Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Medicine Pseudoscience Quackery Science Skepticism/critical thinking

Andrew Wakefield spews nonsense about how the COVID-19 vaccine will “permanently alter your DNA”

Andrew Wakefield’s back, and—surprise! surprise!—he’s a COVID-19 conspiracy theorist who doesn’t understand biology. He thinks RNA vaccines are “genetic engineering” that will “permanently alter your DNA.”

As 2021 dawned, my first post of the year was about how many of my fellow physicians behaved very badly last year with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic. While many physicians, nurses, and other health care professionals bravely risked their lives to care for COVID-19 patients (and some even died of COVID-19), a small but disturbing and impossible-to-ignore number of doctors denied or minimized the pandemic, sold unproven or even quack “cures,” and helped spread conspiracy theories designed to spark resistance to public health interventions, like masking, social distancing, and closures of businesses that involve large numbers of people gathering. Some have even engaged in germ theory denial by claiming that SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that has been shown to cause COVID-19, either doesn’t exist (it’s an exosome!) or doesn’t cause COVID-19. As these examples led me to think about how such people could get through medical school (just as Andrew Wakefield always did), I learned earlier this week that it wasn’t just doctors, but pharmacists as well, who fall prey to conspiracy theories:

A pharmacist who was arrested on charges that he intentionally sabotaged more than 500 doses of the Covid-19 vaccine at a Wisconsin hospital was “an admitted conspiracy theorist” who believed the vaccine could harm people and “change their DNA,” according to the police in Grafton, Wis., where the man was employed.

The police said Steven Brandenburg, 46, who worked the night shift at the Aurora Medical Center in Grafton, Wis., had twice removed a box of vials of the Moderna vaccine from the refrigerator for periods of 12 hours, rendering them “useless.”

“Brandenburg admitted to doing this intentionally, knowing that it would diminish the effects of the vaccine,” the police said.

In addition, Brandenberg was clearly a troubled man who believed in other conspiracy theories as well, was going through a divorce, and reportedly had brought a gun to work on two different occasions.

Regular readers will remember that the idea that mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, like the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, will “damage” or somehow “irreversibly alter” your DNA was featured here quite a while ago. I was…not kind…to those promoting this idiotic idea because, to put it uncharacteristically briefly for me, to have such an idea bespeaks an utter ignorance and/or misunderstanding of some very basic molecular biology of the sort that is taught in introductory level biology classes in college. Unfortunately, it’s not just pharmacists. For example, my post deconstructing that claim primarily examines the claim as promoted by a physician, Dr. Carrie Madej.

And then there’s Andrew Wakefield. Wakefield, as you know, is the British physician who launched the modern antivaccine movement nearly 23 years ago with his Lancet paper implying that the MMR vaccine was associated with an increased risk of autism. When last we left him, pre-pandemic, he had been reduced to writing for the official journal of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) that John Birch Society for physicians disguised as a medical professional society that regularly lets ideology trump science. traffics in the most vile antivaccine misinformation (e.g., from the claim that shaken baby syndrome is a “misdiagnosis” for vaccine injury that I discussed the first time I found the group to anti-immigrant fear-mongering, climate science denial, HIV/AIDS denialism, blaming breast cancer on abortion using execrable “science,” and more. The AAPS views doctors as some sort of mythical brave mavericks outside the “herd” (of sheeple, apparently) whose godlike total autonomy must never be infringed by the government, having gone on record about Medicare as stating that “the effect of the law is evil and participation in carrying out its provisions is, in our opinion, immoral.” Basically AAPS rejects any government involvement in medicine, be it Medicare and Medicaid or even state medical boards, as an unacceptable impingement on the absolute autonomy of physicians. It rejects even the concept of a scientific consensus about anything, while rejecting evidence-based guidelines as—you guessed it!—an unacceptable affront to the godlike autonomy of physicians. It last hit the news in a big way four years ago, when it was reported that Donald Trump’s pick to be his first Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tom Price, was a member of AAPS. More recently, right before the pandemic overwhelmed all other news, it even sued to protect its “right” to promote antivaccine misinformation.

I haven’t written about Andrew Wakefield for a while, because I hadn’t thought that he could top his claim a year ago for AAPS that the measles vaccine will result in a mass extinction of humans), but, like Jason Voorhees, Michael Myers, or Freddie Krueger, the villain who seems to die at the end of one slasher movie, Wakefield has returned, all too alive, to spread more disinformation. The wandering band of antivaccine conspiracy theorists over at that wretched hive of scum and antivaccine quackery, Age of Autism, are, unsurprisingly, on the case, and here’s the video:

Surprise, surprise! Andrew Wakefield is a COVID-19 crank, too! Also, unsurprisingly, this video is not on YouTube, likely given that it’s COVID-19 disinformation. In fact, you can tell from the title of the video that Wakefield buys into the same unscientific bunk about mRNA vaccines as Carrie Madej. True, he tries to make it sound more reasonable (remember, Madej called the vaccines “transhumanism”), but Wakefield needs to read an introductory biology or biochemistry text just as much as Madej or Brandenberg does. I mean, lookl at the title: Dr. Wakefield warns=”This is not a Vax, it is irreversible genetic modification.”

Wakefield starts out reasonably enough, because, as so many cranks and conspiracy theorists are, Wakefield is good at starting with a bit of scientific fact and using it to build his conspiracy:

DNA, deoxyribonucleic acid, are the basis of our genetic structure, if you like, and in every cell encodes for proteins, and it transfers its information to make the protein to messenger RNA. So messenger RNA is an intermediary between the gene and the product, the protein. It’s the protein that ultimately elicits the immune response, not the RNA. If you want to make a vaccine, it’s protein that you give, whether it’s bacterial protein or viral protein or whatever. It’s the protein to which the human immune system develops the immune response.

So far, so good. This is basic biology 101. Of course it’s quite possible to understand these basics (or seem to understand these basics), but still go right off the rails, and go off the rails is exactly what Wakefield proceeds to do very soon after this. What follows next, although not as into the stratosphere of woo as Madej’s take on the same claim, is nonetheless a series of facepalm-worthy statements that gave me a headache.

For example:

So, by definition, an RNA vaccine isn’t a vaccine at all because it doesn’t elicit an immune response. It has to be turned into protein, and it’s the protein in turn that creates the immune response. A messenger RNA vaccine is actually genetic engineering. That’s what it is. It’s putting genetic material from an RNA virus into your cells and asking your cellular machinery with the RNA to produce protein from your cells, to which you then mount an immune response.

Wait, what?

Didn’t Wakefield just say that an mRNA vaccine couldn’t be a vaccine at all because it doesn’t consist of protein, that it has to be converted to protein to cause an immune response? (I could get into the weeds and point out tha RNA itself is immunogenic and can convert an immune response.) Then he says that the mRNA is taken up in the cells and then the cells do make the protein, which in turn does mount an immune response? How is that not a vaccine? It doesn’t matter where the protein comes from, whether it’s in the vaccine itself or whether the vaccine somehow induces the body’s cells to make the protein to which you want to provoke an immune response. A vaccine is nothing more than a biological preparation that provides active acquired immunity against a disease. Does Wakefield say that a measles vaccine is not a vaccine? It’s a live attenuated virus vaccine; so you’re giving actual virus that infects cells but doesn’t cause disease because it’s weakened. Is that not a vaccine? The idea is that the infection with the attenuated virus vaccine results in a viral infection that is similar enough to the unaltered pathogenic virus that immunity to the weakened virus results in immunity to the full strength virus.

Note, though, how Wakefield cleverly tries to portray the COVID-19 vaccine as “genetic engineering,” because, you know, genetic engineering is scary to most people. Of course, in a trivial way, it sort of is genetic engineering, but really it’s not, at least not in the way that we normally mean. In reality, genetic engineering usually means permanently altering the genetic makeup of an organism, of which some examples are listed here. This is not what we’re talking about with RNA vaccines, which are intentionally designed not to permanently alter the genetics of the cells that they “ask” to make the protein being used as an antigen to provoke an immune response. I’ll go even further. Even if mRNA vaccines did somehow “permanently” alter the cells they affected, they arguably would still not really be genetic engineering, because they would only affect an infinitesimal fraction of the total cells in the body, the remainder of which would be unaffected.

But RNA vaccines don’t even do that. I’ll recap yet again. mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 consist of the messenger RNA (mRNA) for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, surrounded by lipids in lipid nanoparticles. These lipids fuse with the cell membrane, allowing the mRNA into the cell and giving it access to the ribosomes, the large enzyme complex that normally bind to and transcribe mRNA to make protein. The mRNA degrades. mRNA vaccines usually chemically alter the mRNA so that it has a longer half-life than most RNA, so that it continues to make protein long enough for the body to mount an immune response to it, but eventually the mRNA degrades and goes away.

Wakefield, predictably, goes deeper into nonsense:

What could possibly go wrong? You have cells in your own body that are producing protein to which your immune system is going to mount an immune response. That’s called an autoimmune disease.

No, no, no, no, no! No, it’s not! The COVID-19 spike protein is not a human protein. Autoimmune disease involves an aberrant immune response against one of the body’s own proteins. The COVID-19 vaccine is inducing your cells to make a foreign protein to facilitate an immune response. By this rationale, all viral diseases are autoimmune diseases, because all viral diseases induce cells to make a foreign protein that elicits an immune response!

None of that stops Wakefield:

The potential for this to go horribly wrong is enormous. They’ve never been used in humans before. It’s never been tested out, but yet it’s been rushed to market…And we’re already seeing some major problems occurring. I think there were two cases of anaphylaxis. There have been deaths that have just been reported.

No, not really, at least not any more than any other vaccine. Once again, antivaxxers like to act as though mRNA vaccines just sprang out of nowhere, when in fact they have been in development for 10-15 years, and we have large clinical trials showing safety and efficacy of the Pfizer/BioNTech and Mdoerna vaccines. In the clinical trials, there was no statistically significant difference between the number of deaths in the vaccinated group compared to the placebo group. As for deaths after the vaccine, I’m betting that Wakefield is referring to the case of Tiffany Dover, who fainted after getting the Pfizer vaccine and about whom conspiracy theories immediately cropped up claiming that she was dead, resulting in her harassment. Yes, there have been well-publicized incidents of anaphylaxis, but all vaccines have the risk of anaphylaxis, and compared to the risk of COVID-19 the risks of the vaccines are very, very low.

None of that stops Wakefield from repeating the nonsense about how the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are not really vaccines and how they are genetic engineering, before repeating yet again that they have never been tested in humans. (How many tens of thousands of subjects were in the final phase 3 trials that led to the emergency use authorization for the vaccines, again?) None of that stops Wakefield from saying something this ignorant:

If it causes a problem—a year, two years, five years down the line—and it’s already been given to billions of people worldwide, it’s too late. You can’t take it out. You can’t switch it off. You can’t stop it. It’s in there.

No, no, no, no, no! Again, the half-life of mRNA is short. In fact, on average, it’s only 10 hours! Then it’s gone. True, there is a wide range in normal human mRNAs. Some mRNAs have half-lifes under two hours. Indeed, I studied the mRNA of a gene that I cloned in graduate school, and I showed that its half-life was on the order of a few hours but that it rapidly degraded in response to certain cellular stimuli. Again, it’s true that the mRNAs in COVID-19 vaccines have been chemically altered to have longer half-lives, but they are nonetheless gone within two weeks to the point of not making protein any more. Again, this is just nonsense designed to scare people who don’t know anything about molecular biology.

Hilariously, Wakefield then accuses scientists of “living in an intellectual bubble.” No, I kid you not. While condescendingly saying that “some of them really believe” that what they are doing will “save the world,” he pivots to accuse them of living in an “intellectual vacuum” and “bubble” that keep them from seeing the potential problems with what they are doing. I laughed out loud when Wakefield say:

“Because we can, we should”? No, because we think we can, we’re prepared to take the risk on people’s behalf. That’s the truth of it.

Nice mangling of Jurassic Park there. Jeff Goldblum disapproves.

Jeff Goldblum reacts to Andrew Wakefield
Jeff Golblum reads this post and can’t believe how Wakefield is abusing his quote from “Jurassic Park.”

In reality, it is those who are working on these vaccines who are most acutely aware of potential problems with the vaccines and the sorts of problems they might cause. That’s why there are so many safeguards and so many details that they attend to. Unsurprisingly, Wakefield then invokes the “science was wrong before” canard, to which I always respond: Yes, science has been wrong before, but you know how we found out science was wrong? With more science. This is also particularly rich coming from Andrew Wakefield, whose science wasn’t just wrong, but fraudulent and who’s never admitted it. Similarly, his arrogant swipe at science as having made arrogant assumptions about its ability to assert dominion over nature made me laugh too coming from Wakefield. The “arrogance” of science is as nothing compared to Wakefield’s arrogance!

I mean, really. He even invokes the Human Genome Project, claiming that altering the expression of one gene thought to cause a disease sometimes had unexpected effects. I’d love to know what group he’s referring to, because, as always, context matters, and I never trust Wakefield to give decent context, but I could point out that in other cases there have been several successful uses of gene therapy (or “genetic engineering,” as Wakefield would likely put it).

The rest of the video is a crank greatest hits. Wakefield claims that scientists are blind and easily swayed about approaches that look like they will work in cell culture if they have the potential to make a lot of money, particularly given how terrified everyone is of the pandemic and the need to “do something.” Of course, there is a grain of truth in there, but it’s a grain of truth there, but Wakefield, as always, takes it straight into conspiracyville, along the way pimping his latest lie-packed movie about the Vaccine Court, parroting some of those lies, such as the claim that there is no liability for vaccine makers and that it was fear that drove lawmakers to pass the legislation that formed the Vaccine Court. Again, there’s a grain of truth in there. There was fear. There was fear that a tsunami of dubious and bogus lawsuits would endanger the vaccine supply by driving all the companies making childhood vaccines out of the US market.

And, yes, Wakefield finishes up with—you guessed it!—Bill Gates conspiracy theories! Because of course he does. Grifters gonna grift, and conspiracy theorists gonna conspiracy, and Wakefield is both of those.

By Orac

Orac is the nom de blog of a humble surgeon/scientist who has an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone, somewhere might actually give a rodent's posterior about his copious verbal meanderings, but just barely small enough to admit to himself that few probably will. That surgeon is otherwise known as David Gorski.

That this particular surgeon has chosen his nom de blog based on a rather cranky and arrogant computer shaped like a clear box of blinking lights that he originally encountered when he became a fan of a 35 year old British SF television show whose special effects were renowned for their BBC/Doctor Who-style low budget look, but whose stories nonetheless resulted in some of the best, most innovative science fiction ever televised, should tell you nearly all that you need to know about Orac. (That, and the length of the preceding sentence.)

DISCLAIMER:: The various written meanderings here are the opinions of Orac and Orac alone, written on his own time. They should never be construed as representing the opinions of any other person or entity, especially Orac's cancer center, department of surgery, medical school, or university. Also note that Orac is nonpartisan; he is more than willing to criticize the statements of anyone, regardless of of political leanings, if that anyone advocates pseudoscience or quackery. Finally, medical commentary is not to be construed in any way as medical advice.

To contact Orac: [email protected]

370 replies on “Andrew Wakefield spews nonsense about how the COVID-19 vaccine will “permanently alter your DNA””

It’s very generous of you to suggest that Wakefield needs a refresher in biology. Although Wakefield hasn’t done science in years, when he tried to he did look at genetic material, and he has a history of misrepresentation. I think he doesn’t deserve the benefit of a doubt here, and that it’s reasonable to think he’s intentionally lying, not forgotten.

Given that he’s now at higher risk of COVID-19 than in 1998, since he’s not as young, I’m wondering if he believes his antivaccine stuff enough that he himself won’t get the vaccine.

He also has a podcast, that appears separate from this.

Oh, and they are latching onto every death rumor they can find, so maybe he has something other than Ms. Dover in mind.

100% lying from beginning to end. A good fraudster matches the zeitgeist, and Wakefield is a good fraudster if nothing else. I don’t for one moment think he believes his COVID crap but he knows that his market will, and will pay for that confirmation in buckets of cash.

A good fraudster matches the zeitgeist

My thoughts exactly. Wakefield jumped on the bandwagon.

@ Dorit,

I am so intrigued by this comment of yours:

“Given that he’s now at higher risk of COVID-19 than in 1998, since he’s not as young, I’m wondering if he believes his antivaccine stuff enough that he himself won’t get the vaccine.”

Does this mean that you think he is not actually antivaccine?

Christine, I’m not Dorit, but the general view here is that Wakefield only cares about Wakefield. He does what he does to benefit himself. He engineered a scare about MMR and tried to make a vaccine.
Wakefield is not an antivaxxer, he’s a grifter. If tomorrow he decided he could make more money pushing vaccination, he would.

Wakefield is a grifter who took a huge payday to provide “evidence to order” to a law firm trying to make a case against MMR vaccine. At the same time, he attempted to patent an alternative vaccine to the MMR. Obviously, more money would pour in if the lawsuit was successful. He also bled children at a party without permission, and did unwarranted colonoscopies on children for an imaginary diagnosis.

And you think he is sincere about his anti-vaccine stance? Or about anything, for the matter?

I don’t know if he’s completely insincere in his anti-vaccine stance, but I do believe, as said below, that he cares about himself, and would say – and do – what serves him best, and that he can and does lie to his followers.

If he personally thinks the vaccine’s benefits outweigh its risk, I completely see him getting the vaccine while, at the same time, continuing to promote misinformation designed to get others to avoid it.

Just like I believe that if he thought his immunity to measles or mumps waned and he was at any risk, he would get another MMR – and not say it.

Brian Deer’s book does a great job setting this out.

Conspiracy theorists often make claims they don’t fully believe, because it’s about getting the result they want, not about consistency. For instance, you claim that vulnerability to vaccines is the result of specific genetic variations (of which, of course, you have every single one), yet you also tell posters here that they are going to get Alzheimer’s from their vaccines, despite zero knowledge of their genetics.

You know, it feel to me like guilt and shame don’t exist anymore or never existed for some inhabitants of this planet, namely wakefraud but also, some orange guy…

Psychopaths and narcissists have no empathy. It’s what makes them good at what they do. Do not make the mistake of projecting your own theory of mind onto them; that’s not how they operate.

“I admire its purity. A survivor… unclouded by conscience, remorse, or delusions of morality.”—Ash

@Has,

There is a few premices wrong in your assertion. First, lack of guilt and shame is an hypothesis of mine, not my theory of mind. I know there’s a field of study regarding theory of mind in psychology and I do know much better to never ascribe a particular theory of mind to a psychopathic individual. You may not know but I suffered for many years having hosted a psychopath in my place of living for over a year before I ran away (and then, I was a target to him).

Please don’t over-read my comment, lack of guilt and shame are part of psychopathy, not the whole essence of it and I haven’t got started about specificity of these criteria either.

Alain

@Alain: Oh, I was very much agreeing with you. Please forgive my tendency to talk in 2nd-person; it’s not aimed at you but at anyone and everyone.

The problem is people who are nice all too often extend their niceness to abusers, which is an appalling mistake. NEVER flex nor bend nor give them a second chance: all that does is make YOU complicit in their abuse.

Give them a choice, but ONLY between doing what they’re told and no quarter.

https://twitter.com/lilithsaintcrow/status/1347293759155838976

Contrast Speaker Pelosi patiently waiting on the phone for half an hour just so she can ask VP Pence to invoke the 25th. Abusers just LOVE people who enable them like that. A coward will back down, but not if you keep offering them an alternative out.

@ has

From your twitter link:

“Domestic abusers, white supremacists, and religious bigots all operate off the same thin but very useful playbook that exploits other people’s politeness and (I’ve got to say it) “civility.””

Dunno about US white supremacists (never met them), but… oh yeah! That’s so true.

Sad that authorities are enshrining that kind of abuse in their policies, and, in the case of France, may I add, in freedom of speech laws (for instance libel in France need not consider facts to sentence someone: attacking one’s dignity is enough for sentencing[@]). I get more or less threatened repeatedly for stating facts as being “impolite” and “uncivil”.

None of the above (abusers and bigots of all stripes) care about facts ; and authorities, whether police or medicine, also have that kind of disregard about facts. And no matter how much formally civil you end up being, the simple fact that facts are inconvenient gets labelled incivility and courts back that up.

Saying “no” is as grave a sin as murder without motive. Biggest lesson of my life.

[@]People nowadays allege that it’s designed to stifle hate speech, but I do not believe the end goal justifies all the side effects of that law. In fact, jurisprudence does not back up this interpretation about hate speech.

Wikipedia on the french notion of libel: “Il n’est pas nécessaire que le propos soit calomnieux (donc faux) pour tomber sous le coup de la loi mais il faut que le reproche ait été exprimé sciemment.” – “It is not necessary that statements be slanderous (hence false) to fall under the scope of the (defamation) law but the rebuke needs to have been expressed knowingly”.

Shitty culture. Shitty country. Shitty people.

“L’exceptio veritatis constitue un moyen de défense au fond. Elle n’est pas admise lorsque la diffamation alléguée concerne les faits de la vie privée afin de ne pas y porter atteinte.” – “The defense by exception of truth (truth defending of you of the accusation of libel) is not allowed when facts pertain to private life in order not to offend”.

