25 ms·

Pre-exposure to mRNA-LNP inhibits adaptive immune responses in mice

255 points by hammock 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
airstrike 4y ago
This submission definitely needs “in mice” appended to the title…
smsm42 4y ago
What is kinda scary is the inheritable part. How is it ends up making inheritable changes - that wasn't supposed to work that way, was it?
ta8645 4y ago
While this appears to be a positive outcome... this: "our studies highlight the need for more research to determine this platform's true impact on human health." Is a terrifying admission about the gamble that was taken. The truth is, we didn't know for sure if things would be this positive or not.
- rgrieselhuber 4y ago
  “Real world data”
- lazyier 4y ago
  > Is a terrifying admission about the gamble that was taken. Right, but according to Reddit, the Australian/New Zealand governments and other places people who didn't want to expose themselves to this stuff where all ignorant selfish assholes.
  - xienze 4y ago
    I think you might have been browsing an alternate-reality Reddit. The one I read was constantly bemoaning that no one in America was taking it seriously, "why aren't we locking down like China and New Zealand", etc.
    - sp332 4y ago
      New Zealand locked down early, but they vaccinated relatively late.
    - mitchdoogle 4y ago
      It's strange to me how so often you will see people bemoaning Reddit for some opinion that goes against the grain, when in reality Reddit is composed of a sampling of millions of humans and therefore is fully aligned with mainstream thought. Some people see a few comments or threads that disagree with them and they use that to say "All of Reddit has lost its mind", always forgetting the vast numbers of comments and threads where people generally agree with them. Funny how people do that..
      - oceanplexian 4y ago
        Reddit is a sampling of roughly 20% of 18-29 year old men who use the Internet. That’s not exactly “mainstream thought”, it’s a self selected demographic and what is popular on Reddit reflects that.
      - oska 4y ago
        > and therefore is fully aligned with mainstream thought It's obviously not fully aligned with 'mainstream thought', when the expression of many widely help positions will get individuals and whole subreddits banned
- bearjaws 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Covzire 4y ago
    >The reality is, way more people would have died without the vaccine You can't and couldn't possibly know that. Nobody could. What we do know today is that the un-vaccinated aren't dying like was originally claimed they would, in fact they seem to be faring better for those under 60 or so.
    - madacol 4y ago
      > ... in fact they seem to be faring better for those under 60 or so. Haven't heard that before!. Do you have a source to read more about it?
      - TylerE 4y ago
        Probably one of those tabloid pieces saying something like "80% of the deaths are now among the vaccinated" - which ignore that the population vax rate in that country is higher than that.
    - bearjaws 4y ago
      I am going to leave age out of it as I don't participate in the "fuck-em they're over the age of 55" mentality. The incident of death does increase substantially past 55, however people died at all ages during covid, so we know more infections = more deaths across the board. Given that the vaccine available at the time resulted in around a 85% reduction in likelyhood of infection, we can for sure declare it saved many more lives than without, unless it directly killed more people than it helped...
    - MagnumOpus 4y ago
      > You can't and couldn't possibly know that. Nobody could Not with that attitude... Yes you can, there are plenty of ways of comparing regions or countries with high and low vaccination rates, or vaccination uptake. (Of course only while demographically adjusting, but the people who do these studies surprisingly often do think about the basic gotchas.)
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  I never understood how people bought into the whole "we assure you it's safe*" narrative. Unless, there's a secret time machine, there's no data (read: no science) to support such hyperbole. And yet, such statements were quickly followed by "...trust the science..." as well as attemps to marginalize those who asked to see that data from the future. Such shenanigans doesn't build trust. It undermines it. As if gov and science need less trust at this point. *effectively an untested type of vax technology is somehow miraculously free of any/all possible short and long term side effects? The comparisons to say the Polio vax were embarrassingly naive, at best. I don't get it.
  - gergov 4y ago
    The anti-vaccination / bashing of anti-vaxx people was a pretty big and one sided internet niche pre-2020. In a way that you did have some tinfoil hat people, you had some whistleblowers, and you had an army of people bashing them left and right. And we're not even talking polio, but with stuff like chicken pox, where there was a vaccine introduced, but the folk solution (locking up the sick kids with the healthy kids so everybody gets over it) were at conflict that turned super, super vicious. In a sense it was an already ongoing battle with every argument already deployed and pre-determined, but all of a sudden everybody and their grandma were involved in the conversation against their will. The perma-online people predictably took up the positions they did, while a plethora of other opinions / skepticism emerged but were all summarily heaped in the tinfoil hat. Now it seems to be unwinding, and it feels just as surreal as the last few hours of a rave where everybody is kind of sobering up and looking at a very bothersome way home.
    - chiefalchemist 4y ago
      Question: What do you call the pro-jab'ers that used lies and hyperbole to "scientifically" justify their position? Not being troll-y or snarky. It's a legit question: Why was the self-proclaimed high road given a free pass on taking the low road? There's been a clear and obvious double standard. Why has that lede been buried?
  - junofan 4y ago
- chaostheory 4y ago
  People in the western societies will do anything to avoid wearing masks. That includes pushing and taking vaccines that weren’t fully tested. Unlike the latest flavor of mRNA vaccine, masks do not lose efficacy against new variants within a few months. If you wear an n95 rated mask or higher, you will have 95% efficacy or higher
  - pas 4y ago
    masks work, but their end-to-end efficacy is very low, because people would have to wear them perfectly. there's no point to wearing masks if you go to places where you take it off. people did exactly that and everyone was pikachu surprised that the pandemic was still alive and well.
    - Workaccount2 4y ago
      Or touch them at all. People say "I always wear N95 for maximum effect" But then they were the same mask for a week and play with it/adjust it 100 times a day.
    - chaostheory 4y ago
      That’s not true. Even an imperfectly worn N95 is more effective than a cloth mask or nothing at all. The n95 mask is high intuitive unless you have a large beard (ie. you just have to ensure it fits your nose bridge area and chin area properly). I would wager that it still has better efficacy than an mRNA vaccine even when improperly worn Thank you for helping making my point
      - pas 4y ago
        good wager (though a but underspecified, efficacy of preventing spread, illness, hospitalization, or death?) as far as I know the numbers are here and show otherwise https://www.healthline.com/health-news/in-the-era-of-omicron-mask-mandates-arent-working-vaccines-are https://www.healthline.com/health-news/in-the-era-of-omicron... https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/briefing/masks-mandates-us-covid.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/briefing/masks-mandates-u... of course for personal health choices it's best to go for a P100 respirator and getting the vaccine
- kingkawn 4y ago
  That’s true of all medical intervention
- creshal 4y ago
  "Please keep funding us, we're doing important work!" is a pretty standard sentence you see in some variation or other in most medical studies.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- ttpphd 4y ago
  Why is everyone voluntarily practicing amnesia? We had a lot of trial data showing safety and efficacy before the vaccines were rolled out. It is standard practice with influenza to update the stains. 0 reason to think that updating the mRNA for COVID vaccines from one strain to another is dangerous. None. Zap. Zero. Zilch.
  - pigeonhole123 4y ago
    I can't recall seeing any human studies on mRNA vaccines before the Pfizer one, which was unblinded and the control group vaccinated after six months. I also don't understand why this was done, since there will never exist any long term high quality data because of this.
  - icare_1er 4y ago
    - lima 4y ago
      It's the long-term, repeated exposure that makes smoking so dangerous.
    - mitchdoogle 4y ago
      I'm pretty sure that smoking regularly (say 10-20 cigs per day) for 6 months will lead to noticeably worse health measures
  - borner791 4y ago
    mRNA vaccine research has been going on since 1989: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine with lots of money and research going into the technology, I don't understand where folks are coming from.
