7 ms·

CDC deletes statement that “mRNA and spike protein do not last long in the body”

83 points by Jimmc414 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
suprjami 4y ago
- 18amxn18 4y ago
  - tom_ 4y ago
    Can you expand on this comment? It's a bit unclear, at least to me.
    - powerhour 4y ago
      It's often used as an antisemitic slur. Given the context I think that is the case here.
    - 18amxn18 4y ago
    - unethical_ban 4y ago
      Foolish racism from extremist caves of the Internet.
- honkkong420 4y ago
  the concern is that the evidence that lead to the approval of these “vaccines” was as bad as the evidence for humors and leeches.
- josephcsible 4y ago
  The problem isn't that they're finally not hosting that misinformation anymore. It's that they're trying to memoryhole the fact that they ever were, instead of saying something to the effect of "we used to believe that the mRNA and the spike protein would not last long in the body, but now we think they do."
  - puffoflogic 4y ago
    - jdlshore 4y ago
      What’s your reason to believe the CDC would “come after” archive.org? It sounds like pure conspiracy-theory fantasy.
  - rowanG077 4y ago
    What do you expect? An entire history lesson about everything on the CDC site? Go read the scientific articles if that's what you want. CDC should reflect the current best knowledge without fluff.
    - inglor_cz 4y ago
      Actually, a searchable history of no longer valid statements together with an explanation what invalidated them (plus links to the relevant articles) would go a long way towards teaching people how science really operates and that it isn't a kind of "just trust us and our dictate" authoritarian system. It wouldn't have to clutter the most recent info page, but just be provided as a link somewhere.
      - bandyaboot 4y ago
        Perhaps lobby your representatives in Congress to dedicate additional funding for the CDC to build that out?
        4y ago
- luvs2code 4y ago
  If they are changing the information because of scientific knowledge the CDC should have no trouble whatsoever detailing 1) Why they had the information on their website in the first place 2) Why the information in the past was wrong (in light of new evidence) 3) Why the current information should be taken seriously in light of the aforementioned misinformation.
- origin_path 4y ago
  "Science" is not a get out of jail free card for making false claims with 100% confidence that then later get inverted, over and over again. Science is a process for the discovery of things that are true and management of uncertainty is a key part of that process. Our society seems to have massive problems at every level with distinguishing science from pseudo-science. The CDC is perhaps the biggest and best funded source of misinformation on the planet. They have been constantly making claims backed by nonsense-level studies or even no studies whatsoever, simply to get people to obey their policies. Them quietly editing their website with no admission or notification that they were previously wrong is not Science!!, it's the act of a dystopian bureaucracy. What would actually be needed here is: 1. A written press release notifying the world of the change, instead of it being spotted by people who have learned not to trust them about anything. 2. A really detailed and thorough investigation of how they were so wrong about such a critical fact, and how the trial / regulatory approval process missed it. 3. A recognition that other people, with far fewer resources, were actually stating that the mRNA seemed to be lingering in the body many months ago. And that therefore their constant demands that anyone who disagrees with them be silenced are wrong.
- tomohawk 4y ago
  The CDC did not cover themselves with glory in this pandemic. They insisted that they were the only outfit who could conduct covid testing, and shut down all other labs that were doing testing. This was at the very beginning of the outbreak where testing was critical. Then, it took them a long time to produce a test, and the test ended up not working. And this was after being lazy and just believing the authorities in China about covid instead of doing their own surveillance. Taiwan did a great job of this, but the CDC epically failed. Remember "2 weeks to flatten the curve"? And what about the teacher's union using the CDC as a sock puppet? https://nypost.com/2021/05/01/teachers-union-collaborated-with-cdc-on-school-reopening-emails/ https://nypost.com/2021/05/01/teachers-union-collaborated-wi...
  - mbg721 4y ago
    The details aren't important, as long as we're good patriotic citizens and comply.
- dang 4y ago
  Please don't post flamebait like this on divisive topics. Would you mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules? Note these ones: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." "Eschew flamebait."
kennywinker 4y ago
This is stupid. The page links to a full article describing how quickly this stuff is broken down in your body. If there was new research that said it stuck around longer they might change it - but there hasn’t been - so any change is there for clarity not some secret admission of guilt.
m3047 4y ago
This is an archived page. So what's shown here is that the site /did/ say mRNA and Spike don't last long. Arguably this is incorrect, although maybe poetic license applies: "Our cells break down mRNA from these vaccines..." This is incorrect because the mRNA hijacks the cell's machinery to produce spike so no, this is incorrect; on the other hand, the immune response... mediated by other cells... does indeed break down the cells which are emitting Spike, at least eventually, or at least that's the plan.
- josephcsible 4y ago
  > This is an archived page. So what's shown here is that the site /did/ say mRNA and Spike don't last long. Right. Now compare it to the page as it looks today to see that they deleted that section.
- jryb 4y ago
  All mRNA is regularly degraded. Just because it gets translated doesn't mean it is immune to the degradation machinery. In any event, none of this even matters - the mRNA and spike proteins are completely innocuous on their own and this language existed just to assuage unfounded (but reasonable) fear.
AlbertoGP 4y ago
