Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Bad science Medicine

Does spike protein from COVID-19 vaccines interfere with DNA damage repair?

A study claiming that COVID-19 spike protein gets into the nucleus and inhibits DNA damage repair, thus increasing the chances of cancer, has gone viral. Even if it shows exactly what the authors claim it shows, it is not evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are unsafe.

Every so often there is a study that goes so viral that people start sending it to me and asking me if there’s anything to it. Sometimes I act and write about such studies; sometimes I do not. Sometimes I roll my eyes at the study and think it’s not worth bothering with, only to see how widely it is being disseminated to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about vaccines, cancer treatment, conventional medicine, and the like. When that happens, I generally break down and look at the study. So it has been this week with a study out of Sweden that is being spread far and wide that claims that spike protein gets into the nucleus and interferes with the repair of DNA damage (specifically double-stranded breaks in DNA) by blocking the action of BRCA1, a very important DNA damage repair protein, and 53BP1. For reference, BRCA1 mutations can predispose to a very high lifetime risk of certain cancers, in particular breast and ovarian cancer.

[Orac note: Sorry this is late. Somehow the scheduled posting feature of WordPress didn’t work, and I didn’t notice it until now.]

This is the study. And this is the way antivaxxers are spinning it:

This study shows no such thing.
That’s a lot to hang on a single in vitro study that lacks certain controls.
No, this study shows nothing of the sort.

One example of what I’m talking about is this video, which has been viewed 1.6 million times already in which Dr. Mikolaj Raszek wildly speculates that the results of the study urgently need to be confirmed and could demand the reconfiguration of vaccine design because of the risk of cancer from spike protein from vaccines:

Spoiler alert: Even if this study is correct (and its methodological shortcomings produce a great deal of doubt about that, as I’ll discuss), it’s just an in vitro study, and, more importantly, from a strictly biological and logical standpoint it doesn’t mean that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer through interference with DNA damage repair. Dr. Raszek describes this study as a “game changer.” Another spoiler alert: It’s not.

So what is the key “finding” of this study. I’ll cut to the chase (unusual for me) and list the abstract:

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS–CoV–2) has led to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID–19) pandemic, severely affecting public health and the global economy. Adaptive immunity plays a crucial role in fighting against SARS–CoV–2 infection and directly influences the clinical outcomes of patients. Clinical studies have indicated that patients with severe COVID–19 exhibit delayed and weak adaptive immune responses; however, the mechanism by which SARS–CoV–2 impedes adaptive immunity remains unclear. Here, by using an in vitro cell line, we report that the SARS–CoV–2 spike protein significantly inhibits DNA damage repair, which is required for effective V(D)J recombination in adaptive immunity. Mechanistically, we found that the spike protein localizes in the nucleus and inhibits DNA damage repair by impeding key DNA repair protein BRCA1 and 53BP1 recruitment to the damage site. Our findings reveal a potential molecular mechanism by which the spike protein might impede adaptive immunity and underscore the potential side effects of full-length spike-based vaccines.

First of all, note that this study really has nothing to do with vaccines, but the authors can’t help but throw in some verbiage that allowed antivaxxers to easily make it about vaccines. The scientists here are testing the hypothesis that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines that use full-length spike protein from SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Yet, they can’t help but speculate in the abstract that their work could “underscore the potential side effects of full-length spike-based vaccines.” Later, in the discussion, they write:

In contrast, our data provide valuable details on the involvement of spike protein subunits in DNA damage repair, indicating that full–length spike–based vaccines may inhibit the recombination of V(D)J in B cells, which is also consistent with a recent study that a full–length spike–based vaccine induced lower antibody titers compared to the RBD–based vaccine [28]. This suggests that the use of antigenic epitopes of the spike as a SARS–CoV–2 vaccine might be safer and more efficacious than the full–length spike. Taken together, we identified one of the potentially important mechanisms of SARS–CoV–2 suppression of the host adaptive immune machinery. Furthermore, our findings also imply a potential side effect of the full–length spike–based vaccine. This work will improve the understanding of COVID–19 pathogenesis and provide new strategies for designing more efficient and safer vaccines.

Interestingly, the reference cited doesn’t seem to show anything of the sort. In fact, it doesn’t even mention vaccines, much less receptor binding domain (RBD) COVID-19 vaccines or even the RBD itself. (RBD is just the part of the spike protein that binds ACE-receptor to enter the cell.) Rather, it is a paper about how SARS-CoV-2 mRNA can be found in exosomes, which might help spread the infection. I rather suspect that the authors meant to cite this paper (although I could be mistaken), which reviews data and marshals arguments to suggest that RBD-targeted vaccines are at least not inferior to the current vaccines that use the entire spike protein and very well might be superior. Either way, though, the paper under discussion doesn’t really support the idea that spike protein causes cancer.

Let me boil it down in a way that I’ve boiled it down to people who have written to me. Let’s, for the sake of argument, assume that this paper, even though it’s an in vitro paper using nothing but cell culture methods, is completely valid and the spike protein can enter the nucleus of cells, either from infection or from mRNA vaccination, and bind to important proteins involved in DNA damage repair, thus inhibiting their ability to fix DNA damage, which in the long run can lead to cancer. You know what produces a crapton of spike protein in the cells of many different organs throughout the body? You guessed it! SARS-CoV-2 infection!

Now compare that to vaccination, in which a small amount of mRNA is injected into skeletal muscle (usually the deltoid muscle), where it gets taken up by some muscle cells, there to make SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which is then displayed on the cell surface and stimulates an immune response. (It is true that vaccine-spike protein does get into the blood—for instance, from the Moderna vaccine—but it’s at an incredibly low concentration, so much so that it took the development of special assays even to detect it, as I discussed a while back.) Basically, if there is a cancer risk or risk of other harm from mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, the very worst we could expect is that tumors might develop at the injection site. Of course, even that is very unlikely, again taking the findings of this study at face value, because muscle cells do not replicate and DNA damage repair mechanisms tend to impact cancer only in replicating cells. (Again, compare that to the crapton of spike protein that a SARS-CoV-2 infection produces in the cells of the lungs and other organs, which if you believe the conclusions of this study as spun by antivaxxers, would imply that it is COVID-19 survivors who need to worry about an increased risk of cancer, not those who are vaccinated.) To go beyond that requires postulating that the vaccine mRNA somehow gets into other cells (such as the various white blood cells that circulate in the area, fibroblast in the connective tissue of the muscle fibers, or into the cells of the vasculature in the area) and causes cancer would produce the same result: Local cancers.

Let’s look at it this way. The authors speculate:

Although it is debatable whether SARS–CoV–2 directly infects lymphocyte precursors [26,27], some reports have shown that infected cells secrete exosomes that can deliver SARS–CoV–2 RNA or protein to target cells [28,29].

Remember, the entire hypothesis behind the study is that the spike protein can interfere with DNA damage repair mechanisms in immune cells—a process known as V(D)J recombination—which are important in the the mechanisms of DNA recombination occurring in specific immune precursor cells that lead to the production of specific antibodies. It is this mechanism by which, the authors propose, SARS-CoV-2 might inhibit the immune response to its infection. Yet right here the authors admit that it’s not clear whether SARS-CoV-2 directly infects these cells and have to resort to a handwaving argument about how exosomes (small lipid particles) might carry SARS-CoV-2 mRNA, a process whose significance, even if it occurs, is not yet clear in terms of its ability to contribute to the progression of COVID-19 infection. I’ve also discussed exosomes before in the context of germ theory denial, in which certain deniers have claimed that SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t exist and what is being seen is actually exosomes.

You can stop reading right here if you want, as these are the main reasons why this study does not cast doubt on the safety of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines through the supposed ability of the spike protein to inhibit DNA damage repair. Or you can join me as I continue the discussion, specifically describing how the study itself has a number of problems that call into doubt whether its data support its conclusions. At best, this paper is difficult to interpret and not at all clear evidence for the conclusions that its authors make, which is probably why it was published in an MDPI journal, rather than a good virology or molecular biology journal, whose reviewers would certainly have demanded more controls and grilled the authors more about their methods. (MDPI journals tend to be bottom-feeding crappy journals, in my experience and estimation.)

Before I discuss some of the problems with this paper, I have to noe that I’m not an immunologist or an expert in DNA damage repair mechanisms. I am, however, a PhD molecular biologist in addition to being a surgeon, and I’m not alone in noticing the problems. So let’s look at what the authors did. In one experiment, they transfected (introduced plasmid DNA into the cells) HEK293T and HEK293 cells with DNA plasmids expressing the cDNAs encoding the spike protein, as well as a number of other SARS-CoV-2 proteins (NSP1, NSP9, NSP13, NSP14, NSP16, and nucleocapsid proteins), after which they did subcellular fractionation and found that the nuclear fraction was enriched for spike protein, but not just the spike protein. They found Nsp1, Nsp5, Nsp9, Nsp13, Nsp14, and Nsp16 proteins were localized in the nucleus too.

This result brings up another issue. This study is not the first study to look at the subcellular localization of SARS-CoV-2 proteins. (Indeed, figuring out where in the cell these proteins go would be one of the obvious early experiments to do, and, of course, it was done.) Normally, when you get a result like this, you’re supposed to compare your results to past results. If your results agree with past results, great! If they don’t, you really do need to explain why you think you got different results and possibly even do experiments to figure out why there was a discrepancy.

So here’s the older study, which found:

As can be seen in the Supplementary Fig. S2, the viral proteins are either cytoplasmic (NSP2, NSP3C, NSP4, NSP8, Spike, M, N, ORF3a, ORF3b, ORF6, ORF7a, ORF7b, ORF8, ORF9b and ORF10) or both nuclear and cytoplasmic (NSP1, NSP3N, NSP5, NSP6, NSP7, NSP9, NSP10, NSP12, NSP13, NSP14, NSP15, NSP16, E and ORF9a).