  - dudeDDRrulez 4y ago
    This already-tired argument again. Vaccines for influenza have been around for decades. The first covid shot was the first ever mRNA technology ever approved for human use. Now the booster doesn’t simply swap out strains. It moves from a monovalent to a bivalent (original formula plus the Omicron Ba4/Ba5 formula) and we shouldn’t test it? The first ever bivalent mRNA vaccine. Deployed to everyone on the planet. With absolutely no human testing done. If you’re okay with it, that’s great… that’s your personal choice to trust corrupt health authorities and for-profit vaccine manufacturers. Let me know how it goes.
- epgui 4y ago
  Almost every single biomedical paper includes a line that says "more research is needed" because one of the main goals of research is to figure out what research to do next.
- fdewrewrewf 4y ago
  However, I hope that lessons about human nature have been learned, now that we have all lived through the pandemic. Whenever we look at history and ask "how could people buy such a flimsy story, and abandon all that they previously held dear?", the answer is "willingly, enthusiastically, and they will turn in previously good friends and family to further the supposed moral ends".
metalliqaz 4y ago
Oh this will be fun hearing about from Joe Rogan for the next thousand years.
- macspoofing 4y ago
  At least someone is talking about this. This is in fact an argument against censorship and for dispassionate and objective reporting where you don't take the word of government representatives or pharma executives at face value. If the (mainstream) media cedes this ground to more conspiratorial voices, whose fault is that?
- IceHegel 4y ago
  The question is of course, why will it only be him.
  - mikece 4y ago
    Because only Rogan has both the platform and enough f-you money to not care if he's deplatformed from the internet in total? And let's be honest: controversy drives interest, just like the MMA fight coverage he's a part of.
    - realce 4y ago
      So he has more money and popularity than God yet he needs to desperately generate controversy to get more... money and popularity or something?
      - mikece 4y ago
        I suspect he's genuinely interested in the topics at least for a while. I can relate to a certain degree: when I am learning something new I deep-dive on a topic and talk to people who know things about it, I just don't have access to people to interview like Rogan does. In my case, once I exhaust my learning on a topic I usually never care about it again (eg: is a 56V cordless drill inherently superior to one that operates at 18V) and just move on to other interests though while I'm learning it's like a fever that I cannot shake until I get to the bottom of the inquest.
greggeter 4y ago
[dead]
guardiangod 4y ago
>LNP alone led to long-term inhibition of the adaptive immune response So it's the lipid capsule, not mRNA, that has an unknown effect on the immune system. Make sense as many pathogens have lipid proteins on their surface. > the resistance of mice to heterologous infections with influenza virus increased while resistance to Candida albicans decreased. Better in some, worse in others >mice pre-exposed to the mRNA-LNP platform can pass down the acquired immune traits to their offspring, providing better protection against influenza. What about candida albicans (might be no effect?)
- jcims 4y ago
  This is a point that I think is being missed. It's about the package, not the product.
  - BbzzbB 4y ago
    But the package is part of the product that we, billions of people, took..
    - jcims 4y ago
      I suppose. Obviously if these findings hold for humans we could all be impacted. I just think it's important to differentiate what is caused by the nanoparticle delivery mechanism and what is caused by the mRNA. For example it's not super clear (based on a quick scan) which part they are talking about with the notes on heritability.
- Izkata 4y ago
  > So it's the lipid capsule, not mRNA, that has an unknown effect on the immune system. Make sense as many pathogens have lipid proteins on their surface. They were too toxic to use as a delivery mechanism as recently as 2018. IIRC it somehow damaged cell walls. Around 2018/2019 there was some sort of breakthrough that eliminated most of the problem, but the article I read last year didn't even try to call them perfectly safe, just safe enough as far as we could tell. I think this was also the main reason that even though mRNA was being researched for decades, using it in a vaccine was a no-go until recently: We didn't have a working delivery mechanism.
pxeger1 4y ago
There's some good discussion about this at https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/x5kynn/preexposure_to_mrnalnp_inhibits_adaptive_immune/ https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/x5kynn/preexposure...
- fluidcruft 4y ago
  ... good discussion on ... Reddit ...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Entinel 4y ago
    There is a very common elitist sentiment here that HN good; reddit bad. Certain subreddits like /r/Science have VERY strict moderation that lead to a high quality discussion and community. /r/Science is a much better place to have this discussion than somewhere else where "I saw the vaccine is bad on Substack" comments get voted to the top.
    - nonethewiser 4y ago
      I don't think it's an elitest HN sentiment. Redditors commonly lambast the quality of discussion on Reddit.
      - Entinel 4y ago
        A good number of every communities members thinks their community sucks.
    - fluidcruft 4y ago
      I'm actually a long time redditor and used to agree with you. However it has actually become entirely impossible to have conversations on reddit at this point even in the non-standard niche subreddits and the random banning by admin has become insane. Reddit : Digg :: <waiting> : Reddit Reddit used to be a place where you could discuss things candidly. It feels like a form of high tea nowadays. It's boring and bland and full of increasingly bizarre litmus tests leading to bans. I don't really care whether HN is better or not. What I'm saying is that Reddit is not even anywhere in my list of places to have discussions. I wouldn't even bother add "reddit" to a google search anymore.
mabbo 4y ago
> On the other hand, we report that after pre-exposure to mRNA-LNPs, the resistance of mice to heterologous infections with influenza virus increased while resistance to Candida albicans decreased. It sounds to me as though the tradeoff being made here is: a slightly decreased immune response generally, but a better immune response to the thing you've been immunized against. That seems to be a reasonable tradeoff if there's something really bad going around. But as they say in the paper summary: more research is needed. Also: this is purely in mice. They have zero data on whether this is true for humans.
- sawyna 4y ago
  Well, the paper quotes unexpected changes in your adaptive immune response. What's observed is a slight decrease of immune response in mice for a highly specific condition. We don't know how the overall immune response changes. For all you know, small decreases in immune response to diseases might bubble up to be a significant decrease.
- lazyier 4y ago
  I donno. Seems like white blood cells are kinda important. We have a huge number of interactions with bacteria and viruses and all sorts of microorganisms. Hundreds? Thousands times a day? Scratches in the kitchen while preparing food, for example, floods our body with stuff that white blood cells are required to deal with. Giving up some of the ability to deal with those for a small reduction in the symptoms associated with a specific disease doesn't seem like a useful trade off.
  - dangerlibrary 4y ago
    Over a million people, in the U.S. alone, died in under two years after being infected with this virus. Even granting the unlikely possibility that this mouse model is reflective of the immune response in humans, whatever other microorganisms people were encountering were demonstrably less dangerous than SARS-CoV-2. Unless you know of some other highly infectious microorganism that rapidly spread to hundreds of millions of people and killed 1-2% of those it infected?
mikeyouse 4y ago
[flagged]
- 01100011 4y ago
  Same goes for finance and many other topics outside of the expertise of most HN participants.
  - qwerty456127 4y ago
    I feel like the opposite. I really am not here to read about machine learning or JavaScript. News and comments on non-IT subjects are the real gold of the HN.
    - danwee 4y ago
      > News and comments on non-IT subjects are the real gold of the HN. Because they are fun to read, not because they are true. I do also comment on topics I have very little knowledge about. Just for fun.
- cced 4y ago
  Where exactly should this be discussed? We've seen that any COVID discussion that goes against the main narrative gets blackholed, people get cancelled for wanting to push the breaks, everyone gets pushed into a one-size fits all "solution" and we're finding out that we still need more data.
  - mikeyouse 4y ago
    Yes, a lot of places have quality control that removes the tiring "just asking questions" concern trolling and bad faith arguments from people who don't understand the basics of epidemiology. This comment section would be better with the same moderation. Confusing dissent with informed dissent is a big problem on "free speech" platforms.
