First of all, what he said had no basis in cell biology reality (see below).
Second, he said "in miniscule amounts". So you believe he must be telling the truth about it shedding (because it fits your fear of it) but then don't believe he is telling the truth about the scale (because it doesn't fit your fear of it).
That makes perfect sense, if you use fear to guide your reasoning.
I am a cell biologist and bio-nanotechnology researcher in a field related to the vaccines. There is no biological basis for a transmembrane protein to escape the lipid bilayer it is locked into, somehow escape the body, somehow enter into another body (apparently by teleportation) somehow cross into the bloodstream, somehow make it to a cell that is expressing the ACE-2 protein, and then somehow aligns with that protein, and then somehow do anything except cause that single receptor to shut down. That would do NOTHING to a whole cell, and less than nothing to the tissue it lives in.
So you understand, transmembrane proteins of the type that is the SARS S protein can't escape the membrane. it just doesn't happen. Even if they did, the lipid bilayer is essential for the structure and function, requiring both mechanical forces and the hydrophobic environment only existing within the lipid bilayer. So if it escaped, it would instantly unfold and would form some other structure. Considering that the ACE-2 ligand part of the S protein is dependent on the S Proteins tertiary structure, which instantly changes if it miraculously escaped the membrane, there is virtually no way it is still capable of activating the ACE-2 receptor even if all the other 10 miracles happened that got it into another persons body and interfacing with the right cell in the right orientation.
From the perspective of someone who does research in these things, the concept is beyond ludicrous that the S protein is "shedding" and making people sick.
Considering all "sickness" it is causing is related to menstruation, and menstrual sympathy has been a thing forever, and the vaccine itself has been shown to accumulate in the ovaries, BY FAR the most likely explanation is a pheromone response causing menstrual sympathy.
He said that the spike protein sheds (as a fact), and then offers his thought (a hypothesis) that the shedding is minor.
He said that it sheds. He invented it.
Edit to add: Everyone assumed that the injection stays at the injection site too... and it doesn't... and now we discover that not only does it spread throughout the body, it also has the ability to cross the blood / brain barrier... so, shedding is truly not out of the realm of possibility, despite you trying to convolute and confuse with your Cell Biology terminology.
Everyone assumed that the injection stays at the injection site too... and it doesn't
When people were saying this, I was saying that there was NO POSSIBLE WAY it was remaining at the injection site. Such an idea was ludicrous. I made protest after protest about the design of the vaccines and how they would easily enter the cardiovascular and lymphatic systems and spread everywhere.
Which was completely obvious to me because I have designed lipid nanoparticles for cell specific targeting drug delivery...
So I know a thing or two about what is going on.
despite you trying to convolute and confuse with your Cell Biology terminology.
If what I said was confusing I apologize. I was trying to be specific and accurate. It is difficult to explain how ludicrous some of the ideas are without getting into the nitty gritty.
it also has the ability to cross the blood / brain barrier
Of course it does. I said that from the beginning. We create PEGylated lipid nanoparticles of that specific size precisely because they CAN cross the BBB.
so, shedding is truly not out of the realm of possibility
Just because someone else got a completely unrelated thing wrong, doesn't mean that this is also wrong. That is a logical fallacy.
I don't care to look into the mechanism of which chirality or stereoisomer does which or whatever. The point is, that we just DON'T KNOW. Do I want you to be right? Of course! But, we don't know.
I am letting you know the inventor is very likely incorrect. There is no biological basis for it to occur.
Its not a chirality thing... But I get your point.
But, we don't know.
No. We don't, and biology can be surprising. But given that there is zero evidence of ANYTHING other than menstrual sympathy, and given that as an expert in the field I am saying I can see no possible path for it to happen, and have given a detailed report of what my protests are, it is LUDICROUS to think it is something other than menstrual sympathy (AKA a pheromone response).
At the very least every protest I have made should be addressed specifically, since I am telling you what is known about the biology, and how such a thing is basically impossible.
Let me give you a little more on why a transmembrane protein such as the S protein can't exist outside of the cell membrane (and thus a cell) and remain in its proper interacting form.
