Jump to content

COVID-19 Outbreak


adamsapple

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

The main argument for why it isn't happening, or with such a low frequency that it is really trivial, though, is that if RNA in the cytoplasm could move into the nucleus and get integrated though the actions of this new DNA repair system, this should also happen when we are infected with other RNA viruses, and as far as I know, this has never been observed to happen. We get infected with RNA viruses about yearly (whenever we have a cold or the influenza, which are caused by viruses with single-stranded RNA, like SARS-CoV-2 or the mRNA in the vaccines). If RNA could enter the nucleus, we should have discovered fragments of these viruses embedded in our genomes through all the genome sequencing we have done, but we haven't. Hence, I end up concluding that it doesn't happen.

I want to correct myself. I read some articles and we do have evidence for RNA from other RNA viruses having been integrated in our genome (and which aren't retro-viruses like Herpes). But it seems to be really rare. Scientists have been looking for mechanisms for how this can happen (both the transport to the nucleus and the subsequent integration), and the new article that@downzy posted presents a possible explanation. Which is cool. 

Regardless, this seems to be a very rare event, because if not we would experience this more frequently as we get infected with RNA viruses like the cold virus and flu virus. And we would have many more examples of it happening with SARS-CoV-2 than we (might) already have. Again, whether it actually has happened with SARS-CoV-2 is still being discussed among the virologists.

But even if it turns out that RNA from SARS-CoV-2 can in very rare cases be integrated into our DNA, it doesn't necessarily mean that mRNA from the Covid-19 vaccines can be integrated, too, and there is no reason to think that it would be a more common occurrence. SARS-CoV-2 comes with genes that might increase the likelihood of it happening. mRNA from vaccines do not, and would require that the cell itself has some mechanism for retro-transcription, the transport and the integration. So most likely it will be super rare that mRNA from the vaccines get integrated.

Does it matter if it happens? It really depends on with what frequency it does happen. The likelihood of an integration event actually causing harm is very remote. Most integrations are neutral since they happen in non-active parts of the genome. But in very rare cases, integration may affect the host cell's natural gene expression which could lead to cell death or, much worse, that the cell becomes cancerous. I would think that the probability of vaccine mRNA getting transported into the nucleus, followed by integration into the genome, resulting in disruption of cell function that results in cancer, would be an ultra-rare adverse side effect that would barely increase the natural probability of developing various cancers and hence not be picked up in long-term side effect monitoring. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

today Dallas was closing the Fair Park, it has the September Texas Fair, today after the last people getting the covid shots. The number of people getting vaccinated have gone down, but Dallas is supposed to be about 80% vaccinated, but show knows?

My mom's cousin who lives in Florida had her son visit last week from NYC with his wife and kids. The kids stayed with her, but her son and his wife went to Mexico for a week's vacation. They came back to Florida last Sunday and went back to upstate NY on Monday. On Tuesday they got sick and went to get tested. They all have the delta variant and the son and wife have already been vaccinated. The kids are under 10 so they stll have fever, but are all home.

See what I'm saying. You just don't know with this Delta variant.

Also I went shopping yesterday to a few stores. My daughter needed sneakers for the school year which begins on Monday August 2. Most people weren't wearing mask and that included shoppers and workers.  Still we all wore masks and distanced because you don't know who's vaccinated or not. And since tons of people are still traveling, who the hell knows?

I'm going to continue to do what I've done since the pandemic to be sure and stay healthy and keep my child safe too.

I suggest you guys do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The UK seems to be doing the opposite of what my country is doing. In both countries numbers are rising, yet we are reintroducing several restrictions and the UK is dropping almost all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gavin82 said:

Covid: Update on jabs for children due as rules lift in England - BBC News

 

Lots going on today in England with this FREEDOM day etc all night clubs were open from midnight last night 

 

It’s more like survival of the fittest day.

Honestly sick of this bullshit now. UK hospitals are screwed over again and it’s another round of having to cope with too many poorly people with nowhere near enough staff. Yay! Happy freedom day!