There’s a hell of a disagreement there. The previous study found that spike protein was not nuclear and was only cytoplasmic, but the current study found spike in the nucleus. If I were a reviewer, I would have insisted on an explanation or at least that the authors acknowledge the difference between their results and previously reported results and at least speculate as to why they found something different. Seriously, one has to wonder about their the methodology used.

The authors also used specific assays to test DNA damage repair in response to radiation and other DNA damaging agents. This is important, because what gets lost in the antivax ranting about this study is that the authors found that several SARS-CoV-2 proteins inhibited DNA damage repair. For instance, in addition to spike protein, Nsp1, Nsp5, Nsp13, and NSP14 inhibited a type of DNA repair measured by non-homologous end joining (NHEJ). (You don’t need to know the details for purposes of this discussion.) Similarly, Nsp1, Nsp13, and Nsp14 inhibited a process known as homologous recombination (HR), which is important in DNA damage repair. True, in the authors’ assays, spike protein was the most potent inhibitor of these processes, but several other SARS-CoV-2 proteins that supposedly locate in the nucleus inhibited them too. Indeed, Nsp1 inhibited NHEJ almost as potently as the spike protein. One notes that none of these proteins are targets of COVID-19 vaccines and could only theoretically cause problems during COVID-19 infection. In fairness, the authors note that these proteins also inhibit cell replication and that their apparent effect on DNA damage repair as shown in the assays could be secondary to that, but you know what? They should have done further experiments to see if that was indeed the case!

Did I mention again that this is just a single in vitro study done in only two related cell lines whose relevance to the in vivo situation is not shown? Also, no experiments here show that spike actually interacts with the DNA damage repair proteins postulated, just that the levels of various DNA damage repair proteins remained unchanged by cranking up the expression of spike protein.

Other problems that I’ve seen pointed out include a distinct lack of proper controls, as noted by an actual expert, who noted that the assay lacked positive and negative controls:

Given the lack of followup on the results for the other SARS-CoV-2 proteins supposedly interfering with the VHEJ and HR assays to clarify the mechanism, plus the questions raised about the relative lack of proper controls, I, too find this paper more or less uninterpretable.

I could go on, but it’s unnecessary for the reasons I listed above. Even if this paper is 100% accurate about the effects of spike proteins on DNA damage repair, even if spike does get into the nucleus and interfere with the DNA damage repair proteins and pathways implicated, it does not demonstrate that the spike protein made by COVID-19 mRNA vaccines gets into the nucleus and interferes with DNA damage repair mechanisms, and even if vaccine-produced spike protein did that the very worst thing that could result might be tumors at the injection site. Think of it this way. If the results of this paper actually did translate to humans, it would be a very strong argument not against vaccination for COVID-19 but for being vaccinated. That’s because, if these results were to hold true in experimental animals and then humans, they would imply that the massive amounts of spike protein made by SARS-CoV-2 infection in cells in organs all over the body, particularly the lungs, would lead to a hugely increased risk in future years of potentially deadly cancers in a number of organs, rather than a very small potential risk of a tumor at the vaccine injection site, something incredibly unlikely to be life-threatening. And that’s leaving aside the methodological weaknesses of the paper that call into question its results, plus the fact that it’s just an in vitro study with one cell line.

Finally, it’s been observed that before the pandemic and social media’s ability to amplify and misuse science like this, a paper like this would likely have been published and read by few people, influencing no one but a subset of scientists interested in the questions raised. A few with a special interest in DNA damage repair might have used it as a starting point to carry the research forward with other experiments, but only a few, and the authors’ wild and unfounded speculation about how their results suggest that current COVID-19 vaccines might be unsafe and need their design rethought correctly ignored as unjustified extrapolation from results that are at best preliminary and at worst just plain wrong.

That was then. This is now

In the age of the pandemic, this study has been accessed over 350,000 times, and the video to which I linked above has been accessed over a million times. Another video discussing the study and making many of the same mistakes has been accessed nearly a million times. Meanwhile on Twitter, the Tweets above from researcher Jeremy Stark are the only Tweets I could find pointing out the flaws in the study, in contrast to the hundreds of Tweets touting this study as “evidence” that COVID-19 vaccines are going to cause cancer because the spike protein gets into the nucleus and interferes with DNA damage repair. (I included six such Tweets just to make that point, but there are more than I have time to read, and the number has been climbing ever since this study went viral a few days ago.) Scientists need to be a lot more careful about their speculations in their papers, and reviewers need to call them out on it when they do engage in speculation that doesn’t flow from the results of a study. Whereas before studies like this would have languished in justified obscurity, now they provide grist for the antivaccine movement to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about vaccines. It’s even worse than that, though. These days crappy preprint studies that haven’t even passed peer review can be weaponized. We need to do better.

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]

162 replies on “Does spike protein from COVID-19 vaccines interfere with DNA damage repair?”

A question which seems relevant given the authors of this controversial study propose that vaccines using less than a full-length version of spike protein might be safer/more efficaceous:

Do the existing mRNA Covid vaccines all make use of nucleotide sequences encoding full-length spike proteins?

According to the CDC:

“COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle. The mRNA will enter the muscle cells and instruct the cells’ machinery to produce a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein. The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19. After the protein piece is made, our cells break down the mRNA and remove it.
Next, our cells display the spike protein piece on their surface. Our immune system recognizes that the protein doesn’t belong there. This triggers our immune system to produce antibodies and activate other immune cells to fight off what it thinks is an infection.”

Note the reference to a “piece of…the spike protein”.

The Mayo Clinic refers to vaccines producing a “version” of the spike protein. Another site describes vaccination as resulting in the synthesis of “fake” copies of the spike protein.

These sources suggest or explicitly state that cells are (temporarily) churning out something less than the full native spike protein in order to induce an immune response. Other sites simply refer to production of “spike proteins”.

So which is it – a part or full mini-spike-a-thon?

And would other coronaviruses producing such ailments as the common cold (or human viruses in general) have similar DNA repair effects in vitro?

Both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines use the full-length spike protein, slightly modified so that its subunits stay together. There has been talk of using just the receptor binding domain, and maybe that will be a component of future vaccines, but right now the full length spike protein is used.

It all just makes me think that if there is a The Deep State, it is all this misinformation and divisive rhetoric that is “the plan”. Can’t unite to throw down corrupt sub-governments and elites if we’re all divided over basic medicine. Also, it draws people who do trust medical science to be more likely to just go with the flow of what the official narrative is. By painting the conspiracy theorists as dissenting nutters there’s more compliance with the general population, and things that may have been questioned before are more likely to slip through now, because to question them now puts one in with the “nutters”. Which also may cause people who might be on the fence, but would still follow the main narrative, to jump over the other side of the fence.
It makes me so sad, that here was a potential for humanity to come together, to have a common “enemy”, the virus, and to overcome it together. But instead, we have this.

@jjaeg03 Can you simply tell where Orac was wrong, withouyt conspricay theories

jjawg03: “Which also may cause people who might be on the fence, but would still follow the main narrative, to jump over the other side of the fence.”

bUt BoTh SiDeS!!!!1!1!!

Or, if you prefer: “Oh look now see what you’ve made me do”—the plangent cry of the gaslighting abuser.

“But instead, we have this.”

What do you expect? Someone always gets rich from a fire sale.

Well, still denying that these vaccines are indeed unsafe, after so many hundreds of young athletes collapsed after vaccination due to heart inflammation or heart attack, is really like still denying that the coronavirus exists at all.

If and when you get citations, I suspect they will be very specific. For example, one commenter on Twitter shared (unconvincing, since pretty small scale) data about FIFA supposed to show this – not explaining why all the other sports don’t show anything like this.

“after so many hundreds of young athletes collapsed after vaccination due to heart inflammation or heart attack”

When? Where? An assertion like that requires you provide evidence — you haven’t yet.

The citation will be Natural News.

Someone has scoured the world news for reports of sports people, sports coaches, trainers, etc. (mostly soccer) who have had heart attacks, or collapsed on or off the field and concluded they had all been vaccinated and their symptoms were the result of vaccination. Natural News has picked it up and amplified it and it is now doing the rounds of the conspiracy minded, so here we are.

I don’t think that anyone is disputing that some people have had severe side effects to the vaccines – but tales of the coming vaccine-Apocalypse seems to be build on weak (uncited) data at best, and wishful thinking at worst. It may be hard for you to grasp 2 things at the same time – but something can be both safe but not 100% safe. Real life is messy like that sometimes.
Whereas, the ignoring the health costs of the pandemic right before our eyes is a new kind of self-serving denial that keeps costing lives.

“You know what produces a crapton of spike protein in the cells of many different organs throughout the body? You guessed it! SARS-CoV-2 infection!”

In “nature”, the spikes are attached to the whole virus. Do they often get plinked off as the virus floats around?

“don’t worry, it’ll probably be just arm cancer” still sounds pretty scary!

In case you missed the relevant portion of Orac’s article:

“…the very worst we could expect is that tumors might develop at the injection site. Of course, even that is very unlikely, again taking the findings of this study at face value, because muscle cells do not replicate and DNA damage repair mechanisms tend to impact cancer only in replicating cells.”

Again, this presupposes that the paper’s findings are 100% accurate and reproducible, and that what happens in these cell lines reflects what actually occurs in human beings. Is there potentially an assay that could measure DNA repair activity in lung tissue from people suffering from Covid-19 pneumonia?

I’m still waiting for evidence that carcinogenesis is a potential consequence only of infection with SARS-CoV-2, and what effects on DNA repair mechanisms might result from infection with other coronaviruses (like ones causing the common cold) and non-coronaviruses.

Anything new and unnatural should be suspect. The spikes are exposed on the outside of the cell that generated them — well won’t the immune system find it confusing that cells considered “self” have created foreign proteins? It doesn’t happen that way in nature as far as I know. And yes, nature went through billions of years of trial and error.

<

blockquote> won’t the immune system find it confusing that cells considered “self” have created foreign proteins? It doesn’t happen that way in nature as far as I know.

<

blockquote>

This statement does not feel right. There is some guy on here bitching about killer T-baddies all over the place.