For many decades they were able to figure out the shape of many proteins using X-ray crystalography. But for transmembrane proteins they never could. It took decades to figure out a way to keep them in their proper shape once taken out of the membrane to get a good picture of them (they had to put hydrophobic molecules in between in a very specific way). The instant a TM protein hits an aqueous environment they immediately change form in a violent way.
In addition, getting a transmembrane protein out of a membrane REQUIRES a hydrophobic environment. (Our entire body is an aqueous environment except in the cell membranes). If a cell were to die with those proteins on the membrane, they would stick with the membrane, making it basically impossible to go anywhere except down the gullet of some phagocyte. They must be in a bilayer (cell membrane or bleb membrane). Its not speculation, its physics.
Of course it does. I said that from the beginning. We create PEGylated lipid nanoparticles of that specific size precisely because they CAN cross the BBB
I edited my comment while you were responding. Apologies for a sneaky edit!
I read what you wrote thoroughly. My days of cell biology courses are behind me but I can understand research papers just fine, thank you for your derision and condescension.
You're right, he's a poser, and don't let the tap dancing obfuscate what is plainly observed IRL- clinical observations proved transmission of blood-poisoning substances to individuals in the proximity of test subjects. And all injected are test subjects, because it's not a vaccine.
I do say blood poison because the effects CROSS SYSTEMS- reproductive, vascular, respiratory, nervous, etc.
Trying to identify the transmitted agent on our end is kind of futile because big pharma has been incredibly dishonest from the get go and we really do not know what is in the injections.
Take it from another researcher, you've made several assumptions and you're tying everything to one alleged protein. We know different test subjects are getting different injections, easily proven despite blank ingredient sheets, simply based on the extreme differences in event reporting by lot.
We know there's more side effects from SHEDDERS than menstrual, and even then, putting the extreme bleeding, sudden huge painful, off- cycle extended bleeding to magical synchronization which normally happens gradually over months is beyond ludicrous. Especially since MALES have caused the reactions in FEMALES. You have some lab vocabulary but clearly no clinical experience so kindly stop trolling and read moar.
you've made several assumptions and you're tying everything to one alleged protein.
I have only made the case that the S protein is not shedding. I am not tying anything to anything. The claim is the S protein is shedding. That is what I am addressing.
We know there's more side effects from SHEDDERS than menstrual
Please point to a single piece of credible evidence to support this statement. "I got tired" or "I didn't feel well" don't count as evidence. The most likely scenario in that case is psychosomatic. I have seen no actual evidence, even anecdotal that supports this claim. If some exists I would really like to see it.
You have some lab vocabulary but clearly no clinical experience so kindly stop trolling and read moar.
Really? You are attacking me and not my arguments? That is not the path to elucidation but the opposite.
I am well versed in what is going on. Yes, I am a researcher. Yes, when I inject things its mice, not people. That doesn't mean I am ignorant, and it certainly doesn't mean I can't analyze evidence or research.
Especially since MALES have caused the reactions in FEMALES
This could easily be a pheromone response.
I also have seen no evidence that it is true.
sudden huge painful, off- cycle extended bleeding
The evidence I saw for this was in a vaccinated person not an off target effect.
You have offered not one bit of evidence and a bunch of attempts to discredit without addressing my arguments in response. If you wish to converse, please do so.
And if you wish to see all that I have said on the topic, please read further above. I go into greater detail that helps explain my position. It extends into the "continue reading thread" section.
I never said you should trust me. That would be stupid. You absolutely should not trust me.
However, it must be understood that I have not made a statement, I have presented an argument. If the argument can't be refuted (which it hasn't) then the argument stands as the best argument until it is refuted.
That is all that is going on here. Never hand over your critical thinking skills to me or anyone else. Look at the evidence, hear the arguments.
Unfortunately, since there are no other actual biological researchers commenting on my arguments they are not able to prove that they stand up to debate. I really wish there were. I know there are at least a couple on the board, but they aren't chiming in.
Many Dr,’s are reporting multiple patients coming in with nosebleeds, severe bruising, some with abdominal bleeding, ITTP (idiopathic thrombocytopenia Purpura), patients having stillborns in the 2nd and 3rd trimester (uncommon), clotting abnormalities, and these are not isolated incidences.
