Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday July 30 2020, @11:58AM   Printer-friendly
from the give-it-a-shot dept.

Some scientists are taking a DIY coronavirus vaccine, and nobody knows if it's legal or if it works:

Preston Estep was alone in a borrowed laboratory, somewhere in Boston. No big company, no board meetings, no billion-dollar payout from Operation Warp Speed, the US government's covid-19 vaccine funding program. No animal data. No ethics approval.

What he did have: ingredients for a vaccine. And one willing volunteer.

Estep swirled together the mixture and spritzed it up his nose.

Nearly 200 covid-19 vaccines are in development and some three dozen are at various stages of human testing. But in what appears to be the first "citizen science" vaccine initiative, Estep and at least 20 other researchers, technologists, or science enthusiasts, many connected to Harvard University and MIT, have volunteered as lab rats for a do-it-yourself inoculation against the coronavirus. They say it's their only chance to become immune without waiting a year or more for a vaccine to be formally approved.

Among those who've taken the DIY vaccine is George Church, the celebrity geneticist at Harvard University, who took two doses a week apart earlier this month. The doses were dropped in his mailbox and he mixed the ingredients himself.

Church believes the vaccine designed by Estep, his former graduate student at Harvard and one of his proteges, is extremely safe. "I think we are at much bigger risk from covid considering how many ways you can get it, and how highly variable the consequences are," says Church, who says he has not stepped outside of his house in five months. The US Centers for Disease Control recently reported that as many as one-third of patients who test positive for covid-19 but are never hospitalized battle symptoms for weeks or even months after contracting the virus. "I think that people are highly underestimating this disease," Church says.

Harmless as the experimental vaccine may be, though, whether it will protect anyone who takes it is another question. And the independent researchers who are making and sharing it might be stepping onto thin legal ice, if they aren't there already.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by ledow on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:17PM (26 children)

    by ledow (5567) on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:17PM (#1028560) Homepage

    Making it? No problem.
    Administering it to themselves? No problem.

    Sharing it with the intention for others to administer? That's a problem.

    You'd be hard-pressed to convict based on available evidence, I imagine, but if a team of researchers work on a vaccine and decide to administer it to themselves, that's their business. Without it, several quite famous medical solutions would be unavailable to you - because their inventors did exactly that. It's when they administer it to each other, or share it around, then it becomes legally tricky.

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:44PM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:44PM (#1028570)

      probably the most famous case is that of Barry Marshall, who gave himself ulcer on purpose: https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/the-doctor-who-drank-infectious-broth-gave-himself-an-ulcer-and-solved-a-medical-mystery [discovermagazine.com]
      just in case people demand a citation for the "famous medical solutions" wording.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @01:52PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @01:52PM (#1028602)

        There would, however, be a difference between infecting oneself to prove something medically and treating oneself to cure something without proper control studies.

        The former may pave a way to understanding something. Marshall and Warren certainly deserved their Nobel. But it took much more work and many more studies than Marshall infecting himself for the information to be accepted. Accepted it did become, after the finding was properly verified.

        This story is an example of pure selfishness and reckless experimentation even if it is self-experimentation. No control and no ability to be accepted. Without verifiability and acceptance, which only comes from controls, there is no science here. Kind of like the people who insist HCQ is good, despite all the evidence that control studies have provided that the benefits (if any) are outweighed by the already-known risks of using HCQ.

        Put even more simply: There are damn good reasons one has to wait for a therapy or a vaccine. (And in cases where one cannot wait because of death likelihood there are acceleration procedures which help streamline the process further.) This is stupidity at work, not science.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @04:28PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @04:28PM (#1028756)

          We aren't waiting for a vaccine, its being warp drived.

      • (Score: 2) by driverless on Friday July 31 2020, @03:36AM

        by driverless (4770) on Friday July 31 2020, @03:36AM (#1029088)

        There's an endless number of cases of both doctors and non-doctors trying various miracle cures on themselves going back centuries if not millennia. This is just more of the same, with nothing but the Covid19 connection making it newsworthy.

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:48PM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:48PM (#1028573)

      I've seen zombie movies.

