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.
in-silico protein-folding shape prediction for this spike protein has led to some interesting structural results, i think it validates the HIV conclusions those early research papers reached
And I fully understand your point and get where you're coming from. I'm not trying to argue and I really feel like this discussion is helpful!
But, another question... what about everyone who is offering anecdotes?? I realise that anecdotes don't necessarily carry much weight individually. Singly. But when more and more people are experiencing things, it gives me pause? Are they all experiencing psychosomatic responses? It would be remiss of me to classify ALL of them as such, right? It's hard to coalesce everything when the name of the game is CENSOR!
When all the information is censored, then getting those data points in order to compile reasoned research is near impossible.
Do I understand the mechanism of HOW shedding would work? Do you have to sniff people? How much sniffing is required? Ridiculous questions, but not necessarily completely irrelevant?? I always felt that good science happened when scientists were forced into semi-ridiculous hypotheses. Sometimes in the absurdity lies the answer.
And, full disclosure, I HATED my cell biology course work. One instructor I had put a multiple choice question on which elements comprised a cell membrane: lipids and sterols. I can't remember precisely which ones she had listed, but suffice to say, ALL of them comprised a cell membrane. She then asked us to pick the one that was less..... Ummmmm????
All of the anecdotes that I have seen with real tangible effects (i.e. not "i don't feel well, I feel tired", etc.) have been related to menstruation.
It has been shown (I can't find the link atm) that the vaccines accumulate in the liver, and a few other places, but also in the ovaries. It has also been shown that the spike protein itself can cause damage to endothelial cells (vasculature). So if they are accumulating in the ovaries, and causing damage to the vasculature, that could cause some serious menstrual problems.
If a woman is experiencing serious menstrual problems there could be a violent (excessive) pheromone release. We know that menstruation releases pheromones, there is no reason to think there can't be an excess release under a stressful menstrual cycle. If there is excess pheromones, then another woman interacting with that person releasing those pheromones could have a sympathetic response in excess of the normal response due to the higher concentration of pheromones (or perhaps a different type of pheromone, I don't really know much about pheromones except their basic chemical structure). We have known about menstrual sympathy forever. There is nothing here that is strange to me.
This is the simplest explanation that fits all the evidence (that I have seen).
When all the information is censored, then getting those data points in order to compile reasoned research is near impossible.
It is exceedingly problematic and frustrating.
I most certainly do not ignore the anecdotes. I log them away and keep a store of them. I consider them constantly. What I do not ever do is jump to conclusions. I never assume that something is impossible. But in the case of S proteins having off target effects directly its so IMPROBABLE that every time I consider it in earnest it butts heads with over a decade of contrary experience working on such things directly. I know exactly why its basically impossible.
I shouldn't say that, there is a mechanism by which a small piece of the protein on the exterior of the cell can get cut off and maybe get into someone else. There are specific proteins that can get cut and those short peptides are signals to other cells. But then that small peptide wouldn't have the other required parts or tertiary structure required to interact with the ACE-2 receptor. It would be just a handful of amino acids long, so its effectively impossible. Even if that did happen, it would happen so infrequently as to be not a concern in the slightest.
Its just all so...
I don't know. Its like someone trying to tell me that black is white. I know its black. I have decades of experience with it being black. Why does everyone keep saying its white!
I always felt that good science happened when scientists were forced into semi-ridiculous hypotheses. Sometimes in the absurdity lies the answer.
You will get no argument from me there. That is exactly what is happening with the S protein shedding thing. Its absurd, and so I have had to think about it. I may get a bit snippy when explaining it, but only because I have done so so many times it gets tiring trying stop the spread of disinformation.
Nevertheless, the universe is always surprising, and it is always good to entertain the absurd. I do it all the time and have all my life. Sometimes it even turns out to bear remarkable fruit.
She then asked us to pick the one that was less
I have had a few teachers like that. There is nothing more frustrating than poor tests. I have many teachers that remember me specifically because I was by far the most argumentative on how their tests were fundamentally flawed. I was also the most likely to get a grade change, and years later I have had more than one thank me for helping them improve their test creation methods.
