International Moderna’s MRNA HIV and Flu Vaccines expected to trial this year

[James Bomb]

How is that a right wing post? It's obvious that cancer treatment is a massive profit source for some people and those people definitely don't want a cure

It’s a right wing conspiracy theory

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Pharma_conspiracy_theory

 

[Hadron90]

How is that a right wing post? It's obvious that cancer treatment is a massive profit source for some people and those people definitely don't want a cure

Questioning the profits and lobbying efforts of the pharmaceutical industry is now a right wing thing. Good leftists love big pharma and think they can do no wrong.

 

[Hadron90]

Leave it at that, unless you can actually name a single disease known to man that he supposedly invented a working mRNA vaccine for.

Impossible task, since no one has ever made an mRNA vaccine that has received FDA commercial approval.

 

[Hadron90]

https://the-dna-universe.com/2021/04/15/the-history-of-mrna-applications/

The article on the history of mRNA you linked mentions the guy @Heisenboom mentioned:

In 1978, liposomes were utilised for the delivery of mRNA to eukaryotic cells (Dimitriadis, 1978). By the end of the following decade, a cationic liposome mRNA delivery system, DOTMA, was described and commercialised (Malone et al., 1989).

So it looks like was indeed a pioneer in mRNA delivery systems.

So right there on image in 1990 is Jon A. Wolff, demonstrating the first translation of mRNA injected into mice.

Here is the paper:
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/247/4949/1465.abstract

The second author on the paper is the guy that @Heisenboom posted.



"Architect of mRNA" is hyperbole sure, but you can't dismiss the guy as a blogger. Your article on the history of mRNA credits him for his pioneering work on delivery systems, and he is second author on another one of their key milestones. The guy clearly has done very influential work in the field.

 

[Hadron90]

Here's a tip: Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna are not paying this "Architect of mRNA" a single dime.

Are you sure about that? Obviously, who Moderna is paying is a secret, but here is his patent:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5580859A/en

I see in Cited By section that Moderna has cited this patent in 18 of their own patents. Pfizer has cited this patent 30 times. BioNtech has cited it 5 times.
Patent licensing is a complicated area, but there is a non-trivial chance Moderna is paying someone, somewhere, for access to this guy's technology.

 

[Heisenboom]

The article on the history of mRNA you linked mentions the guy @Heisenboom mentioned:

In 1978, liposomes were utilised for the delivery of mRNA to eukaryotic cells (Dimitriadis, 1978). By the end of the following decade, a cationic liposome mRNA delivery system, DOTMA, was described and commercialised (Malone et al., 1989).

So it looks like was indeed a pioneer in mRNA delivery systems.




So right there on image in 1990 is Jon A. Wolff, demonstrating the first translation of mRNA injected into mice.

Here is the paper:
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/247/4949/1465.abstract

The second author on the paper is the guy that @Heisenboom posted.



"Architect of mRNA" is hyperbole sure, but you can't dismiss the guy as a blogger. Your article on the history of mRNA credits him for his pioneering work on delivery systems, and he is second author on another one of their key milestones. The guy clearly has done very influential work in the field.

A blogger with 12k citations to his name, I found it amusing. These days having the incorrect groupthink is a crime.

 

[Limit Smasher]

It’s a right wing conspiracy theory

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Pharma_conspiracy_theory

Pretty sad that your mind is so warped that you see everything through the lens of "left and right". Questioning the nefarious motives of pharmaceutical companies has nothing to do with politics.

 

[Rational Poster]

You guys don’t think the people that rule the nations of the world won’t have any nefarious plans for mRNA?

think again

Nope, real life isn't like a video game. The people that rule the nations are just as susceptible to viruses as you are. It's in their interest to develop effective vaccines.

 

[Rational Poster]

Pretty sad that your mind is so warped that you see everything through the lens of "left and right". Questioning the nefarious motives of pharmaceutical companies has nothing to do with politics.

Nefarious motives like eliminating the spread of deadly viruses... the horror.

 

[Limit Smasher]

Nefarious motives like eliminating the spread of deadly viruses... the horror.

Huh? We're talking about cancer treatment.

 

[Rational Poster]

Huh? We're talking about cancer treatment.

Even more nefarious eliminating one of the leading causes of premature death!