And the government have the audacity to tell us we can’t have fans in the wards in a fucking heatwave because it will help spread covid :lol:

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, MillionsOfSpiders said:

It’s more like survival of the fittest day.

Honestly sick of this bullshit now. UK hospitals are screwed over again and it’s another round of having to cope with too many poorly people with nowhere near enough staff. Yay! Happy freedom day!

And the government have the audacity to tell us we can’t have fans in the wards in a fucking heatwave because it will help spread covid :lol:

If not today then when? We're going to have to learn to live with this otherwise what are the vaccines even for?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dazey said:

If not today then when? We're going to have to learn to live with this otherwise what are the vaccines even for?

There’s still plenty being admitted into hospital with the virus and lots of staff off sick/isolating from catching it again -so why put that extra pressure onto us right now? 

At least keep the masks and some social distancing for now. 

It’s nice people can go and watch football and go to night clubs, don’t begrudge that but feel things can be better handled by the government. 

Edited by MillionsOfSpiders
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2021 at 4:13 PM, lame ass security said:

It's all about the vaccine, if everyone got it this would be a moot point.

Aren't vaccinated people having issues with the dreaded delta variant? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sweersa said:

Aren't vaccinated people having issues with the dreaded delta variant? 

Very small percentages are catching it, even smaller percentages are getting hospitalized, even smaller percentages are dying

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2021 at 2:41 AM, SoulMonster said:

Sad to hear about your family problems.

I actually know a little bit about DNA repair systems, which is what this is about. It's kind of cool. DNA easily gets damaged and unless these damages are fixed, we get mutations that can lead to cancers or, if the mutations occurs in our gametes, be passed on to our children and thus be fixed changes in our bloodline. DNA repair systems' job is to fix such damages and prevent mutations to form. But they are not 100% efficient and if they were a species wouldn't be able to evolve. So there's a tradeoff between being efficient enough to prevent us from dying from cancers before we can propagate, and still allowing mutations to occur with a certain likelihood which guarantees genetic variation which allows for evolution.

One main difficulty with DNA repair is making sure that when DNA damages are fixed, that the DNA sequence is not changed. How do the repair systems accomplish this? For changes in one of the DNA strands (DNA is a helix comprised of two strands with identical genetic information), the DNA repair systems will use the information in the complimentary strand to fix the damages. What the scientists have discovered in the new article you linked, is a DNA repair system that can use the genetic information found in RNA to correct changes in DNA. This has scientific importance beyond merely being a new DNA repair system, it is also one of few examples of biological systems that violates the Central Dogma in genetics, that information exclusively goes from DNA to RNA to protein.

So then, does this mean that the RNA found in some Covid-19 vaccines (the mRNA), can be used by this new DNA repair system to change our DNA? No, not really, for a number of reasons. The most important reason is probably that the mRNA from the vaccines is sequestered away from our DNA. Our cells have compartments and our DNA is located in the nucleus while the process of translating mRNAs to proteins happens in the cytoplasm outside the nucleus. When we are vaccinated, the mRNA in the vaccine will never enter our nucleuses and hence it can never be used as a template for this new DNA repair system to alter our DNA.

But, interestingly, some scientists argue that the RNA found in the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself can somehow penetrate into the nucleus and integrate itself in our DNA. This is from a somewhat controversial new study and the scientific community is absolutely not in agreement here. It is still a bit speculative but the theory came from observering that some people who have been infected with Covid-19 test positive in PCR tests long after they stopped having symptoms. This could be caused by the genetic information of the virus having integrated itself in the individuals' DNA, thus causing a type of false-positive signals. This might sound absolutely crazy but it is actually not, some viruses come with systems that allows them to integrate in the hosts genome (Herpes virus being a familiar example; and it can leave the DNA and cause symptoms like cold sores on the lips when stressed). But SARS-CoV-2 does not come with such integration systems, so how has parts of its genetic information then become integrated in the individuals' DNA? Well, if true, possibly through the DNA repair mechanism described above. This would then mean that the virus RNA somehow managed to get from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, and if the virus RNA can achieve this, then maybe the vaccine mRNA can do that, too, and become embedded also? Well, not likely.

