15 comments

  • squeedles 51 minutes ago
    Manufacturing matters, and six years ago, I said that one side effect from the pandemic is that mRNA technology, which had been lab-scale stuff, suddenly had dump-trucks full of money appearing to help them scale their manufacturing.

    They apparently settled on the the sequences for the original covid vacs in a weekend. Going from that design to billions of doses is one of the hardest things to do, but once done, will persist. And it is ready to be deployed for the next hundred applications that we find for this.

    Flu vaccines is an obvious application, since the prior egg-based manufacturing required about six months lead time and millions of eggs, but nobody wanted to invest in anything better.

  • swingboy 21 minutes ago
    Serious question in good faith: what was the deal with the “calamari” (clots?) the anti-vax crowd kept talking about being found in the veins/arteries of folks who took the Covid vaccine?
    • Torn 7 minutes ago
      > Now an international team, led by Flinders University, have found that in a small number of people, the immune system can accidentally confuse a normal adenovirus protein with a human blood protein termed platelet factor 4 (or PF4).

      Seems to have been a legitimate, very rare, side effect

      https://www.flinders.edu.au/research/articles/covid-vaccine-...

      • tjohns 2 minutes ago
        [delayed]
    • wetpaws 16 minutes ago
      Nothingburger like pretty much everything that antivaxers talk about
    • cedws 10 minutes ago
      IIRC the vaccines were provably linked to the death of young people who had blood clots they shouldn't have had.

      The common argument made is that the vaccine saved more lives than they took, but this is pretty fucked up IMO. It's the trolley problem IRL - if you force someone to get a vaccine and they die as a result, you are responsible for their death. Also, the manufacturers can never be held responsible, because they have legal immunity for the COVID vaccines.

  • ggm 4 minutes ago
    Shorter lead times in the face of viral mutations will be helpful.

    Tailored vaccines for things like cancer are a game changer.

    I live in hope of a semi-universal flu+related vaccine.

    I live in fear of the measles induced "immune amnesia" effect.

  • doginasuit 1 hour ago
    I'm not sure this information will sway very many people. I have relatives who are all getting tested for t-cell counts related to mRNA because they are convinced they are the cause of any and all health problems they are facing. It seems like the medical professionals who are administering the tests are at least somewhat responsible for their misapplication.
    • tomesco 20 minutes ago
      Information won’t sway someone who’s views aren’t based on information.
    • epistasis 1 hour ago
      It's so funny how there's this irrational mRNA skepticism combined with irrational peptide trust.

      Grifters like RFK Jr and the supplement charlatans are cashing in on the lies they perpetuate.

      • javea71 12 minutes ago
        I think you'll find there's a rational distrust in big pharma
        • epistasis 11 minutes ago
          I don't think I'll find that, after investigating the claims I have heard.
      • api 19 minutes ago
        “I won’t put chemicals from big pharma in my body!”

        Proceeds to raw dog a bunch of “research chemicals” cause some roided up bro talked about it on a podcast…

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U7gbFMWZWlo

        They’re not vaccines though.

      • alex1138 52 minutes ago
        RFK's book on Fauci is well cited. You're going to have to do better than "grifters"

        Edit: Hey, feel free to do better than 'downvote'. It's intellectually bankrupt. Thanks

        • epistasis 49 minutes ago
          Please do better than saying an intellectually bankrupt book is "well cited."

          If you mean lots of people cite it, well, that's the grift. It's lies sold to people desperate for validation of their conspiracy theories.

          If you mean that it's a book based on good citations, well, hah, very untrue.

