'Vaccine lettuce' bill (food containing a vaccine is a drug) passes in Tennessee | Hacker News Reader

'Vaccine lettuce' bill (food containing a vaccine is a drug) passes in Tennessee

wsmv.com

38 pointssaalweachter78 comments

> It’s changes your DNA, mRNA changes your DNA when if you have your DNA tested now, and you eat a bunch of this, lettuce take a bunch of these MRNA vaccines, and you go back and get your DNA tested again, it’s gonna be a little different. It’s not going to be the same as it was that you were born with that you got from your parents.

Sigh.

I thought this little gem was going to be in the comments section of the article. Surely not in the article itself. Nope.

This guy has a BachSci in “soil sciences” from University of Tennessee.

I think soil scientists know more about soil than plants.

Anecdotally we have at least one soil scientist who knows less about DNA than plants.

Does Tennessee not require a Biology 1 class?

The legislator in question was born before the discovery of the structure of DNA.

Believing he is ignorant, rather than being purposefully wrong, is no longer reasonable. They lost the benefit of the doubt a long time ago.

Would be a good one for April fools.

What happened to the good ol' days when they limited themselves to legislating the value of mathematical constants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_pi_bill

I am curious; if I was infected with a retrovirus and took an mRNA vaccine, could the reverse transcriptase of the retrovirus pick up mRNA from the vaccine and reverse-transcribe it into a cell's genome?

I suppose the lineage of that cell would already be doomed from the viral infection...

There are two reasons I can think of why that wouldn't happen: first, there's no primer to even initiate the reverse transcription. Maybe you might get unlucky and there's something close enough floating around. But integration machinery usually requires some specific sequence to identify the ends of the viral genome. Maybe that exists, it's not my field, but I've never heard of one.

Also, even if it did integrate, there would be no promoter, so the vaccine gene wouldn't get expressed. So the only danger I see would be if it integrated into something functional, but the virus was going to do that anyway. But this is so improbable to begin with I wouldn't worry about it.

I believe there is some Crisper work going on to remove retroviruses from DNA. I think there was a promising trial recently with trying to strip HIV from someone's immune cells?

AFAIK it's not mRNA-related technology.

TIL that researchers are working on edible vaccines.

> Edible vaccines are genetically modified crops that contain antigens for specific diseases. Edible vaccines offer many benefits over traditional vaccines, due to their lower manufacturing cost and a lack of negative side effects. However, there are limitations as edible vaccines are still new and developing. Further research will need to be done before they are ready for widespread human consumption. Edible vaccines are currently being developed for measles, cholera, foot and mouth disease, Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edible_vaccine

There already are vaccines you ingest orally, but they aren't well known in the West. They are much cheaper to product, but also not as effective (so much more common in developing countries).

Typhoid for example.

The oral polio vaccine is not only less effective but also more dangerous. It, unlike the injected polio vaccine, can actually give you polio.

That's something different. Those are live or killed pathogens that can be ingested orally.

These are transgenic crops (like lettuce) that have been modified to express some proteins shared with the pathogens.

Oddly that article doesn't mention polio, which has had an edible vaccine for a long time. I'd edit it in but I'm not sure exactly how it relates to these others...

It's pretty goofy, yes, but on the other hand, don't we always bemoan how legislation takes years to catch up to malicious practice and wish legislators would take initiative?

Is this a malicious practice?

The entire bill seems predicated on nonsense masquerading as science.

Whoever wrote that drivel doesn't even have a basic high school understanding of how RNA/DNA work, let alone what an mRNA vaccine even is.

Yep, this was my take.

I don't even think the law is necessarily bad. In vague terms, if someone combines a food and a vaccine, we probably should treat it like a vaccine rather than a food.

I don't know if the law reasonably defines the terms, that would be my only holdback. I fear that in their attempt to legislate away something that doesn't exist, they may cast an overly broad net and break mundane farming methods.

It might get really interesting when we get more modern farming developments that "vaccinate" against plant viruses or fungus or someone, which someone who doesn't understand RNA can then get confused about and call on this law to label otherwise-boring lettuce as a vaccine.

This is kind of what I was thinking about. Or even something less sophisticated; I vaguely remember a story about some plants that were cross-bred or spliced onto tobacco, because the resulting nicotine in the leaves kept plant-eating insects away (and I believe there was some biological reason the nicotine couldn't cross into the edible parts, but it's been forever so I don't really remember).

