Getty ImagesThe mRNA vaccine is considered a medical miracle that saved lives during the corporate pandemic, but the United States is now withdrawing from research.
U.S. Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr has canceled 22 projects – $500 million (£376 million) worth of funding – to address infections such as Covid and Flu.
So, does Kennedy (probably the most famous vaccine skeptic in the country) have a point, or does he make a huge miscalculation?
Professor Adam Finn, a vaccine researcher at the University of Bristol, said “this is available,” but abandoning mRNA technology is “stupid” and could be “catastrophic mistake.”
Let us stand out.
Kennedy said he had reviewed the science about mRNA vaccines and concluded that “data shows that these vaccines are not effective in protecting upper respiratory tract infections such as COVID and influenza.”
Instead, he said he would transfer funds to “safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even with the virus’ mutations.”
So is mRNA vaccine safe? Are they effective? Will other vaccine technologies be better?
Another question is where mRNA vaccines should fit in the pantheon of other vaccine technologies – because there are many:
- Inactivated vaccine Use the original virus or bacteria, kill it and use it to train the immune system – for example, the annual flu shot
- Vaccine weakens Don’t kill the infectious agent, but make it weak, thus causing mild infections – such as MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccines
- Conjugated vaccine Use protein or sugar in bugs, so it triggers an immune response without causing an infection – such as type of meningitis
- mRNA vaccine Use fragments of the genetic code that temporarily instructs the body to make part of the virus, to which the immune system responds
Everyone has strengths and weaknesses, but Professor Finn believes that during the pandemic, we “exaggerated” the mRNA vaccine because other methods have been ruled out, and now there is a process of adjustment.
“But so far, waving the swing, mRNA is useless, worthless, and should not be better developed or better understood is equally stupid, and it does a great job,” he said.
Is the mRNA vaccine effective?
Professor Andrew Pollard of Oxford Vaccine Group said that mRNA vaccines cannot prevent upper respiratory tract infections such as Covid and Covid and the flu.
In clinical trials, these vaccines have been shown to provide protection – keeping people alive and away from hospitals.
During the first year of vaccination during the common pandemic, it is estimated that the Pfizer/Biontech mRNA vaccine is only preserved Nearly 6 million lives.
Oppose this is a few cases of inflammation of the heart tissue (called myocarditis), especially in young people.
“Very rare side effects should be balanced with the huge benefits of the technology,” Professor Pollard said.
The pandemic is an era where the world is single and concentrated in common, and the introduction of vaccines has been strictly monitored. Their opinion is that they are overwhelmingly much better than hurt.
But that doesn’t mean they are a perfect technology.
Getty ImagesmRNA covid vaccine trains the immune system and targets only one protein in the entire virus. If the protein in the coronavirus changes or mutates, it can reduce the body’s protection.
We have seen this consequence – weakened immunity and vaccines need to be updated.
One theoretical argument is that different vaccine approaches (such as using the entire virus) will provide better protection, as the immune system will have more targets.
However, Professor Pollard said that mRNA vaccines perform better when addressing Covid than inactivated vaccines.
He said it may depend on how they are made, and the process of killing the virus also “changes viral proteins, so there is less stimulation to the immune system than mRNA vaccines”.
The need for a vaccine update is not a failure of mRNA technology, which can be easily solved by moving from one technology to another, but rather comes down to the basic nature of some viruses.
The same measles or HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccine has been effective for decades and shows no signs of failure because the genetic code of this virus is more stable in every case.
But some viruses live in an eternal state of help.
For example, influenza is not a virus, but a changing target. At any time, a stress will be in a state of excitement and most likely cause trouble in the winter.
Influenza, flu injections are updated every year for adults – and live vaccines for children as nasal sprays. Future influenza vaccine mRNA forms will work in the same way.
“The view of keeping up with the variant is all the technology, not just mRNA,” Professor Pollard said.
When speed is required, mRNA is “street”
There is a reasonable scientific question about which vaccine technology is used for which disease.
What draws scientists’ concern is that doing mRNA research means that sometimes we won’t have those vaccines when we need to do what other technologies can do.
“I don’t think there is any evidence that they are going to be better protected, but RNA Tech is the street where everything else is going to break out,” Professor Pollard said.
New flu vaccines are carried out every year, and the world has a high degree of drilling. But even so, there is still a six-month process that can decide which new influenza strains to target, so that the vaccine can be grown on a large scale in the eggs and then distributed. A brand new vaccine takes longer.
But with mRNA, you can get a new vaccine in six to eight weeks, and then tens of millions of doses in a few months.
Some projects that have received funding in the United States are preparing for the bird flu pandemic. The virus H5N1 has been devastating bird populations and jumping into many other animals, including American cattle.
“It doesn’t make sense, and if we do get a human pandemic with bird flu, it can be seen as a catastrophic mistake,” Professor Finn said.
However, the consequences of the United States stay away from mRNA research will be felt more widely.
What impact does this move have on current vaccines, mRNA or other methods? When the United States is one of the most influential countries in medical research, how will it affect the world? Will it have a chain reaction to other types of mRNA technologies, such as cancer vaccines – or will it be used to treat rare genetic diseases?
Professor Pollard raised another question after RFK JR’s move: “If a huge market rejects RNA, will this put us all at risk?
“This is one of the most important technologies we have seen this century in infectious diseases, biotherapeutic agents for rare diseases and severe cancers. This is the message that bothers me.”
