5 ms·

> Both Young and Jaenisch say they received more intense criticism for their preprint than any studies in their careers, in part because some researchers worrie

by jeegsy 5y ago

> Both Young and Jaenisch say they received more intense criticism for their preprint than any studies in their careers, in part because some researchers worried it played into the hands of vaccine skeptics spreading false claims about the newly authorized mRNA vaccines. I understand that there are strongly desired policy outcomes to consider here but seriously, the histrionics that follow anything that even smells like a deviation from the conventional wisdom regarding this pandemic cannot possibly be helpful

tryonenow 5y ago
Which is why I have trouble trusting any policy related to COVID mitigation. It has firmly become another orthodoxy - especially given it's politicization, and the association of skepticism with being "anti mask" or "anti vax". The bulk of related science will be heavily biased - certain research avenues are simply unlikely to be pursued. There is at least one other preprint floating around now [0] which suggests that the spike protein itself is a general inflammatory agent, and another preprint (having trouble finding it) indicating that the spike protein is possibly responsible for the clotting/vascular nature of COVID. Now as I understand the mRNA vaccines induce cells to produce spike proteins. So if the reports in these preprints are confirmed, then there is a likelihood that the mRNA vaccine will cause chronic inflammation in some proportion of recipients. And given the new orthodoxy, and the political momentum behind a successful vaccine, I expect that confirmation and acknowledgement of such findings to be a long uphill battle. Particularly given the ambiguous nature of chronic inflammatory conditions. Note that a retroviral tendency of the COVID virus could explain positive tests post symptomatic infection as well as so called long COVID. 0. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.16.435700v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.16.435700v1
andrewflnr 5y ago
Yes, but I also feel like you have to empathize with said histrionics when there's a pretty short causal chain from (a) things anti-vaxxers and other conspiracists can use for propaganda to (b) people actually dying.

by jeegsy 5y ago

tryonenow 5y ago

Which is why I have trouble trusting any policy related to COVID mitigation. It has firmly become another orthodoxy - especially given it's politicization, and the association of skepticism with being "anti mask" or "anti vax". The bulk of related science will be heavily biased - certain research avenues are simply unlikely to be pursued. There is at least one other preprint floating around now [0] which suggests that the spike protein itself is a general inflammatory agent, and another preprint (having trouble finding it) indicating that the spike protein is possibly responsible for the clotting/vascular nature of COVID. Now as I understand the mRNA vaccines induce cells to produce spike proteins. So if the reports in these preprints are confirmed, then there is a likelihood that the mRNA vaccine will cause chronic inflammation in some proportion of recipients. And given the new orthodoxy, and the political momentum behind a successful vaccine, I expect that confirmation and acknowledgement of such findings to be a long uphill battle. Particularly given the ambiguous nature of chronic inflammatory conditions. Note that a retroviral tendency of the COVID virus could explain positive tests post symptomatic infection as well as so called long COVID. 0. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.16.435700v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.16.435700v1

andrewflnr 5y ago

Yes, but I also feel like you have to empathize with said histrionics when there's a pretty short causal chain from (a) things anti-vaxxers and other conspiracists can use for propaganda to (b) people actually dying.