Moderna has unraveled

mRNA tech promise vs pharma business reality

• Several commenters think mRNA remains highly promising (vaccines, cancer, targeted therapies) and that Moderna still has long‑term value.
• Others stress the core problem is the pharma model: huge upfront R&D and trial costs, high failure rates, and the end of pandemic-scale government purchasing.
• Some argue “low-hanging fruit” in pharma is gone, pushing companies toward patentable “me-too” drugs rather than breakthrough therapies.

Side effects, personal experience, and uptake

• Wide range of reported vaccine reactions: from “sore arm only” to being bedridden for days.
• Some say repeated significant side effects make frequent boosters unsustainable; others note such reactions are uncommon and comparable to other vaccines.
• This variability within households fuels hesitation, even among people who accept the technology in principle.

Efficacy, transmission, and natural immunity

• Ongoing dispute over what the vaccines “were supposed to do”:
  • One camp: vaccines mainly reduce severe illness/death; they never guaranteed no infection.
  • Another camp: public and political messaging implied near-immunity and non-transmission; when breakthrough infections appeared, people felt deceived.
• Fierce debate over natural immunity:
  • Some argue prior infection should have been accepted in lieu of mandates and is longer-lasting.
  • Others stress data (and messaging at the time) that vaccination, especially combined with infection, significantly reduced bad outcomes.
• There is disagreement about what ended the pandemic: vaccination, viral mutation, widespread infection, or some combination.

Politics, mandates, and trust

• Strong sentiment that mandates, employer/school requirements, and exclusion of non‑mRNA options (e.g., J&J) radicalized opposition to mRNA and eroded trust in institutions.
• Others counter that early political decisions were reasonable given the uncertainty and that later “retconning” ignores what was known then.
• Messaging by politicians and media is criticized as oversimplified or exaggerated, contributing to long-term skepticism of public health guidance.

Regulation, safety, and “rush” concerns

• Some claim mRNA vaccines were “hand-waved” through regulators, lacked long-term follow‑up before mass rollout, and under-disclosed side effects (e.g., myocarditis).
• Others reply they went through standard clinical rigor for emergency conditions, with side‑effect data accumulating and being analyzed over subsequent years.

Ethics, competition, and valuation

• One commenter alleges Moderna suppressed an alternative U. Pitt vaccine, framing current struggles as “karma” and evidence of aggressive moat-building.
• A few call Moderna’s trajectory “pump and dump”; others say its valuation merely reverted to pre‑Covid levels after a one‑product windfall.