- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Moderna says FDA refusing to review application for its first mRNA-based flu shot
Posted on 2/11/26 at 12:28 pm to WeeWee
Posted on 2/11/26 at 12:28 pm to WeeWee
quote:
The predominant flu strain so far this flu season has been the subclad K variant. Subclad K appeared after the flu shot for this year went into production and therefore the flu shot for this year is ineffective. This year flu shot would have been a metric shitload more effective if a midseason booster (for lack of a better term) to cover the subclad K variant could be produced and given.
Take this flu shot. We don't know if it will work. But if it doesn't, then you can just take another. Just keep taking them and eventually we'll get it right. Just trust us.
All you did was convince me not to take flu shots because the "experts" don't really know what is going on.
How much money was made on these useless flu shots this year? Why should I trust you next year when you admit to blowing it this year?
Gee, I wonder why trust in doctors is so low.
1
Posted on 2/11/26 at 12:28 pm to WeeWee
quote:
Are these idiots ever going to learn? DNA is transcribed to RNA and then translated into proteins.
They are translated into spike proteins.
Mrna is a "clot shot":
archived link: https://www.theepochtimes.com/world/exclusive-embalmers-speak-out-on-unusual-parasite-blood-clots-5121795
This post was edited on 2/11/26 at 12:30 pm
Posted on 2/11/26 at 12:33 pm to cornerstore
quote:
Pretty sure they’ve harmed enough of the population already
Even if we accept that position you have to think of the reason why the adverse effects of the approved mRNA vaccines occurred. The reason why they occurred is because of the covid spike protein not the mRNA technology. If you recall the term "clot-shot" was first used to describe the Janssen/Johnson & Johnson covid vaccine which was a viral vector vaccine and not an mRNA vaccine.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 12:35 pm to Ailsa
quote:
mRNA uses aids
Posted on 2/11/26 at 12:39 pm to WeeWee
quote:
The data showed it was more effective than traditional shots.
At doing what? Ceasing a heartbeat?
Posted on 2/11/26 at 12:39 pm to Ailsa
Calling TigerDoc and Crazy4LSU
I wonder why!
quote:
FDA refusing to review application for its first mRNA-based flu shot
I wonder why!
Posted on 2/11/26 at 12:52 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
This is plausible and if it worked would be very useful, but isn't how Prasad is thinking. He wants to RCT more & more and that'll end up slowing down approvals
That is why I ended with the statement that changing regulatory approval is a whole different discussion and another can of worms to open.
quote:
unless there's some equally fast platform to mRNA that I don't know about, so faster vaccine tech doesn't seem in the offing anytime soon.
There is not and that is the main reason why mRNA vaccine technology research continued from the 1980s until covid despite not producing one single commercially viable vaccine prior to covid. It is the only technology that offers the possibility of being able to update vaccines in a timely manner to actually cover a virus before it mutates. Now thanks to internet fear mongering and disinformation people just want to ban the technology instead of looking to improve it. One example of improving mRNA vaccines was changing the timing of the second dose. Studies have shown that the adjusted odds ratio for myocarditis in the Moderna covid vaccine fell from 35 to 13 if you gave the second shot >35 days after the instead of 22 days. That is why the WHO changed the recommendation to wait 8-12 weeks between doses instead of 4 weeks as it was initially given. But no we have people here and elsewhere just saying to ban it because pureblood good and vaccines bad, etc.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 1:10 pm to WeeWee
I agree that it's a really promising technology for both seasonal vaccines and promising for cancer and even HIV. One thing you might highlight for skeptics is how other major public funders (EU, Singapore investment pools, CEPI, multinational alliances, likely China eventually) continue to invest in this technology and eventually we'll get a chance to decide to license it from them if it bears out and we continue to be allergic to trust Moderna/Pfizer.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 1:11 pm to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
Take this flu shot. We don't know if it will work. But if it doesn't, then you can just take another. Just keep taking them and eventually we'll get it right.
I have spent years talking to patients who refuse the flu shot. The most common reason for refusal is that it may or may not cover the predominant strain. If the flu shot was targeted at the predominant strain people would take it. Maybe not retards like yourself but most people.
quote:
Just trust us.
As a medical doctor I can say with high confidence that if you ever have a doctor say to trust him or her or they or whatever without offering an explanation of what they are doing or explaining the reason why you should find a new doctor.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 1:21 pm to Ailsa
quote:
Are these idiots ever going to learn? DNA is transcribed to RNA and then translated into proteins.
They are translated into spike proteins.
