I think the purpose of giving it to people who are at high risk of the cancer make the auto-immune risks later a thing they will at least be alive to run into later; and maybe a fix for that will be found in time.

Given the current result of getting the cancer is very likely death, trading that for a potential of death after years more life seems to be a no-brainer, this FUD-like statement notwithstanding.

[+] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com -9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I think the purpose of giving it to people who are at high risk of the cancer make the auto-immune risks later a thing they will at least be alive to run into later; and maybe a fix for that will be found in time.

This is a vaccine, not a cure. They are given this before they even get cancer, and it's very possible that they weren't even at risk for pancreatic cancer in the first place. But, the vaccine could be worse than the cancer, if it doesn't cure a cancer that never developed and then also triggers some auto-immune response.

Hi, welcome to c/science. If you haven't developed an immediate pessimistic response to all science news, you clearly haven't been here long enough.

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You should read the article.

Pancreatic cancer forms on and is generally preceded by a series of pancreatic lesions, and the participants were only people with a history of medically concerning pancreatic lesions and a genetic predisposition to pancreatic cancer.

It’s also a cure- that was how it was (so far successfully) first tested, and they’re only now testing it as a vaccine.