          • manwe150 2 minutes ago
            Having read it, he does cite something for almost every claim. Although almost every source also contradicts his conclusions on some basic, logical, statistical, mathematical, or humane level, if you bother to fact check them. So it’s quite hard to quantify what it means to say it has good citations.
          • lettergram 46 minutes ago
            [flagged]
            • shakna 33 minutes ago
              RFK's reliance on terrain theory, disproved continually since some five hundred years ago, does much to assist in citations - it is common to cite bad science as evidence where we need to improve public comprehension.
              • alex1138 16 minutes ago
                Flagging is broken on HN. It's astonishing any of you have the 500 karma necessary to downvote substantive comments and how flagging can kill any discussion

                Shame on all of you. You are terrible people

  • declan_roberts 16 minutes ago
    Really glad they confirmed this, about 5 years after I was forced to take one at threat of job loss despite 1) already having had natural Covid and 2) working a fully remote job.

    But better late than never I suppose.

  • d--b 6 minutes ago
    You mean the stuff the whole world got injected with in 2020? Good to know!

    Seriously though, I am very pro-vax, but the fact that studies like these come out now is just confirmation that people had the right to doubt the safety of mRNA back then. Many people shamed others for being anti vax but everyone has the right to be careful.

  • yieldcrv 35 minutes ago
    > The researchers emphasize that, like all vaccines, mRNA vaccines can have side effects. They found that serious adverse events—such as myocarditis, which occurs more frequently in younger males—are rare and consistently outweighed by the vaccines’ protection

    reminder to the myocarditis-maxxies, the actual virus causes that too and the 2020-2021 variants caused it worse

    if we were all going to drop dead (I think 2 years ago now, I’m waaaaiting!) for whatever the vaccine did, it would apply to a broader population due to covid exposure

    • ifyoubuildit 2 minutes ago
      > reminder to the myocarditis-maxxies, the actual virus causes that too and the 2020-2021 variants caused it worse

      Do you know if the vaccine prevents the virus-induced myocarditis? Cause the vaccine didn't do much to stop people from getting covid, multiple times even.

      In other words, was adding more vaccine doses just adding more risks of myocarditis? So many people frame this as either/or, and I don't know why.

    • antonvs 25 minutes ago
      > if we were all going to drop dead (I think 2 years ago now, I’m waaaaiting!)

      Channeling Monty Python:

      ... I got better

  • api 1 hour ago
    The potential for the technology in cancer treatment is what I find most exciting.
    • epistasis 35 minutes ago
      Yes, I've been very excited about that for more than 10 years. It may not pan out, it's far more speculative than infectious disease prevention, but when combined with checkpoint inhibitors, and I fear they may not do the bold thing and do fully personalized therapeutic vaccines, but it does provide a great deal of hope.
    • snootypoot 1 hour ago
      [flagged]
      • hack1312 1 hour ago
        [flagged]
        • weikju 1 hour ago
          Just a much narrower definition of humanity than what we’re thinking.
      • jimbob45 1 hour ago
        Until HIPAA is gone, we’ll never be able to make use of enough data to truly make a difference for those last two.
  • diego_moita 20 minutes ago
    In the end, do facts even matter in politically charged discussions?

    This sounds a bit like providing evidence for global warming, gun control or evolution. The "skeptics" just want to remain ignorant. No amount of evidence will change them.

    The silver lining about vaccine skeptics, though, is the Herman Cain award[1]. What this means is that conservatives die more than liberals from preventable diseases [2].

    [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Cain_Award

    [2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-026-02474-9

  • petilon 1 hour ago
    The science doesn't matter to this administration unfortunately: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74dzdddvmjo
    • timr 1 hour ago
      This administration literally fast-tracked the original covid vaccines for approval.

      Say what you will about the Covid vaccine or Kennedy’s specific motivations (which I disagree with), but choosing to cut government funding for development of wildly profitable pharmaceutical products is a reasonable choice.

      • lokar 1 hour ago
        My understanding is that vaccine research and production is almost never profitable and depends on government support. Either grants, guaranteed purchases, or both.
        • timr 57 minutes ago
          Your understanding is incorrect. All research is unprofitable, by definition. Vaccines are wildly profitable.
          • baronvonsp 44 minutes ago
            Yeah that's called survivorship bias. The ones that make it to market can be wildly profitable to manufacture. Doing all the work to sift through what does and doesn't work to discover new vaccines wouldn't happen without public funding.
            • timr 26 minutes ago
              No, that’s called pharmaceutical development. That’s the business.