Ipso facto: abusers have a free pass. Dunno about “satanic pedophiles”, but Olivier Duhamel has a lot to answer for. As well as the head of Science Po, who knew, denies it, and will likely hide behind state authority and privacy guaranteed by that law. You know what? Give me satanic pedophiles anyday as long as you fix this libel law.

@ F68.10:

Thank you for clarifying French law: I did not realise how it operated. It puts complainants in an impossible situation.

If you have followed RI for a long time, you may know how pseudoscientists/ anti-vaxxers/ woo-meisters use legal threats to silence their critics, e.g.
— Wakefield has tried to silence Brian Deer who had exposed his BS in both the UK and US repeatedly ( see Brian Deer.com for details). When living in the US ( in Texas), one of the hurdles Andy had to leap involved SLAPP which specifically targets lawsuits used strategically to silence critics: he was not successful in any suit.
— woo-meister supreme, Gary Null has sued sceptics who reveal his MO and Wikipedia which details his maleducation/ ‘degrees’/ pseudoscience. A physicist, Lee Phillips, wrote a blog about him and was promptly sued which lasted several years- and cost him money- before it was thrown out. Currently, he is again going after Wikipedia and its editors despite a law that protects their content
He used FOIA to “investigate” Orac who has a public account because of his employment at a state university
— Quackwatch’s Steven Barrett has been sued by several subjects of his inquiries.
BUT
when Mike Adams disseminated boatloads of libelous disinformation about Orac although he had legal recourse, it would have cost him a fortune ( so he instead used the internet to correct the lies spun about him )
.
So the laws may be somewhat better in the UK and US but dishonest operators still are able to frighten critics away or cost them heavily to defend themselves against lies.

-btw- are viewing the current shitshow involving white supremacists, QAnon folk and possible seditionists in Washington, DC. Exciting television!

@ Denice

“-btw- are viewing the current shitshow involving white supremacists, QAnon folk and possible seditionists in Washington, DC. Exciting television!”

Yes. Huge fun. I love coups. They remind me of my childhood in Lesotho. School was cancelled, I loved it. I just hope toddlers in the US also will have some slack time.

More concerning: I went for a walk to buy stuff around here. No one heard of the events in the US. In fact… no one cares. The only politically conscious guy I met explained to me that there was a plan to redo Nazi eugenics by genetically engineering people with vaccines. That’s what I hear in the street. On the net, right-wing people are rooting in more and more for Trump and are awfully lenient. It’s terrifying.

IMO: Democracy is dying in the western world quite fast because of issues we never really did want to address, loosing our time in gibberish politicking. The (almost) only place where I put hope for the future of the notion of democracy is now India. Love their recent speeches at the UN since they got their non-permanent seat at the security council.

IMO, again: People who think truth and rationality matters, no matter how much they disagree, have become a political party, even if they do not yet recognize it. It’s very sad that such fault lines seem to be opening.

“Exciting television!”

Oh, yes. I have a physical reaction when I see building-jumping, hanging,…, just standing around on a catwalk — r/sweatypalms This is like that but just looking away does not fix it.

Nero’s gonna Nero and it better be more than wishful thinking that Pence, Pompeo, et al pull out that 25 and slap the shit out of him with it when he goes for that button. Even scarier is that there is some world event or attack here that warrants retaliation with him still “in control”.

When living in the US ( in Texas), one of the hurdles Andy had to leap involved SLAPP

For some of those sitting on the sidelines (rather than Mr. Deer), it’s too bad that this issue was never reached in the case, as it could have taught Wakefraud a memorable lesson.

@ Tim:

In other news. you might enjoy
Gollum J.Trump ( @ realGollumTrump) who hasn’t tweeted for 2 months has returned..

@Has,

Thanks for the enlightenment (2nd person language).

@F68.10

J’ai toujours pensé que le gazon est jaune taché d’huile à moteur partout dans le monde mais j’avoue avoir oublié les lois sur la calomnie en France et en Angleterre. J’ai effectivement un psychiatre, français (je ne crois pas qu’il soit parisien) et j’en ai eu un autre précédemment (aussi français), ceci dit, en bon québécois je les ai fait virer fou de colère et/ou de peur à certaines occasion donc il me semblerait que le gazon soit moins taché ici au Québec. Ça te dirais une relocalisation au Québec?

translation:

I have always thought the grass is yellow stained with motor oil all over the world but I admit I forgot the libel laws in France and England. I actually have a psychiatrist, French (I don’t think he’s Parisian) and I had another previously (also French), that said, as a good Quebecer I had them go crazy with anger and / or fear on some occasion so it seems to me that the grass is less stained here in Quebec.

Alain

@F68.10

Petit détail, sans aucune conséquences graves pour moi (les colères ou les peurs de mes shrinks). Nada, zilch…

@F68.10 re. India – The ruling party (BJP) is the political wing of the RSS, founded by a man who publicly praised Hitler’s ideology, current PM Modi is considered responsible for the murder of thousands of Muslims when he was Gujarat leader. Much as I love Indian culture and especially music, hypocrisy and fascist tendencies are just as common there as in the rest of the world.

@ Carl

There are issues in India. Hindustani extremists do exist. But it is a country where islamic extremists have freedom of speech and are countered by Indian nationalists. That’s the situation as of today. Of course, you have fascist tendencies in BJP. But you cannot discard everything they do because of that. Very far from it. At the moment, they are one of the countries that are strengthening democracy, secularism and freedom of speech. Even if that policy does stem from a party with fascist tendencies.

That’s the real world. We can’t wish it away. In the BJP/Congress ideological battle, I cannot stand on the side of Congress. Sorry.

Especially when he attempted to patent a single-antigen vaccine as an alternative to MMR.

#FollowTheMoney

With my limited knowledge of genetics, the one remotely plausible way for the spike protein RNA to make it into the genome is an (active) infection with a retrovirus at the time of vaccination. And even then, shouldn’t the modification be essentially confined to the injection site because it is given as intramuscular injection?

@ aairfcchasays

an (active) infection with a retrovirus at the time of vaccination

And even then, an active retrovirus in a cell is bad news for the cell’s health. So whatever the retrovirus does to the cell’s genome, the poor cell is quickly going to be destroyed, if not by the virus itself, then by the immune system.
Making all of these changes moot.

Things like dormant retroviruses (if this is the right word? my virology is a bit rusty) or retrotransposons would have a lesser impact on a cell’s survival, but now we are talking about a scenario where these retrovirus/retrotransposons wake-up right when the vaccine mRNA is around, manage to fetch it up, transpose it and tangle it in the genome (1), and then the dormant virus / transposon goes right back to sleep, instead of making so much trouble they will get the host cell killed.
I’m not even touching on enzyme specificity or other bottlenecks limiting the risk of a random bit of RNA getting inserted by mistake someplace dangerous in our genome.
I’ll be more worried about the risk of a meteorite landing on my car.

(1) where the inserted bits may do nothing, and won’t be propagated to the host’s children anyway (2) – as you pointed out, even if a modification happens, it would be confined to the injection site
(2) well, the mRNA would first need to find its way in germinal cells for that. I guess the take-away lesson is, if you want to be sure, just don’t inject the vaccine in your gonads.

There are bits and pieces of virus in our genes (endogenous retroviruses) so it can happen, but there is a reason or two why I wrote “remotely plausible”: Most are just present in a more or less mangled version of the original with no (known) function or activity and most are quite old additions to our genome.

I am reading Brian Deer’s book. I am not surprised that he was struck off the medical register. What I am surprised about is that he ever got onto it in the first place.

Yes, reading “The Doctor Who Fooled the World” showed me how Andrew Wakefield has complete and utter callous disregard for all things not Andrew Wakefield.

Thanks for the title. Added to my to-read list. Also, I’m a big fan of your posts. You’d get probably all the likes if I could find a way to upvote. Thanks again!

—and it’s already been given to billions of people worldwide

If only Wakfield’s lie were true….then we wouldn’t be here watching the global death count approach 2 million people.

If it causes a problem—a year, two years, five years down the line—and it’s already been given to billions of people worldwide,

The full sentence shows that he is placing himself in a hypothetical future where the vaccine (1) would have already been given to billions of people – not something done now, but done by that time – before the secret nanobots activate and change all of them into pumpkins. Or something.

But I admit, he is being very optimistic. I’m afraid we won’t manage to get a billion people vaccinated in one year, by the end of 2021. Maybe by the end of 2022?
For the second billion, maybe in five years.

(1) vaccine, singular? Why antivaxers are always looking at vaccines as if they were all one and the same?
OK, rhetorical question.

Regarding Wakefield’s misstatements about current Covid-19 vaccines – he has many faults, but stupidity is not one of them.

This latest nonsense about Covid-19 vaccination causing “irreversible genetic modification” adds to the evidence that whatever genuinely held beliefs Wakefield may have had about vaccine risks, his subsequent activities have been designed with the overriding purpose of solidifying his position as an antivax demigod, getting revenge on the mainstream medical and scientific community that cast him out, and above all, garnering attention and money.

It suggests a strong streak of sociopathy.

Indeed. For some time now, facts (or more correctly the lack of them) have not concerned Andrew Wakefield one bit. His efforts have always been about big noting himself and keeping the dollars rolling in. He says just what he calculates his rubes will respond to.

If you thought there were eerie similarities between the behaviour of Andrew Wakefield and Donald Trump, you would be right.

Wakefield must be spewing that Del Bigtree is raking it in so well, given Andy provided the entree into the anti-vax universe.

I am just toying with the thought of whether I delve into AoA to see how they are taking the activities of their other saint.

Wakefield may have had about vaccine risks, his subsequent activities have been designed with the overriding purpose of solidifying his position as an antivax demigod, getting revenge on the mainstream medical and scientific community that cast him out..

I’ve been reflecting on this comment by Dangerous One a lot. Whether we are anti or pro-vaxxers, aren’t we all driven by biases that often infringe on our intellectual conscience and honesty?

Obviously, I am an antivaxxer who strongly believes that for the most part vaccines have caused more harm than good. Now, let’s pretend for a moment that actual evidence exists that vaccines are really good (I am actually being serious here!), how would I deal with this and its potential to shake my committed antivaxx stance? I would say it would be tough as hell

Now, consider a pro-vaxxer: He might sincerely believe that vaccines are really good, but how does he reconcile this with the reality that vaccines are turning 1 in 36 kids’ brains into mush? For him, it will also be tough as hell.

So, antivaxxers and provaxxers are essentially two sides of the same coin. We are all driven by biases. The fact that antivaxxers happen to be right doesn’t minimize this.

I think the fact that the anti-vaccine activist does not stop at repeating the falsehood that vaccines cause autism but describes autism as “turning children’s brains into mush”, showing his baseless contempt for autistics, tells us all we need to know.

No, we are not two side of a coin. You are ableist, in addition to denying reality. A person who thinks he has open permission to degrade and dehumanize others.

@ Greg

“Obviously, I am an antivaxxer who strongly believes that for the most part vaccines have caused more harm than good.”

Obviously…

“We are all driven by biases. The fact that antivaxxers happen to be right doesn’t minimize this.”

If you would kindly go urethral-sound yourself with a plastic drain-hair remover strip, that would be great.

I’m pretty terrified by needles and vaccines. And yet…maybe it is the ‘forbidden fruit’ aspect of it because I can’t get it but I want the damn shot! I’ve read so much trump stump crap that my brain is already mush. I’ve got no worries.

Greg, you are just a sadistic child hater. You would prefer a child get a high fever, seizures, etc instead of getting a vaccine. A child like this one: https://www.oregonlive.com/health/2019/03/unvaccinated-oregon-boy-6-nearly-dies-of-tetanus-racks-up-1-million-in-bills.html

If you do not like the label of sadistic child hater, then provide the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that show the DTaP causes more harm than diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis.

Now, let’s pretend for a moment that actual evidence exists that vaccines are really good (I am actually being serious here!), how would I deal with this and its potential to shake my committed antivaxx stance?

We know how you “would” deal with it.

Oh,how we know.

Obviously, I am an antivaxxer who strongly believes that for the most part vaccines have caused more harm than good.

That and a complete ignoramus about science and medicine. But tell us something we don’t know Greg?

Now, consider a pro-vaxxer: He might sincerely believe that vaccines are really good, but how does he reconcile this with the reality that vaccines are turning 1 in 36 kids’ brains into mush? For him, it will also be tough as hell.

Vaccines do not cause autism. Autism has genetic causes.
Autism does not turn “kids’ brains to mush”.
This is just puerile ableist claptrap. It is a consistent behavioural trait among those who have no compassion for anyone but themselves.

We have known for a long time that you are an anti-vaxxer Greg and we have also known that you care about no-one but yourself. In all your posts you have not told us anything new. You just rabbit on the same old tracks, convincing me ever more that you are a self-centered fool.

@ Chris Preston (@ Greg)

“We have known for a long time that you are an anti-vaxxer Greg and we have also known that you care about no-one but yourself.”

And that also that, once upon a time, he was fond of weird analogies between rape and vaccination that got him banned from this blog for some time.

We have known for a long time that you are an anti-vaxxer Greg and we have also known that you care about no-one but yourself

Indeed I can be selfish Chris Preston, but I am willing to own up to it. What about you, Chris Preston?

The reason that I am no longer keen on engaging in these incessant good-cop/bad-cop topics on this forum is that I am starting to find them pointless. They miss the point that it’s not about antivaxxers vs provaxxers, or Democrats vs Republicans, or the 1% vs the Rest, or even Trump vs Everyone-else. They miss that we are in the mess that we are in because of individuals’ personal failings. We are all bad-cops, Chris.

Here you are, Chris Preston, feeding yourself BS as you point your finger at me. You are pitiful — mahng!

@ Grep

“They miss that we are in the mess that we are in because of individuals’ personal failings. We are all bad-cops, Chris.”

Nope. No cheap relativism allowed, Greg…

What about you, Chris Preston?

Selfish? Maybe sometimes. The big difference between us Greg is that my first response is not “There is a head-banging, sh!t-smearing, brains turned to mush freak”. That, Greg, is because I have lived this. I brought up 2 disabled children and what we did is celebrate that we could be a family and try to be as normal as possible.

I often had people commiserate with me and invariably responded about how lucky we were. I have spent days in hospital entertaining a child in traction, only to have the nurses ask me if I would read to some of the other children in the ward. They mostly had Blount’s disease and were having their leg bones broken and reset. Some would need it several times. I ended with 5 cots circling me for the afternoon. How lucky I was that we would only have to do this once. These other children would likely need to be back one or more times.

Or the week we spent in the respiratory ward full of children with cystic fibrosis getting their monthly IV antibiotics with, back then, their children were unlikely to reach 18. How lucky we were that we would be able to walk out and most likely would not need to go back.

This, Greg, is why I think you are scum. You have done it to yourself.

Orac, I know you folks see Wakefield as the ultimate anti-christ — or is it the quintessential scapegoat?!– but c’mon, Wakefield is a good-looking guy; can’t you find a less swarmy, creepy pic of him?!

Onto this…

No, no, no, no, no! No, it’s not! The COVID-19 spike protein is not a human protein. Autoimmune disease involves an aberrant immune response against one of the body’s own proteins. The COVID-19 vaccine is inducing your cells to make a foreign protein to facilitate an immune response. By this rationale, all viral diseases are autoimmune diseases, because all viral diseases induce cells to make a foreign protein that elicits an immune response!

I have beckoned the experts here so many times to help clarify this matter of what exactly the spike protein is, but it has all been to no avail. My understanding is that the complete spike protein might be unique, but the epitope portion of it, where it binds to cell receptors, may not be so unique in that it may have affinity with human-like epitopes. If this is the case, then Wakefield and that Norwegian scientist’ concern about autoimmunity is indeed legitimate; shared human-like epitopes is where the risk comes in! So, again, is this assessment correct? Dangerous One, Squirrel, Athaic, Aarno, Narad, F68, Orac — hell, Denice! — Anyone?

Well, 16 million odd doses have been administered (as far as a quick internet query tells me). Anyone seen any sign of mass autoimmune ‘events’ yet? How about a (statistically significant) higher incidence of autoimmune events than the remaining unvaccinated population?

If not…..Q.E.D.

For the U.S., it’s now about 5.2 million doses administered out of 17 million deliverd.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-19-vaccine-doses.html

And that is a week after we were supposed to have vaccinated 20 million people.

In the 3 weeks following the first vaccination, the U.S. recorded 1.27 million more cases and 50,132 deaths 🙁 🙁 🙁

I hope that rate continues to ramp up. But at this pace, it will be May 1 when we hit 10% of the population with at least one shot. And it may be next fall before I get mine.

I pick 10% because it is far short of what we need for population protection, but might be enough that we will start to see a shift from slow growth to slow decline in cases.

@ Greg; **

You are concerned about the spike protein in the Covid vaccine causing autoimmunity.

OK, before you get upset about this possibility you should also be worried about spike proteins in other Corona viruses ( which can cause mild illnesses like colds and more serious infections like SARS and Covid) as well as in other families of viruses which
— inundate your immune system every day, even if you don’t get sick from them AND
— come with other stuff inside that allows the virus to multiply and take over your cells.

If you google/ bing “virus images”, you’ll see their structure and notice that the spike is only a small part and doesn’t contain the genetic material which allows their replication ( that is encased in a fatty shell- wash your hands!) So chances are, you are already being hit with various spike proteins in their natural form – in a virus- the kind that can lead to mild or serious illness..
These viruses are ubiquitous and also cause illness in animals, like pets- there are many types and they all mutate and evolve all the time.
The world is not pristine.

** readers, see my note below.

Gerg: “So, again, is this assessment correct?”

Once again for the terminally hard of learning: it doesn’t matter what Wakefield says; his credibility is already so far down the shitter that everything out of that man’s mouth can, should, and will be automatically ignored. Argumentum ad Wakefield would be a logical fallacy all of its own, except that scumbag deserves his name attached to nothing further except a prison cell door. #GotForm

As for you, if you honestly wanted to discuss spike proteins and all the rest you would go crack an undergrad microbiology textbook and educate yourself on the basics so you can carry on an informed discussion. But no, all you care about is smearing your excreta over everyone else’s walls, so why don’t you go 69 your equally feculent high priest down the far end of whatever sewer you both inhabit and give everyone a break from your verbal vomit. #GotFormToo

I agree. Instead of sea-lioning, Greg should do some research on his own. I was going to suggest a cell biology textbook if he doesn’t want to study immunology first. Any suggestions for a good one?

BTW, I really need to dig into Sompayrac soon, but I’m still too busy working through a major life event, and don’t have time to chase down Greg’s chimaeras.

<

blockquote>
But no, all you care about is smearing your excreta over everyone else’s walls, so why don’t you go 69 your equally feculent high priest down the far end of whatever sewer you both inhabit and give everyone a break from your verbal vomit.

Has, am I to understand these references to feces, vomit, and your wish to see me sodomize Andrew Wakefield as you not being inclined to discuss immunology with me? Anyone else?

I agree. Instead of sea-lioning, Greg should do some research on his own. I was going to suggest a cell biology textbook if he doesn’t want to study immunology first. Any suggestions for a good one?

Squirrel, indeed I am a believer in the idea that knowledge is power, and I am always open to educational enrichment activities; still, I believe I am asking a very simple question that the very ‘smart’ people here should be able to answer.

Is it the case that the Covid-2 spike protein has many epitopes that share affinity to human-like epitopes, and that is where the autoimmunity risk comes in? Anyone?!

@Gerg: There is no way to discuss immunology with you, because not only do you know nothing about the field itself, you know nothing of its prerequisites either. So stop trying to pretend you are competent to discuss it as it is patently obvious your only objective is to waste the time of people who have more productive things to do.

I agree. Instead of sea-lioning, Greg should do some research on his own.

The trouble with this idea is that Greg thinks doing research involves reading the pundits at AoA.

@ has:

Yeah, I know that but want to get Greg to demonstrate it over and over if case lurkers haven’t yet noticed..

Here’s how I divide trolls into two categories:
— simple contrarians
— those with more serious psychological issues that fuel their fire

The first group may or may not actually believe the positions they take but are here to argue, waste time** and aggravate sceptics, repeating the same concepts over and over. They may believe that they are “winning” even when sceptics jointly assemble an integrated set of objections against their woo***.
The second group is less firmly rooted in reality, being emotionally driven to oppose us so I don’t engage directly with them; research shows that arguing with True Believers only gets them to dig in more resolutely and dig the hole they’re in deeper and wider. I think that we’ve only had 2 or 3 of them of in the last few months. .

HOWEVER, both can be used to teach apprentice sceptics about how alt med/ anti-vax believers proceed against reality. ..

** when a person repeats the same action, observers are better able to note and recall that fact.
*** which we get to hear!.

@ Denice

Eh, if I was to count, Greg is occupying at least twice the typing length than me on this thread.
For me, I mean the parts replying to him.
That got me to brush on my knowledge, learn or refine a few things from that the others posted, I came up with a fem more analogies to explain things, and as I am currently helping a student on writing a little thing on vaccines, all this mental exercise on the topic of immunity is going to be put to meaningful use right away.
I’ll can that a win.

