I'm not an expert but some of the things she is describing do not jive with what I have been able to discern about the new mRNA vaccines.
I will say that they do seem very risky and I don't want to take it, nor do I think it is necessary. But I'm not sure what she's saying is accurate.
The paper she references does not cover mRNA vaccines, it talks about several vaccines including an mDNA vaccine. That's a different technology. There are a zillion different flavors of this technology (mDNA is one - easier to make work because DNA is more stable - and there are many others that have different operational principles.)
My understanding of the current crop of mRNA vaccines is:
they do not modify your DNA. it's not inheritable. the particles contain a few copies of an mRNA sequence which are used 1 time to exhibit the spike protein on the cell surface
the effect does not continue in your body because the mRNA expresses (one per copy) and then the cells displaying it are probably killed by your own immune system
if the mRNA is ingested by dendritic cells (a type of white blood cells) it will cause your body to learn to make antibodies and then go out and kill all those other cells expressing the spike.
she says "every cell in your body has the spike and gets attacked" - this is not true - maybe it's true for the DNA editing technology, but not for this 1-time use mRNA
That said, it's not great that the vaccine ends up killing a bunch of random cells wholesale and that could be the cause of the side effects (some of which are known as 'death'). But it's unclear to me if the issue in the paper of the next challenge killing people is actually going to happen. For one thing, the trial subjects were exposed to COVID and some contracted it - that's how they assessed the efficacy, 95% more control group contracted it than test group. Thus it stands to reason that a bunch of test group patients also were challenged.
I would love to know more about these vaccines and if anyone has counter-info to what i'm presenting i'd love to hear about it (sauce please though!).
Much as I am not excited about these vaccines, from what I have learned it's actually possible they are safer than traditional vaccine technology!
I'm not an expert but some of the things she is describing do not jive with what I have been able to discern about the new mRNA vaccines.
I will say that they do seem very risky and I don't want to take it, nor do I think it is necessary. But I'm not sure what she's saying is accurate.
The paper she references does not cover mRNA vaccines, it talks about several vaccines including an mDNA vaccine. That's a different technology. There are a zillion different flavors of this technology (mDNA is one - easier to make work because DNA is more stable - and there are many others that have different operational principles.)
here is that paper https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22536382/
here's a paper on a bunch of different flavors of mRNA technology https://www.nature.com/articles/nrd.2017.243.pdf
My understanding of the current crop of mRNA vaccines is:
they do not modify your DNA. it's not inheritable. the particles contain a few copies of an mRNA sequence which are used 1 time to exhibit the spike protein on the cell surface
the effect does not continue in your body because the mRNA expresses (one per copy) and then the cells displaying it are probably killed by your own immune system
if the mRNA is ingested by dendritic cells (a type of white blood cells) it will cause your body to learn to make antibodies and then go out and kill all those other cells expressing the spike.
she says "every cell in your body has the spike and gets attacked" - this is not true - maybe it's true for the DNA editing technology, but not for this 1-time use mRNA
That said, it's not great that the vaccine ends up killing a bunch of random cells wholesale and that could be the cause of the side effects (some of which are known as 'death'). But it's unclear to me if the issue in the paper of the next challenge killing people is actually going to happen. For one thing, the trial subjects were exposed to COVID and some contracted it - that's how they assessed the efficacy, 95% more control group contracted it than test group. Thus it stands to reason that a bunch of test group patients also were challenged.
I would love to know more about these vaccines and if anyone has counter-info to what i'm presenting i'd love to hear about it (sauce please though!).
Much as I am not excited about these vaccines, from what I have learned it's actually possible they are safer than traditional vaccine technology!