Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#31

Post by tryonenow »

jeegsy wrote: post #24

> Both Young and Jaenisch say they received more intense criticism for their preprint than any studies in their careers, in part because some researchers worried it played into the hands of vaccine skeptics spreading false claims about the newly authorized mRNA vaccines. I understand that there are strongly desired policy outcomes to consider here but seriously, the histrionics that follow anything that even smells l…

Which is why I have trouble trusting any policy related to COVID mitigation. It has firmly become another orthodoxy - especially given it's politicization, and the association of skepticism with being "anti mask" or "anti vax". The bulk of related science will be heavily biased - certain research avenues are simply unlikely to be pursued.

There is at least one other preprint floating around now [0] which suggests that the spike protein itself is a general inflammatory agent, and another preprint (having trouble finding it) indicating that the spike protein is possibly responsible for the clotting/vascular nature of COVID. Now as I understand the mRNA vaccines induce cells to produce spike proteins.

So if the reports in these preprints are confirmed, then there is a likelihood that the mRNA vaccine will cause chronic inflammation in some proportion of recipients. And given the new orthodoxy, and the political momentum behind a successful vaccine, I expect that confirmation and acknowledgement of such findings to be a long uphill battle. Particularly given the ambiguous nature of chronic inflammatory conditions. Note that a retroviral tendency of the COVID virus could explain positive tests post symptomatic infection as well as so called long COVID.

0. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.16.435700v1

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#32

Post by [deleted] »

COGlory wrote: post #29

Well this cost me some brain cells. Here is the summary: A retrotransposon/RT (not sure the distinction), that may or may not be active in humans (mostly isn't active), when overexpressed, in the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, will integrate it into the human genome in a preferred orientation. That is the very definition of a laboratory artifact, and there is no biological significance. If the authors want to waste thei…

[deleted]

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#33

Post by jbaber »

vMPQonVtAjLWmr wrote: post #10
Ovah wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It happens frequently with retroviruses. In fact 5-8% of the human genome is from (ancient) retrovirii. Coronavirus however is a completely different class of virus which makes it interesting, at least to me.

Sorry for the nitpick but virii is neither in Latin nor English a plural of virus. The Latin would be vira the English viruses. There are a couple of common variants floating around that probably originate from misunderstanding Latin.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. "vira"? In Latin, virus is a mass noun (like applesauce), so you can pluralize however you want in English because using it in the singular only works in English anyway.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural_form_of_words_ending_...

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#34

Post by dnautics »

COGlory wrote: post #29

Well this cost me some brain cells. Here is the summary: A retrotransposon/RT (not sure the distinction), that may or may not be active in humans (mostly isn't active), when overexpressed, in the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, will integrate it into the human genome in a preferred orientation. That is the very definition of a laboratory artifact, and there is no biological significance. If the authors want to waste thei…

I would not call it an artefact. An artefact is something that is the result of a lab condition (like the type of plastic you use). Overexpressing a retrotransposon is not an artefact, it's the applied factor, even if it's less likely to be biologically relevant.

You're spot on on the comment about suppressing data, though.

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#35

Post by [deleted] »

COGlory wrote: post #29

Well this cost me some brain cells. Here is the summary: A retrotransposon/RT (not sure the distinction), that may or may not be active in humans (mostly isn't active), when overexpressed, in the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, will integrate it into the human genome in a preferred orientation. That is the very definition of a laboratory artifact, and there is no biological significance. If the authors want to waste thei…

[deleted]

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#36

Post by andrewflnr »

jeegsy wrote: post #24

> Both Young and Jaenisch say they received more intense criticism for their preprint than any studies in their careers, in part because some researchers worried it played into the hands of vaccine skeptics spreading false claims about the newly authorized mRNA vaccines. I understand that there are strongly desired policy outcomes to consider here but seriously, the histrionics that follow anything that even smells l…

Yes, but I also feel like you have to empathize with said histrionics when there's a pretty short causal chain from (a) things anti-vaxxers and other conspiracists can use for propaganda to (b) people actually dying.

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#37

Post by Ovah »

vMPQonVtAjLWmr wrote: post #10
Ovah wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It happens frequently with retroviruses. In fact 5-8% of the human genome is from (ancient) retrovirii. Coronavirus however is a completely different class of virus which makes it interesting, at least to me.

Sorry for the nitpick but virii is neither in Latin nor English a plural of virus. The Latin would be vira the English viruses. There are a couple of common variants floating around that probably originate from misunderstanding Latin.

Apparently this seems to be an ongoing and contentious internet debate lol. There's even a wiki article on the subject.[1] The main three arguments appear to be that virii 1) is grammatically incorrect Latin, 2) virus has historically never had a latin plural "as it is a mass noun" and 3) it's a neologistic folk etymology.

While I may agree with the grammatical merits [1)] I'm not convinced (yet). The second argument [2)] that it's never had a historical plural doesn't hold up. The field of virology is much more recent so the need for a plural 'virus' didn't exist at the time.

And 3) is literally how words are formed. If a term used frequently enough it eventually becomes a word regardless of the original grammatical correctness. The term even has 175 years of precedent.[2] As cactus has the plural cacti it's non-obvious why the same doesn't hold true for virus.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural_form_of_words_ending_in... [2] https://archive.org/details/homopathictreati00test/page/48/m...

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#38

Post by Y_Y »

COGlory wrote: post #29

Well this cost me some brain cells. Here is the summary: A retrotransposon/RT (not sure the distinction), that may or may not be active in humans (mostly isn't active), when overexpressed, in the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, will integrate it into the human genome in a preferred orientation. That is the very definition of a laboratory artifact, and there is no biological significance. If the authors want to waste thei…

I think a good compromise here is to publish your results (the truth must out), but to be really clear upfront what this means (in this case nothing) in the context of any hot topics of the day that might want to jump on your research and misuse it.

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#39

Post by boringg »

COGlory wrote: post #29

Well this cost me some brain cells. Here is the summary: A retrotransposon/RT (not sure the distinction), that may or may not be active in humans (mostly isn't active), when overexpressed, in the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, will integrate it into the human genome in a preferred orientation. That is the very definition of a laboratory artifact, and there is no biological significance. If the authors want to waste thei…

Suppression of real data is no good.

Publication of a pre-print that appeals to the use of misinformation for the sole purpose of publicity is another thing. Certainly timing of this could have been better especially in this current covid world where we now use pre-print as an almost equivalent to peer-reviewed.

Also thanks OP for the summary!

Re: Evidence supports claim that SARS-CoV-2 genes can integrate with human DNA

#40

Post by data_acquired »

vibrio wrote: post #28
data_acquired wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, happens a lot. HIV is a notable instance.

Yes, and birds fly frequently, but elephants don't seem too. All viruses are not the same, they are extremely diverse.

Lovable HN snarkiness here. I didn't say that every virus does it. Geez.
Post reply on HN