spot in the virus is an obvious "next move".
saveferris 4y ago
I admittedly have no idea how it works, what the differences are but the article infers that the tech developed here can be used for vaccines. From the article: “If it does,” he added, “it might provide a new therapeutic and also contribute to new vaccine strategies.” Maybe you know, is this just for therapeutics and not vaccines? Edit: looks like someone else answered this below....
ChuckMcM 4y ago
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here but what I took away from all of the papers on the MRNA vaccines is that they were designed to tell cells to build a protein (spike protein) that would stimulate the immune system to create an antibody that recognized said protein and it was those antibodies that made it harder to become infected with SARS-COVID-2. One of the papers I read compared and contrasted the antibody that Pfizer used in their development vs the one that Moderna used in their development, with the conclusion that the Moderna "provoked" antibody was slightly more effective at preventing an infection from taking hold. And based on that understanding (which may be flawed, please let me know if it is) then having a better 'target' antibody that you are trying to provoke the immune system to create, would make an MRNA vaccine more effective.

This is an antibody, not a vaccine. It's for treating a single infection, not for conferring immunity.

whoomp12342 4y ago

how likely is it that this leads to some type of universal vaccine?

throwawaymaths 4y ago
Not saying it's impossible, but I've never heard of it happening in that direction[0]. The immune system uses natural selection to randomly generate and amplify successful antibodies. It seems that the likelihood of generating exactly that antibody in the immunization process is astronomically low. [0] unless the lab-gnerated antibody is "seeing" a different part of the virus that the current vaccine doesn't see, in which case targeting the new spot in the virus is an obvious "next move".

saveferris 4y ago

I admittedly have no idea how it works, what the differences are but the article infers that the tech developed here can be used for vaccines. From the article: “If it does,” he added, “it might provide a new therapeutic and also contribute to new vaccine strategies.” Maybe you know, is this just for therapeutics and not vaccines? Edit: looks like someone else answered this below....

ChuckMcM 4y ago

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here but what I took away from all of the papers on the MRNA vaccines is that they were designed to tell cells to build a protein (spike protein) that would stimulate the immune system to create an antibody that recognized said protein and it was those antibodies that made it harder to become infected with SARS-COVID-2. One of the papers I read compared and contrasted the antibody that Pfizer used in their development vs the one that Moderna used in their development, with the conclusion that the Moderna "provoked" antibody was slightly more effective at preventing an infection from taking hold. And based on that understanding (which may be flawed, please let me know if it is) then having a better 'target' antibody that you are trying to provoke the immune system to create, would make an MRNA vaccine more effective.