From the CDC page: > “The mRNA and the spike protein do not last long in the body. > Our cells break down mRNA from these vaccines and get rid of it within a few days after vaccination. The paper “Immune imprinting, breadth of variant recognition, and germinal center response in human SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination”, Röltgen et al. 2022, published in the journal Cell: > “Prolonged detection of vaccine mRNA in LN GCs and spike antigen in LN GCs and blood following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination > The biodistribution, quantity, and persistence of vaccine mRNA and spike antigen after vaccination and viral antigens after SARS-CoV-2 infection are incompletely understood but are likely to be major determinants of immune responses. > We performed in situ hybridization with control and SARS-CoV-2 vaccine mRNA-specific RNAScope probes in the core needle biopsies of the ipsilateral axillary LNs that were collected 7–60 days after the second dose of mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 vaccination and detected vaccine mRNA collected in the GCs of LNs on days 7, 16, and 37 postvaccination, with lower but still appreciable specific signal at day 60 (Figures 7A–7E).” > https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(22)00076-9#sec2.7 https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(22)00076-9#sec... Maybe I’m reading it wrong, but I understand this as saying that the modified mRNA (using pseudouridine) does not degrade nearly as fast as normal mRNA, “Our cells break down mRNA [...] within a few days” vs. 60 days or more. Now, this is not my area of expertise and I can’t say whether that’s important or not.
norwalkbear 4y ago
This is concerning, so it does last long in the body?
- kennywinker 4y ago
  It does not. That page used to link and STILL links to this page. There is no change in the facts just change in what they are prioritizing for communicating to people https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/where-mrna-vaccines-and-spike-proteins-go https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/where-mrna-vaccines-and-sp...
GenerocUsername 4y ago
This is only news because people labeled conspiracy theorists have been making this claim since the beginning, and now the CDC has to quietly admit that those people were correct. What else will the conspiracy theorists be correct about?
- origin_path 4y ago
  Relevant meme: https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2002287-wikihow https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2002287-wikihow A list of claims that are likely to see some kind of quiet semi-official recognition over the next five years: 1. COVID vaccines can injure and kill people. 2. They do so at a much higher rate than other vaccines have done in the past. 3. They can hurt fertility (see the recent crash in birth rates around the world). 4. For the vast majority they were not a good cost/benefit tradeoff. 5. Lockdowns were a failed policy and failed in the way lockdown opponents said they'd be at the start. Some of these things are actually already being admitted in some quarters, if you look closely. Bill Gates, Mr Vaccine himself, recently admitted that COVID is a disease that "a disease mainly of the elderly, kind of like flu". Remember how people who said COVID is basically a bad flu were treated in 2020? How people who said the vaccines don't make sense for anyone except the elderly in 2021? And w.r.t. injuries you're seeing the Nordic countries pull the vaccines for young people because the cost/benefit tradeoff is wrong. Moderna specifically got banned in parts of Europe for I think the under 30s, though if you look at the data used to justify that it should really have been for more like the under 50s and that data is certainly way too optimistic anyway due to under-reporting. So far it's still dead silence on fertility. But birth rates are public. Anyone can draw graphs of them, align them seasonally and see the massive drop that starts 9 months after the vaccine rollout reached women of childbearing age. Reality is most of the things labelled as conspiracy theories never were. They were people saying wait, these decisions make no rational sense, this is clearly mass hysteria and needs to be opposed. No conspiracy was invoked by the vast majority of the most vocal opponents I follow - just irrationality and institutional, culturally embedded ethical problems in the public health sector.
  - anankaie 4y ago
    It did not help that there were strong political partisan effects further corrupting this situation beyond what you have noted. I have to admit, I really wonder what the counterfactual world (where Trump got elected for a second term) would look like with respect to which groups believe which information.
sazz 4y ago
And for all those who downplay this process of deletion and think that's just how science works: Where were you when YT and FB were deleting content and accusing people of spreading lies because they contradicted CDC information? Where were you to say that error is part of science and people with a different opinion may well be right? Where were you when people from the "team science" mob defamed people with an unpopular opinion and destroyed their livelihoods when they were blackballed by their employers? So yes - actually, it would be a small thing if the CDC corrected this message after the fact. But after everyone elevated the CDC as the only incontrovertible truth, the fall down is now just a little longer.
- erulabs 4y ago
  - sazz 4y ago
    Please read my statement carefully. Do you understand the meaning of a Straw man argument? I am not implying it to "everyone", but accusing people of a double standard who now argue that deleting a statement is "quite normal" because that is how it is done in science. And there are plenty of examples in these threads. So I am not accusing these people of anything (because that would be a straw man argument), but I find it hypocritical when someone considers changes in CDC content to be "everyday scientific practice" without taking into the account that entire careers were destroyed based on precisely this content by a mob using CDC content as their religious truth.
- cyanydeez 4y ago
  What matters is authority, after peer review; not peer distribution. Don't confuse the matter with a random agenda.
  - kurupt213 4y ago
    Peer review is not the gatekeeper for accuracy
sneedless 4y ago
I mean, they link to https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/where-mrna-vaccines-and-spike-proteins-go https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/where-mrna-vaccines-and-sp... on that very same page, I assume that they just thought that they could shovel it off to someone else? It's a little sussy that they just wiped it but I don't see how that's evidence that it's untrue, rather that maybe the science isn't as conclusive as previously thought, or that the wording of "not very long" is stupid and vague, and that it doesn't need to be said because it actually is so conclusive. Think they'll make a statement?