I thought they had one job that was to walk around and kill any cells that was waving the “I’m fucked” flag. Bit, then again, I’m not on the jury.

“won’t the immune system find it confusing that cells considered “self” have created foreign proteins?”
Excellent question! (Seriously, good question.)

And the answer is no, the immune system won’t be confused by this, because this is what happens during an infection as well, and it is exactly what the immune system has evolved to deal with. When cells start expressing non-self antigen that’s a sign to the immune system to kill that cell right quick, before whatever is causing that non-self antigen (virus or intracellular bacteria) gets out.

There are also special immune cells called “antigen presenting cells” who’s job is to just kind of wander through the body nibbling on stuff and presenting it on their cell surface to see if there’s a T-cell that has a receptor for that antigen (an antigen is just a protein or peptide or even a sugar that the immune system responds to).

So, nope, it’s not a problem, it’s how the immune system normally works.

Every cell that is infected by a virus will have proteins or peptides from those proteins put up on the cell surface. That is a key part of the mechanism of identification and destruction of infected cells. That’s what cytotoxic T-cells, aka killer T-cells, aka cytotoxic T lymphocytes, aka CD8+ T-cells do for their living.

Sorry, Justa Tech, I didn’t mean to rehash your post. It wasn’t showing in my antique browser when I wrote my reply.

What does “unnatural” mean, other than “icky”? You realize that we’re communicating on the Internet, not sitting around a fire talking to each other? Transistors don’t grow on trees: even glass is artificial. I’m sitting in a building with central heating, wearing clothes that include plastic and artificial dyes.

Our lives are full of artificial things, the product of tens of thousands of years of human ingenuity. That’s not just eyeglasses and the Internet and bicycles. Consider the produce department: broccoli is a highly modified mustard plant. Cucumbers have had the bitterness bred out of them. Corn looks very little like the ancestral teosinte.

not sitting around a fire talking to each other

Even sitting around a fire is unnatural. The only animals which do that rather than run a mile are humans and any dogs that have grown up with them.

@ JustaTech:

That’s an excellent reply.

It seems that people who are fear mongering about the grave dangers of the spike proteins do not know a great deal about how the immune system works.

During an infection with Covid, not only are myriad spikes involved, they are not lone actors milling about but are part of the whole virus which can do….. bad things.
The spikes are the ‘implements’ that the virus uses to access cells.

Please comment more here.

I’m not sure how this is supposed to work. The fragments of spike protein attach to or somehow break bits of DNA, thus causing genetic damage and upping your chance of cancers ? I didn’t read the paper, because I’m lazy, but if I understand Orac’s explanation of it, the paper is saying that the bits of spike protein damage the genetic repair system, causing genetic damage to go unfixed and so causing more cancers ? Having difficulty visualizing that.

I cannot follow most of this, so suffice it to say that I am grateful to be alerted to this latest bit of rubbish–not that I ever recieve any of it. But some loon will come along and refer to it eventually. I will refer this loon to this post and the loon will come back with something like, “everyone there is elitist and mean so I will not bother”. As if I haven’t severed enough friendships over general woo, now I have to screen for vaccination status!

Interesting that in order to study the vaccine and its side effects, you would at least want to have access to the original study material including test results etc. which is about 329,000 pages.

Well the FDA is now fighting a FOIA lawsuit and only wants to release 500 pages per month.

“FDA proposes to process and produce the non-exempt portions of responsive records at a rate of 500 pages per month.”

A quick calculation shows the it would take the FDA 658 MONTHS to release the whole report (and supporting documents) (about 54 years).

If there is an urgency in mandating the vaccines and the need to get a 3rd or 4th shot, why the delay the release of information that will support what the FDA is advocating. And since Pfizer is not liable for civil suit, under the emergency powers act, why not release the documents.

sirillp.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/020-Second-Joint-Status-Report-8989f1fed17e2d919391d8df1978006e.pdf

Well I guess the spike protein and the effects on the human body and DNA and the testing process using those items, might be useful in the topic, to determine the safety and efficacy of the vaccine would certainly be relevant in the discussion.
But then 95% of the posters here won’t be alive to know the answer to those questions.
The FDA has all the 329,000 pages now, why not release all of them and resolve all this discussion? Do you believe the people that approved the vaccines really read all 329,000 pages?

This goes to your normal practice of barfing up hairballs of conspiracy theories irrelevant to the topic of the post.

It may not have crossed your mind that the FDA have better things to do than spend all their time reviewing 329,000 pages of documents and reacting the parts it is not permitted to release, just so a bunch of conspiracy theorists can entertain themselves.

If there was something wrong with the Pfizer vaccine or it did not work, that would be obvious by now after getting close to a billion doses have been delivered. Data mining the approval process for an apparent gotcha moment does not change the real world efficacy of the vaccine.

Well, this is embarrassing.

Simon Thornley and a co-author have agreed to retract a recently published paper that claimed an extremely high rate of miscarriage in pregnant women who received a Covid-19 vaccination. Criticism quickly followed.

“Professor Scragg wrote that the paper was published in a “low ranking non-indexed journal called Science, Public health Policy and the Law”.*

“Professor Scragg said Thornley and Brock made a major error and used an “incorrect denominator” which led to the major miscalculation, after they claimed that “80-90 per cent of pregnant women will miscarry if they have the Covid-19 vaccination”.

“Thornley declined to apologise but admitted the claim was totally false and said he and Brock “never intended to frighten pregnant people”.”

http://1news.co.nz/2021/11/17/simon-thornley-retracts-bogus-vaccination-miscarriage-claim/

Thornley, who antivaxers have glommed onto as an expert witness, has claimed that SARS-CoV-2 is merely the equivalent of a nasty flu, and that most of the well over 3 million deaths attributed to it were actually due to lockdowns and medical interventions.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/126906088/covid19-a-paper-on-vaccination-in-pregnancy-coauthored-by-simon-thornley-has-been-panned-by-experts-around-the-world

*That “low-ranking” publication is a house journal of James Lyons-Weiler’s IPAK, and he is its editor. L-W trumpeted the article’s findings in a press release.

“trumpeted the article’s findings”

That’s where the problem lies: they’re using the wrong musical instrument. All these problems could have been averted had they, correctly, chosen a chorus of kazoos.

Once the kazoos fall silent, cue the violins.

I’ve certainly heard that 89% figure tossed about at the woo-fraught sites I follow but I would bet you good money that I’ll never hear about the retraction and the incorrect denominator from them.

It is a sad day when a non-journal has to withdraw one of its paper-shaped objects from view.

I also note that Lyons-Weiler has republished Walach’s paper that was tossed from the MDPI journal Vaccines for being a load of old junk.

Science, Public Health Policy and the Law is truly a place where junk science goes to die.

Hi Dangerous Bacon. Found out part of the origin story for Thornley’s embarrassing mistake.

Dr. Jens Foell @fMRI_guy, Nov 18

Good lord, this story

A paper claims that COVID vax almost always leads to miscarriage — because the clowns who wrote it misinterpreted the part of a data set that only included pregnancies that ended prematurely. Paper has now been retracted, damage is already done.

Viki Male @VikiLovesFACS, Nov 18

As a scientist, what should infuriate me about this study is how badly done it was. As a person, what troubles me most is how many people will make bad decisions based on it.

But it turns out I’m actually an academic because the thing that really left me shaking my head was that they basically just copied and pasted their analysis off a screenshot of a letter that was circulating on social media.

Their stupid wrong analysis wasn’t even original.

Dr Siouxsie Wiles @SiouxsieW Nov 18

Hi Viki, Do you have a link to that screenshot or a copy of it?

Viki Male @VikiLovesFACS Replying to @SiouxsieW
There were variants on it – it mutated somewhat as it went along, but they all made the same denominator error. But I think this is the original…..

https://www.skirsch.com/covid/NEJM_LTE.pdf

[LTE, signed by]:

Deanna, McLeod, HBSc, Principal at Kaleidoscope Strategic Inc, Toronto, ON [emails redacted]
Ira Bernstein, MD, CCFP, FCFP, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON,
Sanja Jovanovic, MD, MSc, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Surrey, BC,

The thing is, it’s hosted on Steve Kirsch’s personal webpage.

In case you have not yet stumbled across Mr. Kirsch, this is a good summary, although it leaves out Kirsch’s claim that he understands VAERS better than anyone.

This tech millionaire went from covid trial funder to misinformation superspreader
After boosting unproven covid drugs and campaigning against vaccines, Steve Kirsch was abandoned by his team of scientific advisers—and left out of a job.

By Cat Ferguson
October 5, 2021

More recently, he’s adopted extremist positions on covid vaccines, which he alleges are “toxic.” He has claimed that one in 1,000 people who have received mRNA vaccines have died as a result, and even claimed the vaccines “kill more people than they save” at an FDA public forum, which was first reported by the Daily Beast.

As Kirsch has gone deeper into the anti-vaccine scene, many professional associates have increasingly distanced themselves from him. In May, all 12 members of CETF’s scientific advisory board resigned, citing his alarming dangerous claims and erratic behavior. Over the summer, the conflict reached his most recent startup, M10. Its board told him that if he wanted to remain part of the company he would have to stop making public anti-vaccine statements. In September, he resigned as CEO and gave up his board seat.

So how did a man once intent on furthering science become a source of misinformation that undermines the very research he funded?

https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/10/05/1036408/silicon-valley-millionaire-steve-kirsch-covid-vaccine-misinformation/

What do you mean “It’s not evidence that Covid vaccines are unsafe” & why is “what antivaxers say” the focus of this post?

The vaccines use the full length spike protein.
The spike protein hijacks the DNA damage repair mechanism.
The DNA damage repair mechanism is what mitigates deleterious mutations.
Deleterious mutations cause tumors.

The vaccines don’t elicit antibodies to the entire virus, may blunt CD4 T cell response & efficacy wanes to less than 40% within months.

