Posted on 06/03/2024 4:59:25 AM PDT by RandFan
“Anyone else watching Fauci testify to House committee? Who are the two smirking chimps behind him?”
I don’t know who those two are. But one thing I can tell you is that Fauci has no problem in lying, repeatedly, to the public and to Congress. He is lying and saying he did not say things about Covid and the vaccines that he clearly said. MTG called him out on several of those lies, as did other representatives. Of course, Democrats are giving him tongue baths and practically ready to light their St. Fauci candles in honor of his lies.
I know that a step of the manufacturing process is to treat the E. coli extracts with an enzyme called DNAse which destroys any DNA present. I also know that the mRNA is further purified using chemical and physical processes. Lastly, I know that any fragments of DNA that survive the purification process will be destroyed pretty quickly once they are injected into the body, since the body has multiple systems to identify and destroy foreign DNA.
Do you know how many ORFs were in the mRNA injections?
There is one single ORF in the mRNA vaccine. That ORF is surrounded by instructions telling the ribosome where to begin and end manufacturing the protein encoded in that ORF.
What an ORF even is?
ORF stands for Open Reading Frame. This is the sequence which actually encodes the protein. It consists of a series of three-letter words called codons. Each codon stands for a specific amino acid which is added to the growing protein on the ribosome. The ORF starts with the word AUG, which codes for the amino acid methionine, and is part of what is called the Kozak signal which tells the ribosome where to start making a protein. And the ORF ends with one of three stop codons (UAA, UAG, and UGA) that tell the ribosome to open up and release the new protein and the mRNA.
An mRNA typically consists of a single ORF. Sometimes, an organism uses frame shift mechanisms to find another ORF in the mRNA, but this is atypical.
Or that the m in the Pfizer mRNA jab stands for modified not messenger?
No. The "m" in mRNA *always* stands for messenger. Only professional antivaxxers tell you that it can stand for something else. Since they know that their target audience has no idea what mRNA is, they can basically say anything and their targets will believe them.
I only use the scientific terminology. There is no actual scientific shorthand for "modified." When we specifically want to stress that a particular mRNA molecule is modified, we say the whole word. It's kind of pointless, anyway, since all mRNA molecules are modified. Modification of RNA is a natural component of how cells make mRNA.
As far as I can tell, professional antivaxxers scare people with common scientific terminology since they know that the people they are targeting have never heard the terminology before. I suggest that instead of letting the strange terminology scare you, you try to find out what it actually means when used by scientists. Understanding is the key to combatting fear.
Haha. I did not know that trying to save human lives is dishonorable work.
It does make sense that you choose this argument to promote antivax propaganda. The very first antivaxxers who tried to frighten people into refusing the smallpox vaccine in the early 1800s used religion as a justification. The reasoning was this: if you are fated to catch smallpox and die, but you get vaccinated against it, you are thwarting the will of God and therefore sinning.
Nope, I happen to think that helping people to live longer lives is doing God's work. After all, Jesus is remembered as a healer. Jesus did not tell sick people to die.
Oh, I'm retired now. I am no longer the resident vaccine expert at the institution where I used to work.
There’s another thread acive right now about a court ruling that says the mrna gene jab is not a vaccine. Vaccine and mrna jab are two different things. As a matter of fact I have an appointment this Monday at my friendly neighborhood CVS to get a DPT booster, something I belive that I need because I frequently get my hands scraped, and dirty.
If you haven’t figured out by now what an evil thing the mrna jabs are, and the evil intent behind them, (Fauci, Bill Gates are prominent players in the population reduction program) then that is your misfortune.
People have got the jabs figured out. It’s right there next to remdesivir.
Are you referring to the thread based on a tweet on the platform formerly known as Twitter?
I saw that and have done a bit more research into what the court really ruled. I cannot find any corroboration of the claim that judges and lawyers now feel that they can define a scientific concept better than scientists who are trained in the subject.
One of the arguments brought up in that court case was that "The plaintiffs alleged that the vaccines do not prevent someone from becoming infected with COVID-19 and characterized it as a treatment rather than a 'traditional vaccine.'" The problem with that unscientific argument is that, by that definition, there is no such thing as vaccines. Getting vaccinated does prevent most people from getting the illness, and it decreases severity of illness in those who do get sick. The effects of vaccination are caused by the immune system; the level of protection one develops after immunization is only as good as the recipient's immune system. There does not exist any vaccine that can prevent 100% of infections in 100% of recipients.
The purpose of a vaccine is to present an antigen to the immune system in order to train the immune system to respond to that antigen in the form of specialized T-cells, B-cells, and antibodies. And, in reality, the vast majority of vaccines are not developed to prevent infectious disease at all. The majority of the tens of thousands of existing vaccines are used to immunize animals for the production of antibodies for research. A small subset of those vaccines are approved in humans for the purpose of protecting against infectious disease (NOT preventing 100% of infectious disease). An even smaller subset are used to create antibodies for medical purposes.
That plaintiff's claim also falls flat in another area. A drug that must be used prior to the disease occurring is not a treatment. It is a prophylaxis, which is a fancy word for something that protects. All vaccines (Covid vaccine included) are prophylactics.
The fact that the Covid mRNA based vaccines cause the production of an antigen against which the immune system mounts a response makes it a vaccine by any scientific definition. What stupid lawyers, judges, and ignorant plaintiffs call it is irrelevant and does not change what it physically is.
Finally, are you aware of the fact that every cell in your body is chock-full of mRNA (along with several other types of RNA)? And that when you get a virus infection, that virus turns parts of your body into virus factories that make virus mRNA? You get a far higher dose of spike mRNA from catching Covid than you would ever get from the vaccine.
