That is a protocol definition not evidence of an event.
In that vaccine protocol they include protocols to look for vaccine shedding. This is because real vaccines are made out of viruses. Real viral vaccines can absolutely shed. That is why all vaccine protocols include these specific protocols. In truth its really misnamed. It should just be "viral transmission" because that's what it is, its just called "shedding" to distinguish it from another virus other than the real virus that is the vaccine.
The Pfizer mRNA vaccine is NOT a viral vaccine. It has absolutely nothing to do with a viral vaccine. That does not mean there can't be off target effects. But this protocol definition is not evidence that any off target effects have been found.
Still, we should keep an eye out for off target effects. There is evidence that there may be off target effects. But off target effects are not necessarily vaccine shedding by the definition of that term, They most certainly are not evidence of SARS S protein shedding in any way, shape or form.
I see what you are saying. Sort of like the warnings on your water bottles to beware of the water eating through your clothes if you spill it or make other contact as well as protocols on how to handle water acidity and wet clothing....
I am saying it is standard vaccine trial procedure to include looking for viral vaccine transmission. It is part of every vaccine protocol experiment. It has nothing to do with this vaccine specifically, and being a protocol it just gives what to look for because of previous viral vaccine experiments.
It has nothing to do with this vaccine having found something. (Like, literally nothing.)
As I tried to explain, "vaccine shedding" MEANS viral transmission of a vaccine that is made out of a real virus.
A real vaccine is made out of a real virus. It is a virus that is similar enough to the disease you are vaccinating against, but less virulent, or with its reproductive DNA taken out. Because they are real viruses they can potentially be transmitted, just like any other virus. This is called "shedding" just to distinguish it from in the wild viral transmission, but it is exactly the same thing otherwise.
The mRNA vaccines have nothing to do with a virus. They don't reproduce a viral coat, and make more of themselves, which can then go off into the air and be transmitted. They instead go directly into a cell and never come out again, because they are completely broken down. In fact, there is no part that can come out again.
The lipid nanoparticles can however get into ANY cell in the body because it can enter the bloodstream upon injection or soon after. (Some cells are much more likely than others.) Thus is the nature of these types of lipid nanoparticles. It is exactly this nonspecificity that I screamed about for months, long before they were even distributed. I knew it was going to cause some nasty reactions, which is exactly what happened.
These mRNA vaccines can even get into white blood cells. These white blood cells can then go just about anywhere and the S proteins they express on their membrane surface can go cause damage anywhere in the body. It's pretty nasty.
None of that is "shedding'. Any infected white blood cell isn't going to "shed". That would be ridiculous. Every human interaction would be a disease transmission if that were the case. HIV would be an airborne virus if that was the case.
The difference between the problems I have outlined above, and the S protein going off on its own are, one is a known biological thing, and one is a known not possible thing.
That is a protocol definition not evidence of an event.
In that vaccine protocol they include protocols to look for vaccine shedding. This is because real vaccines are made out of viruses. Real viral vaccines can absolutely shed. That is why all vaccine protocols include these specific protocols. In truth its really misnamed. It should just be "viral transmission" because that's what it is, its just called "shedding" to distinguish it from another virus other than the real virus that is the vaccine.
The Pfizer mRNA vaccine is NOT a viral vaccine. It has absolutely nothing to do with a viral vaccine. That does not mean there can't be off target effects. But this protocol definition is not evidence that any off target effects have been found.
Still, we should keep an eye out for off target effects. There is evidence that there may be off target effects. But off target effects are not necessarily vaccine shedding by the definition of that term, They most certainly are not evidence of SARS S protein shedding in any way, shape or form.
I see what you are saying. Sort of like the warnings on your water bottles to beware of the water eating through your clothes if you spill it or make other contact as well as protocols on how to handle water acidity and wet clothing....
makes sense now. Thanks!
Lol, I'm not sure if that was sarcasm or not.
I am saying it is standard vaccine trial procedure to include looking for viral vaccine transmission. It is part of every vaccine protocol experiment. It has nothing to do with this vaccine specifically, and being a protocol it just gives what to look for because of previous viral vaccine experiments.
It has nothing to do with this vaccine having found something. (Like, literally nothing.)
Previous vaccines shed proteins?
Yes. The ones that were made out of real viruses.
As I tried to explain, "vaccine shedding" MEANS viral transmission of a vaccine that is made out of a real virus.
A real vaccine is made out of a real virus. It is a virus that is similar enough to the disease you are vaccinating against, but less virulent, or with its reproductive DNA taken out. Because they are real viruses they can potentially be transmitted, just like any other virus. This is called "shedding" just to distinguish it from in the wild viral transmission, but it is exactly the same thing otherwise.
The mRNA vaccines have nothing to do with a virus. They don't reproduce a viral coat, and make more of themselves, which can then go off into the air and be transmitted. They instead go directly into a cell and never come out again, because they are completely broken down. In fact, there is no part that can come out again.
The lipid nanoparticles can however get into ANY cell in the body because it can enter the bloodstream upon injection or soon after. (Some cells are much more likely than others.) Thus is the nature of these types of lipid nanoparticles. It is exactly this nonspecificity that I screamed about for months, long before they were even distributed. I knew it was going to cause some nasty reactions, which is exactly what happened.
These mRNA vaccines can even get into white blood cells. These white blood cells can then go just about anywhere and the S proteins they express on their membrane surface can go cause damage anywhere in the body. It's pretty nasty.
None of that is "shedding'. Any infected white blood cell isn't going to "shed". That would be ridiculous. Every human interaction would be a disease transmission if that were the case. HIV would be an airborne virus if that was the case.
The difference between the problems I have outlined above, and the S protein going off on its own are, one is a known biological thing, and one is a known not possible thing.