I think that your interpretation is entirely correct. It's hard to make organism-wide changes to a genome. There are mechanisms for doing so- reverse transcriptases and retrotransposons can certainly take mRNA and turn it into DNA, but I highly doubt that this is occurring on a widespread basis. We would see a whole suite of issues arising from this (or no therapeutic effect if the DNA was not altered to a significant-enough level). What would the target gene even be?
I think it's a whole lot more likely that the mRNA vaccines are designed and act as we would expect, and that the Spike protein created by the body is the cause of the adverse events that we are seeing. It certainly fits the data.
I'm sure the DS would love to genetically-modify us all right out of existence. But I don't see how they're doing it with this vaccine. They'll probably stick to the tried-and-true methods of warfare and starvation.
It's hard to make organism-wide changes to a genome.
In fact it has never been done, at least there is no record of it in the public sphere. Systemic delivery systems have proven to be insufficient so far. How do you get a nanoparticle large enough to contain all the machinery to write to a cell (CRISPR etc.) into all the cells of the body, that doesn't kill (or substantially harm) the organism and has the desired effect (no meaningful off target effects)? The answer is, we don't know.
There may be such tech hidden. Its not impossible. We aren't that far away from it now (a couple decades?), so it may already exist and perhaps has existed for a while, who knows. But there is no known gene therapy that exists today that can alter a person from what they are to something else. All attempts to do such things, such as cure leukemia, have only made it into a small percentage of a persons cells (less than 10% I think in the absolute best case).
The only known way (in the public sphere) to make a true (100%) genetically modified organism is to alter the genome in the embryo stage and let it grow from there.
Even if mRNA could get written to DNA under normal conditions (it can't with any meaningful frequency) and even if those cells that were expressing spike proteins weren't then destroyed by the immune system (which is the entire purpose of the tech) then a person STILL wouldn't be a GMO because the tech itself only gets into a few cells compared to the total number of cells we have.
Don't get me wrong, it goes everywhere. All of our bodies organs are susceptible to this shit, but as a total percent of our bodies cells its still a very small number of cells that get infected by this "vaccine" tech.
I expect you're right about it not having been done on an organism-wide scale, at least for an adult organism. I recall reading about the Chinese doing it to embryos- that's certainly the low-hanging fruit. It can certainly be delivered to the cells via lipid nanoparticles (a la covid vax), electroporation, or viral plasmid vectors. Achieving 100% penetrance in an adult organism seems like a bridge way too far at this stage, though. The complexity involved in delivering any therapeutic to every single cell in the body is mind-boggling. A few injections in the deltoid ain't gonna cut it.
You are completely correct that there is no known gene therapy at this point for adults. Crispr is simply too inaccurate to be used effectively for this, besides the delivery difficulties (it's good, but you need to have 100% precision and accuracy when you're messing with genes).
I can't recommend your comment enough. Such things need to be shouted from the hills. People going around talking like this is some gene-engineering experiment are simply misinformed (absent some alien technology), and it makes us look dumb. There are plenty of reasons to hate the vaccine- for me it's all about government overreach and turning us into compliant little lemmings. But turning us into GMOs is not one of them.
I think that your interpretation is entirely correct. It's hard to make organism-wide changes to a genome. There are mechanisms for doing so- reverse transcriptases and retrotransposons can certainly take mRNA and turn it into DNA, but I highly doubt that this is occurring on a widespread basis. We would see a whole suite of issues arising from this (or no therapeutic effect if the DNA was not altered to a significant-enough level). What would the target gene even be?
I think it's a whole lot more likely that the mRNA vaccines are designed and act as we would expect, and that the Spike protein created by the body is the cause of the adverse events that we are seeing. It certainly fits the data.
I'm sure the DS would love to genetically-modify us all right out of existence. But I don't see how they're doing it with this vaccine. They'll probably stick to the tried-and-true methods of warfare and starvation.
In fact it has never been done, at least there is no record of it in the public sphere. Systemic delivery systems have proven to be insufficient so far. How do you get a nanoparticle large enough to contain all the machinery to write to a cell (CRISPR etc.) into all the cells of the body, that doesn't kill (or substantially harm) the organism and has the desired effect (no meaningful off target effects)? The answer is, we don't know.
There may be such tech hidden. Its not impossible. We aren't that far away from it now (a couple decades?), so it may already exist and perhaps has existed for a while, who knows. But there is no known gene therapy that exists today that can alter a person from what they are to something else. All attempts to do such things, such as cure leukemia, have only made it into a small percentage of a persons cells (less than 10% I think in the absolute best case).
The only known way (in the public sphere) to make a true (100%) genetically modified organism is to alter the genome in the embryo stage and let it grow from there.
Even if mRNA could get written to DNA under normal conditions (it can't with any meaningful frequency) and even if those cells that were expressing spike proteins weren't then destroyed by the immune system (which is the entire purpose of the tech) then a person STILL wouldn't be a GMO because the tech itself only gets into a few cells compared to the total number of cells we have.
Don't get me wrong, it goes everywhere. All of our bodies organs are susceptible to this shit, but as a total percent of our bodies cells its still a very small number of cells that get infected by this "vaccine" tech.
I expect you're right about it not having been done on an organism-wide scale, at least for an adult organism. I recall reading about the Chinese doing it to embryos- that's certainly the low-hanging fruit. It can certainly be delivered to the cells via lipid nanoparticles (a la covid vax), electroporation, or viral plasmid vectors. Achieving 100% penetrance in an adult organism seems like a bridge way too far at this stage, though. The complexity involved in delivering any therapeutic to every single cell in the body is mind-boggling. A few injections in the deltoid ain't gonna cut it.
You are completely correct that there is no known gene therapy at this point for adults. Crispr is simply too inaccurate to be used effectively for this, besides the delivery difficulties (it's good, but you need to have 100% precision and accuracy when you're messing with genes).
I can't recommend your comment enough. Such things need to be shouted from the hills. People going around talking like this is some gene-engineering experiment are simply misinformed (absent some alien technology), and it makes us look dumb. There are plenty of reasons to hate the vaccine- for me it's all about government overreach and turning us into compliant little lemmings. But turning us into GMOs is not one of them.