this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2024
6 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59223 readers
3425 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I hope so much that this isn't a predecessor to this.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago

No, but it gives you autism though /s

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Time for the antivax doomsday cult to extol the virtues of cancer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

god wants the children to have incurable tumors

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I mean don't people already spout this crap?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This is amazing news for countries with free healthcare! Even though the vaccine is expensive, it's nowhere as expensive as the care a cancer patient needs today.

Plus you can send a healthy individual back to their families and into society again.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Idk man that sounds pretty communist to me

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

A country, looking after its people?! Get that communism outta here!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The vaccine works by instructing the body to make up to 34 “neoantigens.” These are proteins found only on the cancer cells, and Moderna personalizes the vaccine for each recipient so that it carries instructions for the neoantigens on their cancer cells.

That’s pretty dope

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

You mispelled "expensive."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I wonder if, even at this early stage of the therapy’s development, this would actually be more affordable than the alternative.

Melanoma patients are highly likely to have the cancer come back and or metastasize. Repeat treatments and hospitalizations are not cheap.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Which is why the Moderna vaccine will be priced at just 95% of the cost of the repeat treatments and hospitalization plus the value of the time saved and pain and suffering avoidance by the patient. Say, an extra half a million. I mean, what price would you put on avoiding seeing your parent or child subjected to round after round of chemotherapy?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Depends on how much time was spent on R&D. You have to recover those costs. I know everyone wants everything for free but it takes a fuck ton of man hours and tons of investments to get to this point. You can't just give it away unfortunately.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You actually can. The simplest way is to literally just give the research away and charge a fair price for the medicine. That's allowed.

The slightly more capitalist way would be to sell the rights to the government to recoup costs.

The slightly less capitalist way is for the government to notify you that you don't own it anymore because of the public good.

This is also ignoring exactly how much the public already funds the basic research that goes into pharmaceuticals, which is quite a bit more than you might expect, so the argument of what's even "fair" is less clearly in favor of the company than you might expect.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago

There's a tricky balance.

For every endeavor that could recoup its costs in a fairly reasonable way, there are several other attempts that end in failure.

If you know that best case your project can be modestly better than break even, but it will most likely completely fail, would you invest in it?

I could respect an argument for outright socializing pharmaceutical efforts and rolling the needs into taxes and cutting out the capitalist angle entirely, but so long as you rely on capitalist funding model in any significant amount, then you have to allow for some incentive. When the research is pretty much fully funded by public funds, that funding should come with strings attached, but here it seems the lead up was largely in capitalist territory.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Did they pay for their own R&D? Usually that get socialized and then the profits are privatized, it's the American Way.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago

I like to shit on big pharma as much as the next guy, but in this case, yes they do. Developing new drugs is a ludicrously risky and expensive venture, typically costing billions of dollars. Sometimes it may be subsidized somewhat, sure, but the vast majority of it is coming out of pocket for these companies.