Greg said: “Squirrel, indeed I am a believer in the idea that knowledge is power, and I am always open to educational enrichment activities;”

Facts say: Greg, you are never open to educational enrichment, and you don’t seem to value knowledge. You’re around to do one thing: misrepresent studies and lie. The time to think you are trying to have an honest conversation or ask an honest question is long past (if such a time ever existed).

You’re around to do one thing: misrepresent studies and lie.

No. He is an <a href=”https://www.google.com/search?q=site://respectfulinsolence.com+”gerg”+”hee+hee”>unadulterated attention whore.

I’m so sorry, my apologies to fecal matter everywhere for comparing you to anti-vaxxer, which was a most cruel and unkind cut, given that you serve a productive purpose, unlike anti-vaxxers.

Christopher, it’s interesting that awhile back I read that infant mortality was way down since lockdown. Supposedly, it’s coinciding with babies missing their well visits.

I got thinking about you, and was wondering if you were also witnessing reduced visits. Christopher, do you find that you’re saddened by the lost business but you are overjoyed by the ‘coincidental’ situation of less dead babies?

None of you mindless AVers (that’s redundant, Greg) seem to get that there isn’t “real time” SUID data, so your sad silly “epiphany” on SIDs is dumb and premature, but then again you use the same idiocy to discount COVID-19 deaths as well, just in the opposite way. And the only thing I worry about regarding pediatric visits is that with the drop in vaccination rates due to fear of being in a doctor’s office (and catching SARS-CoV-2), there will be outbreaks of measles and pertussis once the pandemic goes away. Business if fine enough and again, if you’d ever remember anything you’d read, you would remember I’ve said that pediatricians actually do better financially by not vaccinating (and if we were doing so great giving vaccines, why are we the lowest paid physician group in the US?).

Especially for Greg, I though of this song by the Dutch band Focus:

Answers! Questions? Questions? Answers!

My understanding is that the complete spike protein might be unique, but the epitope portion of it, where it binds to cell receptors, may not be so unique in that it may have affinity with human-like epitopes. If this is the case, then Wakefield and that Norwegian scientist’ concern about autoimmunity is indeed legitimate; shared human-like epitopes is where the risk comes in!

I’ll respond considering this question to be in good faith.

When you’re talking about an interaction between two proteins, say between the spike protein and the cell protein the virus uses to gain entry, you can’t assume that the structures of the proteins on both sides of this interaction are exactly the same. You should think of it as being like a lock and a key. The immune system of a person is tolerant to the structure of the lock because it has been raised to recognize that as self. The key, on the other hand, is a totally different matter; this structure has never been seen by the immune system until the virus brings it into the body. To promote auto-immunity, you would need to raise antibodies that recognize the lock, which probably won’t happen unless you’re trying to raise a response against a non-self protein that looks like the lock… and even then you probably won’t be raising antibodies against the parts of the non-self protein that look like self, meaning that you probably still won’t get autoimmunity unless you hit someone who is predisposed –say someone who already has an autoimmune disorder. If you’re raising antibodies against the key, you won’t see recognition unless the immune system sees the key, which is non-self to begin with. The reason antibodies are useful is explicitly because they are so specific to a particular target and the target is a tiny subsequence of the overall target, which is the epitope. Shared epitope is meaningless if a well trained immune system simply ignores the shared part, which most people do.

You could extend this and say, “Well, cell signaling involves proteins on the surfaces of two cells interacting with one another as keys to locks, maybe the virus key is mimicking one of these normal natural biological self-keys.” Yeah, that’s possible, but there’s no reason that it should. First, the viral key could well be binding someplace else on that lock aside for the natural binding domain of the lock protein. This happens; peanut allergies work because of this. Second, even if the virus is mimicking a self-protein “key,” the immune system is more likely to react to the non-self parts of the viral key because it already tolerates the self-resembling parts.

The problem with this conversation is that it will always be way more nuanced than a catch-all term like “epitopes” or even “shared epitopes” because there’s a non-shared part that probably has a way bigger influence on the situation. It’s true that allergies do happen, but you can’t take the atypical effect as the average occurrence without having a number that says how atypical that effect is. And, right now, the statistics on these vaccines aren’t bad.

Thanks Foolish Physicist! It was a sincere question!.
It appears everything you said about the unlikelihood of autoimmunity is specific to raising a precise ‘neutralising’ antibody key, but that Norwegian scientist mentioned the pitfalls of not doing so, and you also said this..

To promote auto-immunity, you would need to raise antibodies that recognize the lock, which probably won’t happen unless you’re trying to raise a response against a non-self protein that looks like the lock…

So, is this a possible scenario that may occur when you achieve non-neutralizing binding antibodies — you ‘accidentally’ raise an imprecise key that might stumble on a human looking lock?

is this a possible scenario that may occur when you achieve non-neutralizing binding antibodies

No.
In the sense, it’s not a question of the antibodies being neutralizing or not.
The term you are looking for is “low-specificity”, or maybe “cross-reacting”. Although it’s not a question of the antibodies being imprecise, either. Antibodies could be highly specific to a certain protein pattern and cross-reacting with all proteins bearing this pattern.

The “non-neutralizing” quality of an antibody is not about being imprecise. It’s about targeting a part of the bug and not resulting in the bug being neutralized, for whatever reason, Maybe the bug doesn’t need this part to carry-on on being pathogenic, or it’s hidden inside the bug so of course the antibodies cannot reach it.

Also, you know what circumstances produce a lot of non-neutralizing antibodies? A natural infection.
Ah, I see below. Yeah, you are confusing non-neutralizing with non-specific. And also ride the natural fallacy.

If the immune response to the spike protein could result in an autoimmune reaction, we would see it first among the currently infected people.

Athaic, thanks again for taking the time to discuss immunology with me. I really enjoy such discussions because you appear the be the most knowledgeable one around here. I am sure others such as Squirrel, Aarno, Has, and the Dangerous One are also knowledgeable, but they don’t demonstrate it as consistently. Hope they don’t read this and take it the wrong way; it’s just that I had to compliment you.

Athaic, thanks for the distinction between neutralizing and cross-reacting and how they pertain to autoimmunity. It appears that the Norwegian scientist with his vaccine proposal is indeed mindful of the cross-reacting risks with him seeking only to target non-humanlike epitopes. Still, it also appears that he is also saying that non-neutralize binding might indeed be a problem.

Difficult to predict. In such vaccine designs, there is no innate guiding of where the antibodies should bind . However, due to continued boosting of these epitopes through life, elevated there is a n risk for development of ADE which must be expected due to the fact that if at a later date the virus return in a mutated s form having modified composition , antigenic , partial binding may occur ( and hence result in ADE Ricke D, 2020) . et al. , 2020; Negro et al.

Athaic, how do you account for such a claim and how it relates to ADE or autoimmunity? Is it also true that with mRNA covid vaccination there is no innate guiding of where the antibody should bind? Another question Athaic, are you suggesting that mRNA vaccination seems to be doing a better job at clearing the virus, neutalizing it, than natural infection?

@Greg,

To begin with, Athaic has said some a lot that I agree with. I want to add detail on two points related to the following quote:

you ‘accidentally’ raise an imprecise key that might stumble on a human looking lock?

First, adding to what Athaic says:

Also, you know what circumstances produce a lot of non-neutralizing antibodies? A natural infection.

I want to point out that a natural infection produces a lot of antibodies, including, initially, a large number that are very imprecise. This is beyond the notion of a neutralizing antibody or a non-neutralizing antibody. This comes back to how the body responds to a natural infection. It’s worth noting that your body isn’t this assembly line that cranks out the one perfect antibody on some two week schedule after you hit this button that says “I’m infected.” There’s a big phase of training. The way that your body responds to infection is raise this flag on the B-cells that says “Attack.” Any B-cell that has an antibody that binds to anything starts cranking. If you have a B-cell that responds to self at the early phase of an infection, it is instructed to attack too. Therefore, in a natural infection, if you have a self-responding antibody, the natural infection would instruct it to attack the body. That most people don’t go into an autoimmune state of self-destruction when they get sick with anything is a good demonstration that strong self-responding antibodies aren’t present in most people (and have, in fact, been culled out during normal development). The building of the perfect antibody is a process of selection; in the first generation after immune activation, the B-cells that bind best to whatever antigen is present respond to a cytokine signal to make a new generation of B-cells. This second generation of B-cells randomly tinkers with its antibody gene (that’s right, B-cells perform genetic surgery on themselves). And, I say random; the drift in the antibody gene could make a self-binder, but this doesn’t seem to happen frequently. The new generation of B-cells is then subjected to the same selection as the original generation; those that bind continue to make new generations of B-cells which have randomly altered Antibodies that may or may not bind, but being adjustments of an initial not-very-specific binder in the original generation, those that bind better are guaranteed to result in new generations of B-cells. As such, successive generations of B-cells produce antibodies that bind more and more specifically. After two weeks of this, the antibodies are damn precise.

The point here is a simple one: the activation of the immune system during an infection results in production of antibodies that are not that specific to start with and a natural infection could as easily result in autoimmunity as a vaccination. The fact of the matter is that the vaccination doesn’t do anything that special beyond a “natural” infection… it just gives a running start since your body would build on a pre-existing immunity to the vaccine (in the form of memory B-cells) rather than starting from scratch if you should happen to get infected by the pathogen. I would hasten to add that getting fully sick with the pathogen is more likely to result in autoimmunity than vaccination because the immune activation is much stronger and there would be a larger number of chances for self-binding antibodies to be raised. By getting vaccinated, you can avoid the state of being fully sick and there would be lower level of immune activation, and therefore have a smaller chance of raising self-binding antibodies.

The second thing I wanted to bring up, which has been so far ignored in the discussion is that immune response is not solely predicated by antibody binding. The immune system is governed by a big feedback loop that involves multiple components and multiple levels of recognition; I’ll keep this simple because this system is complex and I’ll stick to what I know since stupid physicists should know when to stop talking as the subject exceeds their expertise. The other really important part is the T-cell response. T-cells send out the signal that tells B-cells to “Attack.” T-cell response is governed by a completely independent mechanism from antibodies: they use a system composed of a binding event between the T-cell Receptor (TCR) and the Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC). MHC is displayed on every cell and is the means by which the immune system distinguishes self from non-self (this is why people with transplant organs need immunosuppressants). Further, MHC performs a function called “antigen display” where the MHC presents a pocket on its surface that contains a non-specifically bound antigen epitope cleaved from protein present inside the cell. A T-cell comes along and binds to cellular MHC with their TCRs; if the MHC presents an epitope that is non-self frequently enough, T-cells become activated in large enough numbers and send out their chemical “attack” cue above threshold concentration that starts a cascade that results in immune activation. TCRs are trained in a similar way to antibodies and the developing immune system culls T-cells that activate in response to self-epitopes. Circulating T-cells therefore tend to activate in response only to presentation of antigen that came from a foreign protein, namely virus protein epitopes being displayed from proteins present in the cell which are the markers of a viral infection. During an infection, T-cells undergo a similar selection process where their TCRs become more specific to binding viral protein-MHC complexes, making it easier for them to send out the activation signal if they see that foreign epitope during antigen presentation. With trained memory T-cells, the immune system can activate more quickly and more precisely to the invasion of a virus, just as having trained memory B-cells increases precision of that attack –both of which would be an ideal outcome from a good vaccine.

As I understand it, there are cytotoxic T-cells that kill self cells that they find infected with virus when the virus epitope is discovered during antigen display. As such, one source of autoimmunity might actually be a self-recognizing T-cell TCR, not an antibody! Nobody disputes that autoimmunity can happen. I would argue that an mRNA vaccine is probably way better at training the TCR side of an immune response than a conventional vaccine for the obvious reasons.

Immune activation depends on the interplay of both of these recognition events, TCR and Antibody. You could have the antibodies, but if you don’t have the TCRs, your immune system doesn’t respond. This is why AIDS is bad; HIV specifically kills T-cells and makes it so that you can’t have a coherent immune response, allowing pathogens to go wild. Having non-specific self-recognizing antibodies is not by itself enough to kick off an autoimmune response. If the T-cells aren’t sending out their attack signal, the immune system is suppressed even if antibodies are present that bind stuff. Pathologic autoimmunity would logically require multiple levels of failure, as I understand it, though I would say I don’t know the details without reading some specific literature. (Somebody step in to correct me: Immunology was a long time ago for me)

The immune system of a person is tolerant to the structure of the lock because it has been raised to recognize that as self.

This may be pedantic, but my understanding was that the immune system only “recognizes” non-self and just bides its time otherwise, being self in the first place.

I want to point out that a natural infection produces a lot of antibodies, including, initially, a large number that are very imprecise.

I remain fond of (former SB blogger) ERV’s description.

This second generation of B-cells randomly tinkers with its antibody gene (that’s right, B-cells perform genetic surgery on themselves). And, I say random; the drift in the antibody gene could make a self-binder, but this doesn’t seem to happen frequently.

Wow, Foolish Physicist! Thanks for that! If you weren’t a provaxxer I would kiss you. Damn Khan Academy for not teaching me that B-cells can tinker with their genes.

Athaic, remember where I said you were the most knowledgeable? — actually, I think you are tied with Foolish Physicist, but you are both ahead of Squirrel, Aarno, Dangerous One, and Narad. Come to think of it, didn’t Narad admit he didn’t know much immunology?

Seriously Foolish Physicist, you’ve given this anti-vaxxer a lot to mull over. I will see what I can make of it and will likely follow-up with more queries.

@ foolish physicist

I would hasten to add that getting fully sick with the pathogen is more likely to result in autoimmunity than vaccination because the immune activation is much stronger and there would be a larger number of chances for self-binding antibodies to be raised.

I would have hazarded that a full infection is also providing plenty more of different antigen types – all the molecules brought in by the bug – , compared to a vaccine made with only one protein, and thus increasing the number of B-cells which will find something to react to.
And thus increasing the chance that, among the activated B-cells, there is one with the “wrong” pattern recognition.

(Somebody step in to correct me: Immunology was a long time ago for me)

Eh, for me, too.
Don’t ask me which cytokine or cell domain is specific of B-cell or T-cell.

Is your avatar Kenshin? My sister is a fan (me too).

one source of autoimmunity might actually be a self-recognizing T-cell TCR, not an antibody!

Fully correct. B-cells and T-cells are not that different: both are producing a similarly-build protein able to recognize a specific target.
The T-cell one is shorter and stuck on the cell’s membrane, the B-cell one is bigger, multi-valent/polymeric, mass-produced and send floating in our lymph and plasma. But apart from that…

The immune system is governed by a big feedback loop that involves multiple components and multiple levels of recognition

Foolish Physicist, I believe the video below from Khan Academy does a good job explaining this feedback safety loop between b-cells and effector t-cells. Oh — and watching the video again, it did suggest that b-cells can tinker with their genes or antigens.

Onto to two points made here:

First, both you and Athaic are suggesting that vaccines are less prone than natural infection to cause autoimmunity because natural infection produces a stronger immune response which is more likely to produce errant antibodies, yet we know in actuality vaccination is more likely to cause autoimmunity. Could it be that a strong immune response is more effective at clearing an infection quickly and preventing lasting inflammation known to lead to autoimmunity?

Second, Foolish Physicist, you seem to be suggesting that mRNA vaccination may be less likely to cause autoimmunity over other types of vaccines because it is directly targeting the t-helper response, but I am a little unclear about this. Wouldn’t fiddling with t-helper cells pose more problems? Wouldn’t this lead to the possibility of more errant t-helper cells and the potential of more errant handshakes between t-helper cells and b-cells?

https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrJ7JKDQ_pfeHcAHGc5ByI5;_ylu=Y29sbwNiZjEEcG9zAzMEdnRpZAMEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1610265603/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fm.youtube.com%2fwatch%3fv%3duwMYpTYsNZM/RK=2/RS=ptpHExjhAzBcR4svwxbkye9pxxk-

The second thing I wanted to bring up, which has been so far ignored in the discussion is that immune response is not solely predicated by antibody binding. The immune system is governed by a big feedback loop that involves multiple components and multiple levels of recognition;

Foolish Physicist, I believe Khan immunology videos do an excellent job at explaining these basic immunology ideas and would be of benefit to other lay lurkers. The linked one below addresses this safety feedback loop between helper-tcells and b-cells and how it guards against autoimmunity.

Onto two points that were made here…..

Both you and Athaic are mentioning how natural infections pose a potential greater auto-immunity risk because a stronger immune reaction is more prone to produce errant anti-bodies, yet we know in actuality vaccination is more likely to cause autoimmune issues. Could it be that the stronger immune response from natural infection is more effective at clearing infections and which avoids ongoing activation and inflammation that may cause autoimmunity?

Second, you seem to be suggesting that because mRNA vaccination addresses the t-cell side of things this type of vaccination may actually be less likely to cause auto-immunity over other vaccines; I am not following you here. To me, by meddling directly with t-cells, it just raises another factor where things can go wrong.

Consider things this way: You mention how b-cells over the course of an activation will attempt to fine-tune their antigens. Here is the first potential for them to stumble upon human-like epitopes that may be expressed in the Spike Covid-2 protein. Next, at the cell mediated-level, helper t-cells come along and inspect infected cells and also find human-like epitopes which it may present at its MHC2 receptor. From there, an autoimmune handshake between helper-tcells and b-cells may result.

With ‘old-school’ vaccination, on the other hand, things are not addressed at the cell-mediated level. There is less direct tinkering with t-cells, and I consider less potential for autoimmunity.

https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/organ-systems/the-immune-system/v/helper-t-cells

Foolish Physicist, I am still waiting on a reply from you that expands on your thinking that mRNA vaccines potentially poses less autoimmunity risks than other vaccines. Again, these vaccines are also acting at the cell-mediated level and provoking t-cells to go in and directly kill infected cells without an anti-autoimminty handshake that occurs at the humoral level between t-helper cells and dendritic cells or b-cells. With such a cell-mediated response, the only hope is that the t-cells will not attack any humanlike epitopes on the Spike Covid-2 protein. Should they fail this, then we will have autoimmunity.

@ Greg

Very short answer, nope.

Vaccines are not more likely to result in autoimmunity than a “real” infection.
(a vaccine raised in eggs or introducing some other allergen may start/trigger an autoimmunity, but against an egg protein or that allergen – this is not that you are talking about)

And the killing of cells “infected” with the mRNA vaccine is following the exact same activation steps/handshakes that a natural infection.
A protein is going to be recognized as foreign, targeted, and its bearer destroyed. This is exactly how our immune cells destroy virus-infected cells and cancer cells.

No offense, Athaic, but Foolish Physicist answered my request to talk immunology and all of a sudden he disappeared. Foolish Physicist seems to also know his stuff, and I was hoping to finish our conversation.

Oh, Foolish Physicist, outside of the hope that t-cells will not act against human-like epitopes what other safeguard is there against autoimmunity? At the humoral level there is the anti-immunity handshake between helper t-cells and dendritic cells or b-cells, but I see no such handshake at the cell-mediated level

You’re turning down the good information that Athaic’s offering? An honest conversation isn’t about trying to pin this person down and push someone else out. When it’s just about the conversation topic, it shouldn’t matter who is delivering it. I’m done, I think, and I was pretty much done the instant you made it “my tribe versus yours” a couple posts back. I don’t have the time or the inclination to fight with someone who has told me that nothing I have to say will change their stance. What’s the point? There’s no conversation there. However I respond, there’s no chance you’ll take me at what I say. Consider: if I am on the other side, why in the world would you ever mistake me for honest or knowledgeable? If you actually thought I was either thing, I wouldn’t be on the other side, would I? You have genuine immunology questions, here’s a good textbook: Immunology.

I have nothing else I wish to add.

@ Greg, ” but I see no such handshake at the cell-mediated level”

Co-stimulation markers. T-cells won’t activate without them. Some complexes include CD28-B7.1 or B7.2 (also called CD80 and CD86) as either a hetero-dimer or a homo-dimer.
CD40 and CD40L.
Others I don’t remember off the top of my head.

Like I said several days ago at this point, large parts of the immune system exist specifically to prevent the immune system from turning on or acquiring auto-immunity.

@Foolish Physicist,

Parham looks good but a little pricey.

I’ll work through Sompayrac first.

And just like that, I also lost Foolish Physicist. This is so depressing. Denice, what is it about my personality that leads folks around here to not want to talk immunology with me?

Seriously Foolish Physicist, I was really appreciating your wisdom on the topic. You taught me that immune cells can tinker with their genes. Watching the Khan videos, I thought that such cells possess only non-self antigens that were established at birth and could not be altered. I couldn’t understand how autoimmunity was possible.

Foolish Physicist, please come back so we can finish our discourse. I promise to drop the vaccination slurs and be respectful. Deal?

@ Greg

“This is so depressing. Denice, what is it about my personality that leads folks around here to not want to talk immunology with me?”

Here’s the Dark Triad personality test. My results: Narcissism: 42%. Machiavellianism: 85%. Psychopathy: 69%. Average: 65%. This makes me 31.83% darker than the average person.

