Study: Pfizer RNA can be reverse-transcribed and integrated into human liver DNA | Hacker News Reader

Study: Pfizer RNA can be reverse-transcribed and integrated into human liver DNA

mdpi.com

28 pointshajile12 comments

This has an inaccurate title which does not match the source. This is also at least the second submission of this study with the same inaccuracy in its title: see also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30481053 .

Original headline: "in Human Liver Cell Line"

Submitted HN headline: "in human liver DNA"

Abstract: "we investigated the effect of BNT162b2 on the human liver cell line Huh7"

huh7.com: "Huh-7 is an immortal cell line composed of epithelial-like, tumorigenic cells. The majority of Huh-7 cells show a chromosome number between 55 and 63 (mode 60) and are highly heterogeneous."

When it comes to stability of their genome, huh7 cells are not even remotely similar to human cells. Much less similar to human cells than mouse sells. Probably less similar to human cells than an average bacterium.

The title was taken from the abstract and then I removed words until it fit. DNA was substituted for a couple words and was the next to last change I made as it does alter the meaning slightly (though probably not meaningfully for most people).

The question here isn’t stability. The mRNA was present in the cDNA sometime within 6 hours. That isn’t some fluke, but instead points to something that happens somewhat readily.

The fact that clinical side effects seem related means we need to be replicating toes study and if that is consistent we need to start testing in other cells.

Finally, we should be on the lookout for any cancers seeing large increases in diagnosis after late December 2020

"Human liver" vs "human liver cell line" may sound like only a slight alteration in meaning to a layperson, but it's actually an enormous difference. I don't think anyone is particularly surprised to hear that a cancer cell line is expressing reverse transcriptase and grabbing random mRNA. People would be very surprised to hear that about cells in a random human.

That's true, but what other word would I drop to add those words?

Maybe it's too much to assume people on a technical forum will read the paper (or at least the abstract/conclusion) for themselves.

Definitely out of my depth on this one - is this just saying that the vaccine concentrates in the liver, or am i reading what sounds like a proven case of artificially modified cellular DNA of a live organ/living tissue?

Because that’s how you get zombies. I don’t want zombies!

This guy talks about it in a really understandable way, step by step:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjxlvduyJyc

That guy did a fantastic explanation. Thanks for the link.

Great explanation indeed. There is a Q&A follow up:

"Your Questions About Pfizer Vaccine Becomes DNA in The Liver Cells Study" https://youtu.be/g8vY0tyVmjY

IANABiologist, but it sounds like there is an existing human transposon (LINE-1) which has already been implicated in some funky stuff related to cancers and the immune-system.

This is somehow interacting with the vaccine, however it's not clear whether there's anything special about the vaccine or whether this is just LINE-1 indiscriminately doing its usual shenanigans.

LINE-1 comprise something like 17% of the human genome according to early work by Eric Lander and team. They also have a fascinating interplay with HIV and Interferon Signaling System: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2021.7327...

When the pre print was first published it was heavily discussed. From memory they over express by several thousand times the concentration of RNA. These are not the same conditions during vaccination.

Also MDPI is borderline predatory journal that will publish anything.

Time to review the Biology books kids! Today's lesson is "DNA Mutations"

https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_and_Gene....

Reply on news.ycombinator.com