- jgalt212 4y ago
  There are far worse places. I think the HN crowd is pretty good at looking and analyzing data (regardless of the source). There are many other places (respected and non-respected) where the audience takes as gospel whatever the newsreader says (irrespective of whether supporting or muddling data is presented).
airstrike 4y ago
TL;DR > We found that pre-exposure to mRNA-LNPs or LNP alone led to long-term inhibition of the adaptive immune response, which could be overcome using standard adjuvants. On the other hand, we report that after pre-exposure to mRNA-LNPs, the resistance of mice to heterologous infections with influenza virus increased while resistance to Candida albicans decreased. My layman question: how is this different from exposure to SARS-CoV-2 itself?
- mikece 4y ago
  Getting SARS-Cov-2 without getting an mRNA shot allows the body to develop durable immunity; how many people do you know who got the shot have gotten SARS-Cov-2 once or more after getting the shots and boosters? I'm not trying to be controversial but it seems if just get SARS-Cov-2 and survive you're better off than if you didn't get the shots and boosters.
  - airstrike 4y ago
    Perhaps, but that is not the question I’m asking
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - bearjaws 4y ago
    I know people who got it without the vaccine and have since gotten it multiple times (one up to 4 times!). Rather than use anecdotes and spread misinformation, we can Google (multiple sources!) and find some studies comparing the outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated people. It has been known for some time that there is slightly weaker long term immunity for 2 shots when compared to getting it without. This gets better 3 shots, and getting 3 shots and having gotten covid is actually the most durable response of all 'options'.
    - jaywalk 4y ago
      This is silly. Getting two shots was the "most durable" until it wasn't. There's literally no reason to believe that three shots is the holy grail, especially since we're up to four. Or is it five now?
manwe150 4y ago
The HN title seems to be somewhat misleadingly chopped. The study here showed that injection of a fake vaccine (coding for GFP) in mice appeared to reduce the effectiveness of future vaccines (coding for influenza) that used the exact same delivery mechanism. Note that this a preprint, but appears to be accepted for publication, though may still undergo revisions to this draft.
- kmeisthax 4y ago
  So... exactly the same problem with adenovirus-vector vaccines, in that each vector virus is "burned" by the introduction of a vaccine using it? That's somewhat disappointing.
  - manwe150 4y ago
    I think it was quite different from that in this study. This result appears to suggest that the mRNA remained an effective vaccine vector against new viruses, but suggested that it also slowed the body's immune response to an unrelated yeast infections in the week immediately after vaccination. If I understand correctly, they then also showed that vaccination pre-pregnancy has inheritable benefit to their offspring in reducing the severity of illness in their children.
    - Traubenfuchs 4y ago
      > If I understand correctly, they then also showed that vaccination pre-pregnancy has inheritable benefit to their offspring in reducing the severity of illness in their children. Mothers pass on all the antibodies they have in their blood and breast milk to the baby. This effect diminishes greatly after colostrum is gone and stops as soon as the baby is weaned. This can be considered an external immune system. Once the baby is weaned, it is fully vulnerable to all the diseases it might have been protected from by its mothers antibodies.
  - Traubenfuchs 4y ago
    When vaccination was required to keep participating in social life this was my motivation to get a second JJ vaccine despite the pressure to get an mRNA vaccine. I assumed my immune system would have an easier time to remove it from my body.
incrudible 4y ago
- omginternets 4y ago
  Bluntly, your opinion will be interesting only when you're able to tell us: 1. What metabolic pathway is being modeled by a mouse 2. Why it's important to the study 3. How that pathway differs in humans 4. How that difference materially affects the results of the study Until then, just revealing your own ignorance. Mice are chosen deliberately. It's not an accident.
  - caeril 4y ago
    This appears to be a "whoosh" moment. OP's "better than eight mice" is referring to the rigorous experimental standards used for the safety study to greenlight the BA.5 omicron booster.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      > OP's "better than eight mice" is referring to the rigorous experimental standards used for the safety study to greenlight the BA.5 omicron booster. Which is bullshit. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32824855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32824855)
    - omginternets 4y ago
      Ah, perhaps it was indeed a "woosh". If so, I apologize. If not, I don't ;)
Aldipower 4y ago
Last time I've posted something about mRNA on Hackernews, it reached page 1 in about 2h and then got flagged immediately. HN is not a good place for mRNA discussions.
- wil421 4y ago
  Was it from a legitimate source?
  - Aldipower 4y ago
    It was from "The Lancet", so I think, yes?!
  - forgingahead 4y ago
    You mean like a Pfizer press release? I'm being sarcastic but I don't think downvoting because of "source" is a good habit for HNers to have - there are far more diverse views and interesting points being made outside of the mainstream narrative, and if the goal is to have discussion with an intelligent community, "source" is a pretty weak reason to not have that discussion.
    - loeg 4y ago
      There are a plethora of extremely bad sources around covid and vaccines that you would be wise to ignore.
    - wil421 4y ago
      The bar can be pretty low from a direct from the source Pfizer press release to a tweet from some crazy fanatic. Both happen on HN daily.
- nostromo 4y ago
  Yesterday I noticed that happened to a reputable paper that recommends against boosters for young people. Posted, front page, flagged, dead… https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32820934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32820934
wikitopian 4y ago
I chose to get vaccinated and I continue to believe it was the right decision. More data may prove me wrong. We'll see, I suppose. But research like this underscores the point that we should not be forcing or coercing vaccination. We also should not have subjected children to years of isolating and alienating lockdowns.
- MrBuddyCasino 4y ago
  [flagged]
- giamma 4y ago
  I disagree, statistics demonstrated that the death number largely decreased among vaccinated. As such to me "forcing" vaccination is legit if it saves more people than it harms, it's for the greater good. Personally I don't want to risk my life because my neighbour is not vaccinated, but on the other hand no one is preventing my neighbour from relocating to an isolated hut on the top of a mountain and avoid any contact with anyone if he/she does not want to get vaccinated. But as long as my neighbour wants to live in a city then he must comply with the decisions of the majority of people, who, at least in my country, rushed to get vaccinated as soon as possible. It's the same with politics: sometimes politicians are elected which I don't like, so I can either accept the decision of majority of electors and live with that, or I can move to another place. What I can't do is decide that I refuse to comply with a law because it was enacted by a government that I don't like or didn't vote.
  - base698 4y ago
    I don't really understand this level of risk aversion. I'm probably old for hacker news, early 40s and my infection fatality rate is somewhere around 5 to 12 in 100k. I've got many hobbies and lifestyle choices that expose me to greater risk. Even at 80 years old the risk of covid at worst is basically no different than wingsuit base jumping hard for a season. Yes of course if you can lower your 5% risk of death by all means the vaccine is worth it. Somewhere between 50 and 80 is a gray area.
    - 4y ago
seydor 4y ago
We actually don't need to run these experiments in mice anymore, we should have adequate data from the real-time studies in humans with multiple doses for 2 years now
- lima 4y ago
  Real-world data won't don't tell us whether it's the LNP platform or the Spike payload that induces particular changes.
realce 4y ago
inheritable... like... over successive generations?
- jaywalk 4y ago
  Yes, it's right in the summary: > Interestingly, mice pre-exposed to the mRNA-LNP platform can pass down the acquired immune traits to their offspring, providing better protection against influenza. Who knows what other interesting discoveries will be stumbled upon in the future!
- the_third_wave 4y ago