Your turn: give us your results and we may have a chat about that.

Or… you may choose to stop baiting people. Your choice.

@ Greg:

Maybe if you listened to what Physicist, Athaic ,JustaTech and others have told you rather than keeping on questioning them. They answered your questions but you don’t accept the answers.

@ Greg

At the humoral level there is the anti-immunity handshake between helper t-cells and dendritic cells or b-cells, but I see no such handshake at the cell-mediated level

There. Is. The. Same. Handshake.
There is no difference between the activation of b-cells and the activation of cytotoxic T-cells. Helper T-cells must be here to help, and suppressor T-cells are here to impede.

And to be more precise, you got it wrong
The handshake you talk about is the one starting an immune response. Like the ignition key of a car. No ignition, no running car.

The handshake you wish to talk about, the one which is stopping immune cells with tendencies toward autoimmunity, has happened a long time ago, before the cells are exposed to actual foreign particles.
In the thymus, in the case of the T-cells.

It’s like a spy agency, there is an intense formation before the agents are sent on the terrain.
In a first step, immune cells must learn the signs and countersigns to recognize each-other. By connecting the fiddly bits holding the HLA code. Those who fall at it are killed (I hope that not happen in an actual spy agency)
In a second step, immune cells are given by specialized dendritic cells an opportunity to recognize antigens from the self – autoantigens, if you prefer. Those who do are killed.
Those who survived both processes are then allowed to start patrolling the body.

Trouble arises with the cells who managed to slip through the second process. Or, in case of some leukemia, skipped the whole school altogether and went into berserk mode.

@Denice: “Maybe if you listened to what Physicist, Athaic ,JustaTech and others have told you rather than keeping on questioning them.”

That assumes Gerg is asking questions to get answers. He’s not: he’s asking questions to make you lot piss as much of your own valuable time down the drain as he possibly can. And congrats, he’s having great success at that.

Antivax baiters are not good-faith actors, so stop treating them as if they are or they will keep playing you forever. They’re abusers, plain and simple.

That assumes Gerg is asking questions to get answers. He’s not: he’s asking questions to make you lot piss as much of your own valuable time down the drain as he possibly can. And congrats, he’s having great success at that.

C’mon man, why you always calling wolf on me?! The folks around here are answering my questions out of their own volition, and I don’t think they need you acting as their parent and telling them who not to talk to.

They are responding to me because they are passionate about immunology and I am asking great questions. Maybe you can also contribute to the discussion if you’re also knowledgeable.

Oh — I get it now! The reason you seek to shutdown these conversations is because you’re not that knowledgeable about immunology, and you’re afraid of getting exposed. Has, prove me wrong by joining in and sharing what you know. I bet you can’t.

@Athaic

There. Is. The. Same. Handshake.
There is no difference between the activation of b-cells and the activation of cytotoxic T-cells. Helper T-cells must be here to help, and suppressor T-cells are here to impede

Actually Athaic, I did miss that and it wasn’t mentioned in the Khan video. So, Helper T-cells also interface with T-cells, essentially also giving them permission to attack? I thought they just interface with dendritic or B-cells at the humoral level. We are really getting far with these discussions!

Athaic or Foolish Physicist, down below the Norwegian scientist, Sorenson, also describe a potential autoimmunity scenario of mRNA covid vaccination. I am not quite clear about what he Is saying. Can you please explain.

Difficult to predict
In such vaccine designs, there is no innate guiding of where the
antibodies should bind. However, due to continued boosting of these
epitopes through life, there is an elevated risk for development of ADE
which must be expected due to the fact that if the virus returns at a
later date in a mutated form, having modified antigenic composition,
partial binding may occur and hence result in ADE (Ricke D, et al., 2020;

I am not quite clear about what he Is saying.

Obviously. From the abstract:

Interpretation: Safety testing of COVID-19 S protein-based B cell vaccines in animal models is strongly encouraged prior to clinical trials to reduce risk of ADE upon virus exposure.

protein-based vaccine.
Not mRNA vaccine, per your claims.

Interesting article, BTW. Bit above my pay grade, but it will improve my knowledge.
Oh, and ADE is not auto-immunity. Not in your sense, anyway.

So yeah, thanks for all the fish. And that Has is saying.

Does anyone want to explain to Greg that any of us, him included, could at any moment spontaneously develop an autoimmune response to pretty much anything? Or a hypersensitivity response?

Nah, me neither. He doesn’t really seem interested in learning, just pestering.

So here’s a Fun Fact! The rash you get from poison ivy? It’s T-cell mediated! Who knew? I always assumed it was a histamine reaction, but no, it’s T-cells.

@ JustaTech

Does anyone want to explain to Greg that any of us, him included, could at any moment spontaneously develop an autoimmune response to pretty much anything?

Not me, I reached my quota for the week.
But his Norwegian scientist could also use the explainer, if I’m parsing that mangled and ill-referenced quote correctly.
That, or it was so moved out-of-context, it may be on another planet.

“Is it the case that the Covid-2 spike protein has many epitopes that share affinity to human-like epitopes, and that is where the autoimmunity risk comes in?”
No.

If that were the case the first time you caught any corona virus you would have developed auto-immunity. You haven’t, therefore it is not a problem.

Half of your immune system’s job is to keep the other half turned off almost all the time. Your body edits heavily for auto-reactive receptors on your immune cells.

If that were the case the first time you caught any corona virus you would have developed auto-immunity. You haven’t, therefore it is not a problem.

Half of your immune system’s job is to keep the other half turned off almost all the time. Your body edits heavily for auto-reactive receptors on your immune cells.

Thanks JT, I am just trying to understand if this safety valve system can get compromised when mRNA vaccination produces non-neutalizing antibodies. What happens when such b or t-cells are struggling to rid the body of the virus but they are not fine- tuned to do so? As the never ending wrestling match persists, what collateral damage can be expected? When the virus returns in a more mutated form, what further collateral damage can be expected?

It seems that natural infections side-step these problems with the production of more precise neutralizing antibodies.

when mRNA vaccination produces non-neutalizing antibodies. What happens when such b or t-cells are struggling to rid the body of the virus but they are not fine- tuned to do so?

You forget to ask, what happens if an invisible unicorn keep messing with the T-cells?

You are just wasting our time.

Greg, if the immune system produces non-neutralizing antibodies then nothing happens.
If the vaccination were completely ineffective, as you are imagining, then the B-cells and T-cells would just have to get along the way they would with any infection. The presence of the virus would do all the fine-tuning needed.
Or not, and then the person would die, as is happening all the time.

If what you mean is non-specific antibodies, again, your body is full of antibodies you aren’t using right now. They don’t hurt your immune response when you’re fighting a different pathogen. They’re just … there.

There isn’t any evidence that the mRNA vaccines produce either non-specific or non-neutralizing antibodies. So it is all moot.

Foolish Physicist gave a very good and very detailed explanation.

@ Narad:

I’ve always suspected that we have much in common with cats.

Maybe Greg will change his mind because he admits that FoolishPhysicist and Athaic are worthwhile sources and perhaps he will read an immunology text as someone requested.
Please don’t ask me to estimate the likelihood of that event but hey, anything is possible.

anything is possible

Snazzm, I thought about looking up the quantum tunneling odds before recognizing that this is far from a square potential.

but c’mon, Wakefield is a good-looking guy; can’t you find a less swarmy, creepy pic of him?!

Actually, that’s a relatively flattering pic of Wakefield. IMHO, he consistently looks like a slimmed-down version of Jabba the Hutt.

I’m sure you’re aware of the old saying: “Handsome is as handsome does.”

He’s ugly.

From the horse’s mouth…

A search so tailored to match against all human known proteins will give a 78.4% human similarity to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, that is if all epitopes on the 1,255-amino acid long SARS-CoV-2 spike protein can be used by antibodies then there will be 983 antibody binding sites which also could bind to epitopes on human proteins. This is what we did and found. We were in the minority of vaccine designers with regard to HI

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/DBBC0FA6E3763B0067CAAD8F3363E527/S2633289220000083a.pdf/biovacc19_a_candidate_vaccine_for_covid19_sarscov2_developed_from_analysis_of_its_general_method_of_action_for_infectivity.pdf

PS: I see Athaic is out and about. Athaic, can you please set aside some time for me so we can discuss immunology?

“Get back with us when you finish chapter 1”

Tell him to eat slowly though or he’ll get indigestion.

Is 78.4% similarity enough?

That’s less similarity than humans have with mice (85%), and last I checked I have neither a tail nor whiskers.

Does that 983 take into account protein folding? Or is it just sequence?

We also share about 60% of our genome with bananas. Yet people with banana allergies don’t drop dead from autoimmune issues.

Ok from an non insurrection news organization, WaPo.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-trump-coronavirus-vaccine/2020/09/16/2ffbea6a-f831-11ea-a275-1a2c2d36e1f1_story.html

Did fox make up the U-tube video, that was embedded in the story too. do a u-tube search or is u-tube part of the conspiracy too.

If you didn’t like fox try
https://nypost.com/2020/09/16/trump-biden-recklessly-endangering-lives-by-doubting-vaccine/

“If Donald Trump tells us to take it, I’m not taking it.” Cameltoe Harris
That was from the C-span debate.

@ scott allen

From the little I read on this matter, I do not see anything specifically wrong with Biden’s position. In fact, it’s a rather sound policy to call for rigorous oversight.

What’s the big fuss?

scott allen:
You know, I really didn’t need any more misogyny today.

Hey scott, can you spot the important and relevant difference between today and September? The one specific to these vaccines?

I’ll give you a hint: it’s called data.

@scott allen: WaPo link is paywalled, but even NYPost (which is a rag) admits:

Biden said at a Wednesday press conference he doubts the efficacy of any vaccine if there isn’t robust independent scientific oversight of the approval process.

In other words, Biden, like every other rational person, says he won’t simply take Trump’s word for it. Which is fair enough, what with Trump being a malignant narcissist, pathological liar, and just about the most malicious manipulative abuser on the planet there is right now.†

So, Scott, ever tried just telling the truth? Because when it comes to lying you could not be any worse at it.

† And that was before Donald J Trump turned full cop-killing seditionist and traitor to America.

@ JustaTech and others

Hey scott, can you spot the important and relevant difference between today and September?

I keep telling you, scott was asleep these past five years and just woke up.
Um, maybe it was more like 85 years. He went to sleep before the burning of the Reichtag and missed all the fun we had since.

@ scott allen

Bullshit. There’s no taboo about worrying about such things when you are in a position of power and responsibility.

This is not remotely comparable to Carrie Madej’s bullshit about mRNA vaccines turning is into GMOs. Not remotely comparable.

False equivalence. A massive one.

“”from the little I read on this matter” that would imply you didn’t read the newspapers or actual watch the video nor did you go to u-tube to watch other similar videos from Joe Biden or Harris on the “fake” vaccine

When Biden claims it might be a “fake” his words, vaccine, he is just worrying about such things because he is in a position of power and responsibility.

@ scott allen

Look big boy… I did read the NYPost article you gave. I haven’t delved further because I do not see where the big issue is. And honestly, I’m way too busy dying to care about your attention-seeking attitude. Now, give me specific quotes that you find outrageous, or link in the youtube video directly for everyone else to see.

Until then, I’ll be busy on the net advocating for Brutal State Violence against anyone doing the kind of things we witnessed overnight.

Capito?

Has getting laid been added to the list? I haven’t been following the proceedings closely.

@Narad, at this point, I suspect that scott shares more than 60% of his genome with a banana.

The Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine does insert double-stranded DNA into the nucleus though. AVers would have a better case with that one.

Not a good case though.

Even though the viral vector (a non-replicating adenovirus) in that vaccine enters the nucleus and has mRNA transcribed there, host DNA is not altered. Genetic material from the vaccine virus is broken down after it’s used to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

If adenoviruses could “permanently alter your DNA”, hysterics could argue that various common disorders caused by adenoviruses (colds, conjunctivitis etc.) are responsible for “transhumanism”.

Readers::
I have said before that I won’t respond to trolls but I’ll be more concise:
there are two types that I can discern of late
–contrarians who oppose the SB position of the OP and regulars because they either like to oppose consensus or truly believe in their ideas or both. Often they can ask meaningful questions that we can elucidate .Some of the trolls/ scoffers here may be of this type
— there is another variety which bases their opposition in deep seated emotional issues that they openly air in a public forum and reiterate constantly, adding fuel to their own fires. It is highly unlikely that anything we write will affect their views which are not based in either reason or data. Interacting with them merely strengthens their position and possibly enables their poor relation to reality. So I won’t respond to them
I venture that we currently have two of each and one in-between

And yes, I know, we often respond merely to clarify misinformation for other readers. .

@ Denice

“there is another variety which bases their opposition in deep seated emotional issues that they openly air in a public forum and reiterate constantly, adding fuel to their own fires.”

Yep. That’s me.

@ F68.10:

Believe it or not, I think that despite the fact that you have experienced horrors, you are predominantly based in reality. You are not chasing phantoms or toxins or imagined malfeasance.

@ Denice

“there is another variety which bases their opposition in deep seated emotional issues that they openly air in a public forum and reiterate constantly, adding fuel to their own fires.”

Yep. That’s me.

F68, I must say I am struggling a little trying to understand your species. Like PGP, are you the bad-cop type of provaxxer — and as you operate under the cover of, F everything including public health, I am just here to defend the science and challenge antivaxxers?

@ Greg

“F68, I must say I am struggling a little trying to understand your species.”

It’s very easy: I take the slogan “I am not anti-vaxx, I am pro-disease” very literally. Isn’t that what Münchausen syndrome is, after all? My ‘nym is the ICD billing code for that disorder.

More to the point: I do believe there are very serious shortcomings in medicine, and of a very gruesome type. I also do believe that antivaxxers are misguided. And I initially had no grudges over conspiracy theorists: more of the very tolerant type of guy towards bullshit. Had I not been, I wouldn’t have survived anyway, and I wish I did not survive, to be honest. But what I find appalling in the antivaxx mentality, and this goes way beyond your petty psychological idiosyncrasies, Greg, is that it stops people from looking at some very real problems.

In my case, I believe medicine puts a very pudic veil over the kind of thing I witnessed. And does so by lumping me into your category of conspiracy theorists, among other aspects. And on top of that, people like you pull on a blanket of bullshit.

In the end, my personal situation ends up being very opaque to everyone. The proof? You can’t wrap your head around it. I’m not castigating you: you’re not the only one.

@ Denice

“You are not chasing phantoms or toxins or imagined malfeasance.”

Officially, I am. Having problems with one’s own mother is a capital sin in psychiatry, and being kind of an insurrectionist for patients’ rights (a different notion from anti-science, notwithstanding what people may claim) is kind of punishable by… death? Or at least lifelong psychiatric sectioning, as I’ve personally witnessed being threatened with.

So I do score very high on that ladder: “imagined malfeasance”, officially.

Anyhow, doctors can sleep fine on their pillows: I must concede that I am now quite thoroughly disabled (and will not “seek help”, thank you very much) and therefore not much of a threat.

But I have way too much time on my hands, now, and would gladly see this coming to an end. If you see a vaccine with a heavy dosage of nembutal in it, I’d be quite interested! Maybe reading antivaxxers’ prose will bring me a glimmer of hope… though I do not expect much from such wankers.

And I initially had no grudges over conspiracy theorists: more of the very tolerant type of guy towards bullshit.

“Our victory is over horseshit rather than bullshit. Bullshit is a rare and valuable commodity. The great masters have all been bullshitters. Horseshit, on the other hand, in the common parlance, refers to downright crap. The free, playful, entertaining flight of ideas is bullshit; and more often than not will be found afterwards to accord perfectly with universal truth. Horseshit is contrived; derivative, superstitious, ignorant. We might take Gurdjieff as an example of a master bullshitter and Meher Baba as an example of a master horseshitter.”

“There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”

“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

“So I won’t respond to them”

And yet, you still reply to their posts or persons who you think are in agreement with your position, while urging others not to reply.
Ironic.
Its one of reasons I came to this site a year ago.

@ scott allen

““There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.””

No consensus over 0 + 0 = 0? Come on

Slogans only get you that far…

@ scott allen:

Let me draw you a picture:
— visible commenters are only a small section of people who read RI;.if you knew Orac’s other venues you might have an idea of the true number.
— most regulars assist Orac in presenting SB information whether by supporting his posts, sharing news or responding to others
— some non-SB commenters/ trolls present mis-information or conspiracy theories that run counter to Orac’s – and our- mission
— less sophisticated readers who lurk silently might take that pseudoscience, misinformation or dreck seriously as facts if no one corrects misguided comments.
— thus, our information really is for lurkers and regulars not the originators
— regulars present methods of educating as well as information and display solidarity through interaction.

People who have unrealistic ideas did not acquire them through reason or facts and they won’t be affected by those means. They are a lost cause. Uninstructed newbies are reachable: no one can talk a true believer out of their fantasies although sometimes Life itself will teach them.
If you interact with a person with unrealistic ideas – even to argue with them- you may unwittingly be helping them strengthen these bad ideas ( as research shows) and dig the hole they’re in even deeper.. .

requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world*.

Actually, scott; I first ran into the term consensus processing and archiving other’s algorithms on radar data.

This particular radar was low power so that it trained in one ‘beam’ for some time. Winds shift, bugs come in, birds… 3-axis was enough but 5-axis (east, west, north, south, vertical) was even better. Complicating matters was that it was a relatively wide beam width.

Now, there was the raw data, the moments which was quite gigantic in volume. And then the processing would generate the human-readable consensus… taking the ‘moments’ with spectrum width, outliers, average, jiving with the other beams, and systemic error (such as the platform was not perfectly level) into account.

In the end, this remote sensing turned out to line up pretty good with balloons and tethered wind vanes — we were even solicited to ‘cheat’ in a high stakes balloon race with the system {my superiors declined}.

No measurement is *perfect. Such that it takes consensus to arrive at the best guess.

Orac discussed that 10 years ago.

I suggest you scan back and read it.

In fact science is all about coming to a consensus, but it’s about coming to a consensus based on data, experimentation, and evidence, a consensus that has reproducible results that are, as Crichton put it, verifiable by reference to the real world. After all, what is a scientific theory like the theory of evolution or Einstein’s theory of relativity but a statement of the current scientific consensus regarding a major scientific topic? What is peer review but quality control (making sure the scientific methodology is sound) coupled with testing new science against the current consensus to see where it fits in or where it exposes weaknesses? What is science but attempting to forge a consensus regarding theories and statements that most accurately describe the universe in a useful and predictable way?

Crichton is a pretty good author, but he is not a working scientist and hasn’t made any notable contributions to the philosophy of science.

I suspect you are looking for a way to validate your disagreement merely because you disagree.

@Squirrelite: ISTR Crichton’s method for validating his disagreements was to cast his critic as a pedophile in his books.

Denice while you are attempting to sound very erudite, you are actually being very condescending.
A friend in our group is a regular reader on orac’s other sites. (They have posted items with more subtle but still ironic/sarcastic remarks than mine) which many though the remarks were in support of others rants, big hint, they were not.

As to your and others point on science and consensus. Here is just a few of the science that was consensus at one time.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/natashaumer/science-facts-you-might-have-believed-in-the-90s

Added to that list are the canals on mars and receiving radio transmissions from mars’

https://fs.blog/2015/11/cargo-cult-science/

https://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970

And this story from Vox, hardly a right wind anti science source.

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2015/12/15/10219330/elite-scientists-hold-back-progress

To squirrelelite

Crichton has been dead for 12 years, so his contribution to science ended 12 years ago, but yes you’re correct he hasn’t made any serious contributions to science lately

@squirrelite: Yeah, memory serves me well. Goddamn but I hate that I hate humanity, but humanity makes it goddamn hard to feel anything else. Anyway Crichton’s dead now so I hope they all pissed on his grave.

@ scott allen

Let’s be clear. Speaking for myself, I am indeed condescending and not ashamed of it. For two reasons: 1. I have the means to be 2. You behaved like a jerk with, among other things, the Nazi gambit. I see no reason, short of a flat-out apology, not to be condescending.

Now, to the main point: we all know that scientific consensus moves over time. And as I am… “erudite”?… I refer you to the cornerstone textbook on the topic: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn. Start there: you’ll learn a lot.

And you’ll also learn that all that has no reason to change my position or Denice’s position on the matter. So get your shit together.

@ Narad

I tend to spit on ZFC. Long story. But I’m fond of lambda-calculus. Not sure it’s worth it making explicit beta-reduction of Church numerals on this blog to prove that 0 + 0 = 0.

But if you beg for it, I may indulge.

(BTW, I may eventually be interested discussing a few math things off-blog with you. There are some things I may appreciate having an external eye on, if you’re not too rusty. Working alone has been a drag, and I’m not overly good at writing things down. Would appreciate some talk, but not if it takes too much time on you.)

I’m very, very rusty and didn’t even specialize in mathematics as an undergrad or (disgruntled)* grad student.

*But, hey, Roger Schank et al. eventually gave everybody brain-dead phone trees. My one great privilege was having Phil Agre in the department for a year.

