Critics say this needs more testing - cool sure let's make that happen! I don't think its wrong to publish data from 1 or 2 people, so long as you don't present that data as definitive.
this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
161 points (98.8% liked)
science
24167 readers
472 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
dart board;; science bs
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Really interesting approach, but I must agree with the critics that this needs much better testing. The bureaucracy may be annoying, but we do rigorous testing for a reason. The harm that could be done by unsafe, untested vaccines is not just problematic because of the people that it could harm directly, but because of the already growing number of people who are unwilling to vaccinate themselves and their children out of (unfounded) concerns over safety.
There are excellent, proven reasons why we have to a lot of rigorous testing on drugs. Sure it takes a long time, but when it has been properly tested, then it will be valuable to humankind beyond measure, forever. That's worth waiting for and doing it right.
And there are times when the process can be shortened in an an emergency, like Covid. I remember years ago, when they were doing a double-blind test on one of the first successful AIDS drugs, and it became apparent that the new drug was working incredibly well. It made it obvious who had been given the placebo. The new drug was so successful, that they determined that it would be morally wrong to deny it to the others in the test who were getting the placebo, and were continuing to get sicker, so they ended the study and gave everyone the new drug.
then it will be valuable to humankind beyond measure, forever.
"....until Martin Shkreli gets the patent and makes it impossible to afford." FTFY
Valid, goddammit.
there are times when the process can be shortened in an an emergency, like Covid.
The core reason why covid RNA vaccines were developed and released far quicker then a normal drug or vaccine is due to the size of the trials, especially the phase I and II trials.
Basically most infectious diseases don't really affect huge amounts of humans. Pandemics are rare.
However on the flip side is that you have small pools of people who are at risk of being infected.
However the covid pandemic massively increased the number of people at risk of being infected, especially those in the phase III trial. Consequently the efficacy of the vaccine could be easily identified.
And there were shit tons of people willing to be part of the testing.
That's why the development got super charged.
That and a huge amount of money (oh and it didn't hurt that the RNA vaccines tech had been in development for years prior. Kinda perfectly positioned for the perfect storm we faced)
Great title!
Top notch headline. I'll drink to that!
This is the similar to the discovery of a cure for stomach ulcers. Great work!
Beyond the title, a very well written and thoroughly explained article. Worth a read.
Fuck them rpg dice viruses.