Many people have now prompted these spike proteins to develop on their cells, interfering with their DNA damage repair mechanism; three times in the last 11 months.

Shouldn’t the most pressing issue be to stop the children’s immunization campaign immediately?

You have the platform to do this, Orac.

How are you going to stop the children catching Covid, Christine? Since the study was looking at Sars-Cov-2 damaging DNA repair mechanisms then, assuming the study is applicable to humans, Covid and vaccination could have the same result.

You may then say “children are less affected by covid (generally)” but then shouldn’t they be less affected by the vaccine too in that case?

@ NumberWang,

Re: “How are you going to stop the children catching Covid, Christine?”

Maybe we shouldn’t be stopping children from catching Covid.

Re: “Covid and vaccination could have the same result.”

“Could” have but probably not. Vaccination bypasses the benefit of IgA antibodies from the mucosal immune system & IgG antibodies from the tonsils.

I wonder if people who have had their tonsils removed are suffering more severe covid than those who have not. Tonsillectomy is no longer a “routine” surgical procedure. But is was, when the 50+ crowd were children … but anyway …

Re: “You may then say “children are less affected by covid (generally)” but then shouldn’t they be less affected by the vaccine too in that case?”

Its not “generally”; it’s “overwhelmingly”. And no. I hope so but I doubt it.

@Christine Kincaid

You write and exp[ressf very well. I like the cut of your gib, launguag wise. Why is your intent always so {null strinfg} retarded?

Christine, stop for a moment and think. The study looked at the effect of SARS-Cov-2. Not vaccination. SARS-Cov-2. The actual virus. The one you are infected with when you get Covid. Are you so fixated that you’ve already spun this in your mind, so that the results don’t apply to children?

Did you read what Orac wrote ? Authors used plasmid (piece of DNA) containing the spike protein. Vaccines do not use plasmid, but mRNA. Plasmids are stable, mRNA is not. Plasmids produce lots of protein, and are used in bioengineerig beacuse of this.

It has been known for quite a while that the vaccines can enter the blood, and can get past the blood-brain barrier. It might depend on exactly how the shot is given. I am very skeptical of Orac’s certainty that only tiny amounts enter the blood. We have no reason to be sure of that.

And this study really just reminds us of how little is understood about this virus, the vaccines, and cellular biology in general. That is why it was reckless to force these experimental vaccines on the trusting public. The vaccine makers went ahead without knowing much about the spike protein that they decided to use as the antigen. But it was a big emergency, big rush, so recklessness was considered acceptable.

I am very glad studies like this go viral, and at least remind people that the experts don’t all agree with each other, and not everything is known or understood. Orac ALWAYS takes the side of the drug companies in any controversy. His opinions should be considered, but we should be skeptical as with any other extremely biased source of information.

A few observations…

–Orac takes the side of the data and has been known to criticise pharmaceutical companies.

— if spike proteins are so incredibly dangerous, wouldn’t we want to inhibit their activity such as when they occur naturally in extremely high numbers DURING AN INFECTION WITH COVID? Which vaccines do with much lower and controlled numbers?

— in related batshit news: RFKjr’s book, The Many Crimes of Anthony Fauci ** is highly ranked on Amazon. 5 stars, many reviews.

** not the real title

RFK Jr.’s book still ranks behind The Body Keeps the Score by Bessel Van Der Kolk, M.D. and The Subtle Art of Not Giving A F*ck, which is how I feel about RFK Jr.’s outpourings in general.

By the way, children definitely are affected by corvids, as anyone who’s seen “The Birds” would realize.

RFK’ Jr’s book also has blurbs from Natural News and a professor who denies that HIV exists.

I prefer Larry Kramer of ACT UP, who went from being an intense critic of Dr. Fauci to being a close friend.

RFK Jr is an embarrassment to his dad and uncle’s legacy, including President Kennedy’s efforts to implement polio vaccination.

Let me boil it down in a way that I’ve boiled it down to people who have written to me. Let’s, for the sake of argument, assume that this paper, even though it’s an in vitro paper using nothing but cell culture methods, is completely valid and the spike protein can enter the nucleus of cells, either from infection or from mRNA vaccination, and bind to important proteins involved in DNA damage repair, thus inhibiting their ability to fix DNA damage, which in the long run can lead to cancer. You know what produces a crapton of spike protein in the cells of many different organs throughout the body? You guessed it! SARS-CoV-2 infection!

Is that not a fair point? Yes, I have to concede that it is. (Damn, how it grieves me having to concede to Orac!) Yes, I believe knocking out the toll-like receptors is a far more concerning finding of how mRNA vaccination can cause cancer, but I will still also have to agree with Christine and Indie that exercising the precautionary principle is best.

To say we will do whatever because natural infection might be worse is not a very good excuse. Too much of a mad scientist feel to it!

Let me present you with a hypothetical…..

A new disease emerges which kills 50% of all infected.

However, survivors become immortal.

A vaccine is available.

Do you advocate for it?

I remember reading Gullivers travels, where he lands somewhere, were there are some people who are immortel and they are not envied, because al the disadventages of aging, still we be expressed and at some point they forget everything they did, or read a short time befite.

So being immoral, without eternal youth, no thanks.

Knocking out Toll like receptos ? Your favorite paper said that one is upregulated, two are downregulated. There are 13 TLRs.,.
Paper is question used DNA (plasmid) not RNA, Do you spor the difference ?

I’m probably being very stupid , but wouldn’t a cell producing spike protein be destroyed by the immune system ? So it would not have the opportunity to become malignant ?

“wouldn’t a cell producing spike protein be destroyed by the immune system?”

Only cells that express spike protein on their surfaces are destroyed by the immune system. They are talking about spike protein inside the nucleus of cells. Of course the other question is: how likely is it that cells with spike protein inside their nucleus will also have spike protein on their surfaces. If the answer is “almost always” then you have a point.

(Of course, it has not been proven that spike protein can get into the nucleus. And, as Orac pointed out, there is a prior study that suggests this is not the case).

Nurhachi’s ashes would probably fetch a tidy sum. They could be mixed with tiger balm to cure cancer.

“So, no one knows. Big experiment.”

I definitely did not say that.
If the vaccine causes cancer, then the infection is even more likely to do so, and by many orders of magnitude.

Therefore get the vaccine, not the infection 😉

Indie Rebel:
“So, no one knows. Big experiment”

I definitely did not say that.
If the vaccine causes cancer, then the infection would be far more likely to cause cancer. And by several orders of magnitude.
So…get the vaccine rather than the infection would be my advice.

The Hill, new
Fauci overwhelmed by calls after journal published mistake over beagle experiment
3600 calls in 36 hours.

They claimed NIAID funded Tunisian study on sandflies with beagles, PLOS Neglected Tropical Disease Journal, which later corrected it.

I just finished listening to that one. I am really not a microbiologist and they consulted Brianne Barker before recording the episode. She said that V(D)J recombination occurs in T and B cells but not ‘regular’ human cells which further undercuts the relevance of this in vitro study.

And some reviewer should have cautioned them about speculating on relevance to vaccines which weren’t part of their study.

An even bigger issue is that V(D)J recombination only occur pre-B cells and thymocytes (T cell precursors), which largely occur only in childhood when the B and T cell repertoires are generated. Once B and T cells are mature, then there is no further V(D)J recombination. The authors of this paper lack an understanding of adaptive immunity, in which somatic hypermutation during an infection leads to affinity maturation of antibody genes in mature B cells (no such thing occurs in mature T cells). Somatic hypermutation is a result of a different enzymatic pathway (AID et al.) that has nothing to do with the DNA repair enzymes (plus RAG1/2) used during V(D)J recombination. This process not only leads to high affinity antibodies (i.e., “high titer”) but it also leads to class switching from IgM to IgG and IgA.

In other words, this paper has virtually no impact on how SARS2 spike might negatively impact adaptive immune response.

The antivaxxers where not concerned about the effect on the immune system. They glommed onto the possibility that the spike protein, as a result of its effect on the lymphocytes as described in the paper, could also increase the risk of cancer. The paper itself did not even mention cancer.

Lawrence says:
November 18, 2021 at 6:56 pm
“Let me present you with a hypothetical…..

A new disease emerges which kills 50% of all infected.

However, survivors become immortal.

A vaccine is available.

Do you advocate for it?”

And yet you said about my post on the release of information from the FDA.

“This is irrelevant to the topic of this post.”

when I questioned the FDA foot dragging on the release of PUBLIC information relevant to the damage done to human test subjects and possibly their DNA.

There is a paper about this, not very good one, subject of this post. There is lots of follow up studies. No need to haraass FDA.

This may have been posted but I haven’t seen it….

Natural News claims that only PUREBLOODS will survive the oncoming Holocaust due to spike proteins and radiation. Only they will be able to reproduce.

I don’t know but isn’t that rather interesting language? Who is he trying to entice?

Other woo-based outlets I survey also sound alarming.

@ Montague,

Re:”You write and exp[ressf very well. I like the cut of your gib, launguag wise. ”

Thank you.

Re: “Why is your intent always so {null strinfg} retarded?”

Well, I certainly don’t think my intent is retarded. Can you clarify what you think my intent is?

Invoking inhibited DNA damage repair for a 7 year old child, is more foreboding than for a 70 year old adult; because it shifts the risk:benefit ratio quite a bit. A possible increased risk of cancer is not the only concern. DNA damage repair is also an important factor in adaptive immunity & mitigation of autoimmune disorders.

You’ve made a convincing case for vaccinating children against Covid-19. Why subject them to what would be a massively higher dose of spike proteins through active infection and illness?

Of course, the study findings have yet to be confirmed by other researchers and more importantly, shown to translate to actual human beings, not just cells in a flask.

@ Dangerous Bacon,

Re: “You’ve made a convincing case for vaccinating children against Covid-19”

No, I have not, because:

Re: “Why subject them to what would be a massively higher dose of spike proteins through active infection and illness?”

They aren’t subjected to a massively higher dose of spike proteins when actively infected. They are subjected to a dose of the entire virus, not just a spike. And the immune response is different for a whole virus, than it is for just a spike.

