1. The sudden viral load is orders of magnitude larger than typical exposure and given the complexity of the immune system, may produce a different response. Also recall that unlike traditional vaccines this mRNA hijacks your cellular machinery to produce an inflammatory protein - so comparing it to past vaccines in this respect is invalid.
2. Again because of the complexity of the immune system, its possible that a sudden, massive injection of spike protein mRNA will not activate the immune system in the same way that a gradual infection by the full virus.
3. From what I've read, the spike protein when manufactured from snipped mRNA is then expressed on cell surfaces, in contrast to a true viral infection which releases the full viral particles into the bloodstream. This could induce autoimmune reactions which would explain many of the documented side effects.
My main point though is that many in the vocal pro-vaccine crowd are underestimating the borderline chaotic complexity of the finely tuned chemical soup that is our biology. And we are injecting an engineered substance which we know is biologically active in a novel way. It's hubris to casually presume that we got this right the first time.
Edit: for the programmers, think of it as a very clever and involved hack. And hacks can have unintended side effects, especially when the system is poorly understood.
No. It doesn't. This is completely ignorant misinformation. Your molecular machinery for creating proteins are doing so constantly. Introducing a bit of code that produces a protein that looks like the virus is in no way "hijacking" your molecular machinery. Your machinery happily chugs along with every other of the 10s of thousands of other proteins being produced at the same time. Nothing is hijacked.
And such an autoimmune disease, if caused by the vaccine, would possibly be difficult to detect, especially on short timescales, and/or if no one is looking for them. Add in the stigma/silencing of professionals who criticize the vaccines and you're unlikely to get such research done/published, and it is a very real possibility that we just dosed hundreds of millions of people with a substance that may cause long term issues.
There's plenty of room for uncertainty here. It is irresponsible to suggest otherwise, regardless of the media's manufactured consensus.
Next time you read something on the internet that sounds like something you would reasonably like to believe, please ask for a citation before you spread misinformation. The cell types that produce it and display it are exactly the same cell types that do it for every bit of foreign protein your immune system needs to protect against. There is nothing sneaky or take-over or unnatural about this process that happens all the time in your body.
Please stop.
This source[1] cites the following from a dead link to the cdc website:
>Upon entering the cell’s cytoplasm, the mRNA redirects some of the cell’s protein production machinery (of which ribosomes are the workhorse) to begin producing viral spike proteins. The produced spike proteins are then incorporated into and “displayed” on the host cell’s outer membrane surface
If you want something meatier, here's a detailed source[2] discussing this very point, that because the spike protein is not manufactured with the rest of the virus, at least some S protein expression is expected at the cell surface from the vaccine, in contrast to a true covid infection. And this source links to multiple others on the same subject.
People seem to presume that any information which reflects negatively on the vaccines is automatically misinformation and/or argued in bad faith. Its incredibly toxic to productive discussion.
>The cell types that produce it and display it are exactly the same cell types that do it for every bit of foreign protein your immune system needs to protect against.
I'm not sure what you're implying here - that its normal for your cells to absorb foreign RNA and manufacture inflammatory proteins that are then expressed on cell walls and used to induce what is effectively an autoimmune response?
>There is nothing sneaky or take-over or unnatural about this process that happens all the time in your body.
I'm not saying anything about this is "sneaky" but injecting mRNA with the purpose of manufacturing inflammatory proteins is hardly "natural".
1. https://www.acepnow.com/article/how-the-covid-19-mrna-vaccin...
If you are going to cite literature at least understand what you're citing.
> Antigen-presenting cells (APC) are cells that can process a protein antigen, break it into peptides, and present it in conjunction with class II MHC molecules on the cell surface where it may interact with appropriate T cell receptors.
APCs do not hoover up random mRNA to translate. They hoover up remnants after a carnage.
The vaccine is jabbed into the muscle, the spikes are (likely) expresses from the muscle cells, most definitely not only APC cells. Even if they were, it is not normal for APCs to be producing the proteins.
[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/veterinary-science-and-...
It's normal for Antigen Presenting Cells to present antigens on the surface of their cell membrane. It's what they do all day.
So, yes. Every bit of the process is completely natural and normal.
The claims seem incorrect.
Please stop.
The vaccine is not and purposefully does not act like normal mRNA. It's not even made of the same 4 building blocks.
Yes; that's why it has to be stored at such a cold temperature, to stave off that degradation.
The "engineered quasi-mRNA" aspect of things isn't to evade degradation, but initial immune response so it can avoid being broken down before it can express itself. https://www.science.org/content/article/mysterious-2-billion...
