... Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents ...
"COVID-19 vaccines do not change or interact with your DNA in any way. Both mRNA and viral vector COVID-19 vaccines deliver instructions (genetic material) to our cells to start building protection against the virus that causes COVID-19. However, the material never enters the nucleus of the cell, which is where our DNA is kept." https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html
Just to expand on this a bit, since it seems to be an area highly susceptible to disinformation due to the specialized nature of the topic — i.e., most people have no basis in their knowledge to evaluate these wild claims about vaccines altering your genes.
First, the mRNA vaccines cannot alter your "genes" because they don't contain any DNA. The mRNA enters your cells, makes its way to the ribosomes in the cytoplasm, where it gets transcribed to make Covid spike proteins, and then is immediately destroyed. The spike proteins are released and cause an immune response. This entire process simply uses the cell's machinery to manufacture proteins in exactly the same way the cell naturally manufactures proteins and destroys mRNA produced internally. But they key thing to remember about mRNA vaccines is they don't contain any DNA, so there is no DNA to "alter your genes".
The viral vector vaccines work differently and require an additional step — i.e., the production of mRNA — after which the process is identical to the way mRNA vaccines work, as described above. The viral vector vaccines do contain DNA, but they also don't "alter your genes" because they simply don't have the ability to do so. Here's a good explanation of why this is so from https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/91604 "Here's Why Viral Vector Vaccines Don't Alter DNA
— It's pretty simple -- they can't" [emphasis mine]:
Potential to Change DNA?
Adenoviruses deliver DNA that can enter the cell nucleus, which brings up the question of whether they can alter DNA. That's an easy one -- no.
Adenoviruses -- even as they occur in nature -- just do not have the capacity to alter DNA. Unlike retroviruses such as HIV or lentiviruses, wild-type adenoviruses do not carry the enzymatic machinery necessary for integration into the host cell's DNA. That's exactly what makes them good vaccine platforms for infectious diseases, according to Coughlan.
And, engineered adenoviruses used in vaccines have been further crippled by deleting chunks of their genome so that they cannot replicate, further increasing their safety.
"The cell lines that are used for adenovirus vaccines are highly and well characterized cell lines. They are classified by the FDA as nonintegrating, meaning there has never been any evidence in humans and multiple animal models of vector-borne DNA integrating into a host," said Gregory Poland, MD, of the vaccine research group at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.
The enzymatic machinery, which these adenoviruses don't have, in case you are wondering, refers to enzymes that are capable of opening up DNA strands to allow DNA to be inserted. Without this, it's completely impossible for it to "alter your genes" because it simply has no way to do so. It's basically like not having a key to a lock, without which you cannot unlock the door, and in this case unlocking the door is the only possible way in.
Anyone you hear saying something contrary to the above simply does not understand the science they are referring to, and probably not science generally, something all too common these days.
How are people just blindly accepting these vaccine passports? How is it that so few even question something that is so obviously absurd? The fact that they don't accommodate for natural immunity, which is *superior* to the vaccine 'immunity,' should be a clear indication that we're being manipulated. Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents can still catch and spread covid. It's shocking how many people are accepting these 'passports' as somehow justifiable.
It seems you are a person type who gets shocked easily by trivial things. Or are you just belonging to anti-vax camp. And maybe you haven’t realized it yet. That you are in denial of the human progress in medicine.
Firstly, As some one have already pointed out - the vaccination does not modify your genes, contrary to what you are thinking. It’s a fact. And you got your facts WRONG.
Secondly, the society needs to function, what other measures than ‘passports’ do you suggest for mitigating the risk of spreading COVID-19, when the society tries to get to new normal? Or you just criticize the solution without offering any alternatives? Sounds like a grumpy asshole.
Thirdly, the provided to you link https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/why-covid-19-vaccines-offer-better-protection-than-infection.html Is an interview with Virologist Sabra Klein, PhD ‘98, MS, MA, who says an immense amount of data collected in a short time have made clear the safety and effectiveness of vaccines and the limited immunity that comes from being infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It is funny how easily you dismiss the information coming from a virologist.
