this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2024
1236 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

59243 readers
3428 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If a mutation occurs making a cell cancerous then what has changed is human DNA. We're creating technology that can turn immune systems against cells containing specific proteins in human DNA. I think curing cancer is good and maybe even necessary but if creating targets within human DNA is what Moderna is doing then it needs to be strictly controlled and regulated.

Here is a wild hypothetical for you: if you can target the parts of human DNA that make a cell cancerous then in theory you could target parts of DNA that make a person black or target cells in people with green eyes.

[–] viralJ@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Of course it needs to be controlled and regulated. Like any other drugs. One of the reasons drugs are expensive is because there is so many regulatory hurdles that drug makes have to deal with before they can touch a patient.

I get your hypothetical, but it has two shortcomings. Firstly, training the immune system against cancer mutations is fairly easy, because the mutations are not present during the process of T and B cell maturation, so in the population of circulating naive T and B cells in a patient, there are likely to exist ones that are going to recognise the cancer antigen. Whatever proteins drive the dark pigmentation of skin or green eye colour will be used to drive the negative selection of T and B cells in the person with dark skin or brown eyes. And so, even if you administer a "vaccine" encoding these proteins, their immune systems will not be able to mount a response against them.

Secondly, what about the practicalities. Say you made the anti-green eye vaccine - how do you administer it to people? I'm assuming we're not talking about some dystopian future where forcing people to receive injections that contain biologicals killing them is legal. It's not the kind of "vaccine" that you could just spread in the air or add to drinking water for it to take effect.

[–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I think far moreso than any other drug, regulations for drugs in the USA is shit. It needs to be regulated as if it were already a weapon.

Secondly, the nature of mRNA delivery through nanolipids opens up the possibility for oral delivery instead of only injection, a large amount of research is going into that.