Comments by "N Marbletoe" (@nmarbletoe8210) on "Pandemic Science, Vaccines soon" video.

  1.  @Unpopular_Truth  The greatest fraud was the Pope giving half the world to Spain and the other half to Portugal. . Second was the financial crash of 2008, which involved over 10x the world GDP in fraudulent commercial paper. . I get your gist, but as you have admitted, your original wording was incorrect. The CDC did not say that 94% "died from other causes." Thanks for the correction :)
    2
  2. The cells don't have to die; the mRNA gets chopped up by the cell's usual machinery.
    2
  3.  @jamesbarber2882  Small pox vaccine was not mandatory. (in the US, idk about other countries). Yet, it worked. . Mandatory vaccinations would be a crime against humanity. .
    2
  4. I agree. For example, measles is mostly gone in the US, and measles vaccine was never mandatory in the US. Same with Polio. . Making a vaccine mandatory could actually reduce vaccination rates over the long term, as it would be a betrayal of trust by government and medicine, reducing confidence of our institutions and all that they do.
    2
  5.  @susanwoodward7485  I agree it's crucial for safety. The trial in the US will use a saline placebo. . In general the proper control depends on what question you are asking. . The UK trial was asking "Is this as safe as existing vaccines?" and the US trial will ask "Is it as safe as a saline shot?" . Doing one or the other isn't a question of bias, but a bias of question, so to speak. . In other words, humans choose the questions for "biased" (subjective) human reasons, and then scientists design experiments to answer those specific questions in a statistically "unbiased" way (sample means converge on population mean).
    2
  6. PS I appear to be mistaken, an mRNA can be used many times by the cell to make many protiens. . "The mechanism by which translation stops and the message is handed-off to decay complexes is not understood in detail. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messenger_RNA#Prokaryotic_mRNA_degradation
    2
  7. 0.1% is not a tiny percentage when death is on the line
    2
  8. Certainly not safe to assume. But the researchers aren't assuming, they can test for t-cells of various types during the vaccine response, and they look for certain ones as good and others as less desireable.
    1
  9. @Iron Weed Yeah but the mRNA can't alter the DNA. It's a messenger. . I appreciate the wisdom of the ages, however.
    1
  10. @Iron Weed They could make something terrible, for sure, but mRNA is pretty normal stuff. It's in our cells by the trillion right now. It's just a messenger between the DNA and the ribosome. . To alter the DNA, they have CRISPR technology. If you see that word, that's the time to sit up and stay.
    1
  11. @Iron Weed Yes, nano tech in the future, and Crispr right now, there are some ways to alter the DNA itself. It's getting really easy actually.
    1
  12. False. They said 94% ALSO had other causes, not ONLY had other causes.
    1
  13. What % of the population has recovered in Sweden? . In the UK it's like 10%, so that means 6 times 6 months or 3 years-ish, at current rates.
    1
  14.  @nicholasryan2292  I'm just doing back-of-the-envolope guestimates. . So say that population immunity is 10-30% now, we still need another year or two. . If it's 50% or more... we are there already.
    1
  15.  @nicholasryan2292  Ok fascinating. So let's take the 60% figure. If we are at 60%, outbreaks should rarely grow in size beyond their original group. . That's something we can watch for. If we see that small outbreaks usually get bigger, we probably aren't at 60% yet. But if it seems that things tend to fizzle out on their own, without lockdowns (but with masks and distancing), that would support the hypothesis that we are already near herd immunity. . I personally think the virus has probably evolved to be less deadly as well. I have little evidence, but that's the expectation of evolutionary biology for most non-vector born diseases, especially with quarantine and isolation of bad cases.
    1
  16. The placebo group doesn't know it's a placebo, or it's not actually a placebo.
    1
  17.  @bootburner4544  Legit links to real science there. Yet, I am in the middle somewhere on the question. I'm pro vaccine but anti-mandatory vaccine. I think they are more beneficial than harmful but there are some risks. . On Autism, even if aluminum is in vaccines, and aluminum is involved... there are many sources o faluminim. " A comprehensive literature search has implicated several environmental factors associated with the development of ASD. These include pesticides, phthalates, polychlorinated biphenyls, solvents, air pollutants, fragrances, glyphosate and heavy metals, especially aluminum used in vaccines as adjuvant. Importantly, the majority of these toxicants are some of the most common ingredients in cosmetics and herbicides to which almost all of us are regularly exposed to in the form of fragrances, face makeup, cologne, air fresheners, food flavors, detergents, insecticides and herbicides." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412015301252 -
    1
  18.  @cavl894  citation for that MMR warning? there must be some scientific documentation of that risk, if it was on the instructions. . my brief look at google scholar "MMR vaccine fertility" search has found that the vaccine is not to be used for pregnant women.
    1
  19. More important than a "placebo" is a control group. Placebo is just one type of control. . The Guardasil thing you mention seems like a logical form of control group. If you want to know the effect of the protein portion of the vaccine, the aluminium portion could be given to all participants as a control.