But, for clarity, a question:
Are the MRNA jabs effective against The China Virus?
Before you answer, this is a binary question. There are two possible answers that will interest me, and they each are one word.
1. By definition, a drug is no longer experimental once it gains FDA approval. The Covid vaccines are fully FDA approved.
2. No drug or clinical trial company can legally give any experimental drug to someone who did not volunteer to be part of a clinical trial and who is not fully consented as to the nature of the trial. Vaccines are a type of drug.
3. Professional antivaxxers have always stuck the word "experimental" in front of "vaccine" solely for the purpose of scaring people. Every single vaccine that exists is experimental for the purposes of professional antivaxxers whose goal is for more people to catch infectious diseases and die prematurely.
Are the MRNA jabs effective against The China Virus?
What, exactly, are you referring to when you say "The China Virus"? Are you referring to the H1N1 that caused a pandemic from 1917-1919? Or maybe H2N2 that caused a pandemic in 1957-1959? Or do you mean any of the other influenzas, like H5N1 or H7N2 which also originated in China? Perhaps you mean SARS-CoV-1, which caused a pandemic in 2003? Or do you mean SARS-CoV-2, which is only the latest in a series of viruses that originated in China?
I'd include the Black Plague that killed a third of Europe's population in the Middle Ages, but that was caused by bacteria, not a virus.
As far as vaccines go, the mRNA vaccine is as effective or even more effective than any influenza vaccine. According to this, COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness, people who received a Covid-19 mRNA vaccine between Sept 2023 and January 2024 were 54% less likely to catch Covid. What that article does not show is the decreased likelihood of serious disease and death; previous Covid-19 vaccines decreased the chance of death by up to 19 fold.
Before you answer, this is a binary question. There are two possible answers that will interest me, and they each are one word.
Don't be ridiculous. There are no black and white answers in medicine. There are only interventions that increase chance of prevention/recovery. There is not a single intervention ever invented that is 100% effective. The professional antivaxxers know this perfectly well; they choose to imply that vaccines are either all or nothing as part of their overall effort to scare people and make them think that vaccines are useless.
You know what other group uses this kind of all or nothing rhetoric? Abortion businesses. They tell young girls that the failure rate of birth control makes it not worth bothering with, because they know that young girls who believe them will skip using birth control and increase abortion profits.
No one uses "all or nothing" rhetoric if they have the patient's health as their primary goal.
My goal is to educate people on the science so that they don't make life-threatening decisions based on charlatan rhetoric.
You know what The China Virus is, you know what The Jabs are, you know all the true information that RFK brought out into the open in his book/legal brief "The Real Anthony Fauci", and you know which side your own bread is buttered on.
BUT you're unable to answer a simple yes or no question, "is the jab as effective as say, the tetanus vaccine?" in its stated purpose.
So the answer is NO, IT IS NOT, and you know that too. So you deflect and you obfuscate with a waterfall of words
OK, I'm a charlatan.
You're a *** **** liar, doing your part to sell The Jab to innocent people, and you know that too.
Invest it well.
Can you please at least ATTEMPT to understand what I have posted here?
The simple answer is “YES, the shots are effective.” The real answer (which I gave you, with references) is far more nuanced than that, but it looks like you cannot understand nuances.
What a shame. Your inability to understand nuances of medicine leave you wide open to be scammed by the likes of RFK, Jr., who has never taken a class in a medical topic in his life. He’s a lawyer, for goodness’ sake.
“YES, the shots are effective.”
You are correct. They are almost as effective as Fauci, et al., intended them to be. They would be 100% effective if EVERYONE who got the shot had croaked. (And there’s still time for that.)
I’m waiting for him to get jomentia.
Thanks to vaccines, the human life span has doubled in the last couple of hundred years.
If you are not vaccinated against Covid, and you catch it, you are 17 times more likely to die from it than someone who is vaccinated. How to Compare COVID Deaths for Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People.
Whatever makes you assume that professional antivaxxers who set out to scare the daylights out of you over vaccines have your best interest in mind? Does it never occur to you that they WANT you to die prematurely?
“Thanks to vaccines, the human life span has doubled in the last couple of hundred years.”
That would be ACTUAL vaccines. Everything in a syringe isn’t a vaccine. Comparing apples to oranges in medical science isn’t science. Ice cubes are in punch bowls. You don’t throw a turd in a punch bowl and call it ice — because it’s in a punch bowl.
By what scientific criteria do you conclude that the Covid-19 mRNA based vaccine is not a vaccine?
By scientific, I mean criteria that were developed by the scientists who actually study immunology and related fields. I very specifically exclude antivax charlatan "definitions" which have never been used by the scientific community.
There are tens of thousands of vaccines in existence. Although antivaxxers will tell you that a "real" vaccine complete prevents infectious disease (a "definition" that excludes all vaccines used in human and animal medicine), most vaccines have nothing to do with infectious disease.
In scientific usage, the purpose of a vaccine is to stimulate the immune system to produce a specific T-cell, B-cell, and antibody response to whatever is contained in the vaccine. Most of the time, we're not looking to protect against any disease--we simply want the antibodies to use in research.
The spike mRNA in the Covid vaccine is essentially the same as the spike mRNA that SARS-CoV-2 virus forces your body to produce during infection. Whether the mRNA comes from a vaccine or the virus, it has the function of directing the ribosome to make a spike protein molecule. This spike protein stimulates the immune system to make spike-specific T-cells, B-cells, and antibodies.
If you have a scientific (not antivaxxer) source for the claim that the Covid mRNA vaccine does not stimulate the production of anti-spike T-cells, B-cells, and antibodies, please provide it. