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

61–70 of 649 posts

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#61

Post by yuubi »

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…

They are the recipe for one piece of the virus (which is important to its function, so hopefully among the parts least subject to mutation), and then your cells that get vaccine in them make the foreign protein, which then causes the usual immune response to foreign proteins. The difference from what you said is that the code in the vaccine is for the foreign stuff, and the immune stuff comes from your immune system.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#62

Post by Nursie »

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…

It’s more that they contain coded instructions to create a protein which the immune system can then react to, and learning to react that protein confers the ability to react to the virus (which has that protein in its surface)

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#63

Post by tux3 »

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 -…

> Social IQ isn't really HN's forte.

Rude and uncalled for, even after your edit.

Patient discussion is ineffective on people who are acting in bad faith. It is counterproductive.

There is no debate to be had. No one is genuinely trying to learn anything here.

By giving con artists and dangerous vaccine conspiracies a space, you legitimize their line of questionning.

LKML is not a place to send anti-vax emails or to be "just asking questions". Deplatforming works.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#64

Post by AndrewBissell »

seattle_spring wrote: post #45
dvt wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 -…

Maybe so, but I've observed that attitude to be far more prevalent on the anti-vax side than the pro-science side. You don't really see people who advocate for the vaccine calling anyone who disagrees "sheeple," "NPCs," etc., nor do they whine about downvotes or "being silenced," or misattribute moderation to first amendment violations.

> You don't really see people who advocate for the vaccine calling anyone who disagrees "sheeple," "NPCs," etc

No, the rough equivalents are "anti-vaxxer" or "crazy," there's even an "insane" right at the top of the Torvalds email. And they don't tend to complain about being silenced because that's a treatment they are often advocating for others and rarely if ever see applied to themselves.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#65

Post by kube-system »

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…

> But from what I gather, mRNA vaccines basically inject your body with a coded recipe for how to manufacture the immune stuff it normally manufactures in reaction to an infection, only without having to first be infected.

The mRNA in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines contains the instructions to make copies of just the spike protein from the outside of the virus. During the short lifetime of the mRNA, your body will follow these instructions and produce these spikes. Alone, this protein isn’t a virus and is pretty much inert.

Then, your body naturally recognizes this protein as a foreign substance and creates antibodies to attack it.

If the real virus enters your body later, your body will already have antibodies that recognize the spike and will immediately start fighting it off, faster than it normally would if you got infected without already having the antibodies.

It’s like a training program for your immune system.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#66

Post by aantix »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #52
dvt wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 -…

> If you're seriously trying to convince someone they're wrong, you need to be kind, be patient, and have a calm, productive discussion I am doubtful someone spreading anti-vax nonsense can be convinced they’re wrong. (Emphasis on spreading, not just believing or questioning.) What one can do is inhibit the spread of their misinformation. For that purpose, given the stakes, being direct to the point of roughness can…

He just screamed at them.

Getting angry is easy.

Persuasion is the hard part.

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#67

Post by Nursie »

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 -…

So what is the right way to deal with people using a technical mailing list to spread misinformation about vaccines in the midst of a pandemic?

Kittens and sweet tea?

Re: Linus Torvalds on mRNA Vaccines

#70

Post by swader999 »

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 the AZ vaccine a few weeks ago. Yesterday I had a flame heme show up on a retina scan at the eye doc. Was it the vax? Perhaps, the Oxford UK study said these kinds of events are slightly more likely from what they've seen.

Post reply on HN