Watch “Critical Thinking” on Rumble. It had the 5 Dr’s. every Thursday that discuss what they are seeing in clinic. Also, Dr. Judy Macovich has explained the shedding theory.
I personally didn’t believe it but I don’t believe that all of these Dr’s are conspiring to lie.
As a scientist, you know that sometimes science doesn’t explain everything. Sometimes we expect a certain outcome based on what we know and then scratch our head wondering why the heck something defies science. That’s when we have to listen to patients.
First of all: you can blabber on honored jargon, but that does not make you a certified knowledgeable scientist. Anyone on here can claim anything.
Dozens of highly educated and well established virologist do not share your view.
Second:
somehow escape the body, somehow enter into another body (apparently by teleportation) somehow cross into the bloodstream, somehow make it to a cell that is expressing the ACE-2 protein, and then somehow aligns with that protein, and then somehow do anything except cause that single receptor to shut down
Yet, you are willing to go with the narrative that natural "viruses" somehow spread from person to person without ANY evidence. All the evidence you have is concurrence, coincidental data. The only viruses that spread from person to person are designed to do that.
Third:
Any jabbed person is a spike protein factory. It get's into sperm, ovaries, lympfnodes, saliva, brain.
That it influences people with whom a test subject has close contact is even mentioned in the Pfizer contra-indications. You are neglecting a major implication.
You are appealing to the McCLintock effect, yet you have no evidence for it's pathway. You are reaching and you have no evidence.
Dozens of highly educated and well established virologist do not share your view.
Please point out one virologist (not MD, but actual scientist) who says they think the spike protein is shedding and causing problems and presents an argument or evidence for how that is happening.
Just one argument, or one piece of evidence, by one actual scientist.
Just one.
Yet, you are willing to go with the narrative that natural "viruses" somehow spread from person to person without ANY evidence.
There is a ridiculous amount of evidence that viruses spread.
Here is a paper that looks at mask efficacy in an outbreak of H1N1 (or some flu variant, I'd have to look it up by I'm busy finding evidence for you). It show quite clearly that masks don't work to stop the spread of a virus. (Note: "stop the spread of a virus").
Note: I am getting more stuff. I posted accidentally mid gathering. You have way too many things to respond to! At least you didn't put them all in one post.
First of all, what he said had no basis in cell biology reality (see below).
Second, he said "in miniscule amounts". So you believe he must be telling the truth about it shedding (because it fits your fear of it) but then don't believe he is telling the truth about the scale (because it doesn't fit your fear of it).
That makes perfect sense, if you use fear to guide your reasoning.
I am a cell biologist and bio-nanotechnology researcher in a field related to the vaccines. There is no biological basis for a transmembrane protein to escape the lipid bilayer it is locked into, somehow escape the body, somehow enter into another body (apparently by teleportation) somehow cross into the bloodstream, somehow make it to a cell that is expressing the ACE-2 protein, and then somehow aligns with that protein, and then somehow do anything except cause that single receptor to shut down. That would do NOTHING to a whole cell, and less than nothing to the tissue it lives in.
So you understand, transmembrane proteins of the type that is the SARS S protein can't escape the membrane. it just doesn't happen. Even if they did, the lipid bilayer is essential for the structure and function, requiring both mechanical forces and the hydrophobic environment only existing within the lipid bilayer. So if it escaped, it would instantly unfold and would form some other structure. Considering that the ACE-2 ligand part of the S protein is dependent on the S Proteins tertiary structure, which instantly changes if it miraculously escaped the membrane, there is virtually no way it is still capable of activating the ACE-2 receptor even if all the other 10 miracles happened that got it into another persons body and interfacing with the right cell in the right orientation.
From the perspective of someone who does research in these things, the concept is beyond ludicrous that the S protein is "shedding" and making people sick.
Considering all "sickness" it is causing is related to menstruation, and menstrual sympathy has been a thing forever, and the vaccine itself has been shown to accumulate in the ovaries, BY FAR the most likely explanation is a pheromone response causing menstrual sympathy.
No, please don't put words in my mouth.
He said that the spike protein sheds (as a fact), and then offers his thought (a hypothesis) that the shedding is minor.
He said that it sheds. He invented it.
