3 ms·

For one, it's NOT too new, biology has been using mRNA forever. mRNA is well characterized, and well understood. mRNA for use in vaccines has been rolling aroun

For one, it's NOT too new, biology has been using mRNA forever. mRNA is well characterized, and well understood. mRNA for use in vaccines has been rolling around in research for a decade or so as well. What "unknown" are you concerned about? Why do you believe we don't have a good understanding of how mRNA works in the body?

sethammons 2y ago
Seeing as at first they said any unexpected reaction would be impossible because "science" and then reports of myocarditis came in and people said "impossible" which then became "maybe" which then became "yeah, in some cases, but the disease is worse!" The tech was new enough we didn't know about the myocarditis potential side effect. Everyone was so sure, just like you seem to be. "It doesn't work like that" -- except it does cause myocarditis in some patients
- dent9876543 2y ago
  All the while forgetting that benefit is heavily skewed. Those that would really benefit from its protection are often the same group that would be knocked sideways by its side effects (the very old, infirm, already sick or otherwise vulnerable). The majority get nothing much in terms of side-effects, but also nothing much in terms of protection over what our bodies could already do for us. There’s only a small group that are vulnerable enough to benefit significantly, while also being strong enough to tolerate it.
cbeach 2y ago
> biology has been using mRNA forever I'm not sure "biology" uses a synthesiser to build nucleic acid into a man-made sequence, and then injects it into the muscles (or accidentally injects it into a blood vessel) of billions of people within the space of a few months. > What "unknown" are you concerned about? Why do you believe we don't have a good understanding of how mRNA works in the body? Dr Robert Malone is one of the founding fathers of mRNA vaccine technology. You can read his impressive body of research on the subject here: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Jf1bApYAAAAJ https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Jf1bApYAAAAJ He made a video statement regarding the Covid mRNA vaccines which I found very alarming. He described negative effects on the heart, brain, lungs and reproductive system. I won't post links here in case I am cancelled for doing so. For whistleblowing about the mRNA vaccines he was made an instant pariah online, and there was a swift campaign to cancel and silence him, with media outlets instantly refuting his statements (interesting how media "factcheckers" deemed themselves more qualified to opine on mRNA vaccine technology than Dr Robert Malone himself). I'm not a scientist (at least, not a scientist of biology), and I don't know if Malone was right or wrong about the jabs. However, the Malone episode made it clear to me that society is NOT "doing science" correctly, while politicians and the media suppress any inconvenient scientific opinions while rolling out their policies and lucrative Big Pharma contracts.
- stevenAthompson 2y ago
  I don't know what Dr. Malone was like before COVID, but afterwards he was kind of wacky (by anyone's standards). He made claims about the vaccine killing some kid who died in 2013, talked about how the vaccine causes a form of AIDS, and tried to cure it with Pepcid (the anti-acid) and horse-paste. All of that was despite the fact that he took the Moderna vaccine himself, because he had long-COVID. Honestly, I wonder if COVID didn't' damage his brain somehow. Either way, you probably shouldn't believe some fringe guy from the internet more than mainstream science. If your mind is too wide open the flies will get in. *EDIT* I should also add that he didn't even come close to "inventing" the MRNA vaccine. He was one of many people who worked on a a similar concept and contributed to the field. No one person could be said to have invented it, but if there was one person it would not be him. His name was not even listed as one of the main authors of the paper he most frequently cites as proof of his claim.
  - cbeach 2y ago
    The claim about the kid who died in 2013 was a poor choice of retweet on Twitter. Anyone who's used Twitter would understand that at 2am after a few beers it's easy to retweet something silly. That single act shouldn't destroy a man's entire scientific credibility, any more than Musk's "pedo guy" tweet should destroy his status as a titan of sustainable travel and space technology. Malone's discussion around "a form of AIDS" was in reference to the negative efficacy of the Covid mRNA injections recorded by some studies. Annecdotally my wife (tripled mRNA jabbed) has caught symptomatic Covid twice since being jabbed. I tested positive for it only once (I tested as she had it), I had no symptoms. [Obviously the usual caveat applies. Just one data point, etc]. I don't think the science is "done" yet when it comes to understanding the long term side-effects on the immune system of the Covid mRNA injections. Your disparaging reference to Ivermectin ("horse paste") suggests you haven't seen the latest studies on this subject: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00239-X/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5...
    - stevenAthompson 2y ago
      I used the term "horse paste" because people in my country were literally going to "farm and feed" stores to purchase paste made to treat horses for parasites and then eating it, rather than taking the free and safe vaccine that had been tested for human safety and effectivness. Some of the horse paste eaters died of COVID, and many experienced side effects from the unapproved drug. A lot of people are bad at evaluating risk. The internet makes it worse.