Fourthly, you have provide in a later comment 3 links, basically claiming that it is the prove (for you) that natural immunity is better than vaccine. But your claim is wrong. Let’s look into the links you have provided. In the 1st link: there is no such information about what is better In the 2nd link: there is no control group / initial testing. It doesn’t consider that all vaccinated people are documented, but only a part of the infected people are making the test and are diagnosed being sick with COVID-19. Thus the number of people who were newly infected and were already sick with COVID-19 some time in the past isn’t known. This means that the statistics in the article and the conclusion that vacinated people 6 times are more likely to get sick than people with the natural immunity is NOT CORECT AND MISLEADING. In the 3d link: there is finally a control group initial testing done. And the numbers tell us that 4,85% percent of people get reinfected (=62/1278), and only 3,85% vacinated people got infected (=5449/141480). So even in the link you have provided, you proved your own statement is WRONG. You got your facts wrong AGAIN.
You are not simply getting the facts wrong. You are spreading LIES or your own ASSUMPTIONS.
PLEASE STOP IT!!!
That was a lot of effort to be mostly wrong. And for you to embarrass yourself by calling me a "grumpy asshole" lol (points for humor!). A gene is a a segment of DNA or RNA that carries information. Do you know what the 'RNA' in mRNA is referring to? I'll give you one guess. Did I say it modifies your DNA? You don't even have to guess on this one, I'll tell you: no. What it does do is use genetic code to trigger protein production by ribosomes, rather than using inactivated virus particles, like the vast majority of vaccines out there.
It's funny how you maintain the idea of vaccine passports, despite the fact that they don't account for natural immunity, and that vaccines don't prevent infection or transmission, which would be the whole point of limiting travel. But maybe that's a bit too complex for you to sort out, or you're just too triggered by all this to think clearly.
You ask about solutions? Well, the average age of death is around 80 years old, so lets make sure all the elderly are vaccinated (already done! >%90 are in the US). Let's also make sure that anyone who is at risk, with commodities, has the opportunity to get a vaccine (done! they're practically darting people along the sidewalks). Lets also develop a traditional, inactivated vaccine, rather than the gene therapy vaccines that focus only on spike proteins, and thus don't confer a full immune response. The use of 'leaky' and incomplete gene therapy vaccines promotes the creation of variants by making it easier for the virus to evade defenses (if you're vaccinated, you're helping to create variants faster, it's basic science).
In short, you should probably know what you're talking about before spouting off on the internet and accusing people of lying.
Nothing you just posted contradicts anything in the post you replied to, nor does your post contain any useful information at all. Frankly, I don't think you have any idea what you are talking about as your post is just a confused mishmash of words.
How are people just blindly accepting these vaccine passports? How is it that so few even question something that is so obviously absurd? The fact that they don't accommodate for natural immunity, which is *superior* to the vaccine 'immunity,' should be a clear indication that we're being manipulated. Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents can still catch and spread covid. It's shocking how many people are accepting these 'passports' as somehow justifiable.
Listen to the science, science is absolute and no longer open to opposing views of the facts.
Yes. Have blind faith in science, the numbers don’t lie - unless they’re PC marketing specs because that science is wrong science and we only advocate the right science… …until it changes… …next year.
How are people just blindly accepting these vaccine passports? How is it that so few even question something that is so obviously absurd? The fact that they don't accommodate for natural immunity, which is *superior* to the vaccine 'immunity,' should be a clear indication that we're being manipulated. Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents can still catch and spread covid. It's shocking how many people are accepting these 'passports' as somehow justifiable.
Wow, thank you for sharing that, but that is beyond absurd. I can't believe that's published on Johns Hopkins site. Extremely poorly written, lacks context, and even contradicts itself. You don't even need any outside information or knowledge to see how ridiculous this is, and conveniently, they don't reference any actual studies, just framing it as this one person's opinion.
For example, they claim that natural immunity is worse, but don't say how they came to this conclusion (antibodies? B or T cell activation?). They say they don't know how it is better, it just is, then diminish their own point by noting that the vaccines only focus on one set of antigens, the spike proteins, unlike natural immunity that can address all of the antigens on the virus. They also don't mention that focusing on spike proteins also reduces the immune response to B and T cell activation, whereas natural immunity also involves natural killer cells, macrophages, etc. They also don't mention the context of a *much* higher rate of reinfection with those who have been vaccinated vs those who have natural immunity, which shows that this limited gene therapy vaccine immunity is clearly not superior to natural immunity (which is obvious and expected).