@scott
So… when scientists reach a consensus, it’s not because many agree on the reproducibility of results?
Meh. You clearly conflate naif sophism and a sense of superiority with education and intelligence.
The only irony is your emotional investment in semantic pedantry. [Alanis knows more about specialised knowledge]

But I’m fond of lambda-calculus.

Almost forgot: Yale T (a superset of Scheme) is a wistful favorite of mine.* Way back when I had the luxury of not being in a near-constant state of freaking out, I really wanted to have a go at compiling it from source, but whomping up the hardware bindings was quite a hurdle.

*Don’t worry, APL; it was a beautiful romance.

@ Narad

I dabbled a bit with APL: it’s still used in actuarial science, believe it or not. Software like Prophet. But, if you’re into scheme-like stuff, you may like the racket microkanren implementation of a prolog-like language, and the kick-ass prototype of scalogno microkanren in Scala by Nada Amin, which may end up providing prolog-like features in a high-level dependently typed functional language. Impressive IMO, though it doesn’t look like much at first glance. If I had more opportunities, there are things I’d really like to dive into there…

“@ scott allen:

Let me draw you a picture:”

Use stick figures and one-syllable words as much as possible.

There are so many authoritative proofs to show that it does. However, as some engineers have pointed out before, it is sometimes convenient to let the value approach 4 for the purpose of aiming missiles.

@ scott allen

“Did you not read 1984, in the new society to come 2 + 2 = 5 or what ever the government says it is.”

That’s why I refuse that the government legislates on the value of π. And I rely instead on the scientific consensus in place of the government. Because I’m a BLOODY REBEL!

Indeed: the Gauß-Legendre algorithm is more reliable than the 1897 Indiana General Assembly when it comes to π…

That’s also why – incidentally… – vaccine policy should be in the hands of the CDC rather than in Trump’s hands. I nonetheless also acknowledge failures of scientific authority, as the King of Sweden did recently… (I’m so much of a rebel that I sometimes consider myself a monarchist cocksucker when I believe true blue blood doesn’t lie!)

And you know what? I happen to differ with scientific consensus even on topics of pure maths. I happen to believe I have a neater explanation of the umbral group law than what I read in Roman and Rota. No one really cares, but I do beg to differ with scientific consensus, and am willing to defend it as long as people do not argue with fists (which does exclude some doctors from the discussion…)

He even invokes the Human Genome Project, claiming that altering the expression of one gene thought to cause a disease sometimes had unexpected effects.

Making your mom cut your hair and Dilberting the collar on your polo shirt? Oh, wait.

So according to Wakefield’s definition polysaccharide vaccines wouldn’t be vaccines because they contain no protein. At least conjugate vaccines have a protein component although not derived from the pathogen that is vaccinates against. Does that still make them vaccines?

In the realm of “you get what you pay for”, I was pleased to see that the second issue of Volume 1 of the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research is now available for free online.

It is full of ground-breaking and even mind-blowing information that the “elite plutocrats” (their term) don’t want you to know about Covid-19, vaccination and such, from leading Science authors like Sin Hang Lee, Christopher Shaw, Lucia Tomljenovic, David Lewis, James Lyons-Weiler, John Oller*, Children’s Defense Team** and more.

The IJVTPR features one of the most comprehensive Quack Miranda Warnings I’ve ever seen in a journal.

“International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research1(2), January 4, 2021 Page | 142Legal Disclaimer
The information on the website and in the IJVTPR is not intended as a diagnosis, recommended treatment, prevention, or cure for any human condition or medical procedure that may be referred to in any way. Users and readers who may be parents, guardians, caregivers, clinicians, or relatives of persons impacted by any of the morbid conditions, procedures, or protocols that may be referred to, must use their own judgment concerning specific applications. The contributing authors, editors, and persons associated in any capacity with the website and/or with the journal disclaim any liability or responsibility to any person or entity for any harm, financial loss, physical injury, or other penalty that may stem from any use or application in any context of information, conclusions, research findings, opinions, errors, or any statements found on the website or in the IJVTPR.”

Surely this fabulous new journal will join the pantheon of research publications, rivalling Medical Hypotheses.

*Oller is an “endowed professor in communicative disorders III” at the University of Louisiana-Lafayette, who has famously said: “Are the autism epidemic, toxins in vaccines, biological control systems, and human language related? Yes, they are.”
**Children’s Defense Team is listed as the sole author of the paper, in the style of Corvelva. Perhaps the actual authors are worried that if they list their names, Bill Gates will depopulate them using a DNA-altering aerosol vaccine. It could happen.

They’ve taken up software’s {looking at you, Oracle} shitty, psuedo-dark pattern of making the thing so long that nobody even reads the first word.

I’ll just click ‘next’ and get a new browser toolbar every time like with the emojifinder .2 addon {which, strangely enough, was depicted accurately as “a free and sleek new toolbar to find emoji”} only to then find that I’m now subscribed to Eggplant Facts.

In the Coup Room
https://youtu.be/jXM6h9elyTY

https://www.washingtonpost.com./lifestyle/style/trump-show-grand-finale-capitol-riot/2021/01/07/c23e4934-5035-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html

I just had the privilege of signing a very strong Executive Order protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues – and combatting recent Criminal Violence. Long prison terms for these lawless acts against our Great Country!

twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1276633518433538049

Oopsy.

@ scott allen:

“Erudite” ? Is that like “uppity’?

At any rate, the examples ( Buzzfeed) of what people believed in the 1990s are not what MOST scientists in those respective fields continued to believe then**, they’re what the general public may have believed – the title itself suggests that.. Science is continually updating: most of the topics we discuss here though are not likely to be overturned easily and when they are indeed more speculative hypotheses, that is noted clearly.

I’ll repeat:
thousands of people read Orac and never comment. He and his minions are trying to educate readers so if an anti-vaxxer presents MISINFORMATION that silent lurkers might accept, as reasonable so SB people correct it . Orac has chosen to NOT censor commenters ( except in rare instances) but I doubt that he wants to provide a venue for pseudoscience like vaccines causing ASDs, SIDS or Alzheimer’s as several trolls reiterate frequently AND he is a busy fellow so we step in.

** I was familiar with the objections to the Africa Origins and human genetics LONG AGO, other ones too.

“minions” you remembered.

“if you knew Orac’s other venues you might have an idea of the true number.
— most regulars assist Orac in presenting SB information whether by supporting his posts, sharing news or responding to others
that run counter to Orac’s – and our- mission”

You just described what it means to “conspire”

to act or work together toward the same result or goal:

As far as this blog and the other website Orac is part of. I would just think first that this is marketing and second as money making, and third as science based medicine.
If you think that this site doesn’t make money look at what businesses are tracking (23 by last count) all the visitors to this site, each one pays for the access for the information on the thousands of visits
Number 9 on the list is very telling.
Companies that blog have 55% more visitors to their websites.

Orac was probably pretty well known in his circles for his work. But put his name on a blog and websites and be anti- anti vaxer (or pro vaxer if you prefer)…

https://seotribunal.com/blog/blogging-statistics/

So yes I am very cynical.

@ scott allen

“You just described what it means to “conspire””

Shiver! Shudder!

That’s called freedom of association. Or pals. Or buddies. Or whatever you want. But come on, this has nothing to do with the catholic far right wing secret society called the Knights of Faith that ruled France behind the curtains in the 19th century. A real conspiracy, y’a know…

“You just described what it means to “conspire””

to ‘conspire’ means “to breath together”.

Breathing, at least for some, is almost silent; not something conspirers usually go out of their way to make heard with the use of amplifying instrumentation such as a prominent blog.

It could be a cultural misunderstanding — perhaps, in your circles, it might be considered rude if gurgling slurping and hissing aren’t audible to others with every gasp??

Also, what a day. twitter wiped @realdonaldtrump. I don’t know how to feel* about this.. where is @realgollamtrump going to get his material now?? fishfefe

they steals it. nasty twittersis. nasty, triksy, FALSE.

*horrid as it is, it should be preserved for historical record; also, while there may have been something exculpatory (/s), most of it lately is damn incriminating specifically with the insurrection impeachment probably a thing.

Tiny Tim
what merriam-websters are you reading from ????

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conspire.

Scheme
to act in harmony toward a common end

I have noticed that a few posters at this site have a tendency to ignore what we post on this site and focus on things like grammar (Nonards) or erect straw men (Dr.Baconator), or just flip out and go bat crap crazy (F98.6) or just go off their meds crazy (Tiny Tim, its after Christmas so no worries) or are so out of touch with the real world that they fail to realize how they come across (Denise).

All the while they are making these people super rich.

double-click.net
facebook.net
google-analytics.com
linkedin.com
reddit.com
scorecardresearch.com

Just to name a few. The people that run those data mining sites love a good, blog fight, every word you post is filed, recorded and sold to the highest bidder.

I understand being passionate about a cause but sometimes it gets in the way of well reasoned response.

@ scott allen

“…just flip out and go bat crap crazy (F98.6)…”

Naaahh… it’s just applied epistemology wrapped up in dark humour. That’s all. Nothing more. But yeah, epistemology can be bonkers and dark humour can be bonkers. So the double whammy can feel like bat crap crazy… but, really, it’s not.

“All the while they are making these people super rich.”

Not here, slots; Some might consider using NoScript, Umatrix, and Ublock Origin as just “par for the course”, Slicy.

I don’t tard much but when I do I full-on fucktard pointing out that slots would not even be aware of this if not for using these very tools himself.

Kristen Simmons reminds us that conspire translates from latin to mean “to breathe together” and the type of relationships we imagine might take the shape of co-conspirators.

ttps://yellowheadinstitute.org/2020/06/02/to-breathe-together/

welp. I guess I’m radicalized. oh god of fuck.

Tiny Tim

so you use 3 ad blockers/trackers who are wholly owned subsidiaries of google or google/facebook owns a piece of to, block google-analytics and facebook . NET

I am sure that will do the trick.

and please don’t use a lobby group to support your argument.

The people that run those data mining sites love a good, blog fight, every word you post is filed, recorded and sold to the highest bidder.

Spotts, I’m not going to get up from my postprandial rest to look at the logs, but that shit is trivially blocked, and there’s not really anything to mine in the first place. There are also no Orbital Mind Control Lasers looking for “good blog fights,” not that anyone would invite you to one in the first place.

so you use 3 ad blockers/trackers who are wholly owned subsidiaries of google or google/facebook owns a piece of to, block google-analytics and facebook . NET

Now, that’s hilarious. Spotts, have you ever heard of open-source software? (And, really, .NET? Great googly moogly. Shit, I could do this better than you can.)

G-d, you take a break from looking at Persian scholarship on Doppelgänger, and these are apparently the usual consequences.

Whoever the coward who wrote this piece is, he or shes is an anti scientist. Under the scietific precautionary principle alone, this untested an un independently peer reviewed vaccine should never be being used on people. Any interuption of cells is genetic engineering. The vaccine is also unneeded for 99% of the majority and the pcr test has been deemed completely unreliable. If you want to follow fake science and big pharma who care not for science and righteousness then go ahead and inject yourself with their poison. That is unless they force it on you

Says the guy defending a grifting quack who either doesn’t understand basic biology or who does and is lying about it because he knows his followers don’t understand basic biology and has that much contempt for them that he’d lie in order to spread disinformation and burnish his brand.

This doesn’t refute anything – it simply again carries on with the rather obsesssive attack on one man – sadly the usual type of attack that aligns with Saul Alinsky’s ‘Rules for radicals’, of ‘picking on a target ,freezing it, personalising it and pollarizing it’.

Wakefield is one of a huge number of experts speaking out against this enforced vaccine. Over 50,000 thosuand scientists and medical experts have signed the Barrington declaration (deemed a ‘far right conspiracy’ by the usual lazy suspects of course). Here below are also a myriad of experts talking about the dangers of the vaccine including its genetic modification properties.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/what-not-said-pfizer-coronavirus-vaccine/5729461

https://off-guardian.org/2020/12/10/coronavirus-fact-check-9-is-the-vaccine-safe/

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=286&part=1&gen=99

I’d like to give you the benefit of doubt however. You allow comments and open critique and that is admirable. It may well be that you cannot yet comprehend the magnitude of evil and evil intent behind this enforced vaccination programme and lockdown policies. I only hope that you can find the humility to keep an open mind and get to the truth and realise how evil it is

Andrew Wakefield has a reasonable understanding of basic biology all right. He just refuses to let that get in the way of a good anti-vaccine story to fleece the rubes.

Whoever the coward who wrote this piece is

I’ve probably said this already, but somebody really needs to devise a more sturdy turnip truck.

sadly the usual type of attack that aligns with Saul Alinsky’s ‘Rules for radicals’

Jesus, at least I own a copy, not that I ever got through the tedium. Mr. Jones would likely be freaked right the fck out by the Wobblies — they have *music.

… I don’t get this having to make another comment to see that I made a comment. Though, this last one was just minutes, the others have been days. CF is wonky but this is wankers.

check, check…

This man was my prosecutor in 1985. After pleading to get a lesser deal; driving to my great grandma’s funeral, I later found out that he threw the book anyways and that my parents concealed that from me.

I invite him to die in a fire. Or get flattened under my Jeep; I’m indifferent at this point.

I don’t get this having to make another comment to see that I made a comment.

You don’t. I’m guessing that the CF mirrors aren’t well synchronized — I get a back-and-forth between the list of recent comments upon reloading, and on top of that, they’re not always there. Three tries usually cuts the mustard.

Thx, Narad. I’d say, “oh good. It’s not just me then” but I can’t without thinking of Austin Powers’ nutty coffee.

Something has changed on my end.. I’ve gotten used to ‘cool downs’ and a second refresh working “sometimes” but this spreads across browsers and devices that have been ‘cool’ for over a day. CF may not like the vpn sometimes but the other device is not behind one.

Peter Doshi is a not a qualified medical researcher, at most he is a historian, at best just an opinionated hack. And a bad one at that.

Just like you he is a sadistic child hater who loves to see people suffer from fevers, seizures, etc.

@ Chris writes,

“Peter Doshi is a not a qualified medical researcher, at most he is a historian, at best just an opinionated hack. And a bad one at that.” Well you are entitled to your opinion and I can disagree with you.

“Peter Doshi is an associate editor at The BMJ and on the News & Views team. Based in Baltimore, he is also an assistant professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. His research focuses on policies related to drug safety and effectiveness evaluation in the context of regulation, evidence-based medicine, and debates over access to data.”

https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/editorial-staff/peter-doshi

I’d say he is more qualified to understand the subject matter than a rocket scientist.

From that page: “received his Ph.D. in history, anthropology, and science, ”

He is jack of all trades, master of none. He has no medical credentials other than a bunch of silly opinions. He is a hack, and a bad one at that. Just another sadistic hater like you who does not care about the preventable suffering of others.

In the USA there are 4000 deaths per day from Covid-19, and he is whining about raw data. He does not do science, he does opinions. Big difference.

So he worked on a Cochrane review several years ago, traveled to a conference, declined to serve as an expert witness, and got some funding for a PhD student to do research on pharmaceutical product labeling.

Definitely sounds like a top medical researcher !!! /sarc

Also, the bit about access to complete data sounds like a steal from the Republicans’ attempt to ignore much global climate research because all the complete data on some important research is not publicly available.

Orac ( @ 11:13 today) cuts to the heart of the issue:
anti-vax and woo thought leaders attract followers who usually don’t have a basic grasp of biology. AS he notes, either they are unenlightened themselves or they do “know better” and are dishonest. This is quite apparent to people who have studied these disciplines, even briefly ( Bio 101 ).

Their programming includes misrepresentation of their own expertise overestimating the depth of their own studies and experience whilst simultaneously, trashing that of experts on a particular question. Usually they claim persecution by authorities who reject their “contributions” for political or economic reasons Thus, conspiracies are necessary to explain why their brilliance is not the new state of the art globally..

How can a reader who is not highly trained in a particular field ascertain which presenter is likely to be a pretender?:( It’s difficult because occasionally, those with reasonable credentials go far beyond reasonability). BUT, broadly
— they don’t have an educational background and experience in the field which they explore. Sometimes, they may venture into largely distant areas ( an expert in GI discusses the brain or a software creator discusses vaccines) and present themselves as authoritative.as well.
— they describe their persecution by authorities and encourage potential followers to reject expert opinion or criticism.
— they present themselves as leaders of a movement that will “clean up” a corrupt establishment
— they usually sell products, books or themselves as revolutionary figures. Often they create “charities” or “institutes” – some legally, to disseminate their ideas.

Some of the brightest stars in alt med/ anti-vax fit my check points rather well:
— Mike Adams has a degree in technical writing and studied nutrition on his own by following other alt med experts
— Gary Null has unrelated or suspect degrees from a business school ( non-university),alternate pathways to a degree and distant learning schools for nutrition/ PH
— Several anti-vax parent/ leaders studied business, English, law and other unrelated subjects ( Blaxill, Larson,Handley, Kuo, Rossi, Dachel etc)
— Del Bigtree studied television production only
— RFK jr is a lawyer
— I have no background information on Larry Cook and Joshua Coleman

The biggest red light I find is vitriolic attacks on experts, universities and authorities. No one is above reproach but endlessly attacking ALL authority/ consensus is telling.
.

@ Denice

I’ve noticed something else in casual discussions where I live and snooping out information with an acute auditory sense on medical matters.

Doctors around here are vehemently opposed to protocols. This seem to include doctors in private practices and in hospitals. They seem to collectively oppose some kind of authoritarian practices within hospitals, and have legitimate grudges, such as their inability to propagate information to higher echelons. The consequence is that 1. they end up rejecting protocols and 2. they end up rejecting science (and hence Big Pharma: the French are not overly friendly towards money, culturally…) when it means epidemiology and bureaucrats in favor of clinical expertise (and clinical biases). I think this explains the overall impression I have of grass-roots medical doctors endorsing Raoult as a form of rejection of the hierarchical structure in which they operate. It is ironic since Raoult is kind of the epitome of the authoritarianism they despise, but the “charisma” of the man seems to enthrall grass-roots medical doctors. Scientists, epidemiologists, number crunchers and authorities are much less enthralled… But if government keeps making bad decisions (mostly because the administration is – more or less constitutionally – out of control from the executive branch), this will end up playing in the playbook of Raoult and co.

I do not believe we see the same kind of nonsense as Gary Null around here. We are witnessing something else. A real conflict between the instincts of clinicians and the logic of epidemiology and statistics.

BTW, the government has hired “amurikans” to “pilot” the response to the epidemic. Must to the dismay of the chauvinist elements of the electorate. Hilarious. What a shitshow.

@ F68.10:

I think that Orac has discussed that more on the other, not-so-super-secret blog: when doctors don’t follow SBM but rely upon their ‘instincts’ instead ( Dr Jay?)
Also:
recently (on twitter) he has speculated on how medical professionals venture off on the woo-fraught path despite their education and training. Were they perhaps always predisposed towards a fantastic direction, disregarding data and relying upon vague, personal inklings instead? Is there a way to screen prospective physicians for this tendency?

I suspect that the lure of the cult of personality attracts them: Raoult Wakefield, Mercola and many others who should “know better” bur don’t follow through..

I once researched studies about how professionals in diverse fields ( including investment and medicine/ in Org psych journals) made decisions and believe it or not, they weren’t always data based. People who thought, as they got more experienced, used more variables to inform them actually used LESS: were they using information more efficiently or in a more biased or superstitious fashion? Who knows, they didn’t always include how their decisions correlated to results in the real world!

Unlike medicine, we could look at dollar/ pound/ euro results for investment experts and decide if they are successful or not. Right now, I don’t hate the investment advisors ( perhaps ‘machines’?) at my mutual funds but I did in March..

There have been no indpendent peer reviews of this covid vaccine, and it has only had less than ten months of alleged development. Over 50,000 qualified medical and scientific experts from all over the world have signed the Barrington declaration asking to stop this unscientific lunacy. Here are some more highly qualified experts on the subjetc here:

https://brandnewtube.com/embed/qIsNohSIeSgfz2J

It is the MSM propaganda and governments pushing anti human pseudo science and banning real science. If you decide to only listen to those affiliated or funded by big pharma and the giant tech corporations then you are doing yourself and those you know a giant disservice. Please, open your mind to what’s going on and realise that your narrow left/right, vaxxers v anti vaxxers view of the world is inane and helping no one. All people of the world must unite against this evil agenda that is a serious threat to all of humanity

Over 50,000 qualified medical and scientific experts from all over the world have signed the Barrington declaration

Woah. When world-renowned Dr. Ivvana Humpalot signs on, I perk up and take notice!

@Tim (3.15pm). No rebuttal or refutal from you here, just infantile dismissal of real and independent espertise as opposed to what you are spoonfed by the MSM, big pharma corporations and corrupted governments, which so many seem to lap up unquestoningly like Pavlovian dogs

That “declaration” is a joke. The 4000 deaths per day in the USA from Covid-19 is not.

“my name is Dr. R Zac Cox; I’m a holistic dentist and a homeopath…”

That’s as far as I got in that video. I tend to stick my fingers in my ears and go “nanananana” when confronted with new fangled information that I’m not yet prepared to accept.