    1
  20.  @themadmattster9647  The mortality rate doesn't matter by itself. What matters is mortailty rate x infection rate. . If mortality is 100% but one person in the entire world gets the disease each year, there won't be a vaccine research program. . Conversely, if mortality is 1/100th of 1% but it's so infectious 5 billion people could get it in the next few years, there should be a vaccine program.
    1
  21. Curious, but on reflection I like that they are using a saline control in one nation, but an active control in another and quite similar nation. . This way we test both the adjuvants and the viral components of the vaccine for safety.
    1
  22. Yes it would stop. mRNA molecules are single use, disposable. . I imagine too much could be bad.
    1
  23. I figure it would take about 3 years, given that many nations have a 10 to 20% exposure rate (based on random surveys), and also we are acting more safely which reduces the total % needed.
    1
  24.  @RyanHellyer  True, but they are the same order of magnitude. . If not then the entire question is moot, and herd immunity cannot develop.
    1
  25.  @RyanHellyer  I mean, for example, that if a UK random sample study estimates 10% of the population has been exposed, then we can use 10% as a rough estimate of population immunity -- for the purposes of asking "When is the herd coming." . It might be 20% or 5% population immunity in reality, but it's unlikely to be 80% or 2%. . I get your point though. The longer it goes on, the more we have to account for loss of visible antibodies, and the more we have to know about induced immunity and how long it lasts. Otherwise the estimates could be much further off than I am guessing.
    1
  26.  @RyanHellyer  Do you think the UK is more than 10% immune today? I think that is quite possible. I'd say 10% is a minimum for the UK. . The US doesn't have the random sample testing the UK is doing, so that's even harder to guess.
    1
  27.  @RyanHellyer  Fascinating! I hope to see the article. . I studied avian malaria in Hawaiian birds in grad school. The principles are the same even for different species. . One of our principles was "random sample" so it's bizarre to not see that employed in the US and many other countries. A good random sample is the road to Oz, just as much as any vaccine or treatment.
    1
  28. I don't think any of the Ebola vaccines are RNA based. . wikipedia/ ebola vaccine lists a whole bunch, but none seem to be of that type. There is an RNA based treatment (but not vaccine) listed in the references. . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_vaccine#rVSV-ZEBOV.
    1
  29. I disagree. A virus that has a 50% mortality AND a very high transmission is NOT actually that logical. It is conceivable -- plausible even -- but it's not natural. . There is usually a strong tradeoff between virulence and infectivity. This is because the 'bug' needs to reproduce, and it can't do that on a dead body. . A disease with a long latency (like, years) could get around this tradeoff. HIV is like that. However, this gives us time to intervene.
    1
  30. I would think that any vaccine developed decades ago has had decades of testing for carcinogenic effect.
    1
  31. The flu is not related to coronavirus. In fact, they are in different 'phyla' -- so they are (nominally) as closely related as a dog and a clam. . Some vaccines work 100%, some 0%. We won't really know about corona until it's tried. However, if we want a clue, we'd rather look at other coronaviruses, such as cold coronavirus (no vaccines), or cow coronavirus (there is a vaccine). . I don't know if cow vaccine lasts the lifetime, or just a year for the cow. Wikipedia doesn't say. Perhaps a vet or rancher can comment.
    1
  32. no, the mRNA vaccine only codes for one small part of the virus.
    1
  33.  @YumekuiNeru  Oh ok! . So... the answer would be yes. They could easily make mRNAs to produce all the virus components, and the pieces would self-assemble in the cell. .
    1
  34.  @rocklover7437  Flu and corona are as closely related as a frog and a starfish. . It's like buying the same car for 90 years and it never works right, but then you have a chance to buy a bicycle, which is not a car. So it might work.
    1
  35.  @susanwoodward7485  Correct, it is not a "placebo" but it is a "control."
    1
  36. Everyone in the front of the line will be a volunteer. Anyone in line at all will be a volunteer. You don't have to get it now or ever. . Unless you live in an autocratic nation of course.
    1
  37.  @Sue-rp6dq  A small number x a large number = a lot
    1
  38. The mRNA is temporary, it will degrade and then it's gone, but it's still a good question.
    1
  39. That's not what the CDC said.
    1
  40. A vaccine will be a big part of herd immunity. Running rapid is the worst scenario. Slowing it down is encouraging the virus to be mild.
    1
  41. Isolated? Like, grown in a dish and sequenced? That was done in early January.
    1
  42.  @johnwang9914  Ok I see the issue here... mRNA is not "added to the epigenome." . mRNA is a temporary molecule. It is not attatched to the genome. It is not replicated like the genome is replicated. It's single use only. If your wife is the genome, the mRNA is a note saying "Don't forget to buy eggs at Krogers." The note is used once and then tossed.
    1
  43.  @johnwang9914  You should definitely be on the safety committee! I hope they are looking at all of that in the research. .
    1
  44. There were animal tests and also double-blind randomized tests. .
    1
  45.  @jag251080  I am familiar with the temporal nature of the body. Death is good, as birth is good, and both are hard. . Yet, I don't play with the odds when a Sicilian has gained immunity to iocane powder during a land war in Asia.
    1
  46. There's no reason to think herd immunity would take decades. Did someone say that?
    1