It's disturbing that an article like the one you linked is being disseminated as 'reliable' information. People need to wake up and realize that science has been politicized.
First, I wrote this (before using forum):
patchythepirate is an appropriate name for a troll. Here are two examples:
"...they don't accommodate for natural immunity, which is *superior* to the vaccine 'immunity'"
We do not know how to detect superior natural immunity. Some of us may indeed be naturally immune, but we won't know about that for years. If patchytheprirate means innate immunity, the first line of defense, that is clearly not superior, or none of us would get sick. If the writer means acquired immunity from having had an infection, that's still not quite right. In infection provides some immunity, vaccination is better, and the combination of having had an infection and then been vaccinated appears to be the best. There are multiple sources for this, but I recommend the podcast, "This Week in Virology". Chances are there are many relevant links in the notes for some of the episodes. I'd rather listen to experts; they are available there. "Natural immunity" in this context is sleight-of-hand; meaningless as used.
"gene modifying agents".
The vaccines are different, but we know that the ones authorized (not yet licensed) in the USA do not modify the DNA of a vaccinated person. That is, they do not insert, delete, or change the DNA base pairs. We may someday discover that changes in gene expression occur, but those are still the genes the cell started with, given that mutations in cell reproduction do occur, some of which lead to cancer. How gene expression changes is another topic, but it's somewhat like changes in the state of a computer program, and expected and desirable in many contexts. Without it, there would not be different types of cells in our bodies.
Not clear how valid the passports are or how long they should last, but manipulation via false statements is perfectly evident in their post here. ---- But then we have their response, quoted above. It's sort of impressive in a "dropping technical terms suggests you know what you are talking about" kind of way. So to falsify a few of the claims:
The reinfection rate for vaccinated persons is lower than for unvaccinated persons. That's the case for vaccination. The reinfection rate for persons who had the disease versus the reinfection rate for vaccinated persons is less analyzed, but we know there are reinfections and "breakthrough" infections among the vaccinated. We know that the post-vaccine infections are milder and hospitalization and/or death is very unlikely; we have no such observation for post-infection reinfection. I regard the statement that post-vaccination infections are have a much higher rate than post-infection reinfection as misleading and probably false.
Post-vaccination reinfection is really a red herring; being vaccinated is not being infected, the writer refers to people vaccinated and infected twice, which is a very small group indeed, and unlikely to be able to produce a statistically significant high rate. These are people whose immune systems are not working well enough to protect them; they are not typical.
This is a serious disease. You don't want to have an infection at all. Having an infection followed by vaccination produces far more antibodies than either alone; this has been measured. We don't know whether antibodies or T-cells are more important, but both are stimulated by vaccination. An immunoassay can distinguish people infected from people merely vaccinated because only people previously infected have antibodies for the non-spike parts of the virus, which is useful, but may not be relevant to effective immune response.
Also, some symptoms of long covid have been reported to be reduced by post-infection vaccination, especially two shots. Those reports are anecdotes, not data, but interesting and will likely result in data collection later as part of understanding long covid better. It's too soon for that now, but better understanding could be good news for sufferers from other diseases with long post-infection sequelae.
Wow, it's amazing how some people have so much conviction behind what they're saying, yet still don't know what you're talking about. I agree that 'gene modifying' was an imprecise term for me to use, but otherwise you don't do anything to disprove my points. You seem to just ramble on about ancillary issues without actually making much of an argument. Also, innate immunity is more robust than a vaccine that only focuses on one set of antigens (spike proteins). This should not be a difficult concept to grasp lol
Not to mention that when you have reinfection rates from vaccinated people that are multiple times higher than reinfection rates from those with natural immunity, I hate to be the one to solve this simple puzzle for you, but natural immunity is (as expected) better (and it doesn't take years to discover this; where do you even come up with this stuff lol).
Well, these bizarrely confident and incredibly poor arguments have been fun to debunk, but I have to get back to work now, I have a busy medical clinic to attend to.