Correct. mRNA covid vaccines cause dendritic cells to produce spike proteins, but the genome of the cell (aka DNA) is not changed. That means that when the injected mRNA degrades production of spike protein from that dendritic cell stops. When the dendritic cell replicates to create new cells the genome of the new cell is based on the DNA of the progenitor cell not RNA. Therefore future generations of dendritic cells will not produce spike proteins. Also the flu vaccine would not inject mRNA designed to produce spike proteins.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 1:22 pm to Ailsa
It's a bad idea to force the human body's cells to produce an immune trigger.
mRNA can be used to manufacture vaccine components using foreign cells as did Novavax. They used mRNA on moth cells to make covid spikes and harvested them. That is a better methodology that doesn't run the risks of forcing our cells to produce the spikes to trigger an immune response.
How effective the (toxic) covid spikes were at preventing is another issue.
mRNA can be used to manufacture vaccine components using foreign cells as did Novavax. They used mRNA on moth cells to make covid spikes and harvested them. That is a better methodology that doesn't run the risks of forcing our cells to produce the spikes to trigger an immune response.
How effective the (toxic) covid spikes were at preventing is another issue.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 1:25 pm to BugAC
quote:
The data showed it was more effective than traditional shots.
At doing what? Ceasing a heartbeat?
No. Effectiveness against the flu.
quote:NEJM
During the 2022–2023 influenza season, U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines had a vaccine effectiveness of approximately 44 to 54% in participants who were 64 years of age or younger.16,17 Concurrent evaluation of the U.S.-licensed control vaccine that was included in our trial within the same season allowed for comparisons with the modRNA vaccine. In the end-of-season analysis, the 28.7% relative efficacy of the modRNA vaccine as compared with the control vaccine suggests that the efficacy of the modRNA vaccine ranged from 60 to 67%.
modRNA vaccines were about 15-20% more effective against the flu in this study.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 2:02 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
It's a bad idea to force the human body's cells to produce an immune trigger.
No it is not. It is just copying what body's immune system is already doing. The job of a dendritic cell is ingest foreign things like pathogens, process them, and present them as antigens to T cells.
quote:
mRNA can be used to manufacture vaccine components using foreign cells as did Novavax. They used mRNA on moth cells to make covid spikes and harvested them. That is a better methodology that doesn't run the risks of forcing our cells to produce the spikes to trigger an immune response.
The methodology that Novavax used is similar to the methodology that is currently used to produce the flu vaccine. It is a slow production process and that is one of the reasons why it took so long for NovaVax to get approved. That is also why companies have to guess at which strains to put in the flu shot instead of waiting and seeing which strains are circulating. mRNA vaccine technology is the only technology that offers the possibility of producing a vaccine at the same time viruses are circulating and making people sick.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 2:41 pm to WeeWee
quote:Yes.
You sure about that doc?
Until mRNA includes broader antigenic targets rather than just a fraction of the viral surface, tradvax will be more effective.
quote:Did it? My impression is the Moderna study compared the Flu mRNA shot to older outdated traditional Flu Vax. Not the ones being currently deployed.
The data showed it was more effective than traditional shots.
quote:Nor would mRNA in the instance of seasonal flu. That is the problem. Now if we were hit with a 1918-type bug that spanned a couple of seasons, the situation could be different.
A flu vaccine or booster that covered subclad K would likely have kept them from getting pneumonia. The speed of production of current flu vaccines does not allow for that to happen.
quote:I don't know that it is as much mutation as it is transmission of existing strains different than those anticipated. Vaccine “misses” (as with this year) are normally about strain selection and transmission patterns, not brand-new mutations suddenly appearing. It's a different equation from the CV19 challenges ITR.
You just contradicted yourself because the flu mutates in such a manner that new variants are able to slip past immunity from the most current vaccine.
quote:Flu season is six months. You are implying strain ID to widespread deployment of a demonstrably safe mRNA Vax could occur in 3 mos. I'd say 6-mos would be a compressed but doable span.
Only because of the regulatory approval time does not currently make a midseason booster viable even with the increased speed of production for mRNA vaccines. Pfzer and Moderna had the ability to produce mRNA boosters for each new variant of covid in a timeframe that would have actually been beneficial against the predominant strain.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 2:44 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Yes.
Until mRNA includes broader antigenic targets rather than just a fraction of the viral surface, tradvax will be more effective.
Yep. The mRNA was 4 kilobases, the virus was more than 7X that. no wonder exposure to the virus provided far better immune response
Posted on 2/11/26 at 3:02 pm to OccamsStubble
quote:Right. 7-8x. Meaning with a traditional vax, mutation in the 4kb area alone would likely still yield vax conferred immunity. Whereas with current mRNA versions mutation in the 4kb area alone renders the vax ineffective.