83 points by Jimmc414 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

suprjami 4y ago

18amxn18 4y ago
- tom_ 4y ago
  Can you expand on this comment? It's a bit unclear, at least to me.
  - powerhour 4y ago
    It's often used as an antisemitic slur. Given the context I think that is the case here.
  - 18amxn18 4y ago
  - unethical_ban 4y ago
    Foolish racism from extremist caves of the Internet.
honkkong420 4y ago
the concern is that the evidence that lead to the approval of these “vaccines” was as bad as the evidence for humors and leeches.
josephcsible 4y ago
The problem isn't that they're finally not hosting that misinformation anymore. It's that they're trying to memoryhole the fact that they ever were, instead of saying something to the effect of "we used to believe that the mRNA and the spike protein would not last long in the body, but now we think they do."
- puffoflogic 4y ago
  - jdlshore 4y ago
    What’s your reason to believe the CDC would “come after” archive.org? It sounds like pure conspiracy-theory fantasy.
- rowanG077 4y ago
  What do you expect? An entire history lesson about everything on the CDC site? Go read the scientific articles if that's what you want. CDC should reflect the current best knowledge without fluff.
  - inglor_cz 4y ago
    Actually, a searchable history of no longer valid statements together with an explanation what invalidated them (plus links to the relevant articles) would go a long way towards teaching people how science really operates and that it isn't a kind of "just trust us and our dictate" authoritarian system. It wouldn't have to clutter the most recent info page, but just be provided as a link somewhere.
    - bandyaboot 4y ago
      Perhaps lobby your representatives in Congress to dedicate additional funding for the CDC to build that out?
      - 4y ago
luvs2code 4y ago
If they are changing the information because of scientific knowledge the CDC should have no trouble whatsoever detailing 1) Why they had the information on their website in the first place 2) Why the information in the past was wrong (in light of new evidence) 3) Why the current information should be taken seriously in light of the aforementioned misinformation.
origin_path 4y ago
"Science" is not a get out of jail free card for making false claims with 100% confidence that then later get inverted, over and over again. Science is a process for the discovery of things that are true and management of uncertainty is a key part of that process. Our society seems to have massive problems at every level with distinguishing science from pseudo-science. The CDC is perhaps the biggest and best funded source of misinformation on the planet. They have been constantly making claims backed by nonsense-level studies or even no studies whatsoever, simply to get people to obey their policies. Them quietly editing their website with no admission or notification that they were previously wrong is not Science!!, it's the act of a dystopian bureaucracy. What would actually be needed here is: 1. A written press release notifying the world of the change, instead of it being spotted by people who have learned not to trust them about anything. 2. A really detailed and thorough investigation of how they were so wrong about such a critical fact, and how the trial / regulatory approval process missed it. 3. A recognition that other people, with far fewer resources, were actually stating that the mRNA seemed to be lingering in the body many months ago. And that therefore their constant demands that anyone who disagrees with them be silenced are wrong.
tomohawk 4y ago
The CDC did not cover themselves with glory in this pandemic. They insisted that they were the only outfit who could conduct covid testing, and shut down all other labs that were doing testing. This was at the very beginning of the outbreak where testing was critical. Then, it took them a long time to produce a test, and the test ended up not working. And this was after being lazy and just believing the authorities in China about covid instead of doing their own surveillance. Taiwan did a great job of this, but the CDC epically failed. Remember "2 weeks to flatten the curve"? And what about the teacher's union using the CDC as a sock puppet? https://nypost.com/2021/05/01/teachers-union-collaborated-with-cdc-on-school-reopening-emails/ https://nypost.com/2021/05/01/teachers-union-collaborated-wi...
- mbg721 4y ago
  The details aren't important, as long as we're good patriotic citizens and comply.
dang 4y ago
Please don't post flamebait like this on divisive topics. Would you mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules? Note these ones: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." "Eschew flamebait."