How are people just blindly accepting these vaccine passports? How is it that so few even question something that is so obviously absurd? The fact that they don't accommodate for natural immunity, which is *superior* to the vaccine 'immunity,' should be a clear indication that we're being manipulated. Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents can still catch and spread covid. It's shocking how many people are accepting these 'passports' as somehow justifiable.
I recall the former President who had all the kings horses and all the kings doctors working to save his life also gave him the vaccine just before he left office. People I know who got ill with Covid all got vaccinated as well. Why? Variants. Apparently those "gene modifying agents" have not made the population any more intelligent so on that count it failed.
Lol. You realize that pettiness is not an actual argument for.. anything, right?
How are people just blindly accepting these vaccine passports? How is it that so few even question something that is so obviously absurd? The fact that they don't accommodate for natural immunity, which is *superior* to the vaccine 'immunity,' should be a clear indication that we're being manipulated. Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents can still catch and spread covid. It's shocking how many people are accepting these 'passports' as somehow justifiable.
Wow, thank you for sharing that, but that is beyond absurd. I can't believe that's published on Johns Hopkins site. Extremely poorly written, lacks context, and even contradicts itself. You don't even need any outside information or knowledge to see how ridiculous this is, and conveniently, they don't reference any actual studies, just framing it as this one person's opinion.
For example, they claim that natural immunity is worse, but don't say how they came to this conclusion (antibodies? B or T cell activation?). They say they don't know how it is better, it just is, then diminish their own point by noting that the vaccines only focus on one set of antigens, the spike proteins, unlike natural immunity that can address all of the antigens on the virus. They also don't mention that focusing on spike proteins also reduces the immune response to B and T cell activation, whereas natural immunity also involves natural killer cells, macrophages, etc. They also don't mention the context of a *much* higher rate of reinfection with those who have been vaccinated vs those who have natural immunity, which shows that this limited gene therapy vaccine immunity is clearly not superior to natural immunity (which is obvious and expected).
It's disturbing that an article like the one you linked is being disseminated as 'reliable' information. People need to wake up and realize that science has been politicized.
Science is always politicised, that turned out to be its ‘Killer App’ - that & actually killing of course, it’s really effective at that.
Come to think of it, our greatest application of new science is to fix the misapplication of old science (industry destroying ecology etc.) Isn’t one definition of insanity to repeat an action expecting a different outcome? (Quantum physicists & chaos theorists may disagree/agree/simultaneously)
... Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents ...
"COVID-19 vaccines do not change or interact with your DNA in any way. Both mRNA and viral vector COVID-19 vaccines deliver instructions (genetic material) to our cells to start building protection against the virus that causes COVID-19. However, the material never enters the nucleus of the cell, which is where our DNA is kept." https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html
Just to expand on this a bit, since it seems to be an area highly susceptible to disinformation due to the specialized nature of the topic — i.e., most people have no basis in their knowledge to evaluate these wild claims about vaccines altering your genes.
First, the mRNA vaccines cannot alter your "genes" because they don't contain any DNA. The mRNA enters your cells, makes its way to the ribosomes in the cytoplasm, where it gets transcribed to make Covid spike proteins, and then is immediately destroyed. The spike proteins are released and cause an immune response. This entire process simply uses the cell's machinery to manufacture proteins in exactly the same way the cell naturally manufactures proteins and destroys mRNA produced internally. But they key thing to remember about mRNA vaccines is they don't contain any DNA, so there is no DNA to "alter your genes".
The viral vector vaccines work differently and require an additional step — i.e., the production of mRNA — after which the process is identical to the way mRNA vaccines work, as described above. The viral vector vaccines do contain DNA, but they also don't "alter your genes" because they simply don't have the ability to do so. Here's a good explanation of why this is so from https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/91604 "Here's Why Viral Vector Vaccines Don't Alter DNA
— It's pretty simple -- they can't" [emphasis mine]:
Potential to Change DNA?
Adenoviruses deliver DNA that can enter the cell nucleus, which brings up the question of whether they can alter DNA. That's an easy one -- no.
