4 ms·

Unfortunately the only real answer to that is: We don't have the data on either question yet. Hemagglutinin has 18 subtypes, this style of vaccines are targeti

Unfortunately the only real answer to that is: We don't have the data on either question yet. Hemagglutinin has 18 subtypes, this style of vaccines are targeting them all, but we don't have data on how complete coverage will be (and or how common a mutation exists that could allow partial of complete circumvention). We also don't have data on how long before the immune system needs to be retrained (aka re-vaccinated). This isn't to foo-foo this vaccine; this legitimately could create a "universal" vaccine that could last years with only some minor reformulation every so often to catch new sub-types of HA. TL;DR: This thing could be great. We'll need more data to know.

runsWphotons 3y ago
Is there any reason to think the immunity would last? Like is there evidence in animals? Because the one mRNA vaccine we gave had in people did not provide much immunity past three months. That was in environment of virus mutating, but so will the flu.
- MAGZine 3y ago
  one thing that's important to remember is that there are degrees of immunity. ending up with a cough is very different ending up in a hospital, needing a ventilator. people forget that flu vaccines are important: many people die from the flu every year. even if flu vaccines don't 'last' in the sense that they might not stop you from getting any sort of sick, they almost certainly are effective in preventing major illness.
  - runsWphotons 3y ago
    Sure, but there are still tons of questions and tradeoffs.
- jefftk 3y ago
  > the one mRNA vaccine we gave had in people did not provide much immunity past three months That's much more about the virus than the vaccine type, no? The non-mRNA vaccines acted similarly.
  - runsWphotons 3y ago
    I think it is both. The mRNA vaccine immunity did not wane just because of changes in the virus. That was probably a factor but in this case I don't think it was even the biggest one. The immunity just wanes, even to the same strain. It is to do also with the immune system itself.
    - maxerickson 3y ago
      The antibodies produced by any vaccination series wane, it isn't a surprise that it happened with the COVID vaccines. The mRNA vaccines do induce memory T cells, which is exactly persistent immunity, so the immunity doesn't 'just' wane. Repeated doses of the vaccine broaden and increase the antibody response, so of course it makes sense to encourage them when infections are raging, and an annual booster will induce an antibody response, providing increased protection for a period of time, so of course it makes sense to encourage them, especially for more vulnerable people. This inability to look at things in a sort of probabilistic sense, where things can be good without being perfect, is incredibly damaging.
    - kungito 3y ago
      If that was so then things like alergies and autoimmune diseases wouldn't be for life
  - nradov 3y ago
    The non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines that targeted the entire virus rather than just the spike protein generally produced somewhat more durable immunity even after many mutations. In principle it might be possible to make mRNA vaccines that work in a similar way, so I don't think it's a fundamental weakness in the technology.
  - lenkite 3y ago
    The non-mRNA vaccines did not give increased susceptibility to myocarditis AFAIK.
    - revelio 3y ago

runsWphotons 3y ago

Is there any reason to think the immunity would last? Like is there evidence in animals? Because the one mRNA vaccine we gave had in people did not provide much immunity past three months. That was in environment of virus mutating, but so will the flu.

MAGZine 3y ago
one thing that's important to remember is that there are degrees of immunity. ending up with a cough is very different ending up in a hospital, needing a ventilator. people forget that flu vaccines are important: many people die from the flu every year. even if flu vaccines don't 'last' in the sense that they might not stop you from getting any sort of sick, they almost certainly are effective in preventing major illness.
- runsWphotons 3y ago
  Sure, but there are still tons of questions and tradeoffs.
jefftk 3y ago
> the one mRNA vaccine we gave had in people did not provide much immunity past three months That's much more about the virus than the vaccine type, no? The non-mRNA vaccines acted similarly.
- runsWphotons 3y ago
  I think it is both. The mRNA vaccine immunity did not wane just because of changes in the virus. That was probably a factor but in this case I don't think it was even the biggest one. The immunity just wanes, even to the same strain. It is to do also with the immune system itself.
  - maxerickson 3y ago
    The antibodies produced by any vaccination series wane, it isn't a surprise that it happened with the COVID vaccines. The mRNA vaccines do induce memory T cells, which is exactly persistent immunity, so the immunity doesn't 'just' wane. Repeated doses of the vaccine broaden and increase the antibody response, so of course it makes sense to encourage them when infections are raging, and an annual booster will induce an antibody response, providing increased protection for a period of time, so of course it makes sense to encourage them, especially for more vulnerable people. This inability to look at things in a sort of probabilistic sense, where things can be good without being perfect, is incredibly damaging.
  - kungito 3y ago
    If that was so then things like alergies and autoimmune diseases wouldn't be for life
- nradov 3y ago
  The non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines that targeted the entire virus rather than just the spike protein generally produced somewhat more durable immunity even after many mutations. In principle it might be possible to make mRNA vaccines that work in a similar way, so I don't think it's a fundamental weakness in the technology.
- lenkite 3y ago
  The non-mRNA vaccines did not give increased susceptibility to myocarditis AFAIK.
  - revelio 3y ago