News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by jimbob45 on Saturday October 19, 2024 @12:15AM (#41885592)
Drug companies have been unwilling to take financial risks when they can’t be sure there’ll be a market for a strep A vaccine in wealthy countries

Did they not poll anyone on this? I struggle greatly to believe the greater public wouldn’t sprint to their nearest pharmacy for such a vaccine. I wanted to fund such a thing before the article was over - I simply never knew such a thing was on the table.

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by Molitor5901 on Saturday October 19, 2024 @12:29AM (#41885642)
Vaccine makers could lobby the government to make the vaccine mandatory, thereby guaranteeing a revenue stream for the vaccine to reduce the financial risk.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by fshbbdssbbgdd on Saturday October 19, 2024 @01:12AM (#41885782)
I wonder if people downvoted this because they took it as some kind of political point about COVID-19. Maybe it was, but I agree with it as a serious proposal. Even if the government is not confident in its ability to get people to accept vaccinations, it should commit to pay for the doses either way, to incentivize the development of the vaccine. In general, a contest or prize is a smart way to fund a public good. Among left and right economists, this is one thing most would agree on.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by fooker on Saturday October 19, 2024 @02:36AM (#41886062)
Okay suppose the government commits to pay for it and keeps coercing people to take it. What happens when:

(1) TotallyGenuine drug company realizes that they can still get paid giving out fake shots.

(2) NotEvil drug company buys up it's smaller competitors and stops improving vaccines.

(3) KeyboardScientist makes a viral post that the government is sterilizing people of a particular ethnicity.

With a bit of googling, you can find events very close to all these three.

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by kelnos on Saturday October 19, 2024 @02:52AM (#41886136)
And yet we still have many successful mandatory vaccination campaigns. Certainly they've been hurt by all the antivax garbage going around since the pandemic, but that doesn't make them not worthwhile.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by fooker on Saturday October 19, 2024 @03:09AM (#41886192)
We have also had many successful wars. Doesn't mean wars are the best way to solve issues.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by Molitor5901 on Saturday October 19, 2024 @02:29PM (#41889603)
I was actually thinking of Gardasil but yes, it could be applied to anything. It was not meant to be political.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by pfdietz on Saturday October 19, 2024 @12:36AM (#41885672)
The concern with any Strep vaccine is stimulating autoimmune reactions. Rheumatic fever is just such a reaction associated with strep infection, and it can be very damaging, even deadly.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by fny on Saturday October 19, 2024 @12:39AM (#41885685)
First, there are cheap alternatives (antibiotics) which limit the total market size.

Second, it’s almost tautological. If there was enough profit to justify the development time and cost, drug companies would pursue a vaccine. Since they’re not pursuing a vaccine, you can assume there’s not enough estimated profit compared to other research ventures.

The second point includes considerations of difficulty. There are many strep strains. Strep can trigger autoimmune diseases. Will the costs of surmounting these challenges be rewarded above other pursuits?

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by dragonwriter on Saturday October 19, 2024 @02:03AM (#41885943)
> Second, it’s almost tautological. If there was enough profit to justify the development time and cost, drug companies would pursue a vaccine.

No, that's not "almost tautological". In fact, it is a form of the appeal to tradition fallacy. (LIt is tautological -- as are many applications of that fallacy -- if you take the assumptions underpinning rational choice theory as axioms, but it stops being such once you drop the perfect information assumption.)

Your reframing of it in the next sentence subtly acknowledges this, when you shift from "if there was enough profit" to "there’s not enough estimated profit", despite that you are responding to a post that explicitly is arguing that the estimate made of the profit is dubious.

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by log_e on Saturday October 19, 2024 @01:13AM (#41885786)
You realize tautology is a logical fallacy, right?
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by auggierose on Saturday October 19, 2024 @03:56AM (#41886364)
It is not. It is actually quite the opposite.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by schrodinger on Saturday October 19, 2024 @01:49AM (#41885893)
It's like saying "A beginner is new to a subject." That's tautological since the definition of beginner implies being new to a subject.

Those aren't logical fallacies; they're just not very useful.

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by pdonis on Saturday October 19, 2024 @01:16AM (#41885799)
Huh? A tautology is a statement that is automatically true by the laws of logic.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by maxbond on Saturday October 19, 2024 @01:40AM (#41885867)
GP is correct that the argument contains an informal fallacy[1], and people often express this criticism by saying "your argument is tautological," and you are correct that a tautology is a statement which is always true [2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_(logic)

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by pdonis on Saturday October 19, 2024 @07:37PM (#41891683)
> GP is correct that the argument contains an informal fallacy

The GP didn't say that.

As for which informal fallacy the GGP's argument contained, I would say it was more like a false dilemma. And the GGP did say "almost tautological", which implicitly recognizes that there might be other possibilities.

> people often express this criticism by saying "your argument is tautological,"

I have never seen this (nonsensical) way of expressing the criticism that an argument is false by saying that it is tautological (and therefore true).

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by maxbond on Saturday October 19, 2024 @08:23PM (#41891910)
The point is that it's an overloaded term, which makes it easy to talk past each other.

If you wish to see usages like I described, have a look here.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by pfdietz on Monday October 21, 2024 @08:36AM (#41903497)
The first rule of Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology Club.

https://xkcd.com/703/

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by zaptrem on Saturday October 19, 2024 @04:49AM (#41886570)
Even with antibiotics strep really sucks for kids (painful!) and parents (kid needs to stay home from school). Seems like there would be obvious demand. The article says the FDA banned testing for like 40 years due to a tiny issue during a trial in the late 20th century.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by YetAnotherNick on Saturday October 19, 2024 @01:16AM (#41885798)
And the wealthy country here just means United States. It is the only country where pharmaceutical companies could sell their products at any price.
Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by toast0 on Saturday October 19, 2024 @01:37AM (#41885857)
It would depend on the efficacy and the length of time its effective.

One dose and very little strep for the rest of your life is different than an annual regimine.

But you can't know how it will do before a lot of spending.

Re:Strep A kills half a million per year; why don't we have ... by tim333 on Saturday October 19, 2024 @07:06AM (#41887137)
It sounds somewhat comparable to the Hepatitis A vaccine and I'm not sure many are sprinting to the pharmacies although it is moderately successful.