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.
in-silico protein-folding shape prediction for this spike protein has led to some interesting structural results, i think it validates the HIV conclusions those early research papers reached
And I fully understand your point and get where you're coming from. I'm not trying to argue and I really feel like this discussion is helpful!
But, another question... what about everyone who is offering anecdotes?? I realise that anecdotes don't necessarily carry much weight individually. Singly. But when more and more people are experiencing things, it gives me pause? Are they all experiencing psychosomatic responses? It would be remiss of me to classify ALL of them as such, right? It's hard to coalesce everything when the name of the game is CENSOR!
When all the information is censored, then getting those data points in order to compile reasoned research is near impossible.
Do I understand the mechanism of HOW shedding would work? Do you have to sniff people? How much sniffing is required? Ridiculous questions, but not necessarily completely irrelevant?? I always felt that good science happened when scientists were forced into semi-ridiculous hypotheses. Sometimes in the absurdity lies the answer.
And, full disclosure, I HATED my cell biology course work. One instructor I had put a multiple choice question on which elements comprised a cell membrane: lipids and sterols. I can't remember precisely which ones she had listed, but suffice to say, ALL of them comprised a cell membrane. She then asked us to pick the one that was less..... Ummmmm????
All of the anecdotes that I have seen with real tangible effects (i.e. not "i don't feel well, I feel tired", etc.) have been related to menstruation.
It has been shown (I can't find the link atm) that the vaccines accumulate in the liver, and a few other places, but also in the ovaries. It has also been shown that the spike protein itself can cause damage to endothelial cells (vasculature). So if they are accumulating in the ovaries, and causing damage to the vasculature, that could cause some serious menstrual problems.
If a woman is experiencing serious menstrual problems there could be a violent (excessive) pheromone release. We know that menstruation releases pheromones, there is no reason to think there can't be an excess release under a stressful menstrual cycle. If there is excess pheromones, then another woman interacting with that person releasing those pheromones could have a sympathetic response in excess of the normal response due to the higher concentration of pheromones (or perhaps a different type of pheromone, I don't really know much about pheromones except their basic chemical structure). We have known about menstrual sympathy forever. There is nothing here that is strange to me.
This is the simplest explanation that fits all the evidence (that I have seen).
It is exceedingly problematic and frustrating.
I most certainly do not ignore the anecdotes. I log them away and keep a store of them. I consider them constantly. What I do not ever do is jump to conclusions. I never assume that something is impossible. But in the case of S proteins having off target effects directly its so IMPROBABLE that every time I consider it in earnest it butts heads with over a decade of contrary experience working on such things directly. I know exactly why its basically impossible.
I shouldn't say that, there is a mechanism by which a small piece of the protein on the exterior of the cell can get cut off and maybe get into someone else. There are specific proteins that can get cut and those short peptides are signals to other cells. But then that small peptide wouldn't have the other required parts or tertiary structure required to interact with the ACE-2 receptor. It would be just a handful of amino acids long, so its effectively impossible. Even if that did happen, it would happen so infrequently as to be not a concern in the slightest.
Its just all so...
I don't know. Its like someone trying to tell me that black is white. I know its black. I have decades of experience with it being black. Why does everyone keep saying its white!
You will get no argument from me there. That is exactly what is happening with the S protein shedding thing. Its absurd, and so I have had to think about it. I may get a bit snippy when explaining it, but only because I have done so so many times it gets tiring trying stop the spread of disinformation.
Nevertheless, the universe is always surprising, and it is always good to entertain the absurd. I do it all the time and have all my life. Sometimes it even turns out to bear remarkable fruit.
I have had a few teachers like that. There is nothing more frustrating than poor tests. I have many teachers that remember me specifically because I was by far the most argumentative on how their tests were fundamentally flawed. I was also the most likely to get a grade change, and years later I have had more than one thank me for helping them improve their test creation methods.
No winning here. This guy is waaaaay smarter than the people who invent the vaccines.... Derp.