Frankly, I don't even know that "vaccine" is a useful categorization for this. Vaccines, as a category, are defined by their outcome and intent, not their constituent parts or methodology. A properly refrigerated mRNA injection for COVID is a vaccine. If you heat that same vial up to 100C, it's not a vaccine anymore, it's just some junk in a vial. At the same time, a properly-refrigerated mRNA shot and a deactivated virus shot are both vaccines, even though their method of action and production share little in common.

> don't even think the law is necessarily bad. In vague terms, if someone combines a food and a vaccine, we probably should treat it like a vaccine

It would be. It would also be subject to federal law. This is entirely performative nonsense. Tennessee has deep problems; this is a distraction.

> The entire bill seems predicated on nonsense masquerading as science.

Is this a cynical lie or just a reading comprehension fail? The bill isn't "predicated" on this comment. It's one comment that was made about the bill on the floor. Not the text of the bill. Not a comment by the author of the bill. Not a comment by a co-prime sponsor of the bill. Just one politician speaking in support of the bill.

The purpose of the bill is to ensure that consumers aren't unknowingly putting vaccines into their bodies. Do you think it is unreasonable to inform consumers about what they are putting into their bodies?

The comment was made about the bill on the floor, *by its sponsor.*

If that is the best justification for this law that he could come up with, then I'm left to believe that it must be the result of either sheer incompetence, or a malicious attempt to appeal to conspiracy theorist nutjobs.

> Is this a malicious practice?

No, certainly not yet anyway, and I'd agree that wasn't a great phrasing on my part. I'm still not sure what the right phrase would be for whatever nonsense people/companies/governments get up to before anyone gets around to making it illegal.

I realize the specifics here are mostly insane (as I acknowledged in my original comment), I just don't think we should try to punish it too hard, since it's (very) abstractly a step toward something we'd like to see more of. And the resulting legislation even sounds like (what would be) a level-headed response to the threat (if it was real), which is pretty rare even on a good day.

“”” Actually I’ve been reading about data for a couple of years now and evidently with this new technology, they can raise this lettuce is what they’re talking about first. They can raise this stuff so cheap, and I’ve been reading about it talking about putting it in and lettuce and mass medicate everybody, like they do with fluoride in the water. I mean, who could control the dose? If you’re if you eat a lot of lettuce, you’re gonna get a lot of mRNA if you don’t eat any won’t get any. … it was voted on and passed in the Senate. “”” You can’t make this up

I end up accidentally eating a lot of DNA and consequently MNRA, every time I eat a strawberry

Does it clarify that things like water or salt solution don't can't as "vaccine ingredients" somewhere? Or is that like a default legal standard of some kind?

I'm still waiting for Star Trek's hypospray. That, and the medical tricorder so I never need another needle-based biopsy procedure ever\ again.

The hypospray was actually a real technology predating Star Trek: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_injector

That Wikipedia page goes into detail on why jet injectors are no longer used, but there is no mention of the scarring. It used to be common to see people with a circular scar on their upper arm where they got the injector shot as a child.

Are you thinking of smallpox vaccination scars?

https://www.verywellhealth.com/smallpox-vaccine-scar-7096798

That's something different. The scars I'm referring to were shaped like two half-disks facing each other.

Edit: I asked around and nobody seems to know what I'm talking about. Seems either it was a local peculiarity or a misremembered childhood.

No, I remember getting a vaccine that way, and it was different from the smallpox vaccine which was a bunch of little needles that left a scar. I got it in elementary school -- I want to say 2nd grade. I don't think the spray thing left a scar.

I have one of those, actually. Looks like someone put a cigarette out on my arm there.

I had boot camp vaccines with a hypospray. You would rather have the needle, trust me. It hurts less, and the needle doesn't gash your arm if you flinch.

There's been various iterations of jet injectors. Some are better than others. I distantly recall having a jet injector used on me, but the only thing I remember vividly is the peanut butter shot. That had nothing to do with the device though.

This is the most ridiculous 'bill' I have seen in quite some time.

Obviously, these lawmakers are not the subject matter experts on the topic, but I don't think it is accurate to call this a conspiracy theory. NSF has awarded at least one $500,000 grant to study plants as an edible mRNA vaccine delivery method.

https://www.genengnews.com/news/plants-as-mrna-factories-for...

A theory being a conspiracy theory is unrelated to whether or not NSF has funded a particular study.

The two question are very simple:

* What is the crime being planned?

* Who are the conspirators?

If there are cognizable answers to those - in the theory - it's a conspiracy theory. Whether it is true or not is not part of the calculus.