Are we going to give kids three doses within a year too? Three doses of something that inhibits DNA repair?

I’m sure you don’t know. I’m sure not many would care to speculate on that, at this point in time. But … would you be okay with that if we did? Knowing that the spike protein causes DNA damage; would you be okay with giving kids 3 vaccinations in one year?

Christine: “(Children) aren’t subjected to a massively higher dose of spike proteins when actively infected.”

This shouldn’t have to be explained to you, but every virion involved in active infection carries spike proteins. Massive viral replication in a sick person releases vast numbers of spike protein-bearing virions traveling to multiple sites in the body for up to weeks at a time, contrasted with production of much smaller amounts of spike protein via RNA in vaccines that is quickly degraded.

The fact that the entire virus is produced in infection doesn’t mitigate the effects of spike proteins – it magnifies the pathogenic effect, which includes MIS-C in children.

“…severe multi-system inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) (is) associated with COVID-19 in children. Major symptoms include: multiple organ failure, hyper-ferritinemia, and cardiogenic or vasoplegic shock. Furthermore, abnormal blood coagulation parameters due to irregularities of blood flow, vascular injury and abnormalities within the circulating blood leading to systemic coagulopathy in COVID-19 patients.”

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13337-021-00687-2

You must despise children, to wish such suffering and death on them.

@ DB:

No matter how well you say something or how many times you say it, even if others reinforce what you say some people will not or can not learn if it contradicts their idee fixe..
and that’s exactly what we have here.

“Invoking inhibited DNA damage repair for a 7 year old child, is more foreboding than for a 70 year old adult; because it shifts the risk:benefit ratio quite a bit.”

Agreed. CT scans, splashing around in old surplus transformer fluid, the frequent nitro-breaths to blow forth a fire on spots previously used for burning Romex and Lanolium.

The unknown sins of thirty years ago may be catching up with me, I’ve thought pretty much every day since. But these shots don’t seem to be that.

I’ll be all like let’s meet up and “talk” if it comes to mandating something like gene splicing that > than half the people end up with Brundle-Fly finger nails and teeth but without the ability to stick to walls and melt people’s faces. I’ll bring the “cheese dip” and the auto-optics.

“Can you clarify what you think my intent is?”

“Intent” here is like “meaning”. The meaning of the words you string together very good, but, IMHO, quite insufferably wrong as a whole half the time.

I’d have thought the fact that it’s published in MDPI would be grounds alone to toss it out the room. Perhaps Scopie’s Law could use an addendum?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDPI#Inclusion_in_Beall's_list

(Attacking one’s critics by abusing their employer? Yup.)

That folks like Orac and Derek are nevertheless willing to give it the time of day demonstrates a level of respect; something I observe that is never reciprocated by the antivaxxers. Perhaps they should read their Bibles instead? Matthew 7:16 nailed the whole lousy lot.

I didn’t find anything about this on my regular news sources**
it seems that the Proud Boys served as security for an anti-vax rally ( freedomnews, joemygod, democraticunderground,hillreporter, yahoo video)
from the images it looked like a few dozen or less PBs and (not) “thousands” of protestors and NO images of Central Park- which was named- but a Trump building and a street, probably midtown, only close up images .

I only transmit the news because Orac repeatedly warns that there is a link between anti-vax and the extreme right.
Remember this is NYC! The day before there was a rally condemning the Rittenhouse verdict- that made the news.

** I suppose because we elites control all the real news..

Alright, the freedomnews.tv DOES show a large group marching in the street and pasting anti-vax stickers on light poles.

@Denice: Apologies, I might have read that as “sticking anti-vaxxers on light poles.”

(No, I’m not a nice person. But it was good enough for Il Duce, and there’s not much between them, so f’em all.)

Perhaps not a “link” but absolutely a team-up, which speaks volumes about their common cause. And, no, after all the language and behavior I have observed of movement antivaxxers over the years, I am not surprised to see it one bit. It was all very much calculated to get them from There to Here. And I know just enough history to see what that’s to enable next.

See Also.

(I have a close family member who has just got out of a decades-long DV relationship. We are still learning the full horrors of that, and theirs wasn’t even the worst when compared to many others. So when I say NO quarter for abusers, I do not say it as a joke.)

The link is that Orac doesn’t like anti-vaxxers and he doesn’t like what he considers the “extreme right.” And I guess he thinks he’s an “elite.”

And by the way, identifying yourself as an “elite” GUARANTEES that you will be HATED by the majority of Americans. Not that you care.

Trump is a son of a centimillonaire, certainly part of elite. Yet some people like him.

Depends what you mean by ‘elite’ Indie. For instance, I bet you don’t object to elite fighting forces, elite fire fighters, elite troubleshooters, elite investigators and elite race car drivers.

But apparently it’s offensive to your average American to infer that they aren’t as good at science as elite scientists?

There’s a difference between assuming that you are part of the ‘elite’ in a social sense and part of the elite in a particular field. A scientist isn’t a better person than a non-scientist but they damn well are better at science.

You might claim that this is arrogant, but it’s nothing compared to assuming that Barry the chartered accountant can prove an expert in immunology wrong, after a bit of personal ‘research’ on the internet.

@NumberWang: “Depends what you mean by ‘elite’ Indie. For instance, I bet you don’t object to elite fighting forces, elite fire fighters, elite troubleshooters, elite investigators and elite race car drivers.”

Anything that pricks (instead of feeds) their narcissistic bubble is an immediate threat to be stomped on and crushed.

Mao’s Cultural Revolution was a textbook example of this mindset put to productive work. And highly effective it was too… until it wasn’t.

In the end even Mao realized that he’d blown his own foot off and had to mobilize the real military to clean up his mess; by which time all of China was in tatters, wrecked by ersatz civil war. The only remarkable bit is how rapidly they managed to tidy up afterwards and pretend it had never happened at all. Final death toll: anywhere between 0.5 and 2 million (that lack of surety also speaks volumes). And now China is an enormously powerful capitalist police state, and a very stable one too.

And you try and tell these nouveaux Red Guards of today that… they won’t believe you.

@ Dangerous Bacon,

Re: “Massive viral replication in a sick person releases vast numbers of spike protein-bearing virions traveling to multiple sites in the body for up to weeks at a time, contrasted with production of much smaller amounts of spike protein via RNA in vaccines that is quickly degraded.”

But spike proteins administered IV cross the BBB in amounts 10X higher than intra-nasally administered spike proteins. IM administration would be lower than IV but still higher than inhalation or mucous membrane exposure.

And spike proteins from infection are not coated with a lipid nanoparticle, further ensuring transportation across the BBB.

Vaccinations using the full length spike protein will ensure that the DNA damage repair inhibition is directly delivered into the brain, which could potentially result in brain cancer.

Re: “The fact that the entire virus is produced in infection doesn’t mitigate the effects of spike proteins – it magnifies the pathogenic effect, which includes MIS-C in children.”

Magnifies it from what? As of November 1, only 48 children have died from MIS-C.

Re: “You must despise children, to wish such suffering and death on them.”

Because hundreds of thousands of children potentially suffering brain cancer, is somehow preferable to 48 children dying in almost 2 years from mis-c?

@ autismjungle,

Re: “Citations needed for everything in your comment.”

No, they are not needed for “everything”.

Regarding spike proteins found in 10X the amount in the brain if administered IV vs nasal:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33328624/

I’m not citing the fact that the vaccines use lipid nanoparticles, that 48 children have died from mis-c as of November 1st, or that inhibited DNA damage repair can result in tumors. That’s silly. Should be common knowledge. Especially on a post literally talking about the DNA damage repair.

@Christine M Kincaid Vaccines are not administrared IV, repeat this hundred times.
You link was about S1 protein, which is a part of spike protein. SARS CoV 2 does have spike protein, so it should cross BBB, too.
Hundred dead children is a real thing, even if you do not care about them. Effect to DNA damage correction is highly speculative,

Do you not know that vaccines are not adminisrated IV ? It is intramuscular you know. Amount of spike protein in blood is known. There is an immune response against it,and it would been soon cleared
Even if spike protein (a *protein) would cross BBB barrier, how it would go inside the cell ? Spike protein in vaccines just docks on the receptor.
Spike protein in the virus would certainly go into cells, and the virus infects other parts of body than the nose.o

“Even if spike protein (a *protein) would cross BBB barrier, how it would go inside the cell ?”

The protected mRNA goes inside cells, and the cells generate the spikes.

Aarno Syvanen:

First of all, you do a really spectacular job explaining material related to the questions being considered by Orac which greatly benefits the regulars and new readers.

As I said to DB above: some people will not or cannot learn if the material runs counter to their deeply ingrained beliefs which did not develop based on reason or by accumulating facts. There’s a reason they call it an idee fixe– because it doesn’t change no matter what. It is essentially an article of faith with them. Could you “teach” a Christian that Jesus is NOT lord or “instruct” a Hindu that Shiva is only a character in a story someone created millennia ago? You can’t.

When we discuss vaccines or immunology, SBM doubters find fertile grounds for confabulation because very few people know much about these questions and there are many small details, some of which are still being debated in expert circles. In another area, we do know much about how, why and when autism develops in the brain that basically obliterates the vaccine-cause-autism belief. But still anti-vaxxers persist and assiduously avoid the research which shows reality. G-d knows, I’ve listed enough about this research and these scientists.
I sometimes ask scoffers if they could tell me if their ideas are taught anywhere at a university? They can’t.

But anyway, you provide great comments and references.

@Aarno,

Re: “Do you not know that vaccines are not adminisrated IV ?”

As someone who has administered thousands of vaccines? Yes.

Which is why my second sentence in the second paragraph is:

“IM administration would be lower than IV but still higher than inhalation or mucous membrane exposure.”

@Indie Rebel. MRNA vaccine do indeed go into cells, but Christine M Kincaid speaks about spike proteins crossing BBB.

@Denice: IANAD, but I think “idee fixe” goes beyond “devoutly-held article of faith” into Paranoid Personality Disorder and psychotic delusion. As in, there are real physiological malfunctions that cause it, not just this powerful need to believe.

(I have witnessed an acute case of psychotic delusion. It took a locked ward and months of medication to bring them back down, and was horrifying for everyone, including the sufferer, to experience and incredibly damaging to relationships and psyches.)

I have no doubt there are antivaxxers who meet a PPD/psychosis diagnosis; and thus are unable to help themselves. But for many it is the founding commitment for their absolutist fundamentalist faith; and that, if anything, makes them the more dangerous.

Crazy people must also battle their own illnesses in order to fight effectively; and since they do not (and, by definition, cannot) understand the enemy within, they enter the field already badly hobbled. Whereas True Believers are free to invest every fibre of their being on waging their Holy Jihad, entirely unimpeded by either disability or remorse.

“only 48 children have died of MIS-C”

Classic antivaxer callousness. Meantime, the overall pediatric Covid-19 casualty list has gotten longer in recent days.

“Child deaths from a preventable illness like Covid-19, no matter how few, are motivation for authorizing a vaccine in children, the US Food and Drug Administration’s top vaccine official said…”

“In this latest wave of Covid-19, particularly down south, there have been thousands of children hospitalized. And, frankly, it’s an embarrassment in a developed country to have even 100 children, like we’ve had, die of infectious disease that’s preventable,” Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Dr. Peter Marks said in a town hall hosted by the Covid-19 Vaccine Education and Equity Project.
According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 645 children have died from Covid-19 in the US.”

http://cnn.com/2021/10/05/health/us-coronavirus-tuesday/index.html

But in Christine’s view, that’s “only” 645 children. It’s like when anti-MMR types scoff about “only” 500 or so deaths from measles annually in the years leading up to the introduction of measles vaccination (after which deaths rapidly declined), so they can feel good about promoting spurious vaccine-disease links.

Yes, good points, scary facts. The mRNA is coated and prevented from breaking down quickly. I think the mRNA is also constructed to make it last longer.

And we don’t know how long the spike-generating cells are allowed to survive. Can we assume the immune system destroys them within a certain amount of time? No, and how many spikes will be generated is not known. So we have vaccines with variable and unknown dosages.

Too many unknowns. I don’t know why genetic vaccine advocates pretend so much certainty.

IR: Hi there, more facts!
mRNA is inherently unstable. So it breaks down in a relatively short amount of time (hours to days, I don’t have the number off the top of my head). That’s regardless of whether it is the body’s own mRNA or an mRNA vaccine. So the cells that got the mRNA from the vaccine stop making the spikes pretty quickly because the instructions (mRNA) degrades.

The cells that take up the mRNA from the vaccine don’t make spikes forever. Just for a little while and then they stop. Just like they would with any other mRNA in the body. So there is no reason for the immune system to kill those cells.

All of this has been studied (I just don’t have the studies on hand right now). So this is not something to worry about.

@Indie Rebel All this is actually known. There are papers about them, MRNA vaccine half life is 24 h (any measurable amount) and spike protein lasts two weeks (ditto). T cells clear almost all infected cells, otherwise infection would continue.

@JustaTech: “mRNA is inherently unstable.”

But-but-but, Indie Rebel said</em it has been especially reinforced! Perhaps, much like Irn Bru, it is made from GIRDERS? ’Cos we all know cytoplasm can’t melt steel beams!!!!1!1!!

Honestly, the level of paranoid spew is just getting silly now. It’s one thing to know nothing about how things work (I’m certainly ignorant AF); quite another to fill all the gaps with flaming fabulist claptrap in desperate attempt to feel in control and important.

And I guarantee you: not one of these dimwits will ever ask:

“Might there be something I’ve missed?”

It is a question their egos cannot tolerate. An allergy, perhaps.

By that logic, a bunch of your previous comments on vaccines weren’t blocked because they were invalid.

Think about it.

@Indie Rebel: Some comments automatically land in the moderation queue, depending on rude language, number of URLs, and whatever else the software filters are trained to flag as “needs some human eyeballs”.

And since our gracious host does in fact have a day job, need for sleep (allegedly†), Very Important Puppers to play with, and so on, it is perhaps unfortunate but inevitable that he isn’t parked at his keyboard 60/24/7/365 instantly approving your vacant wibble.

e.g. My own exquisite commentary often lands in that queue (unsurprisingly, as I suffer both potty mouth and linkarrhea). And yet, you won’t see me throwing a flaming narc shitfit simply ’cos the whole world won’t lookatme lookatme LOOKATME every seven seconds. Because I have patience, which in fact is not the sick people on a COVID ward.

So sorry to puncture your puffed up messianic persecution complex there, sparky, as I done let all your hot air out now. But not everything is all about you.

@Dangerous Bacon: Rimshot.

† Although what a box of blinkenlights needs to sleep for I dunno. Running software updates, perhaps?

And since our gracious host does in fact have a day job, need for sleep (allegedly†), Very Important Puppers to play with, and so on, it is perhaps unfortunate but inevitable that he isn’t parked at his keyboard 60/24/7/365 instantly approving your vacant wibble.

Are we really to believe this? As if ‘Management’ doesn’t have deep enough pockets to hire an assistant for Orac to manage this blog. Please! Like Indie, I also have to suspect that ‘Management’ is deliberately trying to censor us antivaxxers.

PS: ‘Management’ — ahhemmn, Orac! — I am also waiting for you to post my comments on the other thread.

@Indie Rebel: “It’s probably just poorly written software.”

Page footer: “Powered by WordPress”

Case rested.

Polly, your recipe for success is probably to continue buying phoenix baubles and hope that those and CK can power a trip to the Pleiades.

Dr. Susan Oliver from UNSW did a discussion on the spike paper on YouTube. She linked to two similar investigations that were not referenced in this paper/
https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.15252/msb.202110396
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41392-020-00372-8

She said that these studies did not show spike protein in the nucleus. Also they had more and better controls.

The second reference notes:

Interestingly, some SARS-CoV-2 proteins are detected in nucleus such as NSP1, NSP5, NSP9 and NSP13 as shown in the Supplementary Fig. S2. For these nuclear proteins, we decided to know if they interact with any nuclear structures such as SC (splicing compartment) that is important for gene splicing. As shown in the Supplementary Fig. S5, we didn’t detect any relationship between NSP1 and SC35. Both NSP5 and NSP9 distribute diffusely in the nucleus, but in the strongly stained spots of NSP5 or NSP9, SC35 appears to colocalize with the viral proteins. Interestingly, NSP13 exists in the nuclei of HEp-2 cells as round “dots” (shown by white arrows) that exactly colocalize with SC35 (Supplementary Fig. S5). This phenomenon was also found for Zika virus that NS5 to interact with SC35.5 A similar experiment was performed in Caco-2 cells for NSP13. We found the same results that NSP13 colocalizes with SC35 in the nuclei (Supplementary Fig. S6).

Thanks, squirrelelite, for the mention of Dr Susan Oliver..

I chased down her video and it is just about the most comprehensive and clearly articulated debunking of that paper that I have seen anywhere. The TWiW video is a close second and covers the same issues but it is a bit confusing in part and overlong at 40 minutes compared with Dr Susan Oliver’s 10 minute complete demolition job.

Here is the link for anyone who wants to know how bad that study really is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCs_lgoKDRw

Note: she is a rather odd/quirky character – nothing wrong with that! – but if that worries you just concentrate on the content. It really is excellent.

“Some commentators here have claimed that COID-19 was engineered in a lab. Here’s a story that throws that into doubt.
First Known Covid Case Was Vendor at Wuhan Market, Scientist Says”

From a Wall St. Journal article on the report in Science:

“The reconstruction suggests that early transmission of the virus was tied to the (live animal) market, Dr. Worobey said. Most who were at the market and got ill visited a section where live raccoon dogs, which carry coronaviruses, were sold, which “provides strong evidence of a live-animal market origin of the pandemic,” he wrote.

“You can no longer just dismiss the Huanan market link,” Dr. Worobey said.

Dr. Worobey’s work adds to mounting evidence of a natural, or so-called zoonotic, origin of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19. While many virologists and others who study epidemics say a laboratory accident in Wuhan can’t be ruled out, they believe it’s far more likely that the new virus’s origin occurred in nature…

“My feeling has always been that the virus emerging from an animal source was more likely and my confidence in that is growing” due to Dr. Worobey’s article and other recent research, said Stephen Goldstein, an evolutionary virologist at the University of Utah…

Researchers at the Pasteur Institute, a French nonprofit, reported in September that they had found three coronaviruses in bats in caves in northern Laos, close to the Chinese border, that very closely resemble SARS-CoV-2 and can infect human cells. The portion of the bat viruses that attach to cells, called the receptor binding domain, differs from that portion of SARS-CoV-2 by only one or two amino acids, the researchers said. Their findings were reported on a preprint server, and are being reviewed for publication in a scientific journal.

One of the viruses, collected in 2020 and dubbed in their study “Banal-52,” is so close that it is “essentially the progenitor of SARS-CoV-2,” Dr. Garry said during a webinar this week hosted by the Global Virus Network, a coalition of virologists.

The discovery of these viruses undermines the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 was created or adapted in a laboratory, he said. The differences between these viruses and SARS-CoV-2 show that the latter circulated in another animal after bats, adapting other properties such as a furin cleavage site that made it more transmissible among humans, he said.”

My turn to quote, Dangerous One…

Remember the central issue is how a bat virus got to Wuhan. So now, in both Yunnan and Laos, the only people who knowingly transported bat virus samples to Wuhan — and only to Wuhan — were scientists. Gilles Demaneuf, a New Zealand-based data scientist who’s been analyzing this issue, says the natural spillover theory has “no explanation for why this would result in an outbreak in Wuhan of all places, and nowhere else.”

“The differences between these viruses and SARS-CoV-2 show that the latter circulated in another animal after bats”

My turn. My turn.