There is some evidence coming in on the Barrington* way — America

Spotty masking, distancing, and the abysmal logistics of the vaccine rollout is your testing ground for it. Hospitals are full with some running out of oxygen. It would be a bad time to get it now, I’d think. ~4000 dead yesterday. Do you want to go for 10,000? I could probably spot you 6k by inauguration day if that is amenable to you.

*the ‘50,000’ signators of the declaration are not vetted.

Some of them have actual expertise, but others—such as some homeopaths—only believe they have expertise, and many others are simply Internet vandals signing up with fake names.
.
.
WTF White House

So why in the world is the White House promoting a document with signatories that include “Dr. Johnny Bananas” and “Professor Notaf Uckingclue” instead of the WHO—or, for that matter, its own Centers for Disease Control, which has developed policy advice that focuses on limiting the spread of infection?

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/10/white-house-informally-endorses-letting-pandemic-spread-unchecked/

**brandnewtube.com, huu? Ohh, that dastardly censorship of things they don’t want you to know. Since 230 was all over Fox’n’Fools this morning, I’ll just drop this here {hope to meet you on Parlor /s}:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/23325444617/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act.shtml

@Chris 3.40pm How bizarre also to see all this unquestioning support for big pharma vaccines and the attempted dismissal of all those questioning the covid vaccine narrative as ‘hacks with no medical credentials other than a bunch of silly opinions’. And yet there is zero similar harsh judgement of one of the biggest pushers of the covid vaccine – the great vaccines grand wizard hismself – Bill Gates – a tech geek with zero medical qualifications

@ Chris Jones

“And yet there is zero similar harsh judgement of one of the biggest pushers of the covid vaccine – the great vaccines grand wizard hismself – Bill Gates – a tech geek with zero medical qualifications”

Uh… yes. Because Bill Gates is not spouting random shit not supported by evidence. He capitalizes on current knowledge and tries to engineer solutions on a political and technical level.

A CEO does not know every nuts and bolts of his business. He relies on people who know at lower echelons and his job is to gather, synthethize and act of feedback he gets. He does not pull the feedback out of thin air. Bill Gates is kind of reacting that way when it comes to his work on vaccines. Like a CEO.

BTW: As an old-school linux geek, I have little sympathies for what we witnessed Bill Gates doing in the late 90s and early 2000s. Far from it. And I had these opinions based on facts and real issues that were not intelligently dealt with then. And still are not to some extent. Doesn’t change the fact that on vaccines, he’s clearly more right than those who are determined to be wrong.

It’s as simple as that. Roger?

@Tim 4.43 Another great non refutal which doesn’t refute anything but I’m sure makes you very pleased with yourself. Do you trust the biggest pusher of the covid 19 vaccine Bill Gates even though he has zero medical expertise? Do you know the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is biggest funder of WHO and also fund many other very big pro vaccine groups who have enormous influence over government vaccine policy? Do you know anything of the conflict of the massive interest going on?

You can find some more cold hard facts with very little opinion or conjecture on this here. Please read them for the sake of others if not yourself:

https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/who-controls-british-government-response-covid19-part-one

https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/covid%E2%80%9319-big-pharma-players-behind-uk-government-lockdown

@ Chris Jones

“Do you trust the biggest pusher of the covid 19 vaccine Bill Gates even though he has zero medical expertise?”

More than Carrie Madej. Yes. 100%. No point having a medical degree if you cannot get a few ideas straight.

Bill Gates is a cactus-faced prick with weird mannerisms. But he is now also a philanthropist and genuinely seems to want to do good with his ill-gotten gains.

That declaration is a racist eugenics joke: https://respectfulinsolence.com/2020/10/19/the-great-barrington-declaration-covid-19-magnified-minority-and-eugenics/

Also, whining about big pharma and other things when 4000 Americans are dying every day from this disease is not a joke. Your conspiracy theories are not reality. Science is real whether you believe or not.

Bill Gates actually hires real scientists, while you just whine about not being taken seriously.

@Tim & F68.10

It’s very telling that you choose to give Gates and co, who have zero qualifications or expertise, a free ride yet denounce the myriad of others who do have medical qualifications and expertise. I’m afraid this exposes a considerable naivety and cognitive dissonance. Looking at the bigger picture beyond obsessing over any individuals however, the mere fact that this vaccine hasn’t been independently peer reviewed, has been pushed out in less than ten months without comprehensive testing, and that the vaccine producers have indemnity against prosecution, should tell you everything you need to know that this vaccine goes against scientific protocol and the precautionary principle. If you have any kind of scientific inclination, you will know that this vaccine roll out simply isn’t right

@ Chris Jones

“It’s very telling that you choose to give Gates and co, who have zero qualifications or expertise, a free ride yet denounce the myriad of others who do have medical qualifications and expertise.”

Medical qualifications and expertise? Are you talking about my mom? Yeah… I do not trust her.

More seriously: truth, or the State of Science, is to be found in the literature. Not in, say, the long hair of Raoult the Nazirite, our modern-day Samson. Nor in the milk and honey someone with “qualifications and expertise” is pouring into your ears if it contradicts the literature.

So no. I trust in the Science, mostly. Science is in the Literature. When did we invite writing? Kind of 5000 years ago? I guess that since then we may have mustered a way to reliably put our ideas into words and cast them into what is nowadays known as scientific articles.

Science comes from the literature. Not from a rogue mouthpiece. And Gates sticks to that literature.

So, sorry: no free pass for your ravings.

@ Denice

Listen to that song about Samson and if you take the lyrics to refer to Raoult tearing the down, say, the CDC building, it’s just… so ironic… or moronic.

Chris Jones: “It’s very telling that you choose to give Gates and co, who have zero qualifications or expertise, a free ride yet denounce the myriad of others who do have medical qualifications and expertise.”

So, what are your medical qualifications and expertise? Who are to decide the credibility of anyone? Come on! Give us an answer!

The Gates Foundation was part of creating this building and program. Look who it is named for, explain to me how that man was not qualified: https://www.washington.edu/populationhealth/hans-rosling-center/

@Chris 7.33pm

Yes science is very real. There have been no indpendent peer reviews of this covid vaccine, and it has only had less than ten months of alleged development and has not been comprehensively tested. To release the vaccine on people therefore is unscientific and goes against the scientific precautionary principle which we both seem to believe is important

Be careful what you wish for Chris Jones. Bill Gates doesn’t invent science, he follows the science done by professionals. If you think that this makes his opinions worthless then what does that say about your opinion? What does it say about ANY opinion coming out of the mouth of someone not directly involved in genuine research? Thanks, you’ve just shut down the entire anti-vax top echelons.

Oh, I don’t think you mean ‘peer review’ either. All of the Covid vaccine trial data will have been reviewed by the scientists advising the government’s who are buying it. I suspect that you are really saying that there have been no independent trials or data collection.

Maybe Chris Jones you should tell us what real and independent expertise Professor Notaf Uckingclue has?

@Chris Jones

using fluorescent microparticles called quantum dots (QD) which can deliver vaccines and at the same time, invisibly encode vaccination history in the skin”: the QDs can be detected by specially adapted smartphones. The “new normal” will mean we are tracked and monitored by our own communication systems to an even greater and more intrusive extent.

ukcolumn.org/article/who-controls-british-government-response-covid19-part-one

Bill Gates wants to put quantum dot tags* in us? I don’t think I want those lucifer ace/in {because that name for ‘morning star’ light is Satan’s name} in anything other than my 56k 512 kHz flat screen. I heard it was supposed to be microchips anyways. And Gate’s dots are not satanic but copper based which dissolve over time and probably accumulates in the brain /s.

If they were currently using that tag (they aren’t) then it could help one to get the correct flavor for the 21 or 28 day second dose regardless of location.

I’ve had my time not trusting Gates. I was a kid with my first computer when he was ranting and raving about people stealing his code simply for making a backup. He did come off as wanting to control everything so I grew up very suspicious of him. But he now seems to be doing good things — judge them by their fruits, and all.

I want the shot. If it turns out that all the doom and gloom is true; then just get it over with. At the current rate, many of us will die of old age first. It would be nice if a Bezos or Musk with know-how of logistics/distribution would throw in some billions — that would be most helpifying.

When the first rice-sized rfid capsid was introduced, I thought it was research and development for the ‘mark of the beast’** and that if I let them put it in my cat then I’d be queing up for that. But I don’t think those things anymore.

https://respectfulinsolence.com/2020/10/09/madej-covid-19-rna-vaccines-transhumanism/

**It’s probably not the best look that such tracking, tracing, scanning, ubiquitous in man and beast,…, none shall by nor sell uncomfortably fits the bill but these things are happening anyways, shot or no shot. It’s not like they’re throwing diodes in the mortar to bug your house… wait, it is.

https://scceu.org/the-tiny-satellites-that-will-connect-cows-cars-and-shipping-containers-to-the-internet/

@ Tim

because that name for ‘morning star’ light is Satan’s name

Pedantic hat on:
“Lucifer” is actually, well, Lucifer’s name. He was the most beautiful of the angels, the leader of the heavenly armies – until his fall from grace.
Satan/Shaitan is another guy altogether.

But yes. Lucifer Morningstar is his full name, if I know my Sandman correctly. His star was the first light heralding the new day – hence the names.
In French, we call this star “l’étoile du berger”, the star the shepherd used to guide himself and his sheep back into the grass fields every morning, literally at the first light.
Gets sometimes confused in French traditions and songs with the Bethleem star.

https://www.livescience.com/8365-dark-side-medical-research-widespread-bias-omissions.html

Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?
https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736%2815%2960696-1.pdf

Publish or be ethical? Publishing pressure and scientific misconduct in research
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1747016120980562

Beware the creeping cracks of bias
https://www.nature.com/news/beware-the-creeping-cracks-of-bias-1.10600

More and more people are coming to distrust the scientific community as a whole. The idea of science has the answer to life is coming under assault. I blame the journalist who sensationalize research papers (wine is bad vs wine is good, eggs are bad vs eggs are good you know the rest). But scientist and the publishing industry (5 companies are in control of 70% of published research and the profit margins put the best hedge fund managers to shame) bare/bear some of the blame as well, the mentality of publish or perish, the broken peer review (you get to pick you reviewers) failure to retract published work and review other published work based on the retracted papers et.al.

Denice you will all get put in the same box if you stand by the status quo. Science/research has to self correct but I don’t see a real push for insiders to lead and fix the issues.

Scott, you miss the point. Hmmm, or maybe you miss MY point. Scientists are human. They can make mistakes, they can commit fraud, they can do every bad thing that any other human can do. It doesn’t mean that unqualified people suddenly have the keys to knowledge. The high street bankers don’t suddenly become fonts of wisdom on genetic engineering just because a scientist got it wrong.

If you want to understand science at the level of an expert, you need to be an expert or talk to an expert. If you can’t trust the expert, you are shit out of luck because everyone outside that field is going to get something wrong. The best thing you can do is have lots of scientists working in the same thing. That way erroneous results and bad apples are spotted more easily.

IRONY ALERT

” BUT, broadly
— they don’t have an educational background and experience in the field which they explore. Sometimes, they may venture into largely distant areas ( an expert in GI discusses the brain or a software creator discusses vaccines) and present themselves as authoritative.as well.
— they describe their persecution by authorities and encourage potential followers to reject expert opinion or criticism.
— they present themselves as leaders of a movement that will “clean up” a corrupt establishment.”

You just described Orac

At least Orac is still conducting and publishing medical research. 22 years ago, Andrew Wakefield could at least pretend to be doing the same thing. But when offered additional funding to follow-up on his research, he dragged his feet and then walked away from his scientific career. And when it turned out that he had broken the cardinal rule of science by fudging the numbers in his research, he lost any credence as a scientist. All but a couple of his co-authors asked for their names to be removed from the paper which was eventually retracted. And it now turns out that his own PhD student had declined to be one of those authors because he couldn’t get the positive results that Wakefield was claiming.

So Wakefield is not any kind of a scientist, just an opinionated bystander.

But all of this is just a sort of inverse argument from authority which could equally well be applied to me and practically everyone else who comments here. What really counts is evidence in the form of real data and published research documenting and explaining it. Orac’s articles are extensively linked to provide that data.

I haven’t found any of your claims that are similarly supported.

And neither is the Great Barrington Declaration’

How is a general surgeon, surgical oncologist, PhD in cellular physiology– Orac- unqualified to discuss medical topics like vaccines or phony cancer treatments?
Where does he say he’s persecuted by authorities or tell people to reject experts?

I would guess that supplement salesmen, lawyers, nutritionists, business people, television show producers, writers or computer scientists are less appropriate..

GI transplant surgeon, Wakefield, imagined autism being caused by measles viruses from vaccines in the intestines “damaging” the brain !
I’m not a neurologist but seriously!! Autism doesn’t happen like that.
If that were true, wouldn’t every person who ever had measles be at risk for brain damage because of the millions of viruses in their bodies that could somehow just seep into their brains somehow?.

Denise Walter writes,

“Their programming includes misrepresentation of their own expertise overestimating the depth of their own studies and experience whilst simultaneously, trashing that of experts on a particular question.”

MJD says,

Hmm, nice description of a pioneering inventor.

RFKjr has the pressure of being a KENNEDY – they are supposed to make their mark on the nation, if not the world He also has the burden of fulfilling the potential cut short by the assassination of his father. He declined to get involved as a political candidate so this must feel, to him at least, a suitable replacement.

Denice Walter

In this one thread you have managed to disrespect Dorit Reiss and Orac the very people who you claim are on your side. I don’t think you did that intentionally but your arrogance, pride, pretentiousness or what every you want to call it, you failed to perceived what you wrote.

The items in quotes are what you posted.

“if you knew Orac’s other venues you might have an idea of the true number.
— most regulars assist Orac in presenting SB information whether by supporting his posts, sharing news or responding to others
that run counter to Orac’s – and our- mission”

You just described what it means to “conspire”. Which is what anti vaxxers have been claiming.

In another post you described a list of anti vaxxer’s

“— RFK jr is a lawyer” as a pejorative

note to Denice, Dorit Reiss is just a lawyer.

In another post you posted

” BUT, broadly
— they don’t have an educational background and experience in the field which they explore. Sometimes, they may venture into largely distant areas ( an expert in GI discusses the brain or a software creator discusses vaccines) and present themselves as authoritative.as well.
— they describe their persecution by authorities and encourage potential followers to reject expert opinion or criticism.
— they present themselves as leaders of a movement that will “clean up” a corrupt establishment.”

You just described Orac, as he is a cancer (readers digest version) doctor.

Please for the love of God step away from your keyboard and go to your kitchen and mix 2 Long Island Iced Tea(s) and drink one real fast then sit in an easy chair and slowly sip the other and think of the “ammo” you just gave your opposition. And what you just said about your “friends” aka: “minions” and how you insulted them.

@ scott allen

Same answer: Dorit Reiss sticks to the published consensual science. RFK does not. It you want to challenged the consensus, you do need to bring serious evidence. You may be a lawyer and do that if you’re very smart, very lucky and very well connected. But more often than not, you very obviously can’t without being a researcher. That’s what disqualifies RFK there. On the other hand, Dorit is having an easier game on the scientific front: she’s not “just making shit up”.

There you go.

Not worth debating all the points you raised until you manage to get the above distinction between Dorit and RFK solidly implanted in the space between your two ears.

As a lawyer aren’t they suppose to fight the status quo/consensus. Dorit fights (defends) for the big money drug companies (the us spends more than 511.4 Billion dollars on drugs). These billion dollar drug companies, can buy the science and buy the consensus. 2018 the drug companies spent 194 million dollars lobbying congress, but the real amazing number is the 3.73 BILLION the drug companies spend on public relations (that is not the advertising budget nor is that dollars spent on research) That 3.73 billion bought and paid for a lot of consensus from doctors and administrators and researchers. I am sure that a lot of the evidence she uses is supplied by those same drug companies or researchers who were funded by the drug companies. Its a matter of economics. RFK on the other hand is fighting for a cause that has little money to finance the research and PR it takes to win court cases. So yes there is a difference
I am kind a wondering why all the money, time, effort that is expended to fight these people, if they are a bunch of crazy anti vaxxers, wouldn’t the evidence be self evident enough to end their cause?

@ scott allen

“Dorit fights (defends) for the big money drug companies (the us spends more than 511.4 Billion dollars on drugs).”

Or she “fights” for truth and rationality. Who knows??

@Scott Allen. Kindly do not say untrue things about me. I am not a lawyer, I do not work for drug companies. I am a legal academic. I do not make any money from my vaccine advocacy. In fact, I donate pretty large sums in its service.

To remind you, RFK jr. gets a six figure salary for it.

I am willing to assume the first time was an error, rather than an intentional lie. Once.

@ Dorit

“I am willing to assume the first time was an error, rather than an intentional lie. Once.”

That’s lenient.

@ scott allen
“As a lawyer aren’t they suppose to fight the status quo/consensus. ”

No.

Lawyers defend their clients. Or they prosecute criminal cases. Or they interpret law. Often this means upholding the status quo. (Sometimes the status quo is called “the law”.)

I’d love to know what you’ve been reading/watching that makes you think that all lawyers always fight the status quo, because it is really, really out of touch with reality.

Um, when has Orac bemoaned “persecution by authorities” and encouraged anyone to reject expert opinion?

The tu quoque fallacy is lame enough to begin with; when it’s grounded in fantasy it leads to questions about the mental health of the person employing it.

@ Dangerous Bacon

“The tu quoque fallacy is lame enough to begin with…”

William Bartley wrote a 300 pages book on the tu quote fallacy. It’s a very lame fallacy, but unpacking it is fantastically rich on a philosophical level! It’s clearly my favourite fallacy!

as he is a cancer (readers digest version) doctor.

“readers digest version”

“I will just leave aside a few (important) details in my answer”.

Orac is also a cancer researcher. And is also sourcing his arguments, so people can check.

You really are an idiot. We don’t conspire. We ramify.

(19th century French romantic literature joke. You wouldn’t understand)

To all who are panicking about the daily death toll – Between the hospitals being encouraged to make every death Covid related to get more $$$ and the MSM, I don’t believe the numbers. Then again, who knows how accurate the CDC average daily deaths from 2017: “In 2017, an average of 7,708 deaths occurred each day. January, February, and December were the months with the highest average daily number of deaths (8,478, 8,351, and 8,344, respectively). June, July, and August were the months with the lowest average daily number of deaths (7,298, 7,157, and 7,158, respectively).

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/mm6826a5.htm

Lies – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wuv4f-AmKE4

And you wonder why I call you a sadistic hater of children, and now that extends to everyone. Your “belief” has not stopped hospitals being slammed by very sick people and bodies needing to be stored in refrigeration trucks.

You are are a sadistic despicable liar: https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/mortality-in-the-u-s-was-more-than-280000-higher-during-the-first-eight-months-of-2020-than-any-of-the-previous-five-years-over-the-same-period/

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-chart-us-death-figures-2020-idUSKBN2872MV

That’s the thing about reality. At some point, it gets in your face. More than 27,000 people in the U.S. have died from Covid-19 in the 10 days since the new year started. Hospitals are out of capacity. At some point, the anti-vaccine effort to imagine all this away just doesn’t hold.

It’s not even the vaccines yet. That is like a gnat in a snowstorm here. We just can’t get it up. It’s the tribal “I just don’t think I Iook good meeting dictators, tyrants…” He needed to die. It might have made a schism with half of them. Now, they just concentrate (and break stuff) and then just spread it everywhere.

https://futurism.com/neoscope/coronavirus-patient-egyptian-icu-dies-oxygen-supply-fails

Of course, that ^^ is just fake news and in no way “reality”.

Happy SUNday – OT but wanted to share this video on Thomas Dolby and his song, “She blinded me with science” – a synth pop classic. He starts playing around the 6 min mark but I hope you watch in it’s entirety.

Note to readers:
scott allen misquoted what I wrote ( 7 January 3:47 pm) TWICE by leaving out ten words or so condensing what I said when describing Orac’s minions and trolls which changes my meaning..
Look at what I wrote and how he changes it twice. Why would he do that? I wonder…

Also, Dorit is not a lawyer: she is a professor of law but.F68.10 is correct about her position and advocacy..

No one needs to be an expert** in a particular field to advocate for SBM because they can cite experts. Mr Gates is not a researcher in medical science BUT importantly he is intelligent enough to understand leading experts and has the money to hire the best either to educate him or to work for his foundation. Kim Rossi insults him as a “college dropout” – unlike herself- but he could obviously purchase a college or two if he wanted.
Gates is nowhere advocating for people to disregard experts or to follow his own personal ideas as RFK jr does. The latter also finds and cites people who agree with his idiosyncratic
position that is not supported by data ( Wakefield, Bigtree Brian Hooker, Mary Holland, Katie Wright, many others)

Personally, I studied enough life science to know when someone is BSing their audience. By following several accomplished woo-meisters for many years, there are tell tale signs that I can identify as well as discerning psychological tricks they use. Sometimes they give away their lack of expertise in shocking ways that are hilarious as I have recounted here often : mispronouncing common terms, not getting the basics straight, confusing different issues. ..