  Yes, is was already confirmed in a Swedish study that mRNA from these preparations can be reverse transcribed into DNA [1]. Now this study shows that the reverse transcribed DNA is active as well. The first thing that should be clear is that this was not an intended effect, the mRNA was supposed to be acted upon and discarded. As far as I'm concerned this is not a positive development either since it implies that new cell lines will have been created which can produce SARS2 spike proteins. Long after SARS2 is gone or mutated so that these spike proteins are no longer analogous to the ones on the virus these cell lines will still produce inflammation-causing spike proteins. If those cells happen to be in the wall of a blood vessel, in an ovary or testes they're likely to cause problems. As the study says there is a need for more research to determine this platform's true impact on human health. These preparations were offered to and in many cases forced upon a large part of the population without knowing what long-term effects they had. This was the largest medical experiment ever conducted and the jury is out on both the efficacy as well as the safety of the preparations. [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35723296/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35723296/
  - mikeyouse 4y ago
    Just abject nonsense.
    - the_third_wave 4y ago
      Explain, please, why? Preferably with some evidence like that study I linked to and the one which started this thread. Explain why: - it is abject nonsense to state that cell lines will be created which carry DNA originating from mRNA reverse transcription as is shown in the Swedish study - it is abject nonsense to state that this DNA is expressed as is implied in the study to which this thread is linked - it is abject nonsense that cells which express DNA to produce spike proteins will be around even when SARS2 has disappeared or mutated so that its version of the spike protein no longer is analogous to the one produced by cells which carry DNA from reverse transcribed mRNA - it is abject nonsense for such cells to be found outside of the shoulder muscle mass into which the vaccines were meant to be delivered but from where it has been proven they escape into the bloodstream - it is abject nonsense for such cells to cause inflammatory reactions when it is known the spike protein does just that If you sit on knowledge we do not have I suggest you share it.
blhack 4y ago
In the future can we agree not to demonize anybody who has any questions or hesitancy about mandating a brand new type of vaccine like this? I’ll admit: I was hard in on the vaccine. Got it as early as possible, worked to get my friend and family access as soon as possible (by helping them find volunteer shifts at the injection sites). I’m not saying I regret these decisions, but I certainly acknowledge that the skeptics were right to be skeptical. I think that I made the right decision at the time, given the information we had available, but I’m not sure I would make the same decision set today.
- avgDev 4y ago
  My primary was surprised I actually got it. Many years ago I suffered from a severe reaction from Cipro. No one believed me. It caused tendonitis and nerve issues. I went to Mayo clinic and they did not believe me. Today, the medication has a black box label and mentions nervous system damage and tendonitis. I still encounter physicians who DO NOT believe it and refuse to accept it. The issue is still widely under the radar and individuals suffering from side effects receive nearly 0 help from western medicine. I know now that physicians mindset hasn't changed very much over the decades. In 1800s a doctor named Ignaz Semmelweis, discovered that "childbed fever" was being caused by the lack of washing hands and instruments. It took the medical community 20 years to accept it as a truth and he was fired from his job at the hospital. Wiki link for more infohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis#Response_by_the_medical_community https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis#Response_by_t...
- mitchdoogle 4y ago
  Skepticism is fine, but anytime I saw skeptics questioning the impacts of vaccines, they always conveniently left out the similar unknowns about long-term effects of Covid, as well as the very well-known short-term effects, including possible death, which were obviously orders of magnitude worse than short-term effects of the vaccine. It seems to me like a lot of the skeptics were skeptical of everything involving COVID - of masks, of lockdowns, of vaccines, etc. Which tells me they weren't actually interested in the science or long-term risks or anything like that - they just didn't like anything that was out of the ordinary.
ttpphd 4y ago
This reeks of p-hacking.
- mandmandam 4y ago
  There's quite a bit of smoke now. There was another study showing DNA transcription, and you dismissed that too - not on any scientific basis, but because "anti-vaxers" discussed it, and you apparently had some issue with the journal. You're all over this thread getting aggressive with people; accusing them of being Q fanatics and the like, without cause. Kindly, consider that your anger might be covering for fear, shame, or something else. And even if it's not - could you rein in the general toxicity?
  - ttpphd 4y ago
    Well I find your comment very rude. Please concern troll and police and control someone else. I don't have to pretend like I lost my brain and forgot the last 3 years like everyone else here.
icare_1er 4y ago
Sure the wave of heart attacks in athletes has nothing to do with that either.
wolongong942 4y ago
> Interestingly, mice pre-exposed to the mRNA-LNP platform can pass down the acquired immune traits to their offspring When 'unvaxxed sperm is the new bitcoin' is no longer a joke.
- jcims 4y ago
  That and unvaxxed blood donations. Makes me wonder if there will be a market for frozen sperm/blood to bank to avoid downstream impact from this kind of thing.
sk00terpt 4y ago
- stoplying1 4y ago
  Y'all are gonna be much scarier, convincing, whatever, whenever you realize that the little extra certain imagery that you just had to throw in there exposes you. People would accidentally take you more seriously if you could manage to get (whatever that energy is that requires you to induce phallic imagery) out in some other way than in random comments about vaccines.
stoneglyph 4y ago
[flagged]
cjbgkagh 4y ago
You can get dysautonomia from either the covid virus or the covid vaccine. The vast majority of people don't yet know what dysautonomia is let alone how to diagnose it or treat it. And from my experience most doctors as well. It's easily observed and the fact that doctors and medical researchers can't get that right diminishes my trust for them being able to get less easily observed phenomena right as well. Everyone should learn about dysautonomia as we're entering an epidemic of it and we're all going to encounter it one way or another over the next few years.
- pas 4y ago
  how serious it is? how prevalent? how persistent? how big of a public health problem it is and/or going to be? can it be treated? how well? was this known before? what other sources cause it?
  - Traubenfuchs 4y ago
    A quick pubmed search shows that interest in dysautonomia existed since 1954 with a clear exponential increase of interest in it since then. -> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Dysautonomia%5BTitle%2FAbstract%5D&sort=date https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Dysautonomia%5BTitle%2... As for many mystery syndromes with broad symptoms it's easily connected to covid infection, long covid and the covid vaccines. A clear and satisfying picture seems to be missing, hence me naming it mystery syndrome.
    - cjbgkagh 4y ago
      Many of the mystery syndromes are different manifestations of the same condition for which dysautonomia is most often a core underlying part. By way of analogy; hEDS is clearly autosomal dominant genetic condition and has been known about since Hippocrates yet because it presents in slightly different ways it largely escapes diagnosis. hEDS is also not rare, it’s only considered rare because it’s rarely diagnosed. The fact that medical researchers and doctors can’t get something so simple right after so long means I don’t trust them with anything that is even slightly complex.
  - 4y ago
Traubenfuchs 4y ago
Dear reader, please keep in mind that this isn't just about the most political virus of all times, but many other diseases. mRNA vaccines against many diseases are researched as we speak, including the elusive HIV vaccine, which could lead to the eradication of the most stigmatizing virus in the world. If all of those required LNP and we find out that LNP are very, very unhealthy, that would be very, very disappointing.
m3kw9 4y ago
Maybe we could the vaccine a hedge where you pay a little for protection but you limit your downsides from getting severe COVID
flobosg 4y ago
Link to the article: https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1010830 https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/j...
bosswipe 4y ago
- throwaway083422 4y ago
  have more * https://www.science.org/content/article/omicron-booster-shots-are-coming-lots-questions https://www.science.org/content/article/omicron-booster-shot... * https://www.fda.gov/media/159496/download https://www.fda.gov/media/159496/download * https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-020-00771-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-020-00771-8
gardenfelder 4y ago
Full text: https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1010830 https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/j...