      Epidemic often starts in labs with researchers fooling around with chemicals.

      • (Score: 2) by Booga1 on Thursday July 30 2020, @01:34PM (2 children)

        by Booga1 (6333) on Thursday July 30 2020, @01:34PM (#1028591)

        Don't forget the ones that start with viruses in labs that lose containment.

        • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @05:45PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @05:45PM (#1028807)

          Don't forget the ones that start with viruses in labs that lose containment.

          Don't forget the ones that start with immune systems in vessels that lose containment.

          There, FTFY.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @04:38AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @04:38AM (#1029123)

          Don't forget the one where Hilary Clinton ordered Fauci to create a killer virus in China to subvert the 2016 election.

    • (Score: 3, Disagree) by ikanreed on Thursday July 30 2020, @01:52PM (16 children)

      by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 30 2020, @01:52PM (#1028601) Journal

      And of course, self administered vaccines with no control group or blinding yield no science.

      • (Score: 2, Disagree) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:07PM (14 children)

        Er... Don't they have the rest of the planet as a control group? In any case, all the folks getting their panties in a wad saying "this won't prove anything"? Yes, it will. It is quite possible to prove whether the vaccine is worth a serious and immediate closer look or not.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 4, Informative) by ikanreed on Thursday July 30 2020, @04:20PM (12 children)

          by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 30 2020, @04:20PM (#1028744) Journal

          No, that's not how control groups work.

          If you don't bring the control group in to check for matching examation, you've learned nothing about comparable infection rates(not that a sample size of fucking 1 would tell you anything on the intervention group either). You've learned nothing at all.

          Which is consistent with a mightybuzzard worldview in general at least.

          • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:11PM (10 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:11PM (#1028817)

            Obviously you don't know the difference between effectiveness and efficacy.

            • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:19PM (9 children)

              by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:19PM (#1028819) Journal

              Hey look, you're testing neither of those. Wow! So impressive!

              No controlled laboratory experiment. No longitudinal population data with matched measurements. A complete absence of useful information! Hooray!

              We should do a controlled experiment to see if it's possible to differentiate your brain from a bowl of banana pudding.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:49PM (7 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:49PM (#1028834)

                Legacy medicine had its time, but it is on the way out: https://www.nature.com/news/personalized-medicine-time-for-one-person-trials-1.17411 [nature.com]

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @08:33PM (6 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @08:33PM (#1028893)

                  N-of-1 trials are not the same thing as giving yourself an untested, unproven, and experimental vaccine.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @08:55PM (5 children)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @08:55PM (#1028909)

                    It is the exact same thing.

                    Am I immune?
                    Take antibody test: No.

                    Take untested, unproven, experimental vaccine.

                    Wait 2 weeks.

                    Am I immune?
                    Take antibody test: Yes.

                    Now vaccine is tested and proven to work in one person. If the last answer was "no", then you would need to try again.

                    • (Score: 2) by Mykl on Thursday July 30 2020, @10:24PM (1 child)

                      by Mykl (1112) on Thursday July 30 2020, @10:24PM (#1028947)

                      A shame you were one of the 1 in 20 people that the vaccine doesn't work for. You've just thrown out something that's effective for 95% of the population.

                      Oh well.

                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @11:19PM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @11:19PM (#1028973)

                        You do your own n = 1 experiment if you want to make sure you get one that works for you. Doing an experiment taking the average is imprecision medicine, you never know if you are the 1/10 the treatment works for or the 9/10 it is a waste of time and money (or even dangerous).

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @02:54AM (2 children)

                      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @02:54AM (#1029082)

                      No, they are not the same thing. There is no general efficacy data necessary to do a Bayesian analysis. The large number of confounding variables that are not controlled for also breaks your repeated-measures design. Further more you small sample size kills any statistical power or significance you have overall even if you attempt to factor those in.

                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @04:17AM (1 child)

                        by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @04:17AM (#1029114)

                        Sounds like someone who has no idea what they are talking about would type into the internet.

                        t0: Do not have antibodies

                        t1: take vaccine

                        t2: Have antibodies

                        Either it was the vaccine or you got exposed somehow else. So stay home between t1 and t2.