kennywinker 4y ago

This is stupid. The page links to a full article describing how quickly this stuff is broken down in your body. If there was new research that said it stuck around longer they might change it - but there hasn’t been - so any change is there for clarity not some secret admission of guilt.

m3047 4y ago

This is an archived page. So what's shown here is that the site /did/ say mRNA and Spike don't last long. Arguably this is incorrect, although maybe poetic license applies: "Our cells break down mRNA from these vaccines..." This is incorrect because the mRNA hijacks the cell's machinery to produce spike so no, this is incorrect; on the other hand, the immune response... mediated by other cells... does indeed break down the cells which are emitting Spike, at least eventually, or at least that's the plan.

josephcsible 4y ago
> This is an archived page. So what's shown here is that the site /did/ say mRNA and Spike don't last long. Right. Now compare it to the page as it looks today to see that they deleted that section.
jryb 4y ago
All mRNA is regularly degraded. Just because it gets translated doesn't mean it is immune to the degradation machinery. In any event, none of this even matters - the mRNA and spike proteins are completely innocuous on their own and this language existed just to assuage unfounded (but reasonable) fear.

AlbertoGP 4y ago

From the CDC page: > “The mRNA and the spike protein do not last long in the body. > Our cells break down mRNA from these vaccines and get rid of it within a few days after vaccination. The paper “Immune imprinting, breadth of variant recognition, and germinal center response in human SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination”, Röltgen et al. 2022, published in the journal Cell: > “Prolonged detection of vaccine mRNA in LN GCs and spike antigen in LN GCs and blood following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination > The biodistribution, quantity, and persistence of vaccine mRNA and spike antigen after vaccination and viral antigens after SARS-CoV-2 infection are incompletely understood but are likely to be major determinants of immune responses. > We performed in situ hybridization with control and SARS-CoV-2 vaccine mRNA-specific RNAScope probes in the core needle biopsies of the ipsilateral axillary LNs that were collected 7–60 days after the second dose of mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 vaccination and detected vaccine mRNA collected in the GCs of LNs on days 7, 16, and 37 postvaccination, with lower but still appreciable specific signal at day 60 (Figures 7A–7E).” > https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(22)00076-9#sec2.7 https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(22)00076-9#sec... Maybe I’m reading it wrong, but I understand this as saying that the modified mRNA (using pseudouridine) does not degrade nearly as fast as normal mRNA, “Our cells break down mRNA [...] within a few days” vs. 60 days or more. Now, this is not my area of expertise and I can’t say whether that’s important or not.

norwalkbear 4y ago

This is concerning, so it does last long in the body?

kennywinker 4y ago
It does not. That page used to link and STILL links to this page. There is no change in the facts just change in what they are prioritizing for communicating to people https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/where-mrna-vaccines-and-spike-proteins-go https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/where-mrna-vaccines-and-sp...