 

[James Bomb]

Pretty sad that your mind is so warped that you see everything through the lens of "left and right". Questioning the nefarious motives of pharmaceutical companies has nothing to do with politics.

I don’t trust pharmaceutical companies much at all, but the idea that they’re sitting on a cure for cancer and wouldn’t put it on the market because of all that sweet chemo money is almost completely a right wing conspiracy theory in practice.

 

[BIKES!]

https://www.biopharma-reporter.com/...nd-HIV-vaccines-into-Phase-1-trials-this-year


What an age we are living in.

Inside of 5 years, could we see HIV and Herpes vaccinations?

Would be nice to have no incurable STI’s.

Sucks that there’s nothing to cure cancer.

Too much money in cancer treatments

 

[Arkain2K]

And yet none of those research citations are anywhere near these hyperbolic claims of "The Inventor of mRNA vaccine", much less "The Architect of mRNA".

He's a researcher, one of many thousands who contributed to the field of mRNA study. Leave it at that, unless you can actually name a single disease known to man that he supposedly invented a working mRNA vaccine for. A real mRNA vaccine that actually exists and recognized by a real medical journal, not by personal blogs and spread via social media.

The article on the history of mRNA you linked mentions the guy @Heisenboom mentioned:

In 1978, liposomes were utilised for the delivery of mRNA to eukaryotic cells (Dimitriadis, 1978). By the end of the following decade, a cationic liposome mRNA delivery system, DOTMA, was described and commercialised (Malone et al., 1989).

So it looks like was indeed a pioneer in mRNA delivery systems.




So right there on image in 1990 is Jon A. Wolff, demonstrating the first translation of mRNA injected into mice.

Here is the paper:
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/247/4949/1465.abstract

The second author on the paper is the guy that @Heisenboom posted.



"Architect of mRNA" is hyperbole sure, but you can't dismiss the guy as a blogger. Your article on the history of mRNA credits him for his pioneering work on delivery systems, and he is second author on another one of their key milestones. The guy clearly has done very influential work in the field.

A blogger with 12k citations to his name, I found it amusing. These days having the incorrect groupthink is a crime.

You are now wrestling with a strawman, and honestly I'm not surprised at all.

That's exactly what I said: Malone is a researcher who contributed to the field of mRNA studies. One of many over the last 45 years.

I've never dismissed the so-called "Architect of mRNA" as just a blogger, nor denying that his studies/contributions exists, but there sure as hell plenty of bloggers and podcasters giving him all kinds of highly-dubious titles right now for some weird reasons. Dubious titles that don't make any scientific sense. I'm assuming he must have said something they like so they naturally try to elevate him to God-hood, as the 100%-accurate description of "Researcher/Contributor to mRNA studies" don't sounds nearly as grandeur as the blatantly-false "The Architect of mRNA". Would that be a fair and accurate assessment?

As far as I know, he's also the only mRNA researcher with an ego big enough to actually make his own webpage to self-proclaims that he's the sole "inventor of mRNA vaccine", a dubious title not recognized by anyone in the scientific community at large, assuming because he provided no evidence of ever inventing an mRNA vaccine that actually worked, in animals or in humans. That same dubious claim is now being parrotted on blogs and social media and starting to spread to our own forum, by weird people who have never thought once to ask "What mRNA vaccine did he invented? Which disease was it for? Did it actually work at all against the immune response problem? If it did, how come this revolutionary breakthrough doesn't appears in any published medical journals?". Would that be a fair and accurate assessment?

If you (along with thousands of others) "invented" mRNA vaccines that don't actually work because of a well-known problem that no one knows how to solve, and then decades later somebody else successfully overcame that problem and FINALLY created something that worked, can you really lay sole claim to that invention? Ofcourse not! Then why do I keep seeing these dubious titles being thrown around as if they actually means anything?

Instead of the hyperbolic bullshit, why not just be honest and say "Self-proclaimed Inventor of an unknown mRNA vaccine that was never proven to actually work"?

Put it in perspective, even the scientists who finally overcame the dilemma that stumped EVERYONE for 45 years and finally made mRNA vaccines a reality, a well-published fact that IS widely accepted by the scientific community, never claim those dubious titles for themselves, since everyone with a brain knows this long-awaited success is a huge collective effort spanning over decades, made possible by various contributions from thousands of researchers in the field, starting from the people who first discovered mRNA in 1961. There is no singular "Inventor of mRNA vaccine", because each contributor only discovered one piece of a big puzzle. Would that be a fair and accurate assessment?