Adenoviruses -- even as they occur in nature -- just do not have the capacity to alter DNA. Unlike retroviruses such as HIV or lentiviruses, wild-type adenoviruses do not carry the enzymatic machinery necessary for integration into the host cell's DNA. That's exactly what makes them good vaccine platforms for infectious diseases, according to Coughlan.
And, engineered adenoviruses used in vaccines have been further crippled by deleting chunks of their genome so that they cannot replicate, further increasing their safety.
"The cell lines that are used for adenovirus vaccines are highly and well characterized cell lines. They are classified by the FDA as nonintegrating, meaning there has never been any evidence in humans and multiple animal models of vector-borne DNA integrating into a host," said Gregory Poland, MD, of the vaccine research group at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.
The enzymatic machinery, which these adenoviruses don't have, in case you are wondering, refers to enzymes that are capable of opening up DNA strands to allow DNA to be inserted. Without this, it's completely impossible for it to "alter your genes" because it simply has no way to do so. It's basically like not having a key to a lock, without which you cannot unlock the door, and in this case unlocking the door is the only possible way in.
Anyone you hear saying something contrary to the above simply does not understand the science they are referring to, and probably not science generally, something all too common these days.
Science rarely fails to deliver its intended outcomes there are robust scientific methods and legal recourse to ensure this. Where science invariably fails is in its unintended outcomes due to lack of consideration for the context of application.
Your commentary is flawed in that cellular reproduction unzips the DNA to RNA. Let’s hope the vaccine mRNA doesn’t make an untimely quantum visit to the delivery room or we won’t be handing out cigars, we’ll be handing out tumours. But I’m sure that context has been very, very well considered.
I am more interested in what the boundary condition was that allowed the first pass to be stored in the wallet, and this pass plus version not suitable for the wallet.
... Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents ...
"COVID-19 vaccines do not change or interact with your DNA in any way. Both mRNA and viral vector COVID-19 vaccines deliver instructions (genetic material) to our cells to start building protection against the virus that causes COVID-19. However, the material never enters the nucleus of the cell, which is where our DNA is kept." https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html
Just to expand on this a bit, since it seems to be an area highly susceptible to disinformation due to the specialized nature of the topic — i.e., most people have no basis in their knowledge to evaluate these wild claims about vaccines altering your genes.
First, the mRNA vaccines cannot alter your "genes" because they don't contain any DNA. The mRNA enters your cells, makes its way to the ribosomes in the cytoplasm, where it gets transcribed to make Covid spike proteins, and then is immediately destroyed. The spike proteins are released and cause an immune response. This entire process simply uses the cell's machinery to manufacture proteins in exactly the same way the cell naturally manufactures proteins and destroys mRNA produced internally. But they key thing to remember about mRNA vaccines is they don't contain any DNA, so there is no DNA to "alter your genes".
The viral vector vaccines work differently and require an additional step — i.e., the production of mRNA — after which the process is identical to the way mRNA vaccines work, as described above. The viral vector vaccines do contain DNA, but they also don't "alter your genes" because they simply don't have the ability to do so. Here's a good explanation of why this is so from https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/91604 "Here's Why Viral Vector Vaccines Don't Alter DNA
— It's pretty simple -- they can't" [emphasis mine]:
Potential to Change DNA?
Adenoviruses deliver DNA that can enter the cell nucleus, which brings up the question of whether they can alter DNA. That's an easy one -- no.
Adenoviruses -- even as they occur in nature -- just do not have the capacity to alter DNA. Unlike retroviruses such as HIV or lentiviruses, wild-type adenoviruses do not carry the enzymatic machinery necessary for integration into the host cell's DNA. That's exactly what makes them good vaccine platforms for infectious diseases, according to Coughlan.
And, engineered adenoviruses used in vaccines have been further crippled by deleting chunks of their genome so that they cannot replicate, further increasing their safety.
"The cell lines that are used for adenovirus vaccines are highly and well characterized cell lines. They are classified by the FDA as nonintegrating, meaning there has never been any evidence in humans and multiple animal models of vector-borne DNA integrating into a host," said Gregory Poland, MD, of the vaccine research group at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.
The enzymatic machinery, which these adenoviruses don't have, in case you are wondering, refers to enzymes that are capable of opening up DNA strands to allow DNA to be inserted. Without this, it's completely impossible for it to "alter your genes" because it simply has no way to do so. It's basically like not having a key to a lock, without which you cannot unlock the door, and in this case unlocking the door is the only possible way in.