              We don’t generally fund Merck’s R&D with federal money. You’ll note the following critical detail from the article:

              > That will impact 22 projects being led by major pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer and Moderna, for vaccines against bird flu and other viruses, HHS said.

              We’ve gone so far round the bend with partisanship that straight-up corporate welfare has become a left-wing cause.

          • lokar 53 minutes ago
            Yeah, there would be none without government support.

            Remember when everyone was contributing spare dimes to fund a vaccine?

            • timr 49 minutes ago
              No. Pharmaceutical companies love vaccines. They’re relatively easy to make, they’re indemnified against harms, they cannot be generic, and they are wildly profitable. And on top of all of that, they often get mandated by schools, ensuring a captive market.

              If the government never funded another study for vaccines, ever, pharma companies would continue to pump them out.

              • lokar 45 minutes ago
                The mandate is the government support, it’s a purchase guarantee.
                • timr 41 minutes ago
                  …Which hasn’t changed.

                  Also, for the record: very few (no?) vaccines are “mandated” by the federal government. Recommendations are made, and state and local governments do this, mainly through school districts.

                  Various agencies and the military will, of course, mandate things for their own staff.

          • antonvs 22 minutes ago
            > All research is unprofitable, by definition.

            The game to compensate for that is to be to convince gullible investors that your commercially viable fusion plant, or quantum computer, or unrealistic space ambitions are just 5 years away! Invest now or miss out!

            The line between research and scamming in an ultracapitalist economy becomes very blurry.

      • adjejmxbdjdn 1 hour ago
        Nope. Not this administration at all.

        Trump 1 was a very different administration.

        And Trump himself has publicly backed off what was probably his one major achievement after receiving pushback from his supporters.

        • timr 1 hour ago
          You’re splitting hairs.
          • TylerE 1 hour ago
            No, he really isn’t.

            Trump one had a sane (terrible, but sane) cabinet that largely controlled his wilder impulses.

            This time he went for loyalty above all else.

            • timr 52 minutes ago
              > Trump one had a sane cabinet that largely controlled his wilder impulses.

              This is absurdly revisionist. The first administration’s cabinet/staff was a reality show and a merry go round of people like Anthony Scaramucci and Ryan Zinke. If anything “controlled” it, it was just the chaos of incompetence.

              As far as loyalty goes, I suppose it’s worth reminding you that Kennedy was a Democrat, who ran in the Democratic presidential primary, and routinely criticized Trump.

              • jancsika 15 minutes ago
                OP is saying Trump has demanded loyalty as a condition of serving in his administration. As HHS Secretary, RFK caved on Roundup, something he famously won a case against as a lawyer[1]. That even lost RFK support from some of his MAHA fans.

                1: https://apnews.com/article/maha-glyphosate-rfk-kennedy-trump...

              • petilon 29 minutes ago
                Relatively speaking Trump 1.0 had a sane cabinet. Yes, there were some crazies, sure, but relative to the people he has around him now, they seem sane.
              • ceejayoz 29 minutes ago
                Where’s the Kelly and Mattis in the second term?

                Kennedy was a Democrat as a spoiler.

      • api 1 hour ago
        The biggest single success from Trump’s first term is the thing his base hates to the point that they booed him over it.
      • altmanaltman 20 minutes ago
        It's literally not the same administration. Also yeah he wants private companies to stop "wild" profits while he grifts the nation with crypto, hosting UFC on white house? You have to be stupid or willfully ignorant to think the current administration gives a single f about unchecked profits or the people's general wellbeing.
      • snootypoot 1 hour ago
        [flagged]
      • petilon 1 hour ago
        Not many people know that Trump had a hand in starting the pandemic.