I think most people take "conspiracy theory" to imply falsehood, or at least exaggeration.

Can an entire state legislature be pulled into a conspiracy theory?

Maybe an April Fools joke gone wrong?

From the article: "This bill merely would require any food that contains a vaccine..."

If someone uses "merely" in a sentence, I automatically think it is at the same level as "I'm just asking questions".

Tennessee also just passed law against Chemtrails. So think it might be safe to assume that an entire legislature has gone down some internet conspiracy rabbit hole.

This is the right day of the year to put something outlandish into the news cycle.

Enhanced. Double. Jello. Shots. ... for a long and happy life.

I am certain that this is going to eliminate most beef and poultry products. The meat-industrial-complex will not be pleased.

According to the linked executive summary, there are no tests for this condition, so the Department of Agriculture won't be testing for anything.

The big worry is what happens when unicorns start eating this stuff.

As long as they don't feed them after midnight (local), it's completely harmless.

The question I've always had - when can you feed them after that? Ok, we stop at midnight, when can we resume?

When the new day starts - at 12:01 AM or sunrise depending on local customs.

12:01 AM? These intermittent fasters are really watering down the definition.

> when unicorns start eating this stuff.

Oh — dude — more people need to be talking about this!

Seems kind of odd that the “party of small government” makes completely frivolous laws like this to prevent something that very likely will never happen. Should we also make sure “food with extra-terrestrial genetic material” is outlawed, just in case?

Don't forget "food which will cause you to be susceptible to remote control via 5G networks"...

I don't see that in the article

It’s about as real and likely as “vaccines in the grocery store lettuce.”

So they should wait until after the food supply becomes contaminated, then study the problem for a few years and only then pass a law to regulate it?

Such things are already highly likely to fall under the FDA’s purview.

It's the legislative branch that determines that, with legislation exactly like this...

Not the TN one, and the US legislative branch has already given the FDA authority to regulate vaccines.

States have a similar setup patterned off the federal government, with most things falling only in the purview of the states. In this case they're correctly making sure that vaccines delivered as food are correctly treated as such under the framework here https://unicourt.github.io/cic-code-tn/transforms/tn/octn/r7...

Considering the active development this is very forward thinking and timely

Again, under Federal law and regulation, these theoretical products are likely to already be deemed drugs (and this determination would almost certainly preempt any state decision in the opposite direction). The legislation is, at best, redundant.

States enforce state law, not federal

Not only is it likely to happen, it is happening: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edible_vaccine#Vaccines_in_dev...

I think there's a lot of people reacting to this article as if "vaccines in food" is a "baseless conspiracy theory" when in fact it's in the study phase. The world moves fast.

While the science and engineering of it is interesting and all, it's bad medicine to put things in the food supply, no matter how convenient it may seem superficially. There's always someone who is going to have a bad reaction, and the more it becomes normalized, the more stuff is going to become worrisome. The entire idea of dosing populations with effectively no ability to control doses is insane. What happens to people who pair these with grapefruit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grapefruit%E2%80%93drug_intera... (and I also highlight the "Mechanism" section)

Passing a pre-emptive law against just lobbing it into the food supply to see what happens is nowhere near as nonsensical as it sounds. It may not be a serious threat right this second, but the cost of a law of this sort is cheap too.

(The stealth mRNA vaccine concerns some people have are silly, though. Given how hard it is to even inject them, they're not about to be passing through the digestive system any time soon.)

Whatever the substantive merits, passing a law like this at the state level seems like a waste of everyone's time and legal fees: the food and vaccine supply chains are pretty much archetypal examples of interstate or foreign commerce, so it's really going to be the federal Congress and the federal executive branch that decide these policies. State policies running contrary to those federal decisions will get invalidated on constitutional grounds, no matter which level of government enacts its law first.

> I think there's a lot of people reacting to this article as if "vaccines in food" is a "baseless conspiracy theory" when in fact it's in the study phase.

Eggs are used to produce flu vaccines, but that doesn't mean those particular eggs can be sold as a food product. The same is going to be true for vaccine lettuce; as with any other vaccination, they'll fall under FDA regulation as drugs.

They're responding to research and articles that are publicly presaging and promoting this technology along with the idea that blind mass medical interventions are somehow ethical as long as it's a vaccine.

Finally.. how hard do you think it's going to be to actually implement this law? Would it require a new cabinet position? A new department? A single new hire? Then how did the government "get larger" as a result?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com