Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related

4293 readers

35 users here now

Health: physical and mental, individual and public.

Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.

See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.

Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.

Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.

Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.

Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

WhoRoger@lemmy.world

RoyalEngineering@lemmy.world

Awa@lemmy.world

FDA refuses to review Moderna's mRNA flu vaccine (arstechnica.com)

submitted 1 month ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/health@lemmy.world

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] TidBit@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's about knowing your audience and phrasing things in a way to increase the likelihood of acceptance. So despite the FDA reviewing and accepting the trial design in April '24 and August '25, plus the trial demonstrating the vaccine to be more effective than the currently available vaccines, I'd bet my last dollar they phrased it like this just for RFK and friends...

[–] circledot@feddit.org 2 points 1 month ago

They phrased it that way because the FDA did. Without any legal basis as it seems.

Moderna said the FDA reviewed and accepted its trial design on at least two occasions (in April 2024 and again in August 2025) before it applied for approval of mRNA-1010. It also noted that Fluarix has been used as a comparator vaccine in previous flu vaccine trials, which tested vaccines that went on to earn approval.

But in a letter dated February 3, Vinay Prasad, the FDA’s top vaccine regulator under the Trump administration, informed Moderna that the agency does not consider the trial “adequate and well-controlled” because the comparator vaccine “does not reflect the best-available standard of care.”