At best mRNA from anticovid injection is based on manipulating host mRNA traffic from the gene to protein synthesis.
Your first paragraph sort of summarizes the vaccine action. However, no host cell mRNA is involved in the production of modified spike protein. This is because the human genome does not contain any spike protein genes. The mRNA from the vaccine uses the cell's protein synthesis machinery in order to produce the modified spike protein. Within a few hours, the foreign mRNA is destroyed in the same manner as the thousands of host mRNA molecules are destroyed. Once the foreign mRNA is destroyed, the cell makes no more spike protein.
The interaction between the transposon, and retrotransposon system are overlooked.
This is primarily a concern during cell division occurring during a viral infection. The retrotransposon system becomes active only during cell division. If the cell happens to be infected with an RNA virus (like coronavirus) at the time, it is theoretically possible for the retrotransposon enzymes to make DNA using the RNA as a template and then to insert it into the genome. Theoretically possible means that I do not know that this has actually been demonstrated to occur during a coronavirus infection; it has only been demonstrated using cells in a lab.
The degradation of the mRNA could possibly yield microRNA or picoRNA snippets which can be active controllers of DNA activity.
Nope. As I already pointed out, the human genome does not contain a SARS-CoV-2 spike gene. Without such a gene, there would be no place on the genome for fragments of the mRNA to attach to. Furthermore, RNA destroying enzymes love nothing more than to chop up RNA into its component nucleotides. One of the biggest challenges for scientists working with RNA is to prevent its destruction. RNA is notoriously unstable.
Why any ethical drug developer would think it is good idea to try manipulation ofgenetic machinery in order to create an antigenic, host derived spike protein is beyond me.
No drug developer did anything to manipulate the human genome. All they did was to take advantage of the cell's natural ability to make protein using mRNA templates.
I should note that during a virus infection, the virus forces your cells to make virus mRNA and virus protein in order to form new virus particles; once the cell is full of virus particles, it bursts open and releases them to neighboring cells and into the blood where the new virus particles can travel to distant parts of the body and infect more cells. What this means is that there is nothing new about human cells using virus mRNA; it happens every time you have a virus infection.
The difference with the vaccine mRNA is that it only contains mRNA coding for the modified spike protein but none of the mRNA encoding the other 28 virus proteins. Thus, it is not possible for cells to make viruses following a vaccine injection. This means that cell death is not an inevitable outcome after vaccination, like it is after virus infection.
All they had to do was kill the virus and use that material as an “old school” vaccine. Or synthesis nucleocapsid and spike protein using recombinant technology in vitro.
The reason mRNA vaccine technology was developed is because all of those "old school" vaccine technologies are very time and resource consuming. Growing and killing a virus to make a vaccine is time-consuming (and somewhat dangerous, since it involves work with an active pathogen). Any time the circulating virus strain changes, it becomes necessary to isolate and grow the new virus and then develop and test a new vaccine made with killed virus. This takes time. This is how influenza vaccines are updated, and it takes months between identifying the need to develop a new influenza vaccine and being able to actually deliver the vaccine to patients.
The synthesis of virus antigen in the lab can be done, but it takes more steps and reagents than just making mRNA. It still requires a plasmid encoding the mRNA, but it additionally requires all of the protein production machinery contained in cells. I used to use extracts of rabbit reticulocyte cells to make proteins in the lab. Those extracts were expensive, not to mention the fact that rabbits had to die so that I could get those extracts. And they weren't just killed humanely--they were poisoned to make them sick days before they were killed. This was done to cause the rabbits to make an abundance of reticulocytes. How many rabbits would have to be poisoned and killed in order to synthetically produce enough modified spike protein to vaccinate hundreds of millions of people? Are there even that many pathogen-free research rabbits in existence?
The thing about the mRNA technology is that making the vaccine only requires the creation of a plasmid--which is a fairly rapid and straightforward process--and then growing that plasmid in bacteria so that they will make mRNA. Any time the circulating virus strain changes, it is a straightforward process to make a new plasmid encoding a new modified spike protein. Bacteria can be grown in huge vats and they grow very fast. They are fed a milk protein. They produce a lot of mRNA which is then cleaned and formulated into vaccines. It is probably the most rapid and straightforward vaccine technology developed so far.
Ok....
I said the mRNA injection manipulates the process of protein synthesis from the gene..the process....not the gene...so , of course, the host DNA is not going to be used...
The mRNA in the vaccine is stabilized by adding long chains of adenine (poly-A tail)...the shorter the tail is the more susceptible the mRNA is to degradation. Note: the mRNA does not USE the protein making machinery...rather the protein making machinery USES the mRNA...pardon me for that semantic clarification...
Regarding the activity of the retrotansposon system...researchers at the University of Lund demonstrated that vaccine mRNA can be converted into short snippets of DNA...IN huh+ human liver cells. In vitro...of course... that’s where most discoveries are made..in vitro. Hopefully some curious scientist will check a living vaccinated persons liver cells for DNA snippets complementary to the mRNA from the vaccine. Fat chance, as long as the general statement is still that vaccine mRNA doesn’t get incorporated into host DNA in the chromosome.
Zhang et al has demonstrated that COVID virus RNA can be inserted into cell DNA/genome. Of course, in the lab. Reported in PNAS.
MicroRNA does not attach to genome DNA....it binds to mRNA transcripts. It “silences” the gene by interfering the mRNAs translation. It doesn’t need the exact complementary sequence of the mRNA transcript. It might need only 6-8 bases to bind to the mRNA and suppress translation.
I did not say the drug manufacturer tried to manipulate the genome. I said they manipulated the genetic MACHINERY.
In terms of making an old school vaccine...your solution is that it is faster to make mRNA rather than grow the virus and kill it. Both steps involved growing a virus. mRNA tech requires synthesis of a new mRNA to reflect the new genetic sequence of the spike protein. Then you completely overlook the testing of the new mRNA Product. Citing it’s speed in being able to make mRNA versus old school.recombinant technology....I am sure they can ramp up old school technology to get their product ready for testing.
Just because some technique is “faster” doesn’t mean it’s better or safer. It still must be tested in a time consuming fashion. Sometimes with drugs a simple lack of a double bond or opposite chirality of a molecule can change the activity of the drug. Dextrothyroxine vs levothyroxine or quinine and quinidine are examples of chirality changes. Amitriptyline vs cyclobenzaprine differ only by a double bond.
I believe most people trust the pharmaceutical companies basic explanation of the biological issues of the vaccines. Like every drug company they explain their products efficacy in terms of it mechanism of action. They do not explain the potential activity of their product in a complex biological system. Mandating such a products use is criminal.
As I said...no need to mess with genetic based protein synthesis in a human. I know they are using the technology is certain diseases. But it is usually used for patients who would be dying soon. Not used to “decrease” infection rate in healthy people who would normally survive the virus.