                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @08:50PM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @08:50PM (#1029485)

                          Or you were exposed before t0 and developed immunity even though the vaccine was no help. Or you were already immune at t0 but the false negative said otherwise. Or you were exposed despite staying at home and developed immunity that way. Or the t2 test was a false positive. Or the reporting was incorrect. Or you were exposed in the vaccine but not its antigen payload. Or you could have antibodies but not enough for an immune response. Or a number of other things.

                          Like I said, there are tons of confounding variables and you don't have the sample sizes or probabilities necessary to discern those things, which is why this design isn't close to being a proper repeated-measure N-of-1 trial.

              • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @08:48PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @08:48PM (#1028901)

                A great saying you should learn (as in embrace and act on): "Perfect is the enemy of good". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good [wikipedia.org]

          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday July 30 2020, @11:15PM

            The rest of the world are already being monitored as closely as they'll allow. If you want them monitored any more closely you need to wait for the water to heat some more to boil that particular frog.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @04:33PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @04:33PM (#1028764)

          The only thing is proves is that it isn't absolutely fucking lethal.

      • (Score: 2) by ledow on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:33PM

        by ledow (5567) on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:33PM (#1028635) Homepage

        No. But they are a small shortcut to prove that it's not immediately fatal or injurious.

    • (Score: 2) by wisnoskij on Thursday July 30 2020, @03:05PM

      by wisnoskij (5149) <{jonathonwisnoski} {at} {gmail.com}> on Thursday July 30 2020, @03:05PM (#1028672)

      I would suspect that legally it might work identically to guns. As long as you had no part in making it, you are free and clear. But these people are likely to be fired, and maybe they would run afoul of the doctor licencing board or even the legal system for practicing medicine without a licence.

  • (Score: 2) by looorg on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:20PM (6 children)

    by looorg (578) on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:20PM (#1028561)

    So he snorted some chemicals that may or may not work for a condition he may or may not have. So if he never gets it is that a sign for that the "cure" worked or just that he never got it? How will they ever know, I guess they could do some proper testing afterwards but the sample size will be horribly small.

    The legality aspect? Who cares? Unless they peddle their chemicals as a proper medicine/vaccine/cure does it matter? It's not illegal to ingest or snort chemicals is it? Unless it's cocaine. Nobody went after Jonas Salk when he tried his polio vaccine on himself, and his entire family, without approval -- but then sure that was back in ye-olden-days.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:51PM (5 children)

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:51PM (#1028575)

      The legality aspect?

      I almost became a chemist and its a broad stereotype but generally lab environments will fire you if you consume anything in the lab (for both safety and property ownership reasons) and you get fired for taking anything home.

      They're mostly aiming at workers trying to make a meth lab at work or "adopting" test animals as pets (or as dinner?), but it would probably catch a guy mixing his own vaccines.

      There's gray area, I had a distant friend who became a radiologist and would record his timesheet as testing when he would x-ray crazy stuff. Crazy like ham radio equipment, 1990s era laptops (which were new and cost $$$$ at the time), nurses purses (AFAIK with their permission), if it fit in the machine he probably zapped it at one time or another. He zapped his pager a bunch of times, his wallet, etc. I will say that something like a mostly plastic handheld ham radio when xrayed looks like cool abstract art. He's probably still out there zapping weird objects. He had a different slang word than zap that radiologists apparently use, but I don't remember.

      Anyway yeah there's a difference between the prosecutor going after you in court vs your boss firing you.

      • (Score: 2) by looorg on Thursday July 30 2020, @01:10PM

        by looorg (578) on Thursday July 30 2020, @01:10PM (#1028580)

        So what they don't know about won't hurt them except that Estep now just outed himself, or got outed by his friend, in the news so he would or should expect a stern talking to from his boss or the HR department at whatever lab he works at.