Other reasons why it is unlikely that vaccine mRNA would get integrated in our DNA, is that the DNA repair system described above is just active in some tissues, that the vaccine mRNA is broken down quickly, and that the DNA repair system will not integrate the entire mRNA, just small parts of it in very rare events. But these aren't reasons to exclude the possibility, just lower the probability. In other words, we can't rule out that it can happen (if the RNA is able to enter the nucleus), just that it is very unlikely and will happen with a very low frequency, if at all.

So my conclusion is that it is very unlikely that mRNA from the vaccine could get integrated in our DNA, but that a new study may indicate a process for how it could be achieved and that we might have some data indicating that RNA (from SARS-CoV-2) could theoretically somehow move from the cytoplasm to the nucleus. Thus we can't rule it out entirely.

The main argument for why it isn't happening, or with such a low frequency that it is really trivial, though, is that if RNA in the cytoplasm could move into the nucleus and get integrated though the actions of this new DNA repair system, this should also happen when we are infected with other RNA viruses, and as far as I know, this has never been observed to happen. We get infected with RNA viruses about yearly (whenever we have a cold or the influenza, which are caused by viruses with single-stranded RNA, like SARS-CoV-2 or the mRNA in the vaccines). If RNA could enter the nucleus, we should have discovered fragments of these viruses embedded in our genomes through all the genome sequencing we have done, but we haven't. Hence, I end up concluding that it doesn't happen.

Another aspect to this is, would it matter if it did happen with low frequency? Nope, not really. The thought of Covid-19 embedding itself in our genome might sound scary, but as I said, some viruses do this quite regularly (Herpes, HIV) without this being much of an issue to us; and if it happens through the DNA repair mechanism described above, only small parts would likely be integrated anyway and likely be entirely inert (except for potentially causing false-positives in PCR tests). In fact, a large proportion of our DNA is comprised of remnants of previous virus integrations (almost 50%!). And if it doesn't happen more frequently than the integration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA into our DNA (which is still speculative; and there is no reason to assume it would be a more likely event), then it really isn't anything to worry about.

On 7/17/2021 at 1:29 PM, SoulMonster said:

I want to correct myself. I read some articles and we do have evidence for RNA from other RNA viruses having been integrated in our genome (and which aren't retro-viruses like Herpes). But it seems to be really rare. Scientists have been looking for mechanisms for how this can happen (both the transport to the nucleus and the subsequent integration), and the new article that@downzy posted presents a possible explanation. Which is cool. 

Regardless, this seems to be a very rare event, because if not we would experience this more frequently as we get infected with RNA viruses like the cold virus and flu virus. And we would have many more examples of it happening with SARS-CoV-2 than we (might) already have. Again, whether it actually has happened with SARS-CoV-2 is still being discussed among the virologists.

But even if it turns out that RNA from SARS-CoV-2 can in very rare cases be integrated into our DNA, it doesn't necessarily mean that mRNA from the Covid-19 vaccines can be integrated, too, and there is no reason to think that it would be a more common occurrence. SARS-CoV-2 comes with genes that might increase the likelihood of it happening. mRNA from vaccines do not, and would require that the cell itself has some mechanism for retro-transcription, the transport and the integration. So most likely it will be super rare that mRNA from the vaccines get integrated.

Does it matter if it happens? It really depends on with what frequency it does happen. The likelihood of an integration event actually causing harm is very remote. Most integrations are neutral since they happen in non-active parts of the genome. But in very rare cases, integration may affect the host cell's natural gene expression which could lead to cell death or, much worse, that the cell becomes cancerous. I would think that the probability of vaccine mRNA getting transported into the nucleus, followed by integration into the genome, resulting in disruption of cell function that results in cancer, would be an ultra-rare adverse side effect that would barely increase the natural probability of developing various cancers and hence not be picked up in long-term side effect monitoring. 