255 points by hammock 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

airstrike 4y ago

This submission definitely needs “in mice” appended to the title…

smsm42 4y ago

What is kinda scary is the inheritable part. How is it ends up making inheritable changes - that wasn't supposed to work that way, was it?

ta8645 4y ago

While this appears to be a positive outcome... this: "our studies highlight the need for more research to determine this platform's true impact on human health." Is a terrifying admission about the gamble that was taken. The truth is, we didn't know for sure if things would be this positive or not.

rgrieselhuber 4y ago
“Real world data”
lazyier 4y ago
> Is a terrifying admission about the gamble that was taken. Right, but according to Reddit, the Australian/New Zealand governments and other places people who didn't want to expose themselves to this stuff where all ignorant selfish assholes.
- xienze 4y ago
  I think you might have been browsing an alternate-reality Reddit. The one I read was constantly bemoaning that no one in America was taking it seriously, "why aren't we locking down like China and New Zealand", etc.
  - sp332 4y ago
    New Zealand locked down early, but they vaccinated relatively late.
  - mitchdoogle 4y ago
    It's strange to me how so often you will see people bemoaning Reddit for some opinion that goes against the grain, when in reality Reddit is composed of a sampling of millions of humans and therefore is fully aligned with mainstream thought. Some people see a few comments or threads that disagree with them and they use that to say "All of Reddit has lost its mind", always forgetting the vast numbers of comments and threads where people generally agree with them. Funny how people do that..
    - oceanplexian 4y ago
      Reddit is a sampling of roughly 20% of 18-29 year old men who use the Internet. That’s not exactly “mainstream thought”, it’s a self selected demographic and what is popular on Reddit reflects that.
    - oska 4y ago
      > and therefore is fully aligned with mainstream thought It's obviously not fully aligned with 'mainstream thought', when the expression of many widely help positions will get individuals and whole subreddits banned
bearjaws 4y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Covzire 4y ago
  >The reality is, way more people would have died without the vaccine You can't and couldn't possibly know that. Nobody could. What we do know today is that the un-vaccinated aren't dying like was originally claimed they would, in fact they seem to be faring better for those under 60 or so.
  - madacol 4y ago
    > ... in fact they seem to be faring better for those under 60 or so. Haven't heard that before!. Do you have a source to read more about it?
    - TylerE 4y ago
      Probably one of those tabloid pieces saying something like "80% of the deaths are now among the vaccinated" - which ignore that the population vax rate in that country is higher than that.
  - bearjaws 4y ago
    I am going to leave age out of it as I don't participate in the "fuck-em they're over the age of 55" mentality. The incident of death does increase substantially past 55, however people died at all ages during covid, so we know more infections = more deaths across the board. Given that the vaccine available at the time resulted in around a 85% reduction in likelyhood of infection, we can for sure declare it saved many more lives than without, unless it directly killed more people than it helped...
  - MagnumOpus 4y ago
    > You can't and couldn't possibly know that. Nobody could Not with that attitude... Yes you can, there are plenty of ways of comparing regions or countries with high and low vaccination rates, or vaccination uptake. (Of course only while demographically adjusting, but the people who do these studies surprisingly often do think about the basic gotchas.)
chiefalchemist 4y ago
I never understood how people bought into the whole "we assure you it's safe*" narrative. Unless, there's a secret time machine, there's no data (read: no science) to support such hyperbole. And yet, such statements were quickly followed by "...trust the science..." as well as attemps to marginalize those who asked to see that data from the future. Such shenanigans doesn't build trust. It undermines it. As if gov and science need less trust at this point. *effectively an untested type of vax technology is somehow miraculously free of any/all possible short and long term side effects? The comparisons to say the Polio vax were embarrassingly naive, at best. I don't get it.
- gergov 4y ago
  The anti-vaccination / bashing of anti-vaxx people was a pretty big and one sided internet niche pre-2020. In a way that you did have some tinfoil hat people, you had some whistleblowers, and you had an army of people bashing them left and right. And we're not even talking polio, but with stuff like chicken pox, where there was a vaccine introduced, but the folk solution (locking up the sick kids with the healthy kids so everybody gets over it) were at conflict that turned super, super vicious. In a sense it was an already ongoing battle with every argument already deployed and pre-determined, but all of a sudden everybody and their grandma were involved in the conversation against their will. The perma-online people predictably took up the positions they did, while a plethora of other opinions / skepticism emerged but were all summarily heaped in the tinfoil hat. Now it seems to be unwinding, and it feels just as surreal as the last few hours of a rave where everybody is kind of sobering up and looking at a very bothersome way home.
  - chiefalchemist 4y ago
    Question: What do you call the pro-jab'ers that used lies and hyperbole to "scientifically" justify their position? Not being troll-y or snarky. It's a legit question: Why was the self-proclaimed high road given a free pass on taking the low road? There's been a clear and obvious double standard. Why has that lede been buried?
- junofan 4y ago
chaostheory 4y ago
People in the western societies will do anything to avoid wearing masks. That includes pushing and taking vaccines that weren’t fully tested. Unlike the latest flavor of mRNA vaccine, masks do not lose efficacy against new variants within a few months. If you wear an n95 rated mask or higher, you will have 95% efficacy or higher
- pas 4y ago
  masks work, but their end-to-end efficacy is very low, because people would have to wear them perfectly. there's no point to wearing masks if you go to places where you take it off. people did exactly that and everyone was pikachu surprised that the pandemic was still alive and well.
  - Workaccount2 4y ago
    Or touch them at all. People say "I always wear N95 for maximum effect" But then they were the same mask for a week and play with it/adjust it 100 times a day.
  - chaostheory 4y ago
    That’s not true. Even an imperfectly worn N95 is more effective than a cloth mask or nothing at all. The n95 mask is high intuitive unless you have a large beard (ie. you just have to ensure it fits your nose bridge area and chin area properly). I would wager that it still has better efficacy than an mRNA vaccine even when improperly worn Thank you for helping making my point
    - pas 4y ago
      good wager (though a but underspecified, efficacy of preventing spread, illness, hospitalization, or death?) as far as I know the numbers are here and show otherwise https://www.healthline.com/health-news/in-the-era-of-omicron-mask-mandates-arent-working-vaccines-are https://www.healthline.com/health-news/in-the-era-of-omicron... https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/briefing/masks-mandates-us-covid.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/briefing/masks-mandates-u... of course for personal health choices it's best to go for a P100 respirator and getting the vaccine
kingkawn 4y ago
That’s true of all medical intervention
creshal 4y ago
"Please keep funding us, we're doing important work!" is a pretty standard sentence you see in some variation or other in most medical studies.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
ttpphd 4y ago
Why is everyone voluntarily practicing amnesia? We had a lot of trial data showing safety and efficacy before the vaccines were rolled out. It is standard practice with influenza to update the stains. 0 reason to think that updating the mRNA for COVID vaccines from one strain to another is dangerous. None. Zap. Zero. Zilch.
- pigeonhole123 4y ago
  I can't recall seeing any human studies on mRNA vaccines before the Pfizer one, which was unblinded and the control group vaccinated after six months. I also don't understand why this was done, since there will never exist any long term high quality data because of this.
- icare_1er 4y ago
  - lima 4y ago
    It's the long-term, repeated exposure that makes smoking so dangerous.
  - mitchdoogle 4y ago
    I'm pretty sure that smoking regularly (say 10-20 cigs per day) for 6 months will lead to noticeably worse health measures
- borner791 4y ago
  mRNA vaccine research has been going on since 1989: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine with lots of money and research going into the technology, I don't understand where folks are coming from.
- dudeDDRrulez 4y ago
  This already-tired argument again. Vaccines for influenza have been around for decades. The first covid shot was the first ever mRNA technology ever approved for human use. Now the booster doesn’t simply swap out strains. It moves from a monovalent to a bivalent (original formula plus the Omicron Ba4/Ba5 formula) and we shouldn’t test it? The first ever bivalent mRNA vaccine. Deployed to everyone on the planet. With absolutely no human testing done. If you’re okay with it, that’s great… that’s your personal choice to trust corrupt health authorities and for-profit vaccine manufacturers. Let me know how it goes.
epgui 4y ago
Almost every single biomedical paper includes a line that says "more research is needed" because one of the main goals of research is to figure out what research to do next.
fdewrewrewf 4y ago
However, I hope that lessons about human nature have been learned, now that we have all lived through the pandemic. Whenever we look at history and ask "how could people buy such a flimsy story, and abandon all that they previously held dear?", the answer is "willingly, enthusiastically, and they will turn in previously good friends and family to further the supposed moral ends".