      • (Score: 2) by wisnoskij on Thursday July 30 2020, @03:10PM (3 children)

        by wisnoskij (5149) <{jonathonwisnoski} {at} {gmail.com}> on Thursday July 30 2020, @03:10PM (#1028674)

        "they're mostly aiming at workers trying to make a meth lab at work or "adopting" test animals as pets"

        I feel like rules like this would more likely be in place to stop idiots showing off and getting themselves killed. Maybe I am way off base here, but I suspect there are 1000 lab workers who would try to cure their cold with lab supplies for every 1 who would try to turn lab supplies into meth. I am pretty sure you can make meth anywhere with over the counter materials, but if you are trying to cure the common cold you probably need access to the good stuff.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:08PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:08PM (#1028816)
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @08:08PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @08:08PM (#1028873)

          Trying to ban stupidity is a part of it. In the chemistry labs I was in the ban was on eating and drinking anything. Didn't matter if it was your own sandwiches. Open a sealed bottle of coke and take a swig. Rules violation, out the door. If you were thirsty you washed up and went out to the break room.
          It wasn't unreasonable, some of the stuff in chemistry labs is deadly in tiny doses. A blanket ban on eating and drinking was the only way to have a clear rule.
          Funny thing, it is also a place where every guy washes his hands before taking a piss.

          • (Score: 2) by VLM on Friday July 31 2020, @12:16PM

            by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Friday July 31 2020, @12:16PM (#1029236)

            It wasn't unreasonable, some of the stuff in chemistry labs is deadly in tiny doses.

            Bringing up contemporary political issues, can't you just tie a bandanna around your mouth and suddenly even nerve gas is safe? Or declare a BLM protest in the lab and suddenly everything is medically safe?

  • (Score: 2) by epitaxial on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:33PM (7 children)

    by epitaxial (3165) on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:33PM (#1028563)

    Might as well suck on some pennies too. You know that chlora-whats-its-name and Zinc are the magic cure that the government is trying to suppress. Somehow these people know more than the rest of the world?

    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:09PM (4 children)

      Have to lick off the copper coating first to get to the chewy zinc center. Ain't copper sposed to be magic too though? Or was that magnets?

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:46PM (3 children)

        by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:46PM (#1028648) Journal

        Actually, for many diseases copper is a "sort of" magic. Most germs won't survive long on anything copper or silver plated. (Probably works for gold, to, as the explanation someone gave me had to do with electrical conductivity...whether it was right or not is another question.) Even COVID doesn't live long on most metal surfaces. (It's hard to know how long it lives, because the only test is to try to grow a culture. You can test for the presence of RNA, but that's a lot more persistent than the active virus.)

        --
        Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
        • (Score: 2) by wisnoskij on Thursday July 30 2020, @03:00PM

          by wisnoskij (5149) <{jonathonwisnoski} {at} {gmail.com}> on Thursday July 30 2020, @03:00PM (#1028668)

          Yes copper is quite toxic, nothing survives being coated in it. Now I might be wrong here, but I suspect that you would kill yourself with copper poisoning long before you hurt any virus living within you. Organic orchards use it as a pesticide, but they cannot use it many years in a row of the trees die and the gwond become too toxic to grow much of anything.

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday July 30 2020, @04:20PM (1 child)

          The phenomenon you're talking about works for coating surfaces outside the body, it's utterly ineffective from within because the quantity you'd need to take to reproduce the effects would be beyond toxicity by several orders of magnitude.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday July 30 2020, @07:51PM

            by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 30 2020, @07:51PM (#1028864) Journal

            O, it's probably quite effective, where it's applied. But getting metallic copper spread throughout your body...even if it weren't toxic the application would probably kill you. But it *is* sort of magic against diseases. That's why coins are relatively safe as cash. (Although, I'm told that even on paper money COVID won't last more than a week...and that's based on the RNA tests rather than trying to culture live virus particles.)

            --
            Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:39PM (1 child)

      by meustrus (4961) on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:39PM (#1028641)

      You mean hydroxychloroquine, which the highest executive of the literal government was signal boosting?

      You mean the zinc that we can freely buy as a dietary supplement, and which is proven to reduce the duration and symptoms of the common cold? Zicam gets to sell itself as a cold remedy because they call it "homeopathic"; no one is willing to spend millions on the FDA-required studies because people will just buy the cheap dietary supplements.