sethammons 2y ago

Seeing as at first they said any unexpected reaction would be impossible because "science" and then reports of myocarditis came in and people said "impossible" which then became "maybe" which then became "yeah, in some cases, but the disease is worse!" The tech was new enough we didn't know about the myocarditis potential side effect. Everyone was so sure, just like you seem to be. "It doesn't work like that" -- except it does cause myocarditis in some patients

dent9876543 2y ago
All the while forgetting that benefit is heavily skewed. Those that would really benefit from its protection are often the same group that would be knocked sideways by its side effects (the very old, infirm, already sick or otherwise vulnerable). The majority get nothing much in terms of side-effects, but also nothing much in terms of protection over what our bodies could already do for us. There’s only a small group that are vulnerable enough to benefit significantly, while also being strong enough to tolerate it.

cbeach 2y ago

> biology has been using mRNA forever I'm not sure "biology" uses a synthesiser to build nucleic acid into a man-made sequence, and then injects it into the muscles (or accidentally injects it into a blood vessel) of billions of people within the space of a few months. > What "unknown" are you concerned about? Why do you believe we don't have a good understanding of how mRNA works in the body? Dr Robert Malone is one of the founding fathers of mRNA vaccine technology. You can read his impressive body of research on the subject here: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Jf1bApYAAAAJ https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Jf1bApYAAAAJ He made a video statement regarding the Covid mRNA vaccines which I found very alarming. He described negative effects on the heart, brain, lungs and reproductive system. I won't post links here in case I am cancelled for doing so. For whistleblowing about the mRNA vaccines he was made an instant pariah online, and there was a swift campaign to cancel and silence him, with media outlets instantly refuting his statements (interesting how media "factcheckers" deemed themselves more qualified to opine on mRNA vaccine technology than Dr Robert Malone himself). I'm not a scientist (at least, not a scientist of biology), and I don't know if Malone was right or wrong about the jabs. However, the Malone episode made it clear to me that society is NOT "doing science" correctly, while politicians and the media suppress any inconvenient scientific opinions while rolling out their policies and lucrative Big Pharma contracts.

stevenAthompson 2y ago
I don't know what Dr. Malone was like before COVID, but afterwards he was kind of wacky (by anyone's standards). He made claims about the vaccine killing some kid who died in 2013, talked about how the vaccine causes a form of AIDS, and tried to cure it with Pepcid (the anti-acid) and horse-paste. All of that was despite the fact that he took the Moderna vaccine himself, because he had long-COVID. Honestly, I wonder if COVID didn't' damage his brain somehow. Either way, you probably shouldn't believe some fringe guy from the internet more than mainstream science. If your mind is too wide open the flies will get in. *EDIT* I should also add that he didn't even come close to "inventing" the MRNA vaccine. He was one of many people who worked on a a similar concept and contributed to the field. No one person could be said to have invented it, but if there was one person it would not be him. His name was not even listed as one of the main authors of the paper he most frequently cites as proof of his claim.
- cbeach 2y ago
  The claim about the kid who died in 2013 was a poor choice of retweet on Twitter. Anyone who's used Twitter would understand that at 2am after a few beers it's easy to retweet something silly. That single act shouldn't destroy a man's entire scientific credibility, any more than Musk's "pedo guy" tweet should destroy his status as a titan of sustainable travel and space technology. Malone's discussion around "a form of AIDS" was in reference to the negative efficacy of the Covid mRNA injections recorded by some studies. Annecdotally my wife (tripled mRNA jabbed) has caught symptomatic Covid twice since being jabbed. I tested positive for it only once (I tested as she had it), I had no symptoms. [Obviously the usual caveat applies. Just one data point, etc]. I don't think the science is "done" yet when it comes to understanding the long term side-effects on the immune system of the Covid mRNA injections. Your disparaging reference to Ivermectin ("horse paste") suggests you haven't seen the latest studies on this subject: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00239-X/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5...
  - stevenAthompson 2y ago
    I used the term "horse paste" because people in my country were literally going to "farm and feed" stores to purchase paste made to treat horses for parasites and then eating it, rather than taking the free and safe vaccine that had been tested for human safety and effectivness. Some of the horse paste eaters died of COVID, and many experienced side effects from the unapproved drug. A lot of people are bad at evaluating risk. The internet makes it worse.