Talk:RNA vaccine
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the RNA vaccine redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article. If you've come here in response to such recruitment, please review the relevant Wikipedia policy on recruitment of editors, as well as the neutral point of view policy. Disputes on Wikipedia are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote. |
Error in "History"?
[edit]The first paragraph in history says "The idea that mRNA could be used for therapeutic purposes was first realized in 1989 by researchers at Vical, a Californian biotechnology start-up.[3][15] Researchers working with the Salk Institute that year published an article showing that nanoparticles could transfect mRNA into cells." and for both these claims, it refers to citation 15. The issue here is, the paper at 15 exclusively belong to the Salk Institute, and from what I can tell at the very least Inder Verma and Robert Malone were both under the employ of Salk, not Vical, at this point in time (Felgners association I can't find). It were the mice studies that were carried out a year after this paper was published that was part of Vical.
Tracking Citation 3 points out the culprit; this paper misidentified the institute as well despite also citing it, so its a faulty citation chain at play here. I recommend clarifying that it was realized by the Salk Institute.
I don't know whether this was corrected in the past but ended up getting deleted when Robert Malone was needlessly highlighted for his accomplishments within the team, but I world recommend correcting it as following the citations seems to declare it as self-evidently wrong
- According to his faculty profile, Felgner worked at Vical. [1]2601:249:8180:28D0:686E:C59D:A30F:2945 (talk) 23:00, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Philip L. Felgner". UC Irvine - Faculty Profile System - Philip L. Felgner.
- Not sure if this is the right section to bring it up in, but am I missing something or is the does the first sentence of "History" misstate what happened? "The first successful transfection of mRNA packaged within a liposomal nanoparticle into a cell was published in 1989." Dimitriadis did this in 1978. https://www.nature.com/articles/274923a0 The Malone, et al contribution was drastically increasing the efficiency by using a newly developed liposome, not being the first successful transfection or mRNA in a liposomal particle. Jwhite85 (talk) 20:33, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Sloppy use of references concerning mRNA research and side effects
[edit]One paragraph in this article uses suggestive argumentation with outdated or inadequate references:
"Up until 2020, these mRNA biotech companies had poor results testing mRNA drugs for cardiovascular, metabolic and renal diseases; selected targets for cancer; and rare diseases like Crigler–Najjar syndrome, with most finding that the side effects of the mRNA delivery methods were too serious.[29][30]"
Reference [29] is dated 10 January 2017 [1] Reference [30] is dated 13 september 2016 [2]
These references can't be used for a statement that the side effects of the mRNA delivery were too serious 'up until 2020'.
"mRNA vaccines for human use have been developed and tested for the diseases rabies, Zika, cytomegalovirus, and influenza, although these mRNA vaccines have not been licensed.[31]"
Reference [31] [3] links to a webpage of the Centers for Deisease Control and Prevention about 'Understanding mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines'. There is nothing on this page about mRNA vaccines not having been licensed.
"Many large pharmaceutical companies abandoned the technology,[29] while some biotechs re-focused on the less profitable area of vaccines, where the doses would be at lower levels and side effects reduced.[29][32]"
Reference [32] [4] is a CNN article that opens with a description of a meeting of vaccine developers with President Trump. The first line of the article reads: 'It almost felt like an episode of "Shark Tank".' This statement inspires little confidence that the author is an unbiased source. And there is nothing in the referenced article that substantiates anything in the sentence or paragraph. Reference [29] is the same reference as in the first line of this paragraph, linking to an article from 10 January 2017.
Escritor Polopos (talk) 13:09, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
References
- Big thanks, corrected. — kashmīrī TALK 09:49, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- There is still the issue of the citations 33 and 34 not supporting the statement. The article states, "mRNA drugs for cardiovascular, metabolic and renal diseases, and selected targets for cancer were initially linked to serious side effects," but the articles only note the difficultly in getting mRNA into cells without "nasty side effects." Neither article mentions serious side effects associated with any specific drugs (or categories of drugs). Torven (talk) 16:07, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Side Effects: Blood Clots
[edit]In the United States "CDC and FDA identified 44 confirmed reports of people who got the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and later developed TTS. Women younger than 50 years old especially should be aware of the rare but increased risk of this adverse event.[1]
"Denmark has ceased giving the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid vaccine amid concerns about rare cases of blood clots, the first European country to do so fully."[2] "Camilla, one of three Danes to be diagnosed with the side-effect VITT, experienced telltale symptoms of extreme headaches, bruising and clotting that could have proved fatal. Of the three Danes to have suffered from VITT – a rare and often fatal side-effect of the AstraZeneca vaccine – Camilla is the only survivor."[3]
- ^ "Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Johnson & Johnson's Janssen (J&J/Janssen) COVID-19 vaccination is rare."". CDC. CDC. Retrieved 2 September 2021.
- ^ "AstraZeneca vaccine: Denmark stops rollout completely". BBC. BBC. Retrieved 2 September 2021.
- ^ "Corona Round-up: Sole survivor of rare AstraZeneca side-effects in Denmark speaks out". CPH Post Online. CPH Post Online. Retrieved 2 September 2021.
September 2021 Nature article
[edit]https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w
NEWS FEATURE
The tangled history of mRNA vaccines
Hundreds of scientists had worked on mRNA vaccines for decades before the coronavirus pandemic brought a breakthrough.
Elie Dolgin
Nature
14 September 2021
--Nbauman (talk) 04:23, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Add to #Mechanism, the mRNA ligand function which also modulates the immune system, rather than only through its genetic code
[edit]mRNA influences the immune system not only by its genetic code but also by the shape of its molecule. It functions as a ligand. As such it can bind to Toll-Like Receptors (TLR).
The immunomodulatory effects of the ligand function of mRNA depend on whether the nucleosides are methylated. Pseudouridine Ψ (methylated uridine) uniquely suppresses the capacity of RNA to activate primary dendritic cells through binding to TLRs and the suppression is dose dependent. [1]
WouterHavinga (talk) 12:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
References
- ^ Karikó, Katalin; Buckstein, Michael; Ni, Houping; Weissman, Drew (2005-08-01). "Suppression of RNA Recognition by Toll-like Receptors: The Impact of Nucleoside Modification and the Evolutionary Origin of RNA". Immunity. 23 (2): 165–175. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2005.06.008. ISSN 1074-7613. PMID 16111635.
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:38, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect-Class COVID-19 articles
- Mid-importance COVID-19 articles
- WikiProject COVID-19 articles
- Redirect-Class Molecular Biology articles
- NA-importance Molecular Biology articles
- Redirect-Class Genetics articles
- Low-importance Genetics articles
- WikiProject Genetics articles
- Redirect-Class MCB articles
- NA-importance MCB articles
- WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology articles
- All WikiProject Molecular Biology pages
- Redirect-Class medicine articles
- Low-importance medicine articles
- All WikiProject Medicine pages
- Redirect-Class Microbiology articles
- Low-importance Microbiology articles
- WikiProject Microbiology articles
- Redirect-Class pharmacology articles
- Low-importance pharmacology articles
- WikiProject Pharmacology articles
- NA-Class Skepticism articles
- Low-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- Redirect-Class virus articles
- Low-importance virus articles
- WikiProject Viruses articles
- Wikipedia controversial topics