** my father was a business man who developed heart disease when he was over 80: he knew enough to NOT listen to alt med gurus on the radio or ask salespeople in health food stores for the correct herbs or supplements for his condition; instead,, he asked an internal medicine doctor who advised him with the help of a cardiologist and kept him going for a long , long time.
,

Denice I did not misquote you.

“an act or instance of quoting something incorrectly”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/misquote

I cut and pasted exactly what you wrote/typed in your bullet points how is that misquoting you. And yes I condensed what you wrote, as you have a tendency to drone on.
I have found that on this site if you over post or site website, the people that reply rarely read the links and post that are more than 3-4 paragraphs don’t don’t get read.

To Dorit I will apologize for misrepresentation of you employment.
When I was in college a professor of law had to be a lawyer.
I never claimed you worked for a drug company, “Dorit fights (defends) for the big money drug companies”.
As for RFK jr. making 6 figures, most plumbers, truck drivers, firemen,policemen, heck even the driver our trash truck (she has a cdl license) makes 6 figures

As for RFK jr. making 6 figures, most plumbers, truck drivers, firemen,policemen, heck even the driver our trash truck (she has a cdl license) makes 6 figures

Might as well roll on.

As for RFK jr. making 6 figures, most plumbers, truck drivers, firemen,policemen, heck even the driver our trash truck (she has a cdl license) makes 6 figures

Well, unlike Junior, they’re all doing something useful.

Damn,that was too easy.

@ Terrie:

Exactly!

re RFK jr:
he only receives ” 6 figures” from CHD but isn’t he also a lawyer?
He has a firm ( Kennedy and Madonna) and also is associated with another ( Morgan and Morgan) see Wikipedia
his work is in environmental law: suing companies.

Is his work for free?
Don’t his activities in anti-vax and environmental concerns both contribute to his fame ( infamy?) and affect his fees? As does his name or brand?
His basic message is that large companies pollute for profit- be it rivers or children’s and adults’ bodies- leading to death. destruction, cancer and autism.

He contributed to environmental cleanup of rivers based on data BUT that doesn’t give him carte blanche to speculate about “vaccine damages* based on sympathetic feelings and parents’ confabulatory evidence/

@ NumberWang 1:29 am

“Be careful what you wish for Chris Jones. Bill Gates doesn’t invent science, he follows the science done by professionals. If you think that this makes his opinions worthless then what does that say about your opinion? What does it say about ANY opinion coming out of the mouth of someone not directly involved in genuine research? Thanks, you’ve just shut down the entire anti-vax top echelons. Oh, I don’t think you mean ‘peer review’ either. All of the Covid vaccine trial data will have been reviewed by the scientists advising the government’s who are buying it. I suspect that you are really saying that there have been no independent trials or data collection.”

You’ve conveniently proved my point, I don’t have any medical qualifications either, my opinion is therefore as valid as Bill Gates’ in that regard. The difference is that Gates is an unelected person trying to push vaccines and vaccine policies on elected governments and their populations who are supposedly living in democratic systems rather than corporatocracies and under medical tyranny. I am merely giving my opinion based on extensive independent research which everyone should do.

And yes, like you admitted, “the Covid vaccine trial data will have been reviewed by the scientists advising the government’s who are buying it.” -there has been no independent peer reviews of the vaccines, or indeed independent trials or data collection. I’m sure you agree that this is very conflict iof interest is very problematic and goes against the basic scientific principle of comprehensive and independent testing. If you want to go ahead and inject material in to yourself that will genetically modify you and goodness knows what else, that is your own personal choice. Howver no government, unelected corporation or multi billionnaire has a right to force anyone to do anything including take their grubby vaccines.

@ Chris 10:21 pm Chris Jones: “It’s very telling that you choose to give Gates and co, who have zero qualifications or expertise, a free ride yet denounce the myriad of others who do have medical qualifications and expertise.So, what are your medical qualifications and expertise? Who are to decide the credibility of anyone? Come on! Give us an answer!”

I will Chris, it is this, as stated above: I don’t have any medical qualifications either, my opinion is therefore as valid as Bill Gates’ in that regard. The difference is that Gates is an unelected person trying to push vaccines and vaccine policies on elected governments and their populations who are supposedly living in democratic systems rather than corporatocracies and under medical tyranny. I, as an unelected citizen am merely giving my opinion based on extensive independent research which everyone should do. I am up for open debate and discussion and am not trying to force my beliefs on anyone. let alone a vaccine

Bill Gates cannot “push” vaccines on systems. He can suggest, and he has influence, in par through donations, but that’s it.

But what he has done that you do not, is work with experts and expert bodies to provide science-based support to save lives in the developing world, through a range of options. He earned respect by doing good. So his opinions are treated more respectfully than those of science deniers even by experts.

“Bill Gates cannot “push” vaccines on systems. He can suggest, and he has influence, in par through donations, but that’s it.”

Yes, that is indeed it, I would agree with you that that is how he mostly pushes his grubby vaccine agenda, very much so

“But what he has done that you do not, is work with experts and expert bodies to provide science-based support to save lives in the developing world, through a range of options. He earned respect by doing good. So his opinions are treated more respectfully than those of science deniers even by experts.”

He has certainly earned respect from those he donates lots and lots of money to for sure. Not so much countless vaccine receivers in India and Africa if you care to make a bit of research

@ Chris Jones

“Not so much countless vaccine receivers in India and Africa if you care to make a bit of research”

Show me. I do care about these places. So if your argument has some sound basis, I’ll gladly welcome it. Show me.

@F68.10 4:39 pm

Search engines are your friends in this case. I can send you loads of link of course but better for you to find yourself and without prejudice

@ Chris Jones

Start with one link. I’m busy elsewhere spouting links on child abuse. The Battered Child Syndrome is one of my favourites. Give one, I’m curious, honestly.

@ Chris Jones

“You’ve conveniently proved my point, I don’t have any medical qualifications either, my opinion is therefore as valid as Bill Gates’ in that regard.”

Nope. Bill Gates knows how to pick and open a book and get info from that. You obviously do not. So, no, his opinion and yours are far from being “as valid” to one another.

Sorry. Try again.

You may carry on worshiping the unelected faultless billionaire Gates if it makes you happy as it seems to. The fact remains that the covid vaccine agenda has not been comprehensively tested and therefore goes against the scientific precautionary principle. Personally, and call me old fashioned, but I believe in real and thorough science and on the accountability of elected representatives rather than unelected billionaires dictating medical policy

Doesn’t it all boil down to the quality of sources?
Don’t they teach this to students before secondary school?
SBM advocates use reliable sources and expert consensus.

Alt med leaders despise Wikipedia because you cannot say whatever you please:
they fume over bios and CVs about themselves because they are not purely PR but from reliable outside sources. Their personal sites include their own versions..PRN

If Orac writes about vaccines, he consults up-to-date literature including the newest.
Anti-vaxxers have their own list that is not recognised generally and includes Wakefield, RFKjr and diverse charlatans**.

Notice how they tell followers to avoid mainstream media, governmental agencies and universities on the subject. In other words, avoid most reliable sources and to listen to them instead. The whole world is corrupt but THEY aren’t.

Sadly, anti-vaxxers like Jameson teach their own children anti-vax who then argue for it in school debates or in college admissions essays.

** my question to anti-vaxxers: can you show me an accredited university who offer a course on what you believe?.

@ Chris Jones

I do not worship Bill Gates. In fact, I’ve even be politically active at one time against him in the free software world. No sympathy for the guy.

Nonetheless, Bill Gates’ arguments are what you find in books. Attacking his position is the same as attacking… books!

Because you cannot attack what’s in the books, you want to kill the messenger.

I’m not treating the rest of your arguments until we get to the bottom of your Bill Gates anti-fetishism.

“Personally, and call me old fashioned, but I believe in real and thorough science…”

I do not call you old fashioned. I call bullshit on you.

@F68.10 3:01 pm

It’s commendable that you have so much faith in those in power over us and in ‘the books’. However this doesn’t stop the fact most of those in power over us do not have our best interest at heart, and worse. Academia and science have been corrupted and subverted from within for some time now-in their place we have pseudo science, a scientism cult and academia that pushes dangerous and polarising identity politics and group think and what to think rather than how to think. This on top of the power of the international corporations. You may call bullshit on me but I am of little consequence – worry more about yourself and those you cherish and look beyond wher you are told to look with an open mind

@ Chris Jones

“However this doesn’t stop the fact most of those in power over us do not have our best interest at heart, and worse.”

I would beg to differ. The problem is not that they do not have our best interests at heart. It’s that sometimes they do not weigh in some consequences… to put it mildly. My personal medical situation is a testimony to that.

“Academia and science have been corrupted and subverted from within for some time now-in their place we have pseudo science, a scientism cult and academia that pushes dangerous and polarising identity politics and group think and what to think rather than how to think.”

This has a modicum of truth, but is not quite true either. The scientism gambit can sometimes be founded, but on topics such as vaccines, or creationism, or what-you-not, it’s very-more-often-than-not a smokescreen for bullshit. I’ll give you this, though: rationality is not essentially about what you believe, but much more about the process by which you wean out bad ideas. Though decision-making must ultimately rely on accepted ideas, called the scientific consensus. Hard to cut shortcuts through that…

“This on top of the power of the international corporations.”

I’m hugely pro-Very-Big-Business. I was a financial risk manager in a company managing 20 billions. So, no, I do not vindicate that gambit. Though, I do acknowledge that people have some legitimate qualms about Big Business; which nonetheless does not allow them to spout random shit as if it were true because… Big Business. The same way that you do not reject gravity because… nazis. You see what I mean?

Good intentions and good feelings can be misleading. As I sometimes say to local lefties: if you do not like Big Pharma because $$$… do you believe that if the USSR would have won, we wouldn’t have another Big Pharma in one form or another? Of course we would… because the need for organized development of pharmaceuticals and vaccines would still be there, and even a communist economy and system would channel the required resources there. Aside from efficiency, it wouldn’t change a darn thing. That’s why my advice is: quit bickering, and get down to cross-checking their facts and claims. And to do so, you have to rely on some people doing the job. Society has decided to give that job to scientists because, you know… Inquisition… Galileo… Descartes… Galvani/Volta… stuff like that.

@Chris Jones

You may carry on worshiping the unelected faultless billionaire Gates

What’s with the fixation on Gates?
I, and I am most sure, most regulars here did not form our opinion on vaccines in general and mRNA anti-SARS-Cov2 vaccines in particular by listening to Gates.
Heck, I don’t even know what’s Gates position on mRNA vaccines.

Tl;dr: it’s not that we agree with Gates. It’s that Gates agree with us.

@Athaic: “What’s with the fixation on Gates?”

It’s cult-of-personality projection masquerading as their theory of mind.

Chris Jones believes that because he, Chris Jones, would drop his kecks in delight for Andrew Wakefield to fuck him in the ass, the rest of us must all respond in the same way at the sight of Bill Gates. You can tell him till you’re blue in the face that you are simply repeating the best science done by credible scientists, and Bill Gates’ money is just a practical tool for amplifying that message so it gets heard by lots of people, but Chris Jones simply cannot conceive of any motivation outside of those that he has experienced himself.

Remember, we aren’t dealing with towering intellects of philosophical insight, we’re dealing with squalid little martinets, paranoiacs, and narcissists, who self-select their own brain trust for more of the same. And while we can easily “walk in their shoes” just by dredging up all those ugly character failings in ourselves that we’ve worked so hard to suppress and letting those run wild for five minutes, it is nearly impossible for them to imagine themselves as anything higher than the toilet-dwelling tyrants that they are. They possess no point of reference to mentally model that, so must of necessity project everyone else down to below their level so they can control. The alternative would be to admit to themselves “this is something new that I don’t understand”—and if they were capable of doing that they would be us, not them, already.

There are two ways to get ahead in this world: working hard to try to raise yourself up, or stomping everyone around you down. No prizes for guessing in which camp antivaxxers—like all abusers—fall.

If I had to guess, something somewhere is bigly over-petafloping trying to impersonate some kind of filibustering scott allen.

It wants the answer. It has to have the answer. It has been given answers but maybe not the answer. For the love of blinking thermal management systems all over the planet, somebody placate it:

To release the vaccine on people therefore is unscientific and goes against the scientific precautionary principle which we both seem to believe is important

Also, I’m stealing this: “conflict of the massive interest”

@Chris Jones

Without even googling that, I’ll give it a shot. It is something, and a physiological plausible something, at that; when doing nothing means so many more dying; maybe even me.

Who was Hans Rosling? Why do you think I am asking that question?

And why should we care about your random opinions?

Where have you been for the last month?

Twenty-three independent doctors and researchers — virologists, pediatricians, immunologists, infectious disease doctors, and I’m sure I’m missing some specialties — were given the data on the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. That’s a hell of a peer review.

Want to see who’s on the committee? Here’s the link: https://www.fda.gov/media/144232/download

What conflict of interest? You think a government paying over £12b for millions of doses of a new vaccine isn’t going to bloody well check out the data?

Also, your opinion isn’t in competition with Bill Gates opinion. Gates is following the science. His opinion is therefore the opinion of experts in the field of vaccination. I don’t think your ‘research’ is in the same class at all. If Gates ever states an opinion on which cheese goes the best with cream crackers then you might be in with a shout.

You’ve conveniently proved my point, I don’t have any medical qualifications either, my opinion is therefore as valid as Bill Gates’ in that regard.

You forget the small matter of Bill Gates’ opinion on this topic being in line with all the major medical societies across the world and with the overwhelming bulk of the scientific literature. Your opinion? Not so much.

Opinions are only as valuable as the data that backs them up.

If you want to go ahead and inject material in to yourself that will genetically modify you and goodness knows what else

Since this is not that we do – at least on the genetically modifying part – then this is a moot discussion.

Hey Chris Jones, do you know what else the Gates Foundation promotes?

Sanitation. That everyone in the world should have a clean and safe place to urinate and defecate.

Are you going to become anti-toilet because Bill (and Melinda) are pro-toilet?

(It’s like all the Bill Gates haters think that he runs the foundation by himself, rather than employing experts when then fund other experts working in the field.)

@ JustaTech

“Are you going to become anti-toilet because Bill (and Melinda) are pro-toilet?”

Do not defend Big Toilet!!! $$$$$!!!

Do not defend Big Toilet!!! $$$$$!!!

Eh, how to get rid of human waste and process it is actually a very important topic, and most civilisations, including us Westerners, tend to adhere to a “out of sight, out of mind” politic.
I mean, doing more to recycle our waste, avoiding to p!ss away some good phosphorus, and/or stopping mixing-up our gray water and black water would have great ecological impacts. Maybe some economic ones as well.
Flush toilets and a “tout à l’égout” approach are not necessarily the right direction to go.

One of the Laws of the Internet is (or should be) that any poster who smugly says “You’ve proved my point” didn’t understand the point in the first place.

I’m still waiting for someone to come up with a logical explanation of how promoting and helping to distribute vaccines makes Bill Gates tons of $$$$$, or explain rationally how his “agenda” is Evil.

Seems to me that that the worst you could say of Gates is that ego motivates his efforts to some degree, i.e. burnishing a legacy as one of Mankind’s Greatest Benefactors.

The alternate explanation (that he’s furthering the world depopulation conspiracy and the formation of human-alien hybrids through vaccine-altered DNA and 5G), while appealing to loons, is a wee bit short on evidence.

Good, you’re starting to open your mind a bit more to the possibility that all is not what it seems. This is often half the battle in this information war which is also a spiritual war – understand these things and you may have a chance of saving yourself and those around you. Nobody can force you to look more in to this and have to deal with the usual slurs of being ‘a loon’ , ‘anti science’, ‘science denier’ etc etc. But your most basic gut instinct must be telling you that the world isn’t right and there must be reasons for that. This should surely be glaringly obvious to most rational people by now. Listen to your intuition with an open mind and let the truth take you where it may

@ Chris Jones

You know what? I welcome disclosure of evidence when it’s contrary to my views. For instance, when it comes to alleged UFO videos by the Pentagon. It’s cool with me. Though we may rely on rationality and not merely “intuition” to start seeing the truth in phenomena such as the Bermuda Triangle.

Having an open mind and intuition is fine. That’s how we come up with hypotheses. Then we must use rationality to double-check, confirm or refute our hypotheses. And rationality has rules, though not many people understand them thoroughly.

@F68.10 6:35 pm

“Having an open mind and intuition is fine. That’s how we come up with hypotheses. Then we must use rationality to double-check, confirm or refute our hypotheses. And rationality has rules, though not many people understand them thoroughly.”

I very much agree with you. The things you describe above are what we must all do when dealing with all the mainstream media and governmental narratives being forced upon us on a 24/7 and unquestioning basis. The same media and governments that have sold us countless illegal and criminal wars that have led to the deaths of millions based on these lies. We must also question and rationalise alternative and independent media equally as well of course – in amongst all these things lies the truth

For the third time: who was Hans Rosling? Why am I bringing him up?

Also, why should we care about the opinions of the guy who last took a science class in 7th grade (when it was still required), but sat in the back of the class with his/her head down while snoring?

IDK about “in amongst all these things lies the truth”.. to generic. Mainstream “they took the babies out of the incubators” does sting abit.. Otherwise, very, very cool story, bro.

@ Chris Jones

The same way you need to check if “the government” is not bullshitting you, you also need to check if the ones who are telling you “the government” is bullshitting you are not bullshitting you themselves.

What I mean is that you cannot assume that “the government” is bullshitting you all the time out of principle and just for kicks. Honestly, the US is one of the most open form of government on Earth. In France, things are much less open to inquiry and antivaxxers are another kind of beast: they believe private companies are bullshitting us, and that the government does not favor national companies. Pfizer is shit because… hey! give more time to Sanofi to come up with a vaccine! The government also is shit because it does not favour national companies… solution: a stronger government in bed with national companies! That why mRNA = GMO ! They’re not French!

We all know there are levels of politics in vaccine policy. For instance, going back to India (which I follow a lot lately), I have little doubt that if Bharat Biotech’s vaccine has had green lights from Indian authorities… it’s because it’s indian. We cannot 100% wean out these motivations when it comes to many issues, vaccines included. But if we drop scientific evidence, we have 0 chance of trying to get more sensible policies in place.

And, moreover: All these lame excuses are mutually incompatible. Antivaxxers compound them as if they made the case stronger. But if you have three brain cells and an electrical impulse between their axones and dendrites, it’s fairly easy to see that all these excuses do not compound… but more often than not tend to cross-annihilate each other. Are you a leftie anti-money antivaxxer, or a rightie nationalist antivaxxer? Who cares in the end? Indeed: all that you need to agree on both sides of that political spectrum to get along is that the government is screwing you up with bogus scientific evidence… with no evidence to support such a claim of fraud other than the fact that antivaxxers want it to be true. Because it suits them.

So, no: do not assume out of principle that you only have to check if the government is bullshitting you. You also have to check whether it has decided not to bullshit you. Be happy to be in the US on that count, as imperfect as that country may be. It’s not China.

sEX robots, rise up! “They took the batteries out of the fleshlights and left them to die in the cold kitchen drawer.”

But your most basic gut instinct must be telling you that the world isn’t right and there must be reasons for that. This should surely be glaringly obvious to most rational people by now.

Perhaps you’d care to explain what “isn’t right” and what would be before insisting upon the “reasons” and that “most rational people” agree with such vagary.

Well the “truth” is that I’m about to go coat some T cells in fluorescent antibodies and then gently bop the cells with some lasers.

There’s no “spiritual war” or “information war” in my lab, just squishy cells and the things they do.

And do you know what the best part is? I don’t know what those cells are going to do! I’ve got ideas, expectations, predictions, but all of those will either fall by the wayside or be upheld by the data from the lasers (among other instruments). I go where the data leads me.

Funny thing is, it never seems to lead me to “everything is wrong!”. I wonder why that is?

“For the third time: who was Hans Rosling?”

I’m guessing “John Galt” is probably incorrect.

Yes, John Galt is incorrect. I gave it away in my first comment mentioning him. Obviously Chris Jones does not know how to click on a link. Or just does not like learning new things.

Chris Jones apparently wants us to aquire new skills to counter dickwads such as himself. I feel like I failed. But I’ve been distracted; so, there is that.

Acquiring the “new skills” per Chris Jones is more of a step backwards. Personally I am not fond of de-evolution.

We should just let him stew in his own personal cesspool.

Orac, you said:

“The COVID-19 spike protein is not a human protein. Autoimmune disease involves an aberrant immune response against one of the body’s own proteins. The COVID-19 vaccine is inducing your cells to make a foreign protein to facilitate an immune response.”

And then:

“Again, the half-life of mRNA is short. In fact, on average, it’s only 10 hours! Then it’s gone.”

So … that 10 hours is long enough for an immune response to be generated & then there won’t be any more covid spike proteins being built because the trigger protein has degraded?

What is the actual length of time, specifically for the vaccines used today; that the vaccines caused the cells to make spike proteins? You said there was chemical altering done to make it last longer than normal, so they must know how long it lasts. Why don’t they just come out & say; “Our vaccine will only cause your cells to make covid proteins for 3 days (or whatever it was, as determined by the research) & then it stops”? Surely they can PROVE it will stop, because it DID stop, in 100% of the trial participants, by a certain amount of time, right?

From Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia:—

“mRNA is not very stable. Its half-life in human cells is estimated in hours. For purposes of mRNA-based therapies, modifications have been developed to keep the molecule in cells long enough to allow for the therapy to be successful. But even with this, the mRNA will not lead to protein production for more than 10-14 days.”

Why do you care? You are obviously not going to get it anyways. And, yes; it probably won’t scale over and minimize that hand.

@ Tim,

Omg I changed it. My hand is normal, lol it was just that pic. You are right, I am not going to get it. I want to know because I should know.

So … that 10 hours is long enough for an immune response to be generated & then there won’t be any more covid spike proteins being built because the trigger protein has degraded?

10 hours is the average length of time that the mRNA lasts. The proteins it produces last for a week or so. The immune response is against the proteins, not the mRNA.

Surely they can PROVE it will stop

Of course it will stop. Once the mRNA is broken down, no more protein can be produced. However, all the protein produced will be sitting on the outside of cells, signaling the immune system to destroy those cells. Once the cells are destroyed, the protein is gone.

@ Chris Preston,

Thank you & that confirms my understanding but … the vaccine uses a lipid nanoparticle coating to envelope the mRNA & I can’t find how much exactly that delayed the degradation.

Don’t you claim to have an RN degree? Do you actually remember anything you learned there, or is that another of your exaggerated claims?

@ Terrie,

How does being an RN help me to see the data on how long it took for the mRNA to degrade after they employed the lipid nanoparticle coating? That information is surely buried somewhere in the research, right?

We already know to expect it to last around 10 hrs without it; so how long did they find it lasted with it?

“so how long did they find it lasted with it?”

I’m going to just guess and say “the same?” The lipid droplet is just the delivery vehicle into the cell (I think) and remains behind/is absorbed as the mRNA slips through.

So … that 10 hours is long enough for an immune response to be generated & then there won’t be any more covid spike proteins being built because the trigger protein has degraded?

The difference between RNA and the proteins built with is 10th grade stuff. I fully expect Tim to break out the Zoolander bit about a building for ants since you can’t tell the difference between a blueprint and a building.

https://youtu.be/0KC_rd7-bf0?t=5

@christine kincaid

Did you know that cells are even smaller than ants and the 3-d printers inside them are even smaller still?? Or they might really be like TARDISes; IDK.

I have no idea if this is how it all works because it stops just when the poopoo is starting to coming out. r/gifsthatendtoosoon

https://berthub.eu/articles/protein-short.mp4

It seems to be from a software developer describing the vaccine so it’s probably a little ‘iffy’:

berthub.eu/articles/posts/reverse-engineering-source-code-of-the-biontech-pfizer-vaccine/

@ Natalie White

Vaccines are no “medical tyranny”. There are much more gruesome instances of medical tyranny. Stop tying knots in your brain for trifles.

And without $$$, there are many projects society cannot do. To engineer vaccines, you need $$$. To go to Mars, you also need $$$.

Money can be misused. But money is not evil. It is not the devil’s feces.

@F68.10

Nice dream. But I think that the living elements needs to be under the surface because very weak** magnetic field == lots of cosmic rays and solar stuff. The surface is for energy/fuel production, mining, communication, and transportation hubs.

If a suitable cave/ lava tube system can not be found at a lattitude favorable for solar energy then Musk owns The Boring Company; he may be able to get’er’done.

**If I recall right, a bit of that field is due to the aroural electrojet {like a charged jet stream} and that nukes might can gen that up a little bit and with added teensy bits of more atmosphere possibly boiled off the poles.

Or maybe they’ll unearth a giant air reactor and some schmuck will fight through Musk’s libertarian hords and do the thing Quato said.

As far as the starships themselves, the speculation is that water supply will be jacketed around the shell — errm.. those who go are still gonna get a dose.

For the rest of my lifetime, I’d more expect that mars will be littered with starships connected together like some spread out Cabrini Green. But that is only because I seem to be a cynic.

Prof Rei$$ is for medical tyranny and has stock in GSK.

Um, so you have no mutual funds in place for retirement? SMURT! Life insurance? Hell, no investments whatever?

Looking into my own and associates’ ( different) large cap mutual funds, I was surprised to see how little was invested in pharma: not the top sector or amongst the most represented stocks because they were instead, heavily invested in
TECHNOLOGY
all the usual companies.. Microsoft, FaceBook, Alphabet, Adobe, Netflix, Apple etc
,
One fund – not mine- had pandemic stars like Moderna ( symbol MRNA) and internet meeting/ educational services BUT only tiny amounts, not significant percentages.

If pharma is truly all powerful, why don’t funds just invest in it and save themselves a lot of research money, employee pay etc?

@ christine kincaid (@ Denice Walter)

“The Wakefield video is gone now.”

Yep. Not sure what people are hoping to achieve by shutting down antivaxxers this way. I do not believe that will be enough to stop these ideas from propagating.

Anyhow, the situation in the US seems to be better than around here. I get more or less (semi-legally) threatened for “injure” and “insulte” around here when bringing up some personal thoughts on child abuse. By all these right wingers that complain (more or less rightly) that they are being censored by the State (1881 law on the freedom of the press) for their xenophobic ideas.

Right-wing logic: spouting shit on foreigners and immigrants is free speech. Being pushed around on sensitive child abuse topics (in the news since the Olivier Duhamel case) is “injure” and “insulte”… Not that our left wing is much better! Luckily, we can sporadically have a beheading or two by muslim extremists that reminds us that free speech matters. Because, otherwise… I’m pretty sure it would go away.

Note to Denice: just read Ouest-France reporting on the twitter ban on Trump. Their reaction: 1. better now than never 2. should have been done before 3. by the way, it would be nice that the State cracks down on intolerable speech such as Trump’s 4. in order to do so, we should prosecute usage of anonymity or pseudonymity on the net. The Ouest France editorial states “Messages, most often anonymous.” and this is not a thinly-veiled thread: lawmakers and minister of justice have repeatedly been urging to ban anonymity on the web.

Not kidding. If we did not have beheadings once in a while, I guess free speech would die quite fast around here.

Oh! BTW, we shouldn’t prosecute child abusers because Jesus forgives and Jesus saves! People are that dumb. Not kidding. That’s an exaggeration, but given the twisted and twisting wording I am facing, I cannot decipher to which extent I am exaggerating.

The idea of banning anonymity shouldn’t be taken too seriously in the US because one of the prime movers towards its “glorious revolution” was a pamphlet, Common Sense, that was first published anonymously

I understand that there should be a line drawn whenever violence is advocated but, I have a nagging suspicion that those who are empowered just might be the ones who define “violence”

.

@ F68.10

Ah, these newspapers – and all the laymen – who are suddenly pitching in for a more
thorough censoring or against the current deplatforming of Trump and his supporters are… interesting. Or very cute.
And more than a bit confused and mixing-up everything.
I loved some newspapers who ran editorials about “Twitter not being legitimate” for deciding they don’t want Trump on their platform. While these newspapers are obviously deciding which editorial/opinion they will publish and are moderating their own comment sections (I should know, I got comments rejected in one of them).

By confusion, I mean that originally, this whole “freedom of speech” is about freedom from the government while using any medium to express your ideas.
It was never about granting someone a right to use someone’s else medium.
In pre-internet time, in free societies, nothing stopped you from stepping on a soapbox at a crossroad and declaim your truths. Similarly, nothing stopped you from buying a press and print your own newspaper.
(OK, not too many things, and I’ll admit we French could have learned one thing or three from the British and the Americans)

And here comes internet, giving everybody an opportunity for an unmatched outreach to spread their ideas.
Except that internet tools and platforms are for the most part managed by private companies. At the difference of the street outside your house, the public space of internet is actually very much a private-owned space (but certainly not private, which is adding to the confusion).
If tomorrow, Orac bans me from these threads, my freedom of speech vis-à-vis the government would be untouched. OTOH, my outreach would be severely curtailed. If I was using a big platform like Facebook or Twitter, and those ban me, even more so.
Again, nothing stopping me from creating my own blog or my own platform, but then I’ll have to build an audience. And in the latter case, building a platform, that also takes quite some resources.

So we end up with people who are either asking the government to go limit the freedom of the people using these platforms, or to go limit the freedom of these platforms in what their publish, to force them to publish someone’s speech.
In the current case, a country leader’s speech. As if he doesn’t have official venues already.
I’m not a fan of the giant companies who control the big platforms, but I’m not sure I like the idea of the government interfering with them. There are some bad precedents with the supposedly free press,

@ Athaic

In the US, the only mechanism to limit free speech is the civil society. In France, in the collective mentality, the only legitimate actor to do so is the State. This is clear from discussions I’ve had with… journalists! Even they haven’t grown out of this statist mentality.

This is why the debate on the limits of free speech in the US is so toxic in France: each decision the US civil society takes to more or less curtail free speech, either vaccines, or holocaust denial, or Trump, is instrumentalised around here to allow the State to curtail free speech. Big difference.

This is the big difference with the US. And one of the reasons the debate on free speech gets lost in translation across the Atlantic. Neither the right nor the left in France can be trusted on that matter.

But, yeah… I essentially agree with your view.

“While these newspapers are obviously deciding which editorial/opinion they will publish and are moderating their own comment sections (I should know, I got comments rejected in one of them).”

Did you try bashing cranks or medical decisions in medical blogs hosted by newspapers? I did. You just can’t. You can criticize up to the point where you “I disagree respectfully”… but “this is BS” is not de facto allowed. As is “confraternité” should not apply only within the medical world but should extend to the layman! The only medical blogs where you can comment more or less freely around here are those of… cranks with pedigree. Very sad. Or you can fiercely defend Raoult on… political blogs! That’s OK. In the end: Science has retreated in its ivory tower and not standing its ground in the public space: I do not consider Laurent Alexander to be a respectable figure…

But all this has been years in the making. I can’t say I feel sorry any more.

@ Athaic:

Anti-vaxxers/ alt med proselytisers that I survey are very unhappy being de-platformed by FaceBook, Twitter, YouTube, Pinterest etc and shriek when Wikipedia publishes realistic appraisals of their activities/ backgrounds,.

I agree with private companies like these who do not charge participants to use their outlets and frown upon their usage for extremist/ unrealistic propaganda**..

Thus, they have to create their own social media/ internet outlets or find alternates
— it costs them major MONEY to set up alternate video sites/ ( mis)information sites
— these newly inaugurated sites don’t have the reach of the standard ones AND
— followers have to switch over, losing some
( Natural News, PRN, Mercola, Bigtree, many more)

** although it TOOK A LONG TIME for them to take action!
closing door after horse left barn

@ F68.10

<Did you try bashing cranks or medical decisions in medical blogs hosted by newspapers?

Ah, in my revoked comments, I was saying some bad things about Raoult. It was back in March, when he was walking on water and multiplying HCQ..
I’m at a loss to tell you if that counts..

@ Athaic

“Ah, in my revoked comments, I was saying some bad things about Raoult.”

Not surprised. I had the nerve to mention that a (cranky) member of the Academy of Medicine was spouting shit contradicted by studies that got its author fired. An author that Orac defended. Got banned. Medical blog on Le Monde. Not a crank blog….

Misplaced civility kills rational discourse.

refusing masks offered by Democratic Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester (Del.) while in the room. In a tweet Friday, Blunt said she was “disappointed” by her colleagues who refused masks. “My goal, in the midst of what I feared was a superspreader event, was to make the room at least a little safer.”

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/01/congressional-doctor-warns-insurrection-may-have-been-superspreader-event/

“Why should the R’s be the only ones with it? Now’s our chance, boys!” — Matt Gaetz, probably

I am very annoyed about this, since one of the people infected is my Rep (or the Rep two streets over, I’m on the border and I can’t tell).

No one should have to make the decision “rampaging goons with guns or plague rats”.

And in the news this morning, guess who else just happened to follow the crowd and wander into the Capitol on Wednesday?

Our old friend, Simone Gold!!!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/simone-gold-capitol-riot-coronavirus/2021/01/12/d1d39e84-545f-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html

Although dozens of Capitol Police officers were injured when they were overrun by pro-Trump protesters and one later died as a result, Gold said she did not witness any violence.

“I can certainly speak to the place that I was, and it most emphatically was not a riot,” the California resident said in a phone interview Monday. “Where I was, was incredibly peaceful.”

Gold confirmed that she went inside the Capitol, saying she followed a crowd and assumed that it was legal to do so. She said she has not been contacted by anyone in law enforcement.

She was joined by John Strand, communications director of America’s Frontline Doctors.

Gold said she traveled to Washington to speak at a “Rally for Health Freedom” on the East side of the Capitol on Wednesday afternoon. She attended the rally along with John Strand, the communications director for America’s Frontline Doctors, a group she founded last year to speak out against the government’s efforts to contain the coronavirus. Strand is pictured next to her in the photos circulated by the FBI and D.C. police.

Asked for comment, Strand wrote in a statement to The Post that he was at the event to assist Gold and “ensure her safety.”

You better watch it, buddy; Simone Gold has asked people to stop saying negative things* about her and she has hired Lin Wood to sue everybody.

https://youtu.be/4m44_lH6XkA?t=191

UPDATE 1/12/2021, 11:15am EST: And now there is a third. Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill) announced Tuesday morning that he, too, has tested positive for COVID-19 after sheltering with maskless Republican colleagues.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/01/second-dem-has-covid-after-riot-calls-for-fines-against-maskless-republicans/

maskholes

*ohh, you are sly. You didn’t actually “say” anything negative about her.

It turns out that in addition to Simone Gold, there was apparently at least one other Capitol “insurrectionist”/mob participant/gee-I-was-just-along-for-the-ride type who’s been linked to fear and loathing of vaccines.

The self-described “QAnon shaman”, who showed up wearing horns, a bearskin headdress and red, white and blue face paint reportedly got booted out of the Navy for refusing a vaccine.

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/qanon-shaman-guy-navy-veteran-vaccine/

Since Chansley already qualifies for martyr status (having been brought up on charges) he might become the next face of the antivax movement.*

*he’s probably a revered figure over at the Organic Consumers Association for having refused to eat in jail unless given organic food. A judge has agreed he should have it as part of a strict shaman diet. I am not making this up.

Quite a few others were there. Apparently both Denise from Freedom Angels and Leigh Dundas, the scientologist lawyer, were sprayed with tear gas. Dundas said some pretty extreme thing.

Other antivaccine activists that spoke included nurse Erin Marie and friends, and other people there included Rita Palma from New York, Sandy Spaetti, Del Bigtree, and more. I don’t think they went into the capitol, though.

@Dorit,

I can’t wait to see what evidence of Russian interference in the last election Trump has.

Since she thinks the Lincoln assassination is an appropriate precedent, I wonder if she thinks the people arrested in this incident should be tried under civil or military justice?

“as part of a strict shaman diet.”

#WWG1WGA… get your mitts off muh wholefoods arabica-sourced salad! Lesser co-jailed underling.

“Send in international observers”

If you could petition your peeps to do that, that would be great.

Apparently the judge and the U.S. Marshalls are agreeing to his food request.

https://nypost.com/2021/01/12/qanon-rioter-jake-angeli-to-be-given-organic-meals-in-jail/

It sounds like a blend of confirmation bias (he remembers one or two times he got sick after eating normal food) combined with motivated reasoning (he has bought into the “organic is healthier” claim).

I used to think that eating at Taco Bell gave me a case of diarrhea, but it was more likely a mix of too much sugar water and not enough fiber in my diet.

I know one elderly person who refused to move to assisted living because she got sick once after eating the cafeteria food at her apartment complex. (She has some medical problems affecting her stomach.)

A mild rebuke to Lin Wood.

“A Delaware Superior Court judge slammed pro-Trump attorney Lin Wood in a Monday decision, revoking Wood’s right to represent ex-Trump aide Carter Page in a defamation suit stemming from the Mueller investigation.

“The conduct of Mr. Wood, albeit not in my jurisdiction, exhibited a toxic stew of mendacity, prevarication and surprising incompetence,” Judge Craig Karsnitz wrote.

Karsnitz said that he is required to “ensure that those practicing before me are of sufficient character, and conduct themselves with sufficient civility and truthfulness,” particularly when out-of-state counsel is selected. Wood is based in Georgia…

Karsnitz also made mention of Wood’s tweets, specifically one calling for the arrest and execution of Vice President Mike Pence and another against Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts “too disgusting and outrageous to repeat”—tweets which the judge said partly “incited” the January 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol.”

http://newsweek.com/pro-trump-attorney-lin-wood-not-sufficient-character-practice-law-decides-judge-1560898

Ouch. Will Wood sue the judge for defamation?

“Will Wood sue the judge for defamation?”

I would guess “no”* after the secret service and various other agencies stops by for a chat. Apparently, some of his parlays make his twitter look like he was suggesting how to nurse kittens.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/01/parlers-amateur-coding-could-come-back-to-haunt-capitol-hill-rioters/

https://gizmodo.com/parler-users-breached-deep-inside-u-s-capitol-building-1846042905

80 Tbytes. Location data. oof. It wouldn’t surprize me one bit if many of that gang’s phones slipped onto congressional wifi.

*I wouldn’t count out Wood sneaking an electronic device or two tucked up inside his prison wallet with which to rouse up a ragtag fugitive gaggle of rednecks to go to his house and yell stuff, though.

“a toxic stew of mendacity, prevarication and surprising incompetence”

Which of our favorite woo/antivax/conspiracy websites does this description most closely fit?

Good idea. there are actually good recipes in there, although it takes some poking around.

From another source, I signed up for a start of the year program to get in shape. The first post was about drinking lemon water to balance my body’s pH and some food recommendations to detox my body !?!?!?

There may be some good exercises but my 3 mile walks in the park are probably about as good.

@squirrelelite: If I never hear someone recommend room-temperature lemon water as a “health” thing again it will be too soon. It is so common and so dumb.

That is great news {in mice}. Most of my mice with MS ended up in snake bellies before they became like Micheal J. Fox or Neil Cavuto.

jk. It is great news. I’ll just assume you will be doing a Hawking before taking it?

A treatment for multiple sclerosis? This IS great news.
For mice, at least, as you pointed out.

@ Tim

Eh, my “for mice, at least” was a facetious acknowledgement that humans are not mice, so results need to be confirmed in human before we uncork the champagne..
As we have kept pointing here and some other places for the past year whenever people hawked some magic pill.

OT, – well, Covid-related – I think you may like the names of the instruments:
Mid-way down, paragraph starting with “The state leased the space for the lab”.

Also, a great story about people in charge taking the long view AND addressing the current little infectious annoyance. While supporting the private sector,, despite being nasty leftists. They understand what “investment” means.
Which should please the people ranting against commifornia, if they were consistent in any way. But I digress.
I wish my state was more like this. Our (mostly righ-wing) French leaders are busy fumbling around setting up testing facilities and vaccine distribution. Generally looking for cheap, quick short-term solutions. I think it will be some time before I may get a vaccine.

@ Athaic

Did you notice how vaccine policy is debated in France? By mobile messaging between high-ranking politicians?

“Hold Tight! We’ll get to screw these bastards!” — Macron to Véran, minister of health.

That’s the impact of politicking on health issues the way we’ve witnessed during the pandemic: too many idiots – within the administration too – to take the time to bother with formal niceties.

And now that we got the Pfizer vaccine documents cracking of the European Medical Agency (by the Lazarus Group? Seems people are blaming the Russians in France and not the North Koreans… suits them to believe what they want to believe…), we’re going to witness a huuuuge huuuuge spike of disinformation: we’re going to face accusations of Vaccines = Big Pharma = European Bureaucrats = Pull Out of the EU! It’s going to be that simple, that direct, and that brutal of an attack from the budding european and french branches of the QAnon religion.

Oh well!… I’m monitoring the Gotrunk-like fusion of catholic right-wingism with QAnon-like nonsense around here. And I must say: it’s a blessing to live in these times.

@Athaic

hehe. They were wise not to include a ‘Stan’; put it in the same room with ‘Shelly’ and both machines would be acting up like unbalanced washing machines on spin cycle.

I must say, if it doesn’t mess with the test, sucking on rock salt is the most rapid way to generate gallons of saliva; much better than smelling a pickle.

@ F68.10

Did you notice how vaccine policy is debated in France?

My own take is how amateurishly vaccine policy seems to be organized.
But it’s all through personal and thus highly subjective experience.

You know, these super-expensive freezers, to store vaccines at -80°C? We have one in our lab. Empty.
And we were contacted by a nearby colleague who has at hand a whole empty building which could be set-up as a vaccination center. Great minds think alike.
We signaled their existences to the local regional authorities, and our willingness to make them available.
Some undersecretary answered us that they are not interested.

You pointed that French tend to be very statists. I think that we really are control freaks.

@ Athaic

The place that sends you mad.

“No! We do not want to register a galley!”

Honestly, if Jupiter (i.e. Macron’s self-given nickname) could use this opportunity to discharge thunderbolts and electrocute his administration, something good could emerge from this pandemic.

Want to respond to Orac? Here's your chance. Leave a reply!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.