----
Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA. Unlike certain gene therapies that irreversibly alter cell DNA and could act as a source of side effects, mRNA-based medicines are designed to not irreversibly change cell DNA; however, side effects observed in gene therapy could negatively impact the perception of mRNA medicines despite the differences in mechanism. In addition, because no product in which mRNA is the primary active ingredient has been approved, the regulatory pathway for approval is uncertain. The number and design of the clinical trials and preclinical studies required for the approval of these types of medicines have not been established, may be different from those required for gene therapy products, or may require safety testing like gene therapy products. Moreover, the length of time necessary to complete clinical trials and to submit an application for marketing approval for a final decision by a regulatory authority varies significantly from one pharmaceutical product to the next, and may be difficult to predict. [bold mine]
Link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1682852/000168285220000017/mrna-20200630.htm
--------
So you cherry picked that sentence without giving the context. Whatever you need to do for/about a product within the government bureaucracy, you need to list a product class. Many regulations are keyed to product class. Trademarks are keyed to product class, too. Because mRNA vaccines are new, and mRNA is one ingredient of gene therapy, which is not new, it had been already classed as a gene therapy product by the bureaucracy. It does not mean the vaccines are gene therapy.
Of course pharmaceutical companies made a big profit. That's the reason they're in business. And they have stockholders to answer to.
What about these pharmaceutical industry cash cows?
Humira (adalimumab): $13.6 billion/yr
Harvoni (ledipasvir/sofosbuvir): $10 billion/yr
Enbrel (etanercept): $7.4 billion/yr
Do you think these are harmful?
Sure, the vaccines earned their makers even more, but how long will that last? Moderns is optimistically expecting $19 billion in sales for its Covid vaccine for the entire year of 2022. But how much will it be in 2023?
Yes, it's wrapped in a lipid envelope to keep it from degrading. The lipid used also acts as an adjuvant.
Yes, and viruses naturally have mRNA. Cows are natural. Is a filet mignon cut out of the cow and wrapped in porcine lipid unnatural and harmful?
Viruses enter our cells and alter them and turn them into little virus factories:
The ideas about the vaccines you espouse are very much in line with the stuff posted here from Stew Peters and The Expose and JD Rucker's NOQ Report. You post links to things about "QAnon Doc" Carrie Madej who claims the vaccines contain bio-sensing nanomachines designed to alter human DNA and control people’s minds (along with the usual Q stuff about the global elite pedophile ring and so on):
https://www.vice.com/en/article/88avy5/a-qanon-doctor-who-spoke-at-the-capitol-riots-said-the-covid-vaccine-is-a-witches-brew
And also posted a link to this interview of David Martin (who does not have a medical degree), who is also into "Climate investing" -- so it looks like he's grifting off both the antivaxxer doomers and the climate doomers. Nothing like a good doom merchant! He was in the "Plandemic" video, too.
https://usawatchdog.com/up-to-700-million-worldwide-will-die-from-cv19-vax-by-2028-dr-david-martin/
So you place your trust in the likes of these people. Just because Fauci and Birx turned out to be untrustworthy in a number of respects does not mean the vaxx doomers are trustworthy. I don't trust much of what I read in the MSM either, but that doesn't mean I have to think the World Weekly News' Bat Boy is real. Or David Icke's lizard people.
What "massive deleterious effects of the jabs"? Where is your proof of that?