Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

AutoModerator t1_izm5i42 wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

grab-n-g0 OP t1_izm69gn wrote

Related news release from George Washington University: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/972703

>A research team led by George Washington University has developed two mRNA vaccine candidates that are highly effective in reducing both malaria infection and transmission.
>
>“These vaccines were highly effective at preventing infection and they wiped out transmission potential almost entirely,” said Nirbhay Kumar, a professor of global health at the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health.
>
>To see how the mRNA vaccines stacked up against other nucleic acid -based vaccine platforms, Kumar and the team repeated the experiment using DNA plasmids. The mRNA vaccines were far superior in inducing an immune response compared to the DNA-based vaccines, they found.

73

blehhhhhh01 t1_izm8wvo wrote

Can’t it be used in the application of p53? Science wise I’m a total cretin but surely with the rise of mrna, crispr etc could we not weaponise this enzyme for the benefit of humankind in the fight against cancers within the cell and as an enzyme? It is more abundant in heffalumps and they have markedly less cancer rates. Again they don’t hVe McDonald’s etc so hard to compare studies however when rates are so high among humans anything is worth investigating.

−37

noshore4me t1_izmafbh wrote

Actual title:

mRNA-LNP expressing PfCSP and Pfs25 vaccine candidates targeting infection and transmission of Plasmodium falciparum

169

Hickawa t1_izn1eto wrote

Almost like technology marches on and it wasn't some super weapon created by the boogyman in your closet. I'm super excited about this. It's a massive step forward and is going to save so many lives.

244

socialistrock t1_izn2qvs wrote

Woo! We've known about mRNA vaccines potential for years but getting the money to test and convert it to treatment has been the issue. I guess when life give you COVID lemons, disinfect them and make lemonade.

73

TomWatson5654 t1_iznoci6 wrote

As someone who has had Malaria twice and nearly died once from it I am very excited about this!!!

41

updownnick t1_izo0ck4 wrote

So does malathion blue, for pennies!

−19

Splatter_bomb t1_izo12tg wrote

This seems less reckless than the gene-drive approach of limiting malaria affect on humanity.

−11

moneymanram t1_izodbqp wrote

I feel the a lot of miscommunication on this type of vaccine was to blame for a lot of people being skeptical about it. I’ve talked to a lot of people and they didn’t want to get vaccinated because they thought that the vaccine was a quick turn out, not knowing that mRNA technology has been in the works for decades! It just so happens we were able to get it to work the same time COVID became a thing. I love to see the advancements we’ve made medically for these kinds of things

11

obliviousofobvious t1_izodp72 wrote

Replying to thrillho333 (#901,016)

Vaccination as a practice has been something we've been doing for over a century.

Virulent diseases like malaria and HIV were either innefective using the old methodology. mRNA methodologies are simply a different way of causing the exact same effect and have proven effective with these viruses.

Just because we've found a new variation on how to do it, it doesn't preclude THAT we've been doing it since Polio, if not earlier in ancient Egypt.

13

thrillho333 t1_izoizm0 wrote

Replying to obliviousofobvious (#901,067)

So because the practice of immunization using actual viruses has supposedly been practiced since ancient Egypt, you unequivocally know that this “different way of causing the same effect” is comparably safe but infinitely more effective? And you are in “horrified awe” that these shots, that ushered in a new tech with zero liability, and that were maliciously pushed onto the populace have been politicized?

You realize they had to literally change the definition of vaccine so that people like urselves can tie it into the safe and storied history of vaccines in their propaganda

Edit: also “proven effective for these viruses” is an incredibly naive statement to make on this thread — they are just beginning to understand the efficacy on mice. that’s incredibly long way from being safe products for me

−17

mOdQuArK t1_izoogck wrote

Replying to thrillho333 (#901,335)

> unequivocally know that this “different way of causing the same effect” is comparably safe but infinitely more effective

I am far more willing to believe in the opinions of the many experts who have studied the subject in cooperation with each other for years, than I am the half-assed opinions of fear-mongering willful-ignorants whose closest view of a test tube was from mad scientist horror flicks.

8

66mph t1_izp1tv2 wrote

It's also being used to create a new flu vaccine. Hubby and I are phase 3 test participants. The mRNA technology can produce more vaccine material faster than previous technologies, allowing the most current flu strains to be targeted. Exciting stuff.

32

therealdannyking t1_izp63cd wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#901,379)

A year is considered "long term" when talking about vaccines (https://www.bbc.com/news/health-60468900).

mRNA vaccines have been used in oncology for almost a decade with no long term side effects seen.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7956899/

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01684241

In addition, billions of doses have been given so far, so any long-term side effect must be less than one in a billion if it hasn't cropped up yet.

11

clownburner t1_izpe3du wrote

Replying to UncleJBones (#899,714)

It’s already much better than a lot of the US. I was 80 miles from the nearest city in the Masai Mara and the guides were texting each other. Meanwhile a quarter mile out my front door in the wrong direction and it’s ‘no signal.’

2

100PercentChansey t1_izplqd5 wrote

I know Malaria is still a big problem in much of sub Saharan Africa, so I’m glad they’ve created a good vaccine for it!

2

sabrtoothlion t1_izq1xau wrote

Replying to Hickawa (#898,761)

I honestly wonder how effective it will be. Will booster shots be needed? How often? And do you risk still catching malaria or will it work more like a traditional vaccine?

1

Baud_Olofsson t1_izq21om wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#901,379)

The mRNA you receive in an mRNA vaccine is gone within days.

The rest is just your regular immune system at work. And from that, we know that there is no way that problems would suddenly start appearing years afterwards. Because that's just not how immune systems work.

2

100dalmations t1_izq40e1 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#903,426)

So so true. Imagine billions of biotech mfg capacity made redundant. That’s what’s likely to happen once they figure out how to use this tech for making therapeutic proteins.

1

66mph t1_izq85ly wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#902,338)

We received a shot but don't know if it was the experimental vaccine or the standard flu shot. We'll get tested for antibodies in a couple of months to find out if the vaccine was effective and which one we received. Symptoms were mild tenderness for a couple of days, same as any other flu shot.

5

obliviousofobvious t1_izuhi6k wrote

Replying to thrillho333 (#902,008)

The sheer amount of science that went into mRNA before it ever even made it to the testing phase with the mind boggling amount of intelligent people who worked on it all says it's safe.

But yes; let's trust the "checks notes" random Facebook accounts who all start their thoughts with "I'm no scientist but..."

I'm gonna go with the pros on this one broseph. But you do you.

1