Thanks @SoulMonster for your thorough analysis and helping me understand further the ramifications of the study I linked.  

There's just so much information and misinformation out there that it's difficult for someone like myself, someone with little formal education in biology or virology, to decipher it all.  I do the best I can but posts like yours helps.  I was fairly confident that claims that this study proved that the current mRNA vaccines change your DNA were wishful thinking by anti-vaxxers but just wanted to get your take to get a better idea.  So thanks!

One question I have from your posts is if RNA viruses have previously mapped themselves onto our DNA throughout human's evolutionary history (even though exceedingly rare), why is the study I linked to previously (that proves reverse transmission from RNA to DNA) considered a breakthrough or novel?  In the situations where RNA viruses have contributed to our DNA, is it a result of the RNA somehow breaching the nucleus?  That's the one thing I had a hard time deciphering from the study.  Does the authors of the study suggest that the RNA in question is affecting the DNA through the nucleus or through the cytoplasm?  I'm having a difficult time understanding whether the researchers in this case injected RNA into the nucleus or whether it was a process that involved transmission from the cytoplasm.  Thanks

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dazey said:

If not today then when? We're going to have to learn to live with this otherwise what are the vaccines even for?

I think the question is more about when does vaccination become available for anyone who wants it?

Are there still long waitlists in the UK to get your first or second shots?

I do agree that once everyone has had a chance to get vaccinated that it's time to open things (with a few precautions since kids under 12 won't be eligible for the vaccines until likely winter 2022).

But if there are still people waiting weeks or a month+ to become fully vaccinated, then probably not the best decision to open things up this early.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, downzy said:

I think the question is more about when does vaccination become available for anyone who wants it?

Are there still long waitlists in the UK to get your first or second shots?

I do agree that once everyone has had a chance to get vaccinated that it's time to open things (with a few precautions since kids under 12 won't be eligible for the vaccines until likely winter 2022).

But if there are still people waiting weeks or a month+ to become fully vaccinated, then probably not the best decision to open things up this early.  

As it stands everybody over 18 can now get vaccinated here. Currently I think something like 87% of the adult population have had 1 jab with about 66% having had both. At this point I think we need to press ahead and just allow things to get back to some semblance of normality while progressing the remaining vaccinations as quickly as possible.

I'm not personally against the idea of keeping masked in certain circumstances (public transport etc) nor with continuing to observe social distancing where possible but unfortunately that isn't really possible if we're to allow some of the hardest hit businesses to get back on their feet. This was always about getting to a point where we have to carry out a cost benefit analysis as to when the drawbacks outweigh the benefits of continuing with these measures.

I've been largely supportive of most of the measures taken thus far with the caveat that they have to be finite in duration. For me that duration has to come to an end when the vaccine is doing it's job and I think we've reached that point.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More than half of the population here still isn't fully vaccinated. I'm not getting my second shot until August.

Lifting all restrictions now, or most of them, while delta is going around, is really not the way to do it, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EvanG said:

More than half of the population here still isn't fully vaccinated. I'm not getting my second shot until August.

Lifting all restrictions now, or most of them, while delta is going around, is really not the way to do it, in my opinion.

In your case I would agree with that but we have a much higher rate of vaccination here than most countries so I think it's about time from the perspective of the UK.

18 minutes ago, downzy said:

Thanks @SoulMonster for your thorough analysis and helping me understand further the ramifications of the study I linked.  

There's just so much information and misinformation out there that it's difficult for someone like myself, someone with little formal education in biology or virology, to decipher it all.  I do the best I can but posts like yours helps.  I was fairly confident that claims that this study proved that the current mRNA vaccines change your DNA were wishful thinking by anti-vaxxers but just wanted to get your take to get a better idea.  So thanks!