metalliqaz 4y ago

Oh this will be fun hearing about from Joe Rogan for the next thousand years.

macspoofing 4y ago
At least someone is talking about this. This is in fact an argument against censorship and for dispassionate and objective reporting where you don't take the word of government representatives or pharma executives at face value. If the (mainstream) media cedes this ground to more conspiratorial voices, whose fault is that?
IceHegel 4y ago
The question is of course, why will it only be him.
- mikece 4y ago
  Because only Rogan has both the platform and enough f-you money to not care if he's deplatformed from the internet in total? And let's be honest: controversy drives interest, just like the MMA fight coverage he's a part of.
  - realce 4y ago
    So he has more money and popularity than God yet he needs to desperately generate controversy to get more... money and popularity or something?
    - mikece 4y ago
      I suspect he's genuinely interested in the topics at least for a while. I can relate to a certain degree: when I am learning something new I deep-dive on a topic and talk to people who know things about it, I just don't have access to people to interview like Rogan does. In my case, once I exhaust my learning on a topic I usually never care about it again (eg: is a 56V cordless drill inherently superior to one that operates at 18V) and just move on to other interests though while I'm learning it's like a fever that I cannot shake until I get to the bottom of the inquest.

greggeter 4y ago

[dead]

guardiangod 4y ago

>LNP alone led to long-term inhibition of the adaptive immune response So it's the lipid capsule, not mRNA, that has an unknown effect on the immune system. Make sense as many pathogens have lipid proteins on their surface. > the resistance of mice to heterologous infections with influenza virus increased while resistance to Candida albicans decreased. Better in some, worse in others >mice pre-exposed to the mRNA-LNP platform can pass down the acquired immune traits to their offspring, providing better protection against influenza. What about candida albicans (might be no effect?)

jcims 4y ago
This is a point that I think is being missed. It's about the package, not the product.
- BbzzbB 4y ago
  But the package is part of the product that we, billions of people, took..
  - jcims 4y ago
    I suppose. Obviously if these findings hold for humans we could all be impacted. I just think it's important to differentiate what is caused by the nanoparticle delivery mechanism and what is caused by the mRNA. For example it's not super clear (based on a quick scan) which part they are talking about with the notes on heritability.
Izkata 4y ago
> So it's the lipid capsule, not mRNA, that has an unknown effect on the immune system. Make sense as many pathogens have lipid proteins on their surface. They were too toxic to use as a delivery mechanism as recently as 2018. IIRC it somehow damaged cell walls. Around 2018/2019 there was some sort of breakthrough that eliminated most of the problem, but the article I read last year didn't even try to call them perfectly safe, just safe enough as far as we could tell. I think this was also the main reason that even though mRNA was being researched for decades, using it in a vaccine was a no-go until recently: We didn't have a working delivery mechanism.

pxeger1 4y ago

There's some good discussion about this at https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/x5kynn/preexposure_to_mrnalnp_inhibits_adaptive_immune/ https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/x5kynn/preexposure...

fluidcruft 4y ago
... good discussion on ... Reddit ...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Entinel 4y ago
  There is a very common elitist sentiment here that HN good; reddit bad. Certain subreddits like /r/Science have VERY strict moderation that lead to a high quality discussion and community. /r/Science is a much better place to have this discussion than somewhere else where "I saw the vaccine is bad on Substack" comments get voted to the top.
  - nonethewiser 4y ago
    I don't think it's an elitest HN sentiment. Redditors commonly lambast the quality of discussion on Reddit.
    - Entinel 4y ago
      A good number of every communities members thinks their community sucks.
  - fluidcruft 4y ago
    I'm actually a long time redditor and used to agree with you. However it has actually become entirely impossible to have conversations on reddit at this point even in the non-standard niche subreddits and the random banning by admin has become insane. Reddit : Digg :: <waiting> : Reddit Reddit used to be a place where you could discuss things candidly. It feels like a form of high tea nowadays. It's boring and bland and full of increasingly bizarre litmus tests leading to bans. I don't really care whether HN is better or not. What I'm saying is that Reddit is not even anywhere in my list of places to have discussions. I wouldn't even bother add "reddit" to a google search anymore.

mabbo 4y ago

> On the other hand, we report that after pre-exposure to mRNA-LNPs, the resistance of mice to heterologous infections with influenza virus increased while resistance to Candida albicans decreased. It sounds to me as though the tradeoff being made here is: a slightly decreased immune response generally, but a better immune response to the thing you've been immunized against. That seems to be a reasonable tradeoff if there's something really bad going around. But as they say in the paper summary: more research is needed. Also: this is purely in mice. They have zero data on whether this is true for humans.

sawyna 4y ago
Well, the paper quotes unexpected changes in your adaptive immune response. What's observed is a slight decrease of immune response in mice for a highly specific condition. We don't know how the overall immune response changes. For all you know, small decreases in immune response to diseases might bubble up to be a significant decrease.
lazyier 4y ago
I donno. Seems like white blood cells are kinda important. We have a huge number of interactions with bacteria and viruses and all sorts of microorganisms. Hundreds? Thousands times a day? Scratches in the kitchen while preparing food, for example, floods our body with stuff that white blood cells are required to deal with. Giving up some of the ability to deal with those for a small reduction in the symptoms associated with a specific disease doesn't seem like a useful trade off.
- dangerlibrary 4y ago
  Over a million people, in the U.S. alone, died in under two years after being infected with this virus. Even granting the unlikely possibility that this mouse model is reflective of the immune response in humans, whatever other microorganisms people were encountering were demonstrably less dangerous than SARS-CoV-2. Unless you know of some other highly infectious microorganism that rapidly spread to hundreds of millions of people and killed 1-2% of those it infected?

mikeyouse 4y ago

[flagged]

01100011 4y ago
Same goes for finance and many other topics outside of the expertise of most HN participants.
- qwerty456127 4y ago
  I feel like the opposite. I really am not here to read about machine learning or JavaScript. News and comments on non-IT subjects are the real gold of the HN.
  - danwee 4y ago
    > News and comments on non-IT subjects are the real gold of the HN. Because they are fun to read, not because they are true. I do also comment on topics I have very little knowledge about. Just for fun.
cced 4y ago
Where exactly should this be discussed? We've seen that any COVID discussion that goes against the main narrative gets blackholed, people get cancelled for wanting to push the breaks, everyone gets pushed into a one-size fits all "solution" and we're finding out that we still need more data.
- mikeyouse 4y ago
  Yes, a lot of places have quality control that removes the tiring "just asking questions" concern trolling and bad faith arguments from people who don't understand the basics of epidemiology. This comment section would be better with the same moderation. Confusing dissent with informed dissent is a big problem on "free speech" platforms.
jgalt212 4y ago
There are far worse places. I think the HN crowd is pretty good at looking and analyzing data (regardless of the source). There are many other places (respected and non-respected) where the audience takes as gospel whatever the newsreader says (irrespective of whether supporting or muddling data is presented).

