Avoid dooming, be civil and read the rules! Please do your part to help keep this community awesome. Direct "discussion-oriented" posts to THIS Weekly discussion thread.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (274)
sorted by:
It could very well be confirmation bias, but I took biology in college and I have not seen anyone mention frameshift mutation not once.
I also work and healthcare and spoke with the health department on the requirements needed to store and administer the vaccine. It is pretty complicated.
Most people are thinking it modifies DNA, which it doesn't. We have had a really hard time creating a stable mRNA and given human error, I just don't trust it.
Do you trust that the lithium battery in your phone won't explode? Or that your seatbelt will work effectively? Or that your airplane pilot will land the plane? This is why we have things like government and regulation, for testing.
Vaccines are rigorously tested in the same manner, thousands and thousands of times. Are there random anomalies? Sure, but you need to understand that the cards are heavily stacked in your favor.
Your one experience in college biology does not discount decades of experience by professional epidemiologists and virologists. I mean c'mon, that's like me taking Japanese in college (which I did) and then claiming I'm just as good as a career translator.
You are using false dichotomy to justify the safety of a brand new vaccine.
Me trusting a pilot, seat belt or battery doesn't exactly correlate with my trust of a vaccine. If you really want to go there, these mechanisms have been around for DECADES of trial and error.
I never claimed that I am more qualified than a geneticist or virologist. I simply mentioned that your ribosomes are prone to something that I have not seen any literature address my concerns about and I have talked to a few doctors and they don't know what to think.
I can't find any studies or articles that discuss frameshift mutation and mRNA vaccines. If you can find one, provide it. I rather be safe than sory.
Vaccines take 10-15 years of complex and rigorous studies and trials to approve. This one is no more than a year old.
Can you frame your concern into a question?
To quote from my doctor friend in response to this:
"The trials were quicker than past vaccine trials due to the loads of funding and global necessity for public well-being. Millions vaccinated, minimal reported effects. Historically the more serious vaccine side effects will appear within 2-3 months of vaccine administration. We have over two months of data with no major concerns."
At this pace you are just blowing smoke out of your ass. None of the vaccines have reached phase 3 completion which is critical for public use of the vaccine. That means they are NOT APPROVED.
They are being used for emergency use. Anyone taking the vaccine is PART of phase 3 clinical TESTING.
You simply accepted word of mouth from a doctor instead of looking into primary sources and researching. Many doctors aren't the encyclopedias of knowledge that you think they are.
Convenient for you to ignore my concerns about frameshifting.