Unlimited potential of mRNA

WSJ: Vaccines are only the beginning

mRNA technology is here to stay, and may be successful in treating diseases and conditions which have so far proven intractable.

Maybe even aging.

8 thoughts on “Unlimited potential of mRNA

  1. Great article.

    The mRNA technology is breakthrough. And a great example of how taxpayer and university funding play huge roles in our medical and scientific advances. Not until there are signs of commercial viability, do the risk takers enter the fray. But the basic research is often paid for by you and me. In advance by years, if not decades.


    Liked by 1 person

    1. You didn’t build that.

      Sure, and the laws of thermodynamics weren’t worked out for profit. But there is a very long way(and a awful lot of capital) between that understanding and a useful jet engine.

      You might want to read THE CODE BREAKER , about Jennifer Doudna and her part in mRNA and CRISPR technology. Those researchers may have worked for their universities on grants, but at every step, they were aware of the commercial applications and obsessed with primacy for patents and started scores of commercial partnerships to exploit their discoveries. Profit was a factor from the beginning.

      Profit is a good thing. It is the driver for making use of basic science. Getting government out of the process as early as possible helps us get practical use from that knowledge.


  2. Knee jerk response.

    We paid for the early research. Not hard to grasp.

    I have no problem with investors. That is why we taxpayers get the research started so private money can benefit.

    Just nice to acknowledge the good we do to allow such private profit after we set the table.

    Plus that is reality.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Oh I don’t doubt that philanthropic monies are involved.

        Corporate funding, too.

        We pumped billions into basic research. I believe Moderna was given huge sums from the feds before the pandemic. Not to mention OWS taking the risk out.

        Acknowledging that is not a mortal sin.

        Yes, Obama was taken out of context and that is still the right wing talking point. But the facts are simple. Government provided a lot of money in the basics. Then private money follows when things look promising.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. RE: “Acknowledging that is not a mortal sin.”

          No, but government funding plus government mandates is a classic example of moral hazard.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s