airstrike 4y ago

TL;DR > We found that pre-exposure to mRNA-LNPs or LNP alone led to long-term inhibition of the adaptive immune response, which could be overcome using standard adjuvants. On the other hand, we report that after pre-exposure to mRNA-LNPs, the resistance of mice to heterologous infections with influenza virus increased while resistance to Candida albicans decreased. My layman question: how is this different from exposure to SARS-CoV-2 itself?

mikece 4y ago
Getting SARS-Cov-2 without getting an mRNA shot allows the body to develop durable immunity; how many people do you know who got the shot have gotten SARS-Cov-2 once or more after getting the shots and boosters? I'm not trying to be controversial but it seems if just get SARS-Cov-2 and survive you're better off than if you didn't get the shots and boosters.
- airstrike 4y ago
  Perhaps, but that is not the question I’m asking
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- bearjaws 4y ago
  I know people who got it without the vaccine and have since gotten it multiple times (one up to 4 times!). Rather than use anecdotes and spread misinformation, we can Google (multiple sources!) and find some studies comparing the outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated people. It has been known for some time that there is slightly weaker long term immunity for 2 shots when compared to getting it without. This gets better 3 shots, and getting 3 shots and having gotten covid is actually the most durable response of all 'options'.
  - jaywalk 4y ago
    This is silly. Getting two shots was the "most durable" until it wasn't. There's literally no reason to believe that three shots is the holy grail, especially since we're up to four. Or is it five now?

manwe150 4y ago

The HN title seems to be somewhat misleadingly chopped. The study here showed that injection of a fake vaccine (coding for GFP) in mice appeared to reduce the effectiveness of future vaccines (coding for influenza) that used the exact same delivery mechanism. Note that this a preprint, but appears to be accepted for publication, though may still undergo revisions to this draft.

kmeisthax 4y ago
So... exactly the same problem with adenovirus-vector vaccines, in that each vector virus is "burned" by the introduction of a vaccine using it? That's somewhat disappointing.
- manwe150 4y ago
  I think it was quite different from that in this study. This result appears to suggest that the mRNA remained an effective vaccine vector against new viruses, but suggested that it also slowed the body's immune response to an unrelated yeast infections in the week immediately after vaccination. If I understand correctly, they then also showed that vaccination pre-pregnancy has inheritable benefit to their offspring in reducing the severity of illness in their children.
  - Traubenfuchs 4y ago
    > If I understand correctly, they then also showed that vaccination pre-pregnancy has inheritable benefit to their offspring in reducing the severity of illness in their children. Mothers pass on all the antibodies they have in their blood and breast milk to the baby. This effect diminishes greatly after colostrum is gone and stops as soon as the baby is weaned. This can be considered an external immune system. Once the baby is weaned, it is fully vulnerable to all the diseases it might have been protected from by its mothers antibodies.
- Traubenfuchs 4y ago
  When vaccination was required to keep participating in social life this was my motivation to get a second JJ vaccine despite the pressure to get an mRNA vaccine. I assumed my immune system would have an easier time to remove it from my body.

incrudible 4y ago

omginternets 4y ago
Bluntly, your opinion will be interesting only when you're able to tell us: 1. What metabolic pathway is being modeled by a mouse 2. Why it's important to the study 3. How that pathway differs in humans 4. How that difference materially affects the results of the study Until then, just revealing your own ignorance. Mice are chosen deliberately. It's not an accident.
- caeril 4y ago
  This appears to be a "whoosh" moment. OP's "better than eight mice" is referring to the rigorous experimental standards used for the safety study to greenlight the BA.5 omicron booster.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    > OP's "better than eight mice" is referring to the rigorous experimental standards used for the safety study to greenlight the BA.5 omicron booster. Which is bullshit. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32824855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32824855)
  - omginternets 4y ago
    Ah, perhaps it was indeed a "woosh". If so, I apologize. If not, I don't ;)

Aldipower 4y ago

Last time I've posted something about mRNA on Hackernews, it reached page 1 in about 2h and then got flagged immediately. HN is not a good place for mRNA discussions.

wil421 4y ago
Was it from a legitimate source?
- Aldipower 4y ago
  It was from "The Lancet", so I think, yes?!
- forgingahead 4y ago
  You mean like a Pfizer press release? I'm being sarcastic but I don't think downvoting because of "source" is a good habit for HNers to have - there are far more diverse views and interesting points being made outside of the mainstream narrative, and if the goal is to have discussion with an intelligent community, "source" is a pretty weak reason to not have that discussion.
  - loeg 4y ago
    There are a plethora of extremely bad sources around covid and vaccines that you would be wise to ignore.
  - wil421 4y ago
    The bar can be pretty low from a direct from the source Pfizer press release to a tweet from some crazy fanatic. Both happen on HN daily.
nostromo 4y ago
Yesterday I noticed that happened to a reputable paper that recommends against boosters for young people. Posted, front page, flagged, dead… https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32820934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32820934

wikitopian 4y ago

I chose to get vaccinated and I continue to believe it was the right decision. More data may prove me wrong. We'll see, I suppose. But research like this underscores the point that we should not be forcing or coercing vaccination. We also should not have subjected children to years of isolating and alienating lockdowns.

MrBuddyCasino 4y ago
[flagged]
giamma 4y ago
I disagree, statistics demonstrated that the death number largely decreased among vaccinated. As such to me "forcing" vaccination is legit if it saves more people than it harms, it's for the greater good. Personally I don't want to risk my life because my neighbour is not vaccinated, but on the other hand no one is preventing my neighbour from relocating to an isolated hut on the top of a mountain and avoid any contact with anyone if he/she does not want to get vaccinated. But as long as my neighbour wants to live in a city then he must comply with the decisions of the majority of people, who, at least in my country, rushed to get vaccinated as soon as possible. It's the same with politics: sometimes politicians are elected which I don't like, so I can either accept the decision of majority of electors and live with that, or I can move to another place. What I can't do is decide that I refuse to comply with a law because it was enacted by a government that I don't like or didn't vote.
- base698 4y ago
  I don't really understand this level of risk aversion. I'm probably old for hacker news, early 40s and my infection fatality rate is somewhere around 5 to 12 in 100k. I've got many hobbies and lifestyle choices that expose me to greater risk. Even at 80 years old the risk of covid at worst is basically no different than wingsuit base jumping hard for a season. Yes of course if you can lower your 5% risk of death by all means the vaccine is worth it. Somewhere between 50 and 80 is a gray area.
  - 4y ago

seydor 4y ago

We actually don't need to run these experiments in mice anymore, we should have adequate data from the real-time studies in humans with multiple doses for 2 years now

lima 4y ago
Real-world data won't don't tell us whether it's the LNP platform or the Spike payload that induces particular changes.

realce 4y ago

inheritable... like... over successive generations?