> Assembling mRNA using pseudouridine, a nucleoside variant that occurs naturally in the body, greatly reduced the tendency of immune sentinels called dendritic cells to shoot out inflammatory molecules in response, they reported in 2005.
> When a vaccinated cell dies, the debris will contain many spike proteins and protein fragments, which can then be taken up by a type of immune cell called an antigen-presenting cell. [1]
Is it true that host cells need to die for the vaccine to take effect?
I'm not entirely sure and couldn't find good sources to verify or disprove OPs claim, but I recall some claims that the vaccine kills cells.
> it will lead to the cells death because it produces the foreign protein as instructed until it is killed by your immune system.
Different sites have different descriptions, but even [2] mentions:
> The priming of CD8 T cells can induce the formation of cytotoxic T lymphocytes (5b) which are capable of directly killing infected cells.
Which likely means killing cells presenting the vaccine spikes? Most sites mention some form of cytotoxic action or reponse, which I do not understand, but I take it to mean that some cells are killed.
[1] https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/expl...
> ... but I recall some claims that the vaccine kills cells.
You are spreading your own ignorance.
I would especially be interested in a source claiming APCs transcribe RNA to present antigens; that antigens enter the cells; and that they (rather than you) are full of it.
Note, I think both you and OP presented false claims and misconception. OP probably more, but it is you that will help spread and affirm more anti-vaxers with the - you're wrong, here's what I think, now shut up and take the jab - attitude towards their concerns.
Especially when viruses are commonly described in the same way, since the mechanism and outcome is the same: an entity other than the human cell is controlling the output of the organelles.
In any case this is a pedantic argument and changes absolutely nothing about any of my points, nor is it misinformation.
It is simply presenting the information in the language of your immune system.
That history of research says this: If "symptoms" don't show up within 6 weeks, they don't really show up at all.
That is to say, with ALL other vaccines in existence, issues have shown up within 6 weeks.
Here is an article which explains it, but this is like common knowledge amongst epidemiologists: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/vaccines-...
Autoimmune disorders in particular are not necessarily going to appear in 6 weeks. Especially when the data is so noisy and there's a clear, career risking stigma against reporting anything.
Nobody is.
Regulators are largely looking at facts on the ground before making decisions.
But since the vaccines are proven to be safe given hundreds of millions of doses there is a lot more willingness to trust them.
My point is that the "facts on the ground" are extremely noisy and in large part coming from the pharmaceutical companies themselves. This proof is overstated, ignoring the fact that there hasn't been enough time to detect mid-long term effects, its own can of worms.
All of this doubly so given the chilling effect of the stigma associated with what has seemingly been decided to be "misinformation". Clinicians, researchers, nurses are less willing to stick their necks out to criticize the research/data, and so the problem is dangerously self-reinforcing.
These are the same circles that gave us the opioid crisis. And suddenly we've all forgotten about regulatory capture? None of these criticisms deserve this rabid bullying. This is supposed to be science, not religious dogma.
Edit: and let's not forget that these pharmaceutical companies are legally not liable for any adverse effects. Informed consent requires freedom of discussion.
It really bothers me that people are still touting such numbers around as obvious, indisputable facts given the poor quality of both covid and adverse effect statistical data.
1. What are the odds that you will experience symptoms if you get myocarditis?
2. What are the odds that vaccine induced myocarditis will be reported as such? There is a wealth of anecdotal evidence of people complaining about all manner of possible vaccine reactions to completely dismissive doctors, and filling out a VAERS report is time consuming and already overwhelmed medical practitioners are unlikely to spend 30+ minutes on a report.
3. Does vaccine (or covid) induced myocarditis have long term consequences, even if asymptomatic or mild? I've read repeatedly that myocarditis of any severity represents some degree of permanent damage but have not been able to conclusively verify this statement.
4. Why are we putting so much faith into the statements and research of pharmaceutical companies who stand to gain tens (hundreds?) of billions from vaccines+boosters, when we know that these same companies have been repeatedly sued in the past for dangerous/defective medications (and vaccines) as well as deliberately sociopathic business practices? We are talking about a massive conflict of interest from parties which have repeatedly demonstrated dishonesty in the past.
And then with respect to VAERS self reporting, the average person has been convinced that the vaccine is safe and is not likely to connect strange symptoms weeks after vaccination with the vaccine, if they even know about VAERS or the European equivalent. There's far too much uncertainty in the positive data to support such a rigid social orthodoxy around expression of negative sentiment toward the vaccine.