Anyone you hear saying something contrary to the above simply does not understand the science they are referring to, and probably not science generally, something all too common these days.
Science rarely fails to deliver its intended outcomes there are robust scientific methods and legal recourse to ensure this. Where science invariably fails is in its unintended outcomes due to lack of consideration for the context of application.
Your commentary is flawed in that cellular reproduction unzips the DNA to RNA. Let’s hope the vaccine mRNA doesn’t make an untimely quantum visit to the delivery room or we won’t be handing out cigars, we’ll be handing out tumours. But I’m sure that context has been very, very well considered.
Ok, well, it's pretty clear you have no knowledge of this: "unzips the DNA to RNA". Go learn something and then come back and post when you can write something that isn't nonsense.
I agree that 'gene modifying' was an imprecise term for me to use, but otherwise you don't do anything to disprove my points.
That's because you don't have any points, your posts are just word salad.
It's hilarious how proud people are of themselves and their on opinions. The amount of hubris on this thread is incredible.
Buddy, if you have an actual point to make, let's hear it. Or you can just deflect with some feeble excuse again.
I’m not sure why this is so difficult for you to understand. Natural immunity means that you have to survive the disease in the first place. The idea of the vaccine is to make sure that you survive. So what if you get it? Most people who get it after being vaccinated don’t even have symptoms or very mild ones like when they first receive the vaccine.
When you or your family get it and die, you’ll learn this lesson the hard way like a lot of others that have had first hand experience. It’s Darwinism. Good luck with your natural immunity!
How are people just blindly accepting these vaccine passports? How is it that so few even question something that is so obviously absurd? The fact that they don't accommodate for natural immunity, which is *superior* to the vaccine 'immunity,' should be a clear indication that we're being manipulated. Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents can still catch and spread covid. It's shocking how many people are accepting these 'passports' as somehow justifiable.
You know what modifies your genes? The virus. It hijacks your own cells by injecting it’s DNA into them to reproduce itself.
... Not to mention the fact that they make no sense, since people 'vaccinated' with these gene modifying agents ...
"COVID-19 vaccines do not change or interact with your DNA in any way. Both mRNA and viral vector COVID-19 vaccines deliver instructions (genetic material) to our cells to start building protection against the virus that causes COVID-19. However, the material never enters the nucleus of the cell, which is where our DNA is kept." https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html
Just to expand on this a bit, since it seems to be an area highly susceptible to disinformation due to the specialized nature of the topic — i.e., most people have no basis in their knowledge to evaluate these wild claims about vaccines altering your genes.
First, the mRNA vaccines cannot alter your "genes" because they don't contain any DNA. The mRNA enters your cells, makes its way to the ribosomes in the cytoplasm, where it gets transcribed to make Covid spike proteins, and then is immediately destroyed. The spike proteins are released and cause an immune response. This entire process simply uses the cell's machinery to manufacture proteins in exactly the same way the cell naturally manufactures proteins and destroys mRNA produced internally. But they key thing to remember about mRNA vaccines is they don't contain any DNA, so there is no DNA to "alter your genes".
The viral vector vaccines work differently and require an additional step — i.e., the production of mRNA — after which the process is identical to the way mRNA vaccines work, as described above. The viral vector vaccines do contain DNA, but they also don't "alter your genes" because they simply don't have the ability to do so. Here's a good explanation of why this is so from https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/91604 "Here's Why Viral Vector Vaccines Don't Alter DNA
— It's pretty simple -- they can't" [emphasis mine]:
Potential to Change DNA?
Adenoviruses deliver DNA that can enter the cell nucleus, which brings up the question of whether they can alter DNA. That's an easy one -- no.
Adenoviruses -- even as they occur in nature -- just do not have the capacity to alter DNA. Unlike retroviruses such as HIV or lentiviruses, wild-type adenoviruses do not carry the enzymatic machinery necessary for integration into the host cell's DNA. That's exactly what makes them good vaccine platforms for infectious diseases, according to Coughlan.