        Here's what we know: In 2014, Obama administration halted the so called "gain of function" research because of risk of laboratory accidents. In 2017, the Trump administration restarted this dangerous research. See links below.

        https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/18/us/white-house-to-cut-fun...

        Excerpt: [Obama administration] White House announced Friday that it would temporarily halt all new funding for experiments that seek to study certain infectious agents by making them more dangerous. The White House said the moratorium decision had been made “following recent biosafety incidents at federal research facilities.”

        https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/19/health/lethal-viruses-nih...

        Excerpt: [Trump administration] on Tuesday ended a moratorium imposed three years ago on funding research that alters germs to make them more lethal. Critics say these researchers risk creating a monster germ that could escape the lab and seed a pandemic.

        So, Trump restarted the dangerous research that Obama had shut down. You may be thinking, what does that have to do with Covid? Covid started in Wuhan, China, right?

        It turns out that the Trump administration, through the National Institutes of Health (NIH), provided funding to the EcoHealth Alliance, an American non-profit organization focused on studying emerging diseases. The EcoHealth Alliance, in turn, provided funding to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China for researching bat coronaviruses. The rest is history.

        And then Trump also disbanded the pandemic preparedness team in 2018 just in time for the pandemic. See link below.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/nsc-pandemic-office-t...

        • timr 1 hour ago
          Well, I have to say that this is the most innovative leap of partisan politics I’ve seen so far this year!

          Most left-wing critics are still struggling with admitting that Anthony Fauci really did provide funding to EcoHealth, despite ample documentation.

          • petilon 55 minutes ago
            Not sure what is partisan about this. Some facts were presented. Not opinions, facts. If you dispute any of the above is factual please back up your assertion with citations.
            • timr 45 minutes ago
              The facts are true. Blaming Trump is the innovation.

              For the record, I don’t care who gets blamed. I just think it’s a hilarious twist of partisan rhetoric.

              • petilon 35 minutes ago
                If the President hires someone who then restarted research that previous admin stopped for being too dangerous, does the President get no part of the blame? The buck stops with the President. If he hired the wrong person--and he has hired plenty of wrong people this time around--he gets the blame for the disasters they cause.
        • stinkbeetle 1 hour ago
          No that was a conspiracy theory fueled by Russian disinformation, the scientists and experts testified that there was no gain of function work being done and debunked it.
          • petilon 57 minutes ago
            Citation needed. If you are going to say NYT article is wrong we need more than just your words.
            • stinkbeetle 36 minutes ago
              You really believe some billionaire oligarchs propaganda corporation over foremost self-proclaimed expert Anthony "I am the science" Fauci? Something an agent of Putin would say.
    • dogwalker5000 1 hour ago
      Wow, they literally put an antivaccer in charge of the health department.
      • wrs 14 minutes ago
        I'm honestly surprised they didn't put a flat-earther in charge of NASA.
      • zulux 1 hour ago
        [flagged]
    • yieldcrv 29 minutes ago
      This is a thread about the world, not American hubris about its relevance in it

      Thanks for the new toll in Hormuz though

    • snootypoot 1 hour ago
      [flagged]
    • petterroea 1 hour ago
      If we want to solve that we need to stop enabling career politicians whose only life experience is debating
      • xboxnolifes 33 minutes ago
        Right now, we'd be better off if we even had politicians who could manage an actual debate. Seems like we can't get anything other than mudslinging and strongarming right now.
      • TylerE 1 hour ago
        We would be a hell of a lot better off with career politicians than the current batch of grifters and ex-Fox News chuckleheads.
  • stefanwlb 15 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • snootypoot 1 hour ago
    [flagged]
    • asteroidburger 1 hour ago
      Looking forward to reading about it in The Lancet or another respected medical publication.
      • snootypoot 1 hour ago
        do those exist anymore? any publication that accepted the revised definition of natural immunity during the global push for this untested gene therapy mrna injection seems to be discredited. i remember when natural immunity went from being a normal concept to a right wing conspiracy theory.
  • TacticalCoder 1 hour ago
    [flagged]
    • jleyank 1 hour ago
      They had done safety and effectiveness testing before deployment back then. These are retrospective studies using a real large dosing and placebo population.