GenerocUsername 4y ago

This is only news because people labeled conspiracy theorists have been making this claim since the beginning, and now the CDC has to quietly admit that those people were correct. What else will the conspiracy theorists be correct about?

origin_path 4y ago
Relevant meme: https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2002287-wikihow https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2002287-wikihow A list of claims that are likely to see some kind of quiet semi-official recognition over the next five years: 1. COVID vaccines can injure and kill people. 2. They do so at a much higher rate than other vaccines have done in the past. 3. They can hurt fertility (see the recent crash in birth rates around the world). 4. For the vast majority they were not a good cost/benefit tradeoff. 5. Lockdowns were a failed policy and failed in the way lockdown opponents said they'd be at the start. Some of these things are actually already being admitted in some quarters, if you look closely. Bill Gates, Mr Vaccine himself, recently admitted that COVID is a disease that "a disease mainly of the elderly, kind of like flu". Remember how people who said COVID is basically a bad flu were treated in 2020? How people who said the vaccines don't make sense for anyone except the elderly in 2021? And w.r.t. injuries you're seeing the Nordic countries pull the vaccines for young people because the cost/benefit tradeoff is wrong. Moderna specifically got banned in parts of Europe for I think the under 30s, though if you look at the data used to justify that it should really have been for more like the under 50s and that data is certainly way too optimistic anyway due to under-reporting. So far it's still dead silence on fertility. But birth rates are public. Anyone can draw graphs of them, align them seasonally and see the massive drop that starts 9 months after the vaccine rollout reached women of childbearing age. Reality is most of the things labelled as conspiracy theories never were. They were people saying wait, these decisions make no rational sense, this is clearly mass hysteria and needs to be opposed. No conspiracy was invoked by the vast majority of the most vocal opponents I follow - just irrationality and institutional, culturally embedded ethical problems in the public health sector.
- anankaie 4y ago
  It did not help that there were strong political partisan effects further corrupting this situation beyond what you have noted. I have to admit, I really wonder what the counterfactual world (where Trump got elected for a second term) would look like with respect to which groups believe which information.

sazz 4y ago

And for all those who downplay this process of deletion and think that's just how science works: Where were you when YT and FB were deleting content and accusing people of spreading lies because they contradicted CDC information? Where were you to say that error is part of science and people with a different opinion may well be right? Where were you when people from the "team science" mob defamed people with an unpopular opinion and destroyed their livelihoods when they were blackballed by their employers? So yes - actually, it would be a small thing if the CDC corrected this message after the fact. But after everyone elevated the CDC as the only incontrovertible truth, the fall down is now just a little longer.

erulabs 4y ago
- sazz 4y ago
  Please read my statement carefully. Do you understand the meaning of a Straw man argument? I am not implying it to "everyone", but accusing people of a double standard who now argue that deleting a statement is "quite normal" because that is how it is done in science. And there are plenty of examples in these threads. So I am not accusing these people of anything (because that would be a straw man argument), but I find it hypocritical when someone considers changes in CDC content to be "everyday scientific practice" without taking into the account that entire careers were destroyed based on precisely this content by a mob using CDC content as their religious truth.
cyanydeez 4y ago
What matters is authority, after peer review; not peer distribution. Don't confuse the matter with a random agenda.
- kurupt213 4y ago
  Peer review is not the gatekeeper for accuracy

sneedless 4y ago

I mean, they link to https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/where-mrna-vaccines-and-spike-proteins-go https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/where-mrna-vaccines-and-sp... on that very same page, I assume that they just thought that they could shovel it off to someone else? It's a little sussy that they just wiped it but I don't see how that's evidence that it's untrue, rather that maybe the science isn't as conclusive as previously thought, or that the wording of "not very long" is stupid and vague, and that it doesn't need to be said because it actually is so conclusive. Think they'll make a statement?