And, engineered adenoviruses used in vaccines have been further crippled by deleting chunks of their genome so that they cannot replicate, further increasing their safety.
"The cell lines that are used for adenovirus vaccines are highly and well characterized cell lines. They are classified by the FDA as nonintegrating, meaning there has never been any evidence in humans and multiple animal models of vector-borne DNA integrating into a host," said Gregory Poland, MD, of the vaccine research group at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.
The enzymatic machinery, which these adenoviruses don't have, in case you are wondering, refers to enzymes that are capable of opening up DNA strands to allow DNA to be inserted. Without this, it's completely impossible for it to "alter your genes" because it simply has no way to do so. It's basically like not having a key to a lock, without which you cannot unlock the door, and in this case unlocking the door is the only possible way in.
Anyone you hear saying something contrary to the above simply does not understand the science they are referring to, and probably not science generally, something all too common these days.
Science rarely fails to deliver its intended outcomes there are robust scientific methods and legal recourse to ensure this. Where science invariably fails is in its unintended outcomes due to lack of consideration for the context of application.
Your commentary is flawed in that cellular reproduction unzips the DNA to RNA. Let’s hope the vaccine mRNA doesn’t make an untimely quantum visit to the delivery room or we won’t be handing out cigars, we’ll be handing out tumours. But I’m sure that context has been very, very well considered.
Ok, well, it's pretty clear you have no knowledge of this: "unzips the DNA to RNA". Go learn something and then come back and post when you can write something that isn't nonsense.
Yes, nothing wrong with showing your papers when asked. Right? /s
On a different note, I think my attention span is getting worse. Any of the really long replies I just scan past anymore. Anyone else do the same?
Welll, I shouldn’t say “card”, because what I got from the pharmacy was a flimsy piece of paper that’s too big to fit into my wallet. But that’s New York State for ya. And since Moderna indicated that they will most likely offer a booster shot, I guess I’m not really “fully vaccinated” after all. Glad I live far from the cesspool known as NYC, because that passport thing would never fly in my town.
Comments
First, the mRNA vaccines cannot alter your "genes" because they don't contain any DNA. The mRNA enters your cells, makes its way to the ribosomes in the cytoplasm, where it gets transcribed to make Covid spike proteins, and then is immediately destroyed. The spike proteins are released and cause an immune response. This entire process simply uses the cell's machinery to manufacture proteins in exactly the same way the cell naturally manufactures proteins and destroys mRNA produced internally. But they key thing to remember about mRNA vaccines is they don't contain any DNA, so there is no DNA to "alter your genes".
The viral vector vaccines work differently and require an additional step — i.e., the production of mRNA — after which the process is identical to the way mRNA vaccines work, as described above. The viral vector vaccines do contain DNA, but they also don't "alter your genes" because they simply don't have the ability to do so. Here's a good explanation of why this is so from https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/91604 "Here's Why Viral Vector Vaccines Don't Alter DNA
The enzymatic machinery, which these adenoviruses don't have, in case you are wondering, refers to enzymes that are capable of opening up DNA strands to allow DNA to be inserted. Without this, it's completely impossible for it to "alter your genes" because it simply has no way to do so. It's basically like not having a key to a lock, without which you cannot unlock the door, and in this case unlocking the door is the only possible way in.
Anyone you hear saying something contrary to the above simply does not understand the science they are referring to, and probably not science generally, something all too common these days.
…until it changes…
…next year.
Come to think of it, our greatest application of new science is to fix the misapplication of old science (industry destroying ecology etc.) Isn’t one definition of insanity to repeat an action expecting a different outcome? (Quantum physicists & chaos theorists may disagree/agree/simultaneously)
Talking monkeys ain’t so clever eh?
Your commentary is flawed in that cellular reproduction unzips the DNA to RNA. Let’s hope the vaccine mRNA doesn’t make an untimely quantum visit to the delivery room or we won’t be handing out cigars, we’ll be handing out tumours. But I’m sure that context has been very, very well considered.
When you or your family get it and die, you’ll learn this lesson the hard way like a lot of others that have had first hand experience. It’s Darwinism. Good luck with your natural immunity!
On a different note, I think my attention span is getting worse. Any of the really long replies I just scan past anymore. Anyone else do the same?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26887/