      The closest to “untested drug matter” that existed was the antibody cocktail that might have kept Trump alive.

    • lokar 1 hour ago
      They did all the normal steps in the US. It was faster because they had the full attention of the FDA (so zero admin delays), and they did some parts in parallel, risking wasting money if things did not work out.

      The mRNA approach already had years of work prior to COVID, and was already reviewed for safety.

      • Terr_ 1 hour ago
        > years of work prior to COVID

        It's worth highlghting the importance of years of basic science-research and testing, all little pieces which were mostly there when we finally needed them, work that was always under-threat from people saying "what use is this, why would we ever need that?"

        One example [0] (of many contributions):

        > But the thing is, our vaccine is only generating the spikes itself, and we’re not mounting them on any kind of virus body. It turns out that, unmodified, freestanding Spike proteins collapse into a different structure. If injected as a vaccine, this would indeed cause our bodies to develop immunity.. but only against the collapsed spike protein. And the real SARS-CoV-2 shows up with the spiky Spike. The vaccine would not work very well in that case.

        > In 2017 it was described how putting a double Proline substitution in just the right place would make the SARS-CoV-1 and MERS S proteins take up their ‘pre-fusion’ configuration, even without being part of the whole virus. This works because Proline is a very rigid amino acid. It acts as a kind of splint, stabilising the protein in the state we need to show to the immune system. The people that discovered this should be walking around high-fiving themselves incessantly. Unbearable amounts of smugness should be emanating from them. And it would all be well deserved.

        [0] https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/reverse-engineering-source...

      • jleyank 1 hour ago
        The world was lucky the omicron mutation chose virulence over lethality - it could outcompete the older, more “effective” strains. This coupled with vaccines, isolation and antivirals (and treatment changes) kept the count down.

        A different roll of the mutation dice might have made a sars that spread easily. That would have thinned out the middle aged folks.

    • petilon 1 hour ago
      You do what you have to do when people are dying in droves due to a pandemic and morgues are running out of room.
      • thin_carapace 58 minutes ago
        people indeed were dying in droves. based on the study in sweden the vast majority of those deaths (>90%) were in the age bracket of 70 plus. aged care is already a massive issue thanks to money making being more important than having families and being human - our aging population could have been addressed here. obviously the immunocompromised and the elderly did benefit alongside pharma execs. still this seems like a 'protect the kids' type of excuse. why should I be happy that swathes of the youth had to sacrifice their bodies just so that their grandparents could live a few more years of luxury ? I'm saying this because I know multiple people that were affected negatively by coronavirus vaccines and they were all young.
      • ses1984 1 hour ago
        That’s fake news. I had covid and I was fine.

        /s

    • netsharc 1 hour ago
      They did zero trials before those billions of doses! None! Straight from the lab into your veins!

      /S

  • linzhangrun 1 hour ago
    Two most populous countries, China and India, seem to have mainly relied on inactivated vaccines.
    • epistasis 1 hour ago
      Which makes sense as they had less access to new technologies, and scaling issues were very hard in the early days.

      But I'm not quite sure how that's relevant to the article...

      • ggm 6 minutes ago
        Both economies have massive drug industries and China in particular has advanced manufacturing processes for decades. I suspect they made an economic/risk decision and will be reviewing it in the light of mRNA production lead time.

        We're way beyond lysenko. China has no intellectual or political baggage in vaccine theory or bio engineering.

    • wetpaws 14 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • tencentshill 49 minutes ago
    Good thing we got [rest of world] to do the hard science work, and America can just benefit from it instead!