One question I have from your posts is if RNA viruses have previously mapped themselves onto our DNA throughout human's evolutionary history (even though exceedingly rare), why is the study I linked to previously (that proves reverse transmission from RNA to DNA) considered a breakthrough or novel?  In the situations where RNA viruses have contributed to our DNA, is it a result of the RNA somehow breaching the nucleus?  That's the one thing I had a hard time deciphering from the study.  Does the authors of the study suggest that the RNA in question is affecting the DNA through the nucleus or through the cytoplasm?  I'm having a difficult time understanding whether the researchers in this case injected RNA into the nucleus or whether it was a process that involved transmission from the cytoplasm.  Thanks

The problem is that this shit it complicated so trying to explain the actual science to some plank who thinks Hillary Clinton eats babies isn't exactly a walk in the park. :lol: 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dazey said:

In your case I would agree with that but we have a much higher rate of vaccination here than most countries so I think it's about time from the perspective of the UK.

I'm not following the situation in the UK from up close, but aren't your numbers in the hospitals rising as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, EvanG said:

I'm not following the situation in the UK from up close, but aren't your numbers in the hospitals rising as well?

They are which is to be expected but deaths are staying low thankfully. Thing is that the vaccine doesn't stop us from getting the virus, it only makes the symptoms less severe. Covid is here to stay forever now and we need to learn to live with it. We're currently recording north of 50,000 cases a day which is comparable to the peak back in January yet daily deaths are in the 30's as opposed to nearly 2,000 for the same infection rate back then. The vaccines are clearly working.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Dazey said:

As it stands everybody over 18 can now get vaccinated here. Currently I think something like 87% of the adult population have had 1 jab with about 66% having had both. At this point I think we need to press ahead and just allow things to get back to some semblance of normality while progressing the remaining vaccinations as quickly as possible.

I'm not personally against the idea of keeping masked in certain circumstances (public transport etc) nor with continuing to observe social distancing where possible but unfortunately that isn't really possible if we're to allow some of the hardest hit businesses to get back on their feet. This was always about getting to a point where we have to carry out a cost benefit analysis as to when the drawbacks outweigh the benefits of continuing with these measures.

I've been largely supportive of most of the measures taken thus far with the caveat that they have to be finite in duration. For me that duration has to come to an end when the vaccine is doing it's job and I think we've reached that point.

Exactly my sentiments, at least in America. Children cannot get the vaccine, but they have less of a risk compared to older people. Immunocompromized individuals will have to remain vigilant as always. The rest of the population who are actively refusing the vaccine... :shrugs:too bad.

I was all for lock downs, distancing, masks, etc. and I did my part. I stayed at home (which many do not even have the luxury to do) before the vaccines, I missed gatherings with family and friends, I didn't go to a restaurants or events, and I wore masks diligently. Then, I got my vaccine as soon as possible and waited for full protection. Now I have been living my life as I did pre- pandemic. If some super variant that crushes all vaccine protection (god forbid) materializes, I will go back to taking the proper precautions, but that has not happened.

2 years of shut downs are not sustainable, we do not have the proper social security channels in place to support that. It was a necessary evil to curb the spread while we awaited the world's scientific community to produce a solution. They succeeded, and many of us in the western world are privileged enough to have access to it. If some people want to wait until there is no coronavirus, I am afraid you will never be leaving your house. It is here to stay as a virus, much like H1N1, and many other infectious diseases we have learned to mitigate and live with.

6 minutes ago, Dazey said:

They are which is to be expected but deaths are staying low thankfully. Thing is that the vaccine doesn't stop us from getting the virus, it only makes the symptoms less severe. Covid is here to stay forever now and we need to learn to live with it. We're currently recording north of 50,000 cases a day which is comparable to the peak back in January yet daily deaths are in the 30's as opposed to nearly 2,000 for the same infection rate back then. The vaccines are clearly working.

From my understanding it does a lot to stop people from getting the virus, but there will always be breakthrough cases

Edited by ZoSoRose
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dazey said:

They are which is to be expected but deaths are staying low thankfully. Thing is that the vaccine doesn't stop us from getting the virus, it only makes the symptoms less severe. Covid is here to stay forever now and we need to learn to live with it. We're currently recording north of 50,000 cases a day which is comparable to the peak back in January yet daily deaths are in the 30's as opposed to nearly 2,000 for the same infection rate back then. The vaccines are clearly working.

