4 ms·

The mRNA in this case has chromosomes that cannot be replicated by nature. You might try researching the mRNA vaccine.

moralestapia 5y ago
That's what you don't seem to get. I'm not saying it does happen, neither am I saying it does not happen. There's not enough evidence, that's it. Why is that so hard to grasp? And there's evidence of it happening in plenty of other contexts, so one wouldn't be crazy to believe that at least, in principle, it could happen here as well.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  > And there's evidence of it happening in plenty of other contexts, No, there isn't; “mRNA chromosomes” aren't a thing. The comment you replied to made as much sense as “the server rack isn't duplicated on the hard drive”; there's no evidence of it happening, because no possible real-world event corresponds to those words.
  - moralestapia 5y ago
    What? But I just put some references here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27466738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27466738 Those are peer-reviewed published papers ... and you chose to ignore them? Laughable.
    - wizzwizz4 5y ago
      Those references don't say what you think they say. What is an mRNA chromosome, then?
- guardiangod 5y ago
  >There's not enough evidence [to prove it doesn't happen] What is your idea 'enough evidence'? Do scientists have to gather up every possible reverse transcription gene in the known universe and test them? In principle, anything can happen. Specific cosmic rays can hit my desktop's memory/CPU in such a way that my computer will display a giant smiley face for the next 10 seconds. After all, cosmic rays are known to corrupt computations in plenty of other contexts. I can even propose more than 1 possible pathways for that to happen!
  - moralestapia 5y ago
    >Do scientists have to gather up every possible reverse transcription gene in the known universe and test them? For sure there could be a more practical way, but even if that's the only option well ... science is rigorous, man. Hence why we still have the theory of evolution and the theory of relativity. If you don't like it and wish to go back to "just believing" ... well, good luck, we won't miss you.
wizzwizz4 5y ago
This is very wrong. You mean nucleotides, not chromosomes – but they don't need to be replicated, so long as the codons are. The custom not-found-in-nature nucleotide is equivalent to a natural one, for all purposes except being detected by the immune system. The mRNA is at no point transcribed into DNA. I think this is what you meant – but it might help if you researched the mRNA vaccine before posting internet comments!
- haswell 5y ago
  I don't really understand the science here, so I'm hoping you'll clarify for the lay-people like me. Setting the technical issues aside, what's the bottom line? I think OP's general point was: "This is not dangerous in the way some people believe it to be dangerous". Do any of your corrections change that outcome/conclusion in a meaningful way? (I'm not asking to call your comment into question, but because I don't know how to adapt my understanding based on these two comments).
  - kaba0 5y ago
    I think wizzwizz4 only corrected the (quite big) factual problems of the grandparent. But about the claim of “the vaccine can modify our DNA”, I think this reply is great: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27467454 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27467454 Basically, while there are known mechanisms for mRNAs to getting converted to DNA, these quite complex mechanisms don’t just exist there. And the mRNA injected gets destroyed in ~half an hour. Basically, if there would be a constantly working mechanism for converting mRNA to DNA, our genome would constantly grow significantly since all sorts of mRNAs are constantly created inside cells.

That's what you don't seem to get. I'm not saying it does happen, neither am I saying it does not happen. There's not enough evidence, that's it. Why is that so hard to grasp? And there's evidence of it happening in plenty of other contexts, so one wouldn't be crazy to believe that at least, in principle, it could happen here as well.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
wizzwizz4 5y ago
> And there's evidence of it happening in plenty of other contexts, No, there isn't; “mRNA chromosomes” aren't a thing. The comment you replied to made as much sense as “the server rack isn't duplicated on the hard drive”; there's no evidence of it happening, because no possible real-world event corresponds to those words.
- moralestapia 5y ago
  What? But I just put some references here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27466738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27466738 Those are peer-reviewed published papers ... and you chose to ignore them? Laughable.
  - wizzwizz4 5y ago
    Those references don't say what you think they say. What is an mRNA chromosome, then?
guardiangod 5y ago
>There's not enough evidence [to prove it doesn't happen] What is your idea 'enough evidence'? Do scientists have to gather up every possible reverse transcription gene in the known universe and test them? In principle, anything can happen. Specific cosmic rays can hit my desktop's memory/CPU in such a way that my computer will display a giant smiley face for the next 10 seconds. After all, cosmic rays are known to corrupt computations in plenty of other contexts. I can even propose more than 1 possible pathways for that to happen!
- moralestapia 5y ago
  >Do scientists have to gather up every possible reverse transcription gene in the known universe and test them? For sure there could be a more practical way, but even if that's the only option well ... science is rigorous, man. Hence why we still have the theory of evolution and the theory of relativity. If you don't like it and wish to go back to "just believing" ... well, good luck, we won't miss you.

wizzwizz4 5y ago

This is very wrong. You mean nucleotides, not chromosomes – but they don't need to be replicated, so long as the codons are. The custom not-found-in-nature nucleotide is equivalent to a natural one, for all purposes except being detected by the immune system. The mRNA is at no point transcribed into DNA. I think this is what you meant – but it might help if you researched the mRNA vaccine before posting internet comments!

haswell 5y ago
I don't really understand the science here, so I'm hoping you'll clarify for the lay-people like me. Setting the technical issues aside, what's the bottom line? I think OP's general point was: "This is not dangerous in the way some people believe it to be dangerous". Do any of your corrections change that outcome/conclusion in a meaningful way? (I'm not asking to call your comment into question, but because I don't know how to adapt my understanding based on these two comments).
- kaba0 5y ago
  I think wizzwizz4 only corrected the (quite big) factual problems of the grandparent. But about the claim of “the vaccine can modify our DNA”, I think this reply is great: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27467454 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27467454 Basically, while there are known mechanisms for mRNAs to getting converted to DNA, these quite complex mechanisms don’t just exist there. And the mRNA injected gets destroyed in ~half an hour. Basically, if there would be a constantly working mechanism for converting mRNA to DNA, our genome would constantly grow significantly since all sorts of mRNAs are constantly created inside cells.