jaywalk 4y ago
Yes, it's right in the summary: > Interestingly, mice pre-exposed to the mRNA-LNP platform can pass down the acquired immune traits to their offspring, providing better protection against influenza. Who knows what other interesting discoveries will be stumbled upon in the future!
the_third_wave 4y ago
Yes, is was already confirmed in a Swedish study that mRNA from these preparations can be reverse transcribed into DNA [1]. Now this study shows that the reverse transcribed DNA is active as well. The first thing that should be clear is that this was not an intended effect, the mRNA was supposed to be acted upon and discarded. As far as I'm concerned this is not a positive development either since it implies that new cell lines will have been created which can produce SARS2 spike proteins. Long after SARS2 is gone or mutated so that these spike proteins are no longer analogous to the ones on the virus these cell lines will still produce inflammation-causing spike proteins. If those cells happen to be in the wall of a blood vessel, in an ovary or testes they're likely to cause problems. As the study says there is a need for more research to determine this platform's true impact on human health. These preparations were offered to and in many cases forced upon a large part of the population without knowing what long-term effects they had. This was the largest medical experiment ever conducted and the jury is out on both the efficacy as well as the safety of the preparations. [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35723296/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35723296/
- mikeyouse 4y ago
  Just abject nonsense.
  - the_third_wave 4y ago
    Explain, please, why? Preferably with some evidence like that study I linked to and the one which started this thread. Explain why: - it is abject nonsense to state that cell lines will be created which carry DNA originating from mRNA reverse transcription as is shown in the Swedish study - it is abject nonsense to state that this DNA is expressed as is implied in the study to which this thread is linked - it is abject nonsense that cells which express DNA to produce spike proteins will be around even when SARS2 has disappeared or mutated so that its version of the spike protein no longer is analogous to the one produced by cells which carry DNA from reverse transcribed mRNA - it is abject nonsense for such cells to be found outside of the shoulder muscle mass into which the vaccines were meant to be delivered but from where it has been proven they escape into the bloodstream - it is abject nonsense for such cells to cause inflammatory reactions when it is known the spike protein does just that If you sit on knowledge we do not have I suggest you share it.

blhack 4y ago

In the future can we agree not to demonize anybody who has any questions or hesitancy about mandating a brand new type of vaccine like this? I’ll admit: I was hard in on the vaccine. Got it as early as possible, worked to get my friend and family access as soon as possible (by helping them find volunteer shifts at the injection sites). I’m not saying I regret these decisions, but I certainly acknowledge that the skeptics were right to be skeptical. I think that I made the right decision at the time, given the information we had available, but I’m not sure I would make the same decision set today.

avgDev 4y ago
My primary was surprised I actually got it. Many years ago I suffered from a severe reaction from Cipro. No one believed me. It caused tendonitis and nerve issues. I went to Mayo clinic and they did not believe me. Today, the medication has a black box label and mentions nervous system damage and tendonitis. I still encounter physicians who DO NOT believe it and refuse to accept it. The issue is still widely under the radar and individuals suffering from side effects receive nearly 0 help from western medicine. I know now that physicians mindset hasn't changed very much over the decades. In 1800s a doctor named Ignaz Semmelweis, discovered that "childbed fever" was being caused by the lack of washing hands and instruments. It took the medical community 20 years to accept it as a truth and he was fired from his job at the hospital. Wiki link for more infohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis#Response_by_the_medical_community https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis#Response_by_t...
mitchdoogle 4y ago
Skepticism is fine, but anytime I saw skeptics questioning the impacts of vaccines, they always conveniently left out the similar unknowns about long-term effects of Covid, as well as the very well-known short-term effects, including possible death, which were obviously orders of magnitude worse than short-term effects of the vaccine. It seems to me like a lot of the skeptics were skeptical of everything involving COVID - of masks, of lockdowns, of vaccines, etc. Which tells me they weren't actually interested in the science or long-term risks or anything like that - they just didn't like anything that was out of the ordinary.

ttpphd 4y ago

This reeks of p-hacking.

mandmandam 4y ago
There's quite a bit of smoke now. There was another study showing DNA transcription, and you dismissed that too - not on any scientific basis, but because "anti-vaxers" discussed it, and you apparently had some issue with the journal. You're all over this thread getting aggressive with people; accusing them of being Q fanatics and the like, without cause. Kindly, consider that your anger might be covering for fear, shame, or something else. And even if it's not - could you rein in the general toxicity?
- ttpphd 4y ago
  Well I find your comment very rude. Please concern troll and police and control someone else. I don't have to pretend like I lost my brain and forgot the last 3 years like everyone else here.

icare_1er 4y ago

Sure the wave of heart attacks in athletes has nothing to do with that either.

wolongong942 4y ago

> Interestingly, mice pre-exposed to the mRNA-LNP platform can pass down the acquired immune traits to their offspring When 'unvaxxed sperm is the new bitcoin' is no longer a joke.

jcims 4y ago
That and unvaxxed blood donations. Makes me wonder if there will be a market for frozen sperm/blood to bank to avoid downstream impact from this kind of thing.

sk00terpt 4y ago

stoplying1 4y ago
Y'all are gonna be much scarier, convincing, whatever, whenever you realize that the little extra certain imagery that you just had to throw in there exposes you. People would accidentally take you more seriously if you could manage to get (whatever that energy is that requires you to induce phallic imagery) out in some other way than in random comments about vaccines.

stoneglyph 4y ago

[flagged]

cjbgkagh 4y ago

You can get dysautonomia from either the covid virus or the covid vaccine. The vast majority of people don't yet know what dysautonomia is let alone how to diagnose it or treat it. And from my experience most doctors as well. It's easily observed and the fact that doctors and medical researchers can't get that right diminishes my trust for them being able to get less easily observed phenomena right as well. Everyone should learn about dysautonomia as we're entering an epidemic of it and we're all going to encounter it one way or another over the next few years.

pas 4y ago
how serious it is? how prevalent? how persistent? how big of a public health problem it is and/or going to be? can it be treated? how well? was this known before? what other sources cause it?
- Traubenfuchs 4y ago
  A quick pubmed search shows that interest in dysautonomia existed since 1954 with a clear exponential increase of interest in it since then. -> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Dysautonomia%5BTitle%2FAbstract%5D&sort=date https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Dysautonomia%5BTitle%2... As for many mystery syndromes with broad symptoms it's easily connected to covid infection, long covid and the covid vaccines. A clear and satisfying picture seems to be missing, hence me naming it mystery syndrome.
  - cjbgkagh 4y ago
    Many of the mystery syndromes are different manifestations of the same condition for which dysautonomia is most often a core underlying part. By way of analogy; hEDS is clearly autosomal dominant genetic condition and has been known about since Hippocrates yet because it presents in slightly different ways it largely escapes diagnosis. hEDS is also not rare, it’s only considered rare because it’s rarely diagnosed. The fact that medical researchers and doctors can’t get something so simple right after so long means I don’t trust them with anything that is even slightly complex.
- 4y ago

Traubenfuchs 4y ago

Dear reader, please keep in mind that this isn't just about the most political virus of all times, but many other diseases. mRNA vaccines against many diseases are researched as we speak, including the elusive HIV vaccine, which could lead to the eradication of the most stigmatizing virus in the world. If all of those required LNP and we find out that LNP are very, very unhealthy, that would be very, very disappointing.

m3kw9 4y ago

Maybe we could the vaccine a hedge where you pay a little for protection but you limit your downsides from getting severe COVID

flobosg 4y ago

Link to the article: https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1010830 https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/j...

bosswipe 4y ago

throwaway083422 4y ago
have more * https://www.science.org/content/article/omicron-booster-shots-are-coming-lots-questions https://www.science.org/content/article/omicron-booster-shot... * https://www.fda.gov/media/159496/download https://www.fda.gov/media/159496/download * https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-020-00771-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-020-00771-8

gardenfelder 4y ago

Full text: https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1010830 https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/j...