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

Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

lore.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 649 posts

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#261

Post by markkanof »

threeseed wrote: post #155
swader999 wrote: post #70

Ivermectin and HCQ sure got shut down hard even though recent studies are giving them some credit. If they had been a valid option, emergency use authorisation wouldn't have been granted. I honestly don't know what to think about all of this. I've seen a lot of censorship and stifling of speech. Reading Fauci's emails also makes me hesitate. I think trust in the experts will really take a hit going forward. I did get…

Ivermectin and HCQ were shut down because people were promoting as an alternative to a vaccine. It's not. It is a supplement to the vaccine for people who are already hospitalised.

None of this is correct. Both of these drugs were part of the conversation long before a vaccine was available, and at least withe Ivermectin the proposed usage is as a prophylactic or as soon as you see any symptoms. Not once you are so sick that you need to go to the hospital. To be clear, I'm not giving any medical advice, just clearing up some incorrect statements.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#262

Post by zipotm »

pciexpgpu wrote: post #18

This is good. Now states are combating such hesitancy by drawing lottery for vaccinated folks. Like, having this magic, absolutely mind boggling potion that prevents serious illness and death *isn't* already the lottery win of our lifetime?? People in India and elsewhere are dying because of lack of vaccines and here we have educated, first world countries struggle to get their citizens vaccinated. Unfortunately sham…

"He who has eyes to see, let him see, and he who has ears to hear, let him hear."

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#263

Post by young_unixer »

krastanov wrote: post #210
canadianfella wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been accused of this before and it’s fucking bullshit.

I have been accused of it in another context, so I sympathize with your frustration, but this concept is not bullshit. It is important that we have a taxonomy of fallacies and troll tactics because that makes it easier to detect them. Regrettably, it also makes it trivial for bad-faith actors to just accuse everyone they dislike of some named troll tactic. The cure is not to stop using names for bad behaviors. Rather…

Even if you know for certain that someone is an anti-vaxxer, disregarding their opinion/question by accusing them of sealioning is a fallacy.

Someone is not a "bad-faith" actor for asking precisely the questions that are hard to answer, even if they're using those questions to support a wrong idea.

If you don't have time to answer their questions, don't answer them. If you do have time, you have a good opportunity to expose the falsehood of their ideology. But don't use ad-hominems like "sealioning".

Sure, there are some stupid questions, or questions that come with a false premise, but that's not the same as discounting good questions because they come from an anti-vaxxer.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#264

Post by tptacek »

freyr wrote: post #172
thatfrenchguy wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little bit like asking a random software engineer on the street on how GPU drivers work internally: they're unlikely to have an actual informed opinion.

The alternative here is ignoring the software engineer, and instead asking the crazy person on the corner who’s shouting at the sky and wearing his underwear on his head. Getting the perspective of the software engineer is a reasonable step, and certainly better than basing your beliefs on the rankings of the insane person.

No, I think the alternative here is asking vaccinologists.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#265

Post by SECProto »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #237
pciexpgpu wrote: post #18

This is good. Now states are combating such hesitancy by drawing lottery for vaccinated folks. Like, having this magic, absolutely mind boggling potion that prevents serious illness and death *isn't* already the lottery win of our lifetime?? People in India and elsewhere are dying because of lack of vaccines and here we have educated, first world countries struggle to get their citizens vaccinated. Unfortunately sham…

The "magic" from vaccinations comes from vaccinating most of the population so that the epidemic fizzles out. In that scenario it doesn't matter that much whether you personally are vaccinated or not. An unvaccinated person benefits from herd immunity like a vaccinated person does. From the viewpoint of a healthy young person, the risk/reward ratio of taking a vaccine is bad.

> From the viewpoint of a healthy young person, the risk/reward ratio of taking a vaccine is bad.

Absolutely false. The disease can and does have severe and sometimes long-lasting impacts on young healthy people. The mRNA vaccines don't have any impact worse than a sore arm.

And we aren't getting to a herd immunity level of vaccination if young people are unvaccinated.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#266

Post by moralestapia »

guardiangod wrote: post #203
moralestapia wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what you don't seem to get. I'm not saying it does happen, neither am I saying it does not happen. There's not enough evidence, that's it. Why is that so hard to grasp? And there's evidence of it happening in plenty of other contexts, so one wouldn't be crazy to believe that at least, in principle, it could happen here as well.

>There's not enough evidence [to prove it doesn't happen] What is your idea 'enough evidence'? Do scientists have to gather up every possible reverse transcription gene in the known universe and test them? In principle, anything can happen. Specific cosmic rays can hit my desktop's memory/CPU in such a way that my computer will display a giant smiley face for the next 10 seconds. After all, cosmic rays are known to c…

>Do scientists have to gather up every possible reverse transcription gene in the known universe and test them?

For sure there could be a more practical way, but even if that's the only option well ... science is rigorous, man. Hence why we still have the theory of evolution and the theory of relativity. If you don't like it and wish to go back to "just believing" ... well, good luck, we won't miss you.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#267

Post by 542458 »

skjoldr wrote: post #187
azinman2 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's already been the case that various countries require certain vaccines to enter, or other health clearances. These kinds of standards and even more exceptional for animals, and ultra protective for plants. Why is this any different? Why wouldn't you want someone protected from bringing a (newly) preventable disease into your country?

Because a passport represents a centralized storage of medical data, and that's always a bad idea.

I don’t think there’s any central storage for ICVPs today. As far as I know the records are just held by whoever normally holds your health records - the WHO trusts centres to only certify responsibly.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#268

Post by azangru »

Ok, while Linus so righteously describes the basic molecular biology of RNA, here are some of the less insane questions that he doesn't address:

1) After an injection of mRNA (inside of lipid nanoparticles, if I understand correctly) into the body, which cells will the mRNA enter?

2) The mRNA will cause the synthesis of the spike protein that will be displayed on the surface of these cells and initiate the immune response. Since the cells expressing the spike protein will be treated as infected by the immune system, will it result in the death of these cells? If so – and depending on the answer to the previous question — is this cell death dangerous at all?

3) Following question 2, what are the chances of the development of an autoimmune response?

4) Why do some vaccine recipients seem to develop thrombotic events?

5) Is there a reason to believe that the spike protein itself has cytotoxic properties? If so, is there a reason to believe that the spike protein expressed by the cells transfected with the mRNA can get detached from their membranes and enter the bloodstream? If yes, is there any danger to that?

Edit: I've phrased these questions in the most neutral language of a basic medical immunology textbook, yet, judging by the instant downvotes, I managed to upset someone. I'm not siding with the author of the email to the Linux kernel discussion list; I am merely wondering how much precisely is known about the mechanism of action of mRNA vaccines beyond the basic overview that Linus outlined.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#269

Post by flobosg »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #34

mRNA doesn't change your genetic sequence in any way. It is the exact same intermediate - and temporary - kind of material that your cells generate internally all the time as part of your normal cell processes The m in mRNA stands for messenger. I'm failing to find anything I consider to be a succinct explanation in layman's terms (other than the one in the piece under discussion: all that the mRNA vaccines do is to…

Just to clarify the “messenger” thing: mRNA is called like that because it delivers the message (i.e. the instructions to produce a protein) between the genome and the ribosome. The denomination is also useful to distinguish it from other, usually non-coding (meaning “not blueprints for proteins”) types of RNA.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#270

Post by nneonneo »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #237
pciexpgpu wrote: post #18

This is good. Now states are combating such hesitancy by drawing lottery for vaccinated folks. Like, having this magic, absolutely mind boggling potion that prevents serious illness and death *isn't* already the lottery win of our lifetime?? People in India and elsewhere are dying because of lack of vaccines and here we have educated, first world countries struggle to get their citizens vaccinated. Unfortunately sham…

The "magic" from vaccinations comes from vaccinating most of the population so that the epidemic fizzles out. In that scenario it doesn't matter that much whether you personally are vaccinated or not. An unvaccinated person benefits from herd immunity like a vaccinated person does. From the viewpoint of a healthy young person, the risk/reward ratio of taking a vaccine is bad.

Sure, until the vaccination rate falls below the herd immunity threshold, whereupon outbreaks pretty much immediately occur. This has been seen repeatedly with measles, for example, as it is highly transmissible and it doesn’t take much of a drop in vaccination rates to make outbreaks likely.

Not taking a vaccine if you’re young and healthy is a purely selfish move. Not taking a vaccine should be reserved for only those people who cannot take a vaccine: those who are far too young, or who are immunocompromised. Everyone else should vaccinate to protect the truly vulnerable.

Post reply on HN