Edit to add: Everyone assumed that the injection stays at the injection site too... and it doesn't... and now we discover that not only does it spread throughout the body, it also has the ability to cross the blood / brain barrier... so, shedding is truly not out of the realm of possibility, despite you trying to convolute and confuse with your Cell Biology terminology.
When people were saying this, I was saying that there was NO POSSIBLE WAY it was remaining at the injection site. Such an idea was ludicrous. I made protest after protest about the design of the vaccines and how they would easily enter the cardiovascular and lymphatic systems and spread everywhere.
Which was completely obvious to me because I have designed lipid nanoparticles for cell specific targeting drug delivery...
So I know a thing or two about what is going on.
If what I said was confusing I apologize. I was trying to be specific and accurate. It is difficult to explain how ludicrous some of the ideas are without getting into the nitty gritty.
Of course it does. I said that from the beginning. We create PEGylated lipid nanoparticles of that specific size precisely because they CAN cross the BBB.
Just because someone else got a completely unrelated thing wrong, doesn't mean that this is also wrong. That is a logical fallacy.
Look, you said "Shedding can't happen."
And I offered the INVENTOR saying otherwise.
I don't care to look into the mechanism of which chirality or stereoisomer does which or whatever. The point is, that we just DON'T KNOW. Do I want you to be right? Of course! But, we don't know.
I am letting you know the inventor is very likely incorrect. There is no biological basis for it to occur.
Its not a chirality thing... But I get your point.
No. We don't, and biology can be surprising. But given that there is zero evidence of ANYTHING other than menstrual sympathy, and given that as an expert in the field I am saying I can see no possible path for it to happen, and have given a detailed report of what my protests are, it is LUDICROUS to think it is something other than menstrual sympathy (AKA a pheromone response).
At the very least every protest I have made should be addressed specifically, since I am telling you what is known about the biology, and how such a thing is basically impossible.
Let me give you a little more on why a transmembrane protein such as the S protein can't exist outside of the cell membrane (and thus a cell) and remain in its proper interacting form.
For many decades they were able to figure out the shape of many proteins using X-ray crystalography. But for transmembrane proteins they never could. It took decades to figure out a way to keep them in their proper shape once taken out of the membrane to get a good picture of them (they had to put hydrophobic molecules in between in a very specific way). The instant a TM protein hits an aqueous environment they immediately change form in a violent way.
In addition, getting a transmembrane protein out of a membrane REQUIRES a hydrophobic environment. (Our entire body is an aqueous environment except in the cell membranes). If a cell were to die with those proteins on the membrane, they would stick with the membrane, making it basically impossible to go anywhere except down the gullet of some phagocyte. They must be in a bilayer (cell membrane or bleb membrane). Its not speculation, its physics.
No winning here. This guy is waaaaay smarter than the people who invent the vaccines.... Derp.
WE?
State your affiliation + proof.
"We" being people who design lipid nanoparticles.
Proof.
You don't get my affiliation. Nice try doxxer.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2020/12/04/2020.12.04.409144.full.pdf
Did you read what I wrote or did you stop at the fear statement.
I am a researcher in the field. If you would like to learn why what he said is almost certainly not true I recommend reading what I wrote.
I edited my comment while you were responding. Apologies for a sneaky edit!
I read what you wrote thoroughly. My days of cell biology courses are behind me but I can understand research papers just fine, thank you for your derision and condescension.
You're right, he's a poser, and don't let the tap dancing obfuscate what is plainly observed IRL- clinical observations proved transmission of blood-poisoning substances to individuals in the proximity of test subjects. And all injected are test subjects, because it's not a vaccine.
I do say blood poison because the effects CROSS SYSTEMS- reproductive, vascular, respiratory, nervous, etc.
Trying to identify the transmitted agent on our end is kind of futile because big pharma has been incredibly dishonest from the get go and we really do not know what is in the injections.
Take it from another researcher, you've made several assumptions and you're tying everything to one alleged protein. We know different test subjects are getting different injections, easily proven despite blank ingredient sheets, simply based on the extreme differences in event reporting by lot.
