I threw a post out onto Facebook Saying that I didn’t give a crap whether you wanted to get the Covid poke or not but let’s stop calling it a vaccine let’s call it what it really is, an experimental gene therapy, closer to chemotherapy that a vaccine, which I heard from an oncologist. Immediately after I posted that, Facebook had to put their “it’s a safe and effective disclaimer” on my comment. Fk Facebook.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (22)
sorted by:
A gene therapy is by definition something that intentionally alters the genome of a large number of cells to fix a genetic problem. The mRNA therapies do none of that.
It also is not technically a chemotherapy, as those are generally specific molecules that inhibit cancer specific mechanism, or kill cancer specific cells. This technology can be used to treat cancer though in a similar way to chemotherapies. Indeed I am fairly certain it began life in that field.
While I agree it is not technically a vaccine, it is close enough to it that it isn't completely wrong, and it eliminates confusion in communication. Technically it is an immunotherapy.
I do not disagree with your general sentiment, but it does no good to say "its not this" and then call it something else that it also isn't.
Except that if you go back to some of the mRNA patents in 2015 for the german company that created some of this stuff, it clearly says these mrna vaccines are gene therapy.
Well, considering I design similar tech, and gene therapies, if they do indeed say that they are incorrect.
I'm willing to bet they don't actually say that and people with insufficient knowledge are misinterpreting. Nevertheless its not impossible the patent writers made a mistake.
I can tell you with 100% certainty however, that by definition, and by those in the field, these mRNA immunotherapies are not considered gene therapies.
Let me be more specific. These mRNA immunotherapies deliver mRNA into the cytosol of a cell. The mRNA is then translated into a protein. At no time does the mRNA make it into the nucleus and interact with the DNA. Its nearly impossible for it to make it into the nucleus, and nearly impossible for it to be reverse transcribed onto the DNA. Even if it somehow managed those two separate nearly impossible tasks, it would be nearly impossible for it to be later transcribed from DNA into mRNA as it would be very unlikely to have the transcription sequences upstream to get the machinery on there to make that happen. Even if that happened it would extremely unlikely that it would be in the proper reading frame and have a termination sequence at the right place.
In other words, the odds of this happening in a single cell, using this particular technology is 4 x N, where N = nearly impossible. And that's just for one cell. To happen in multiple cells = M x 4 x N where M = multiple cells.
It would be ludicrous to use this as a "gene therapy". It's efficacy would be on the order of
0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
I'm only giving it that much credit because I got bored writing zeros.
In your professional opinion, are we headed for a catastrophic event by injecting millions of people at once? If so, who would survive, the vaxxed or unvaxxed? So many conflicting theories.
I can't prognosticate with any more accuracy than anyone else. Having said that, I do not think the vaccine is overly dangerous (though it absolutely IS dangerous). By overly dangerous, I mean I do not think it will cause a depopulation level event.
The data suggests there is about a 1:20,000 chance of dying to the vaccine, and a 1:200 chance of getting a serious adverse reaction. My biggest fear on the vaccines however is the potential pathogenic priming and subsequent severe immune response that plagued all previous coronavirus vaccines.
In previous tests, on average, about 5% of the vaccine recipients died when they later encountered the real virus. Because this problem existed in other tests, not having tested that potential effect in these vaccines in animals prior to human tests constitutes a violation of the Nuremberg code and thus a crime against humanity.
Regardless of that though, if these vaccines encounter the same problem, next years "SARS season" could be brutal. Even 5% of the vaccinated is still not a population level event, but it would cause a world wide uproar. Unless they can convincingly play off such an event as "a worse virus" it would red-pill the entire world. I sincerely hope that is not the plan...
As for the other, I do not think it is likely they will release "a worse virus" to kill off the unvaccinated. In fact, I think that is HIGHLY unlikely. Though I admit that it is not impossible.
Having said that, if it did happen, they would have to use the same spike protein used in these vaccines. If they did, you could use the same defenses against that future virus since they are specific to the receptor those spike proteins attack. Those defenses are vitamin D + K + Zn, along with enough other vitamins to not be deficient (notably B, C, Mg). Both HCQ and Ivermectin would also help, but the vitamins are trivially easy to get.