      Just because somebody knows better than you doesn't mean the rest of the world isn't with them. The world is complicated, and there are lots of people in it who know more than you and I.

      --
      If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
      • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:48PM

        by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:48PM (#1028650) Journal

        The problem with zinc is that the dose is critical. To little zinc is harmful to the immune system, but so is too much. You're probably better of with a multi-vitamin and mineral tablet than with a zinc lozenge.

        --
        Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by VLM on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:38PM (2 children)

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:38PM (#1028564)

    celebrity geneticist

    I just had to point that out... A what?

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:51PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @12:51PM (#1028574)

      A scientist that spliced his own with Eeyore's DNA.

      I hear he's hung like a, you know, donkey.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:00PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:00PM (#1028605)

        I hear attempts to merge human and donkey DNA is illegal in 45 states. I sure hope they're in one of the legal states!
        Are they a celebrity because they put the documentary videos online somewhere?

  • (Score: 2) by legont on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:03PM

    by legont (4179) on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:03PM (#1028610)

    Scientists are supposed to make the most dangerous experiments on themselves. Newton was sticking needles into his eyes to get his data right.
    But get this - Russian elite is secretly testing corona vaccine on themselves since April. If I am to believe Bloomberg that is. Such a heroes! We need to elect them here.

    --
    "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by tizan on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:51PM (1 child)

    by tizan (3245) on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:51PM (#1028653)

    Isn't suicide illegal in some countries...
    In the US it is covered by right to privacy or freedom of speech...which ever way you want to look at it.
    So if you want to inject some junk ...it is your right i suspect.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @04:45AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 31 2020, @04:45AM (#1029126)

      Unless it grows naturally in the ground, like cannabis or mushrooms. Those are prohibited.

  • (Score: 2) by wisnoskij on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:55PM (1 child)

    by wisnoskij (5149) <{jonathonwisnoski} {at} {gmail.com}> on Thursday July 30 2020, @02:55PM (#1028661)

    Everyone wants to be the guinea pig who gets the unlicenced cure. But who will step up to be injected with the virus to prove effectiveness?

    Actually, how does the even work? Would not a double blind test for a vaccine imply that some unprotected people would need to get injected with the virus to provide a baseline of effectiveness?
    Or do they just give some people the vaccine, and others saline solution, let them go into the wild and see which ones contract the virus?

    • (Score: 2) by Booga1 on Thursday July 30 2020, @03:34PM

      by Booga1 (6333) on Thursday July 30 2020, @03:34PM (#1028699)

      This "study" they're doing is too small to have double blind tests and placebo treatments. Even with large trials some diseases are so serious that it's considered unethical to give placebos.
      On top of that, immunity isn't always a black and white thing that just works or doesn't. Sometimes immune responses can be sufficient to prevent infection from incidental contact, but repeated exposures or exposure to high concentrations of pathogens can overwhelm it.

      Because of that, I'd expect they won't be going out and doing everything they can to be infected. It makes more sense to just "act natural" and see how things work out. I suspect these self-administered vaccines will only be good enough to say "this is interesting and worth further study" or "what a failure, guess it's back to the drawing board."

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @04:31PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @04:31PM (#1028761)

    All he needs to do is get antibody tested before, take the vaccine, then get tested after.

    No giant double blind trial with control group needed.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @05:40PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @05:40PM (#1028805)

    It's a no-go.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:53PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @06:53PM (#1028839)

    In the worst case they can obtain superpowers and get a lifetime job at Marvel or DC.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Bot on Friday July 31 2020, @05:31AM

    by Bot (3902) on Friday July 31 2020, @05:31AM (#1029149) Journal

    Now this is a vaccine I can consider seriously. In fact, it should be normal that anybody devising a vaccine and promoting it as safe would inject himself and his offspring in front of TV (with a randomly chosen sample of the distributed stuff).

    The stuff coming from entities who enjoy legal immunity from the consequences of their vaccines? not so much. In fact, I question the mental health of anybody whose hair doesn't rise after digging in the subject.

    --
    Account abandoned.
(1)