• CarrotBottom@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’ll be reasonably expensive, but sequencing and gene alteration is way cheaper than in needs to be.

    If this can actually cure cancers, it may even be worth it.

    The thing is, surely there’s antibody against cancer antigens anyway, in ordinary cancer. A cancer cell expresses epitopes not on healthy cells.

    Why is this better?

    • qarbone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      but sequencing and gene alteration is way cheaper than in[sic] needs to be.

      …what? this sounds like you’re advocating for price increases.

      • CarrotBottom@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oops, new to Lemmy. But not new to typing, so no excuse.

        I meant than “it used to be”.

        I blame autocorrect.

    • arc@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think “reasonable” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Whatever price they charge it will be to maximize to Moderna’s profits - i.e. they’ll price it slightly lower than what insurers / national health systems would be stung for what 44% of melanoma patients needing a second round of expensive chemo would cost them but not so high that no one will cover the treatment. So I guess the price is “reasonable”, in that it’ll be cheaper than the alternative but it’s not like Moderna will be charitable or fair about it.

      It’s still an amazing breakthrough though.