No one person can try to claim all the credits for the collective work of thousands of people like this self-serving "Architect of mRNA" is doing without being laughed at, no matter how many bloggers/podcasters/social media posters voluntarily drink his juice without questions, especially those who are happily referencing The Architect of mRNA's own personal webpage as the ultimate scientific proof for these dubious self-proclaimed titles that means absolutely nothing in the scientific community. Would that be a fair and accurate assessment?

 

[Hadron90]

You are wrestling with a strawman.

That's exactly what I said: he's a researcher who contributed to the field of mRNA studies. One of many over the last 45 years.

I've never called him "a blogger", nor denying that his contribtions exists, but there sure as hell plenty of bloggers giving him all kinds of dubious titles right now for some weird reasons.

What you said was:

Here's a tip: Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna are not paying this "Architect of mRNA" a single dime. They are paying the two scientists from the University of Pennsylvania whose invention finally made mRNA vaccines a reality, and their contribution is widely recognized by the scientific community at large, without the need to make their own blog with to push ridiculous claims to prove it.

Pfizer and Moderna have both cited his patent dozens of times. There is a very good chance in fact, that they are paying whoever owns his patent at this time (which may no longer be him since its not uncommon to for patents to get sold several times). His scientific contributions are widely recognized by the community at large--he was directly given credit for inventing the novel mRNA delivery technique in 1989 in the history article you linked, and he has over 12k citations.

And its not an egotistical blog. Its his bio on his company website. Do I think his claims of being the "inventor" or "architect" are hyperbole? Absolutely. But you went too far the other direction trying to downplay his importance. This guy was either the main contributor, or secondary contributor to several of the big mRNA vaccine milestones.

 

[Arkain2K]

Moderna starts human trials of an mRNA-based flu shot
By Nicole Wetsman | July 7, 2021

Moderna gave its mRNA-based seasonal flu vaccine to the first set of volunteers in a clinical trial, the pharmaceutical company announced today. The start of the trial marks the next stage of the company’s work on this type of vaccine technology after the overwhelming success of its COVID-19 vaccine, which was built using the same strategy.

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, mRNA vaccines were still largely experimental, even as they were heralded as the future of vaccine development. People who get an mRNA vaccine are injected with tiny snippets of genetic material from the target virus. Their cells use that genetic information to build bits of the virus, which the body’s immune system learns to fight against.

The high efficacy of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines made by Moderna and Pfizer / BioNTech was a major endorsement for this type of vaccine. Now, pharmaceutical companies plan to use this technology to fight other types of infectious diseases, including flu. The flu shots available each year in the United States are usually between 40 and 60 percent effective. The most common shots are made by growing the influenza virus in cells or chicken eggs, and then killing the virus so it’s no longer dangerous. It takes a long time to grow the virus, so companies have to start making the shots around six months ahead of time, based on predictions around which strain of the flu will be circulating that year.

Pharmaceutical companies hope that mRNA-based flu vaccines can be more effective than the traditional shots. Because they’d be faster to make, production wouldn’t have to start so far in advance, and they could theoretically be more closely matched with the type of flu spreading each season.

Moderna is the second group to start testing its mRNA flu shot in human trials — Sanofi and Translate Bio kicked off a trial this summer. Pfizer and BioNTech have been interested in mRNA flu shots for a few years, and they’re pushing forward with those plans as well.

Moderna says it hopes to eventually create combination vaccines that could protect people against flu, COVID-19, and other respiratory infections with one shot. “Our vision is to develop an mRNA combination vaccine so that people can get one shot each fall for high efficacy protection against the most problematic respiratory viruses,” Stéphane Bancel, chief executive officer of Moderna, said in a press release.

If flu shots using this technology prove to be safe and effective, it could also make us more prepared for a potential pandemic flu in the future. It’s a fairly simple process to design a shot that could target a new influenza virus. “[mRNA] gives us a very strong platform for a rapid response,” Rosemary Rochford, an immunologist at the University of Colorado, told The Verge last fall.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/7/22566634/moderna-mrna-flu-vaccine-trial