I'm all for going back to normal, but if that moment is right now is questionable with delta spreading really fast and many still not being fully vaccinated. A lot of people might not be dying but a lot of them are still getting really sick and suffering from lung damage, even young people. I guess we will see if it's wise to lift most restrictions at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MillionsOfSpiders said:

It’s more like survival of the fittest day.

Honestly sick of this bullshit now. UK hospitals are screwed over again and it’s another round of having to cope with too many poorly people with nowhere near enough staff. Yay! Happy freedom day!

And the government have the audacity to tell us we can’t have fans in the wards in a fucking heatwave because it will help spread covid :lol:

It's like when my nan goes to church can only have 12 and no singing but 90,000 can go to Wembley and 140,000 to the F1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, downzy said:

Thanks @SoulMonster for your thorough analysis and helping me understand further the ramifications of the study I linked.  

There's just so much information and misinformation out there that it's difficult for someone like myself, someone with little formal education in biology or virology, to decipher it all.  I do the best I can but posts like yours helps.  I was fairly confident that claims that this study proved that the current mRNA vaccines change your DNA were wishful thinking by anti-vaxxers but just wanted to get your take to get a better idea.  So thanks!

One question I have from your posts is if RNA viruses have previously mapped themselves onto our DNA throughout human's evolutionary history (even though exceedingly rare), why is the study I linked to previously (that proves reverse transmission from RNA to DNA) considered a breakthrough or novel?  In the situations where RNA viruses have contributed to our DNA, is it a result of the RNA somehow breaching the nucleus?  That's the one thing I had a hard time deciphering from the study.  Does the authors of the study suggest that the RNA in question is affecting the DNA through the nucleus or through the cytoplasm?  I'm having a difficult time understanding whether the researchers in this case injected RNA into the nucleus or whether it was a process that involved transmission from the cytoplasm.  Thanks

 

I will have to read the article more thoroughly to answer the last questions. I will come back to that later.

As for why the research is groundbreaking:

Yes, some RNA viruses can already integrate themselves in our DNA, but they do it themselves. They carry the genes encoding the machinery that allows transport to the nucleus, retro-transcription of the RNA to DNA, and subsequent integration of the DNA into our DNA. ["Transcription" in genetics is the process of reading DNA to generate RNA. "Retro-transcription" is hence the term for the opposite process, to synthesize DNA based on the information in RNA. And viruses that can do this as part of their procreation are called "retro-viruses"].

What is new with this research is that we, mammals, have a system for retro-transcription and integration, too. Like retro-viruses, we can also perform retro-transcription and integrate what was RNA (but has been retro-transcribed into DNA) into our own DNA. 

The reason why we have such a system is likely to aid in DNA repair. Our own RNA (before it leaves the nucleus and is transported to the cytoplasm) can act as a template for the DNA repair system, and be used to repair DNA that has been damaged.

And lastly a small comment to the frequency of retro-virus integration. Yes, it doesn't happen very often that virus RNA is integrated into the DNA of our gametes (and hence will be inherited to our children). It is probably exceedingly rare. But it happens more frequently than evolution can get rid of the foreign DNA that is incorporated into our DNA, so the result is that over time our genome increases in size as we accumulate more and more virus DNA. Today, about 50% of our genome are remnants of old virus insertions (that has been mutated to be inert, and often replicated numerous times). Scientists have for decades pondered why evolution hasn't more efficiently trimmed away all this "junk DNA" and the leading theory today is that the this additional DNA does little to decrease our fitness (and hence there is not a strong drive to remove it) and that it works as "spare DNA" on which evolution can work to create new functional DNA and tat it often has regulatory functions that aren't always immediately obvious. So we don't refer to it as "junk DNA" any more, but rather as DNA that benefits us in different ways without actually being genes that encode proteins.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...