Ooh ooh, let me have a turn again! This is so much fun.

Proponents of natural emergence suggest that SARS2 incubated in a yet-to-be found human population before gaining its special properties. Or that it jumped to a host animal outside China.

All these conjectures are possible, but strained. Proponents of a lab leak have a simpler explanation. SARS2 was adapted to human cells from the start because it was grown in humanized mice or in lab cultures of human cells, just as described in Daszak’s grant proposal. Its genome shows little diversity because the hallmark of lab cultures is uniformity.

Proponents of laboratory escape joke that of course the SARS2 virus infected an intermediary host species before spreading to people, and that they have identified it — a humanized mouse from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/

@Greg Actually both theories have same complexity. White coat, or raccoon was the link. Besides of that, raccon where intentionally varried to the wet market,

@DB: It’s probably safe to say SARS-CoV-2 has a natural origin for the same reason it’s pretty safe to say that of any other new disease: because most new diseases do.

In similar vein, we can observe that the foamy paranoiacs squeaking about CCP and Wuhan labs are unchanged from the foamy paranoiacs squeaking about CIA and “laboratory AIDS” a few decades back. They have a need to assign blame, to identify a clear enemy and hate on them. They are black-and-white thinkers: doubt, uncertainty, and error bars are intolerable, if not inconceivable, to them. This racist eugenicist anti-vax cult we’re hearing from right now is a very old character under that veneer; one that has existed as part of humanity for hundreds, if not thousands, of years, and at least as long as Blood Libel.

By the way, there is an extra twisted advantage to their altered reality: look at all the real, proven shit that the CIA, CCP, etc get up to, and how quiet this lot suddenly are. Indeed, it would not surprise that a major secondary motive for creating these convenient boogeymen is that it saves them having to acknowledge or call out all of those real threats; for if they did that then the cowardice of their subsequent inaction would be revealed to all.

Thus, these boogeymen are created not to be vanquished but to stand forever looming as the ever-present imminent threat: a vehicle for triggering and justifying every panicked populist “reaction” the leadership wishes to exact on its many real-world enemies; from writing off its banking debts by burning all the Jews (a fine European tradition), to fixing its PR problems by rounding up every critic and their families in vast Stalinist progroms never to be heard from again.

Hitler and Mao did not win by swaying the majority to their side—they won convincing that majority to turn a complacent convenient blind eye while their zealous minority did all the killing work.

If anti-vaxxers wish to author blame-ready narratives of Good People vs The Wicked, then two can play at that game. And in contrast to their Mary-Sue fables, our stories have a great deal of recorded sordid human history to back them right up. It won’t stop them, of course, but it will reveal them further for what they really are.

Setting aside the rest of Has’ pscho-babble about ‘antivaxxers’ shortcomings, and, in which he is actually do a remarkable job at channeling Denice, I can’t help but reflect on this. ..

In similar vein, we can observe that the foamy paranoiacs squeaking about CCP and Wuhan labs are unchanged from the foamy paranoiacs squeaking about CIA and “laboratory AIDS” a few decades back. They have a need to assign blame, to identify a clear enemy and hate on them. They are black-and-white thinkers: doubt, uncertainty, and error bars are intolerable, if not inconceivable, to them. This racist eugenicist anti-vax cult we’re hearing from right now is a very old character under that veneer

So, believing in the lab leak theory is racist? How is it more racist than believing in the natural origin one? Seriously, drug dealers, hear me out.

Is it more racist to believe that intelligent, well-credentialed Chinese scientists brought a virus from nature into the lab, and, using cutting-edge science, they cunningly engineered it to be one of the most infectious agent known to humanity? Or, is it more racist to believe that peasant, Chinese vendors sold wild animals at a filthy wet-market, and, through the nastiest hygienic practices, they unleashed the virus on the public?

Seriously, if I were Chinese, out of pride, I would be secretly hoping the lab leak theory is true!

Is it more racist to believe that intelligent, well-credentialed Chinese scientists brought a virus from nature into the lab, and, using cutting-edge science, they cunningly engineered it to be one of the most infectious agent known to humanity? Or, is it more racist to believe that peasant, Chinese vendors sold wild animals at a filthy wet-market, and, through the nastiest hygienic practices, they unleashed the virus on the public?

Cleanup needed in the Inbred Pigfucker aisle.

@Greg, it’s an interesting philosophical question you have raised:
What’s worst: Screwing up ‘on purpose’ or by accident?

I guess it could be framed as: Incompetence vs. Stupidity

“Or, is it more racist to believe that peasant, Chinese vendors sold wild animals at a filthy wet-market, and, through the nastiest hygienic practices, they unleashed the virus on the public?”

I think that many Chinese people will be quite familiar with the structure and practices of a wet market and totally unashamed about it. Any open air live animal market is going to be a challenging environment for cleanliness. I’m sure certain people would object if they insisted on dipping the animals in bleach for a few minutes before bringing them out.

Anyway, where did this intelligent and well credentialed scientist get the virus from? We already know that there was an intermediate animal between bats and humans.

If you can convince yourself that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from the Wuhan lab (or better yet, was deliberately released as a sinister mass depopulation plan), then it makes perfect sense to oppose any and all effective means of mitigating the pandemic.

It’s flawless logic, if you’re an utter loon.

@ has ( re an earlier comment)

I definitely agree that diagnosable conditions can be part of the problem: in fact, Brian Deer once got into trouble for suggesting that the anti-vax mothers who harassed him had issues of their own since their kids had ASDs and ASDs have a genetic factor.
Personality disorders may be common: reading anti-vaxxers’ writings ( RI, twitter, blogs) over the years has led me to suspect those often. Very often.

We know that people with ASDs have differences in their PFC as well as in other areas: some of their family members who are NOT diagnosed can have lesser cognitive issues just as some family members of people with SMI like schizophrenia may have lesser cognitive problems w/o schizophrenia. People with problems in their right hemisphere often have trouble making global evaluations and stick instead to more isolated details. OBVIOUSLY, more serious conditions like dementia and psychosis can include anosognosia, the inability to understand that there is any problem- this is the extreme of course.

As kids develop they learn how to self-evaluate their own abilities as well as those of others ( metacognition, person perception, social cognition) and how to self-programme ( executive fxing). By adolescence, many of these skills approach those of adults BUT not all people develop them well and these skills are not entirely in synch with either intelligence or general cognitive level ( although some require abstraction) yielding many diverse types. Perhaps anti-vaxxers who think themselves equal to experts reflect this problem.

Recent research has shown a tendency of anti-vaxxers and conspiracy believers to have traits that are predictive ( including paranoid ideation, narcissism, believe in being special/ not common, persecution etc). So I have no problem accepting that true believers may have emotional and/ or cognitive issues. I indeed wonder if people without any issues can easily fall into CT or anti-vax beliefs. Can it all be education? Or only about beliefs? There’s a question for people seeking dissertation topics.

@Denice: “I indeed wonder if people without any issues can easily fall into CT or anti-vax beliefs.”

I’m sure anyone can. However, after many years of observation, trying to form a better theory of mind with which to understand other people and their behaviors† (in addition to myself), I feel fairly confident in saying that whoever calculated that Type 2 Cluster B personality disorders constitute 1–3% of the population lost a zero somewhere.

Also, reading Not Always Right and r/JustNoMIL is very bad for my psyche.

I’ve little doubt that paranoid and narcissistic traits run far above average in CT groups. This will also make them perfect targets for the straight-up psychopaths who run the major league grifts. Stoke their fears, fluff their egos, and they will give their wallets and gasp for more. Probably some intersection with addictive traits as well. Lots of very unhealthy enmeshments; all very incestuous. Completely self-confirming and self-amplifying too. CT-ers may be relatively small in physical number, but they do seem to occupy a disproportionate amount of everyone’s time and attention (which’d also fit hypothesis). And, of course, utterly unable to introspect or correct their own precious beliefs, or even entertain others’ opinions just for sake of debate, so emotional insecurity and maybe some OCD too. Certainly not over-endowed with empathy or humility as they proudly stand atop Mt. Stupid, casting their scornful eye over all of us little people slowly climbing that long curve below.

Ah, listen to me. Purple prose is my fail. Alas, when every internet moron looks like a nail…

#MorbidFascinations #HumanityIsSoDoomed

† I might’ve been a tiny bit ASD growing up, although long since replaced by much more impressive adult pathologies.

About narratives:
woo-meisters and anti-vaxxers create identifiable, self-enhancing templates. Humans display a solipsistic tendency towards story creation to explain the world, events, other people and themselves to which science can be a much-needed antidote.
Here are examples I’ve discovered:
— A child who has no problems ( or is superior in some way) is taken to the doctor and vaccinated; then, a horrendous injury occurs and disability occurs. The mother ( usually) on her own learns the truth about the dangers of vaccination, the malfeasance of the medical establishment and how other rebels have healed their children, fought back and told the world. She becomes a warrior for truth- an avenging angel- who will not be silenced , educating others, saving children.
— A humble researcher, observing human suffering, discovers how medical science has lied and profited off of illness and how simple herbs, foods and supplements can cure serious conditions previously deemed deadly or untreatable. He ( usually) battles the entrenched perpetrators and reveals their crimes to the world.
— A valiant doctor rebels against established authority and DARES to treat patients in a more natural manner ( see above), experiences success and is universally reviled by his/ her peers but recognised by the enlightened minority.

As in all myths, a few themes stand out: good triumphing over evil, a single protagonist initiating action against a group, overturning of widespread power/ authority and eventual recognition by the world at large. Someone pure without power rising up to meet entrenched evil.
Haven’t we seen this story somewhere else?

No, I’m fine calling it a conspiracy theory. If the “Laboratory AIDS”, now “Wuhan lab”, lot want to assert SARS-CoV-2 is a man-made virus escaped from a lab, they can damn well put up the evidence to prove it. Until they do, they can shut TF up.