We know there's more side effects from SHEDDERS than menstrual, and even then, putting the extreme bleeding, sudden huge painful, off- cycle extended bleeding to magical synchronization which normally happens gradually over months is beyond ludicrous. Especially since MALES have caused the reactions in FEMALES. You have some lab vocabulary but clearly no clinical experience so kindly stop trolling and read moar.
I have only made the case that the S protein is not shedding. I am not tying anything to anything. The claim is the S protein is shedding. That is what I am addressing.
Please point to a single piece of credible evidence to support this statement. "I got tired" or "I didn't feel well" don't count as evidence. The most likely scenario in that case is psychosomatic. I have seen no actual evidence, even anecdotal that supports this claim. If some exists I would really like to see it.
Really? You are attacking me and not my arguments? That is not the path to elucidation but the opposite.
I am well versed in what is going on. Yes, I am a researcher. Yes, when I inject things its mice, not people. That doesn't mean I am ignorant, and it certainly doesn't mean I can't analyze evidence or research.
This could easily be a pheromone response.
I also have seen no evidence that it is true.
The evidence I saw for this was in a vaccinated person not an off target effect.
You have offered not one bit of evidence and a bunch of attempts to discredit without addressing my arguments in response. If you wish to converse, please do so.
And if you wish to see all that I have said on the topic, please read further above. I go into greater detail that helps explain my position. It extends into the "continue reading thread" section.
Soooooooo why should we trust you over other researchers? Because you said you were right on the GAW page?
I never said you should trust me. That would be stupid. You absolutely should not trust me.
However, it must be understood that I have not made a statement, I have presented an argument. If the argument can't be refuted (which it hasn't) then the argument stands as the best argument until it is refuted.
That is all that is going on here. Never hand over your critical thinking skills to me or anyone else. Look at the evidence, hear the arguments.
Unfortunately, since there are no other actual biological researchers commenting on my arguments they are not able to prove that they stand up to debate. I really wish there were. I know there are at least a couple on the board, but they aren't chiming in.
Many Dr,’s are reporting multiple patients coming in with nosebleeds, severe bruising, some with abdominal bleeding, ITTP (idiopathic thrombocytopenia Purpura), patients having stillborns in the 2nd and 3rd trimester (uncommon), clotting abnormalities, and these are not isolated incidences.
Watch “Critical Thinking” on Rumble. It had the 5 Dr’s. every Thursday that discuss what they are seeing in clinic. Also, Dr. Judy Macovich has explained the shedding theory.
I personally didn’t believe it but I don’t believe that all of these Dr’s are conspiring to lie.
As a scientist, you know that sometimes science doesn’t explain everything. Sometimes we expect a certain outcome based on what we know and then scratch our head wondering why the heck something defies science. That’s when we have to listen to patients.
I pray to God that your right.
First of all: you can blabber on honored jargon, but that does not make you a certified knowledgeable scientist. Anyone on here can claim anything.
Dozens of highly educated and well established virologist do not share your view.
Second:
Yet, you are willing to go with the narrative that natural "viruses" somehow spread from person to person without ANY evidence. All the evidence you have is concurrence, coincidental data. The only viruses that spread from person to person are designed to do that.
Third: Any jabbed person is a spike protein factory. It get's into sperm, ovaries, lympfnodes, saliva, brain.
That it influences people with whom a test subject has close contact is even mentioned in the Pfizer contra-indications. You are neglecting a major implication.
You are appealing to the McCLintock effect, yet you have no evidence for it's pathway. You are reaching and you have no evidence.
THAT is by FAR the most likely explanation.
That leaves us with the observation as is.
By Fauci shill.
Please point out one virologist (not MD, but actual scientist) who says they think the spike protein is shedding and causing problems and presents an argument or evidence for how that is happening.
Just one argument, or one piece of evidence, by one actual scientist.
Just one.
There is a ridiculous amount of evidence that viruses spread.
Here is a paper that looks at mask efficacy in an outbreak of H1N1 (or some flu variant, I'd have to look it up by I'm busy finding evidence for you). It show quite clearly that masks don't work to stop the spread of a virus. (Note: "stop the spread of a virus").
Note: I am getting more stuff. I posted accidentally mid gathering. You have way too many things to respond to! At least you didn't put them all in one post.
Seriously?
challenges such as these in this time and age are a clear demonstration of you being a shill.