The mRNA was 4 kilobases, the virus was more than 7X that. no wonder exposure to the virus provided far better immune response
Granted, the influenza genome is about half the size of CV19, so a 4kb selection might be more effective, but still not as much inactivated (or attenuated) virus vaccinations.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 3:26 pm to WeeWee
quote:See? That's where your antennas should shoot up.
modRNA vaccines were about 15-20% more effective against the flu in this study.
Why?
Why would reduced antigenic mRNA vaccines be 15-20% more effective?
Does that make sense?
Turns out this is exactly the type of trial design the FDA flagged in refusal-to-file letters for the mRNA flu vax. The FDA indicated licensed standard-dose vaccine as the comparator, as in this study, don't meet expectations for the “best-available standard of care”, particularly in older adults.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 3:45 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
You sure about that doc?
Yes.
Until mRNA includes broader antigenic targets rather than just a fraction of the viral surface, tradvax will be more effective.
Well you are wrong doc.
quote:NEJM
During the 2022–2023 influenza season, U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines had a vaccine effectiveness of approximately 44 to 54% in participants who were 64 years of age or younger.16,17 Concurrent evaluation of the U.S.-licensed control vaccine that was included in our trial within the same season allowed for comparisons with the modRNA vaccine. In the end-of-season analysis, the 28.7% relative efficacy of the modRNA vaccine as compared with the control vaccine suggests that the efficacy of the modRNA vaccine ranged from 60 to 67%.
This was for the Pfzer mRNA vaccine. It was 15-20% MORE EFFECTIVE.
quote:
The data showed it was more effective than traditional shots.
Did it? My impression is the Moderna study compared the Flu mRNA shot to older outdated traditional Flu Vax. Not the ones being currently deployed.
Don't know about the Moderna one but the Pfzer one compared mRNA used in the 2022-2023 flu season vs traditional vaccines used in the same flu season.
quote:
You just contradicted yourself because the flu mutates in such a manner that new variants are able to slip past immunity from the most current vaccine.
I don't know that it is as much mutation as it is transmission of existing strains different than those anticipated.
According to google AI the subclad K is a highly mutated version influenza A (H3N2) that first appeared in Australia in July of 2025. It mutated from the H3N2 strain that circulated next year.
quote:
Vaccine “misses” (as with this year) are normally about strain selection and transmission patterns, not brand-new mutations suddenly appearing.
Here are the stains in this year's flu vaccine.
Influenza A (H1N1): A/Victoria/4897/2022-like virus.
Influenza A (H3N2): A/Croatia/10136RV/2023-like virus.
Influenza B (Victoria): B/Austria/1359417/2021-like virus.
Maybe this year's flu vaccine if they used the H3N2 strain from the 2024-2025 flu season instead of the two year old strain it might cover subclad K since it is a mutation of last year's H3N2.
quote:
Flu season is six months. You are implying strain ID to widespread deployment of a demonstrably safe mRNA Vax could occur in 3 mos. I'd say 6-mos would be a compressed but doable span.
3 months is possible with regulatory changes (again another can of worms).
[embed]Based upon interviews with industry subject matter experts, production lead times under
pandemic-emergency conditions were estimated to be 3.5–6 months for viral vector and 2.5–5.5
months for mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines. Differences between mRNA and viral vaccines were
accounted for by the upstream manufacturing process (1.5–3 months for viral vector and ~1 month
for mRNA-based vaccines), reflecting the time for cell culture, bioassay validation, and quality
requirements for viral vector manufacturing.[/embed] LINK
According to google AI it takes 4-6 months to grow enough virus particles to produce the flu shot. New mRNA vaccines were ready to go in 2.5-5.5 months during the pandemic and that was with a new vaccine. Since the flu is a yearly virus I would imagine that efficiency would improve the longer they produced the vaccine. Since mRNA vaccines do not require growing new viruses a booster being ready for production in 3 months is a realistic goal. Subclad K became the predominant strain in Asia and Australia in August. If they had a regulatory process that allowed them to continue to use the already approved mRNA vaccine in production the only thing that would be required is a change the mRNA sequence. That probably could have been done by late October and be administering it by December 1st.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 3:48 pm to Ailsa
quote:
mRNA uses aids to bypass your defenses and modifies your DNA to produce the disease
That’s not how it works at all. The mRNA is not being inserted into the human genome.. the mRNA is being inserted into the nucleus and is being translated by hundreds or thousands of ribosomes simultaneously which in turn produces the protein antigen than is transported out of the cell. Once circulating in the bloodstream the T cells encounter it triggering an immune response.. The issue is in controlling the volume of protein that is produced, cell to cell, person to person. You also have to get the mRNA through the cytoplasm and into the nucleus without it being destroyed by intercellular process that seek out and destroy foreign dna.
Posted on 2/11/26 at 3:53 pm to Ailsa
frick moderna ans lilly
their shite has a lot of jabbers
their shite has a lot of jabbers
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News