There is enough useless noise and malicious agenda going around already; Evidence or GTFO is an absolutely acceptable pre-filter. It’s reasonable for us to assume SARS-CoV-2 made a zoonotic jump, because that’s what the last SARS virus did, and a whole bunch of other viruses have done. And though it’s not inconceivable that this or any other virus could have a man-made source, what is the point of speculating it? And I mean that as a genuine question.

If the answer is: we need to think through disaster planning strategies for research labs, then crack on. But that is not what is happening here: it is racist paranoid shit being flung in the air with the calculated intention of splattering everywhere.

Feynman said that scientists should bend over backwards to show how they might be wrong to everyone else. But that was to provide evidence of one’s own integrity (i.e. show all your workings), not to have that careful honesty abused and weaponized against themselves and others. Don’t feed the liars. Call them out.

To-date we have no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was born in a Wuhan lab. Whereas we do have fresh mountains of accumulated evidence identifying the diseases and sources of Big Lie propagandas. Plus a buttload of historical evidence which proves we ignore it at our peril. A good scientist weighs ALL the available evidence. Oransky et al need to learn how to look better: they’ll find all the evidence they need to arrive at a robust provisional (scientific) conclusion.

Evidence or GTFO. It should not be a hard concept.

@Denice:

As in all myths, a few themes stand out: good triumphing over evil, a single protagonist initiating action against a group, overturning of widespread power/ authority and eventual recognition by the world at large. Someone pure without power rising up to meet entrenched evil. Haven’t we seen this story somewhere else?

Frequently. It’s annoying because it’s childish. Black vs White almost never exists beyond fairy tales; and the Grimms wrote those as teaching exercises for growing young thinkers, not to be taken as perfectly literal by adults!

On second thoughts: I fully apologize for saying that it’s “childish”. That is an insult to children, who are born with the capacity to question and learn, adapt and grow. It’s the people who beat that capacity out of the kids that I want to set fire to. Toxic emotional cripples, who cannot abide to exist in a universe that does not rotate around them.

The worst bit is: these people are not without power. Just being born into first-world society instantly gifts them extraordinary advantages that several billion alive today plus all of our ancestors would’ve gladly gnawed off a leg just to enjoy a small part of. And what they do is squander it. All. Of. It. Wanking themselves silly on their ridiculous pathetic Mary Sue power fantasies, instead of doing something—anything—that would make lives genuinely better. That’s cowardice.

I am sure there are myths for that too.

Some explicitly label their fantasy roleplaying ( Heckenlively as Aragorn; Joshua Coleman as V) but not everyone can be David vs Goliath, Parsifal, Frodo or Luke Skywalker because they’re women so the myths need tweaking. They become Warrior Moms, channeling Jenny McCarthy as we see so often at RI or AOA, who will do battle fearlessly to “rescue” their children and “teach” other mothers. They do “research”, they join groups, they attend protests, they lobby governmental officials and write profusely in self-congratulatory tones.

I’ve looked into a few of the outstanding ones who are often relatively well-to-do and well-educated ( although not in disciplines relevant to critiquing vaccine science):
Katie Wright, two master’s degrees ( her parents founded Autism Speaks), Alison MacNeil, a social worker/ therapist/ instructor ( father was in news), Louise Kuo ( a business executive), Mary Holland ( lawyer, professor), Jennifer Larson ( business owner).Kim Rossi literally learned martial arts in her vendetta against the world.
They are also- nearly without exception- staggeringly white, middle class and above.

@Denice: reading through those Warrior Moms, I can’t help but wonder if at least a few of them are on the Spectrum. Kim Rossi’s obsession (there is no other word for it) with martial arts comes to mind. And from personal experience, martial arts are disproportionately beneficial to autistics.

@ Julian Frost:

Certainly. From what we know about families with ASD and the aforementioned stats on undiagnosed family members with related cognitive issues; there was also a study that showed that when a single child who had siblings had an ASD it was more likely to be de novo variation but when more than one was diagnosed ( like the Staglianos/ Rossis) it was more likely to be genetic/ inherited.

I think we’ve also read commenters like that at RI – although they may have other issues- having an ASD doesn’t rule out other psychological/ cognitive problems- just like people w/o an ASD.

It seems that age cohort can be important because people in that age group ( anti-vax mothers) are highly UNlikely to have ever been diagnosed with ASD/ AS. A British study showed that older people who were never diagnosed when they were children would now be HFA/ AS frequently yielding an overall similar level compared to today’s children. Despite what Ann Dachel says!

Slightly unrelated, but what’s up with Nu? We had Mu and A1, but never this much clamoring that the sky was about to fall.

Could it be just a ruse to get the public on board in welcoming a new brew from Pfizer, and with new antibodies added! Maybe what’s happening in Europe is incentivizing that. Or, could it be that indeed the sky is falling, and Nu is already in Europe?! Anyway, I am definitely smelling a rat.

Do you mean the Omicron strain in South Africa? They do not know how serious it is at present but they are taking reasonable precautions in the mean time. The reason for the concern is that there is a large mutation in the spike protein that could make it far more infectious and it appeared at about the same time as a surge in infections in South Africa.

Wikipedia says that the Omicron strain (B.1.1.529) emerged in Botswana, which has 19.6% of the population fully vaccinated against COVID. Wasn’t someone around here saying that variant creation is driven by high levels of vaccine coverage?

Wikipedia says that the Omicron strain (B.1.1.529) emerged in Botswana, which has 19.6% of the population fully vaccinated against COVID. Wasn’t someone around here saying that variant creation is driven by high levels of vaccine coverage?

And, as Prl asks the question, I am looking around to see who else it’s directed at, but I am finding I am the only person standing.

Prl, I will channel a little Bossche to account. Covid-2 is constantly mutating because that’s what these viruses do. Yet, even if it mutates to a more virulent strain, it might not necessarily take off; it needs to find a ripe situation where there are selective conditions that favour it.

With Omicron, it’s appearing to be vaccine resistant, so highly vaxxed areas are providing that right condition or selective pressure. Ask yourself, why is it increasing exponentially in South Africa and not Botswana where it started?

Botswana doesn’t favour it; it’s just another variant that cropped up there that natural immunity would’ve dealt with, and likely extinguishing it. But, in South Africa, a higher vaccination rate is providing the right kindle for that spark to take-off. Should it reach Europe or North America, that spark will be essentially running into a pool of gasoline.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/chart-shows-quickly-coronavirus-variant-122421144.html

Correction: ‘Botswana doesn’t favour it’.

With a 19.6 fully vaxxed rate, maybe Botswana is staring to slightly favour it over the rest of Africa that might have a close to zero vaxxed rate.

More reflections….

New variants are likely to crop up in less vaxxed areas because in higher vaxxed areas a vaccine resistant strain is likely to dominate. So, does the drug dealers not have a point that we can end the pandemic by vaccinating everything that moves? No! There would still be the issue of getting rid of the dominant vaccine resistant strain, and as we are witnessing with Delta.

Not vaccinating at all would’ve been a better way to end the pandemic. Variants may have cropped up but with none gaining a competitive edge. Eventually, they would’ve all died out

Fewer than 24% of South Africans are fully vaccinated against Covid-19.

So, claiming that the new Covid variant took off there because of a highly vaccinated population reflects ignorance, an attempt to deceive or trolling.

Or in this instance, probably all three.

@Greg, I think that you’re mixing where a variant occurs, with where it’s identified. South Africa identified the variant, because their medical system is more advanced than Botswana.
South Africa may have low vaccination rates, but they have high infections rates. What does this say about ‘natural immunity’?

Southern Africa also has lots of immunocompromised people (due to AIDS), and people with compromised immune systems have been shows to be fertile ground for viral mutations…

So, Pfizer has contingency plans to deal with Omicron? Hhmmnn! I am thinking they are about to add some N to their brew. And, even if a weary public felt that they already had their full, how can they refuse one more cup under this ‘pressing’ circumstance. Sure the antivaxx heathrens will continue to refuse, but thank God for the ‘sensible’ majority!

“Pfizer has contingency plans to deal with Omicron?”

We don’t know that the existing vaccine covers the Omicron strain. They should have a pretty good idea in a few days. Remember all the vaccine needs to do is keep you from dying. Reduced infection and transmission are a bonus.

“I am thinking they are about to add some N to their brew”

If they need to update the vaccine it will about 90 days, so let’s hope not. On the other hand, the present vaccine is unlikely to be totally ineffective against the Omicron strain, so if you haven’t already…..

“if a weary public felt that they already had their full”

Except the 5 million who are already dead. They can’t give a damn anymore. Don’t be one of them.

“the antivaxx heathrens will continue to refuse”

The antivaxxers are a lost cause. Those who are vaccine hesitant because of the disinformation spread by the antivaxxers are still reachable. Where I live the percentage of vaccine hesitant has gradually reduced from 20% to 10%, and now it’s getting close to 5% as over 92% have had at least one dose. People dying around them and ending up in ICU and on ventilators tend to galvanise them into action.

“thank God for the ‘sensible’ majority!”

I’m not sure the gods had anything to do with it. Otherwise where were they when the virus mutated to infect humans and become pathogenic?

N protein messes up innate immunity:
Zhao Y, Sui L, Wu P, Wang W, Wang Z, Yu Y, Hou Z, Tan G, Liu Q, Wang G. A dual-role of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein in regulating innate immune response. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2021 Sep 1;6(1):331. doi: 10.1038/s41392-021-00742-w. PMID: 34471099; PMCID: PMC8409078.
So adding it to the brew wouyld be risky.

NY’s governor just declared a state of emergency because of Omicron: hospitals may restrict nonessential services, surgeries and nonemergency care if hospital capacity dips. People are being asked to uses masks in public venues and get vaccinated. NY has about 20 million residents about two thirds of whom are fully vaccinated and 80% who have had at least one shot. Flights from the areas affected are being restricted.

Want to respond to Orac? Here's your chance. Leave a reply! Just make sure that you've read the Comment Policy (link located in the main menu in the upper right hand corner of the page) first if you're new here!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.