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

161–170 of 649 posts

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#161

Post by MikeKusold »

losvedir wrote: post #55

I'm vaccinated but I think it's hindsight bias to say the mRNA vaccines are obviously safe. We had to wait for clinical trials to show that. There has been a great deal of research and development on the delivery of the mRNA, what kind of molecule to wrap it in, for example. Additionally, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, but with e.g. the Spanish Flu, the morbidity was not from the flu, per se, but the immune res…

They are not "obviously safe". The mRNA vaccines just had an article today that exposed a link to heart inflammation. The AstraZeneca vaccine also has some side effects that didn't show up in their abbreviated trials. I understand why someone would be hesitant to get a vaccine that only has Emergency Use Authorization.

That said, I personally believe that the benefits outweigh the potential side-effects. If I weren't already vaccinated this news would not have have changed my decision to get a mRNA vaccine.

"Heart inflammation in young men higher than expected after Pfizer, Moderna vaccines -U.S. CDC" - https://www.reuters.com/world/us/cdc-heart-inflammation-case...

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#162

Post by moraziel »

dvt wrote: post #26
weatherlight wrote: post #5

I cant +1 this enough. Thank you, Linus for standing up to the wealth of misinformation out there and holding his ground.

> Thank you, Linus for standing up to the wealth of misinformation out there and holding his ground. Being a pompous ass might feel good, especially when you think you are (or you actually are) smarter than your opponent, but it won't sway anyone. In fact, it does quite the opposite. If you're seriously trying to convince someone they're wrong, you need to be kind, be patient, and have a calm, productive discussion -…

What other options does Linus have by your logic, then?

1) remove the person's comments 2) let the person's comments stand unchallenged 3) engage in a lengthy, potentially endless discussion with this person who is highly unlikely to change their mind

None of these seem like great options.

Linus probably recognizes that he has virtually zero chance of persuading this person's opinion. He probably also recognizes that a reader who comes across these outlandish claims unchallenged may get the wrong impression that these views are somehow being embraced by the community. As such he is absolutely correct in briefly explaining that the vaccines are safe and effective.

And being a pompous ass is kinda Linus' thing. :shrug:

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#163

Post by _ph_ »

macksd wrote: post #15

Absolutely agree with everything Linus says here. But I'm almost equally concerned that there's an awful lot of people on the pro-science bandwagon who don't actually support science, but simply don't tolerate dissent or questioning, and that's unscientific and potentially harmful too. I scanned most of the Pfizer trial and was wondering why we expected the immunity after the vaccine to last longer than natural immun…

You are right, not tolerating questioning is unscientific and harmfull. Asking questions is the one way how you can learn things and also, I find it extremely useful for myself to answer scientific questions. Becauses it forces yourself to review the matter at hand, sort out your own thoughts about the problem and refine them to a point where you can deliver a satisfying answer. Often enough that leads to deeper insights.

I am not a doctor, but some observations from my side, what might be reasons for a different behavior of vaccinations vs. an actual infection. One point, that the vaccine is very targetted, you already listed. Then, the vaccine doesn't make you sick. Suffering through the infection might impact the ability of your immune system to build up long-term immunity. I read some article which claims that getting sick of measels does give you good immunity, but lowers your immunity against other diseases for up to two years. Also, the numbers of the time span of acquired immunity of both the vaccinations and getting infected by Covid are varying a lot. Recently I saw some claims that the infection does give you some reasonable long-term immunity.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#165

Post by anonymouse008 »

stavros wrote: post #145
swader999 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same with the push for vaccine passports. Really gets my fur up and question why the need for heavy hands.

Because people who are in the ICU because they refuse to get vaccinated are costing the taxpayer a shitload of money. I'd be all for "you can stay unvaccinated if you like, but you won't get an ICU bed if you get severe COVID", but that's a heavier hand than a passport.

I don’t know… we let people ruin their lives by throwing dice. At least in the US, it’s a country founded on chance over conformity.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#166

Post by briefcomment »

pjc50 wrote: post #89
cronix wrote: post #33

[flagged]

Something odd here; he's investing a lot of effort into denying Kariko's role in mRNA and he looks like a very determined self promoter.

Interestingly, came across this article where, in the comments, Robert and a partner provide evidence for their role in mRNA vaccines [1].

[1]https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2021/04/11/mrna-ip-competitive-la...

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#167

Post by skjoldr »

Amezarak wrote: post #93
bad_alloc wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I'm almost equally concerned that there's an awful lot of people on the pro-science bandwagon who don't actually support science, but simply don't tolerate dissent or questioning, and that's unscientific and potentially harmful too. Dissent to the dominant opinion in any scientific field is always tricky, but that is a self-defense mechanism. Over time opposing viewpoints are integrated into the body of knowled…

I think it's unfair to characterize people who are skeptical about mRNA and liquid nanoparticle technology as anti-vax, but this is what people (including Linus) are doing. Most people I know are pro-vax, have all their other vaccinations, but are leery of new technology being distributed under the same label. I think that's reasonable. I'm one of these people. I don't plan on taking any mRNA vaccine until we have a…

Yet people like this who just don't want to inject anything that hasn't been studied for at least a couple of years, don't coach our opinions in anti-vaxx language. Stuff like "new species" is ridiculous and masks the actual rise of surveillance totalitarianism which uses Covid as an excuse.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#168

Post by XorNot »

ceejayoz wrote: post #37
Quillbert182 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may not have the answers, but you would think they would have a better idea of where to look than someone with no medical experience at all.

People think that, but there’s basically nothing in nursing or anesthesia training that’s gonna deal much with the nitty gritty details of vaccines and how they’re developed and tested. It’s like asking a car mechanic about steel production. Entirely out of their wheelhouse, even if they deal with the steel daily. (Both could comfortably tell you masks don’t cause hypoxia or pneumonia, though.)

There's also nothing in medical doctor training, as well. Or in fact in most specialist training - e.g. my father-in-law who's an ObGyn couldn't you how an mRNA vaccine works beyond what he learns from reading the same material I can - it's not a relevant part of his training beyond "they work and here's the list you should be giving babies as soon as possible".

Medical professions, the ones you interact with as a patient are essentially highly specialized mechanics for the human body.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#169

Post by hackinthebochs »

colinmhayes wrote: post #75
panny wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll bite. He says it's crazy conspiracy theories. I have family hospitalized with blood clots after receiving the vax. She's out now, but that hospitalization will lead to a personal bankruptcy. It's not crazy conspiracy theory when your own family starts seeing negative effects. After watching what happened to her, nobody else in my family has any desire to get vaxxed. Nobody in my family is "anti-vax" as we've all…

The vaccine has saved far more people than have died due to the blood clots.

That's reassuring from a public health perspective, not so reassuring from an individual perspective. When it comes to one's personal risk, you have a sense of control over not getting COVID, and/or are personally at low risk of severe complications, which can weigh in favor of avoiding a vaccine with extremely rare but serious side effects.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#170

Post by moralestapia »

sdabdoub wrote: post #72
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…

The "central dogma"[1] of biology: DNA -> RNA -> Protein DNA is read sequentially base-by-base (essentially like the read head on a HDD) by a protein called RNA polymerase. As it is reading, it produces RNA. If that RNA is meant to become a protein, it is post-processed to remove various bits and becomes a messenger RNA (mRNA). This mRNA is inserted into another huge protein called the Ribosome[2], and is read 3 base…

If you actually read further than the first paragraph, you would find plenty of examples where the dogma is broken.

>Computational Biologist at Ohio State

Oh, come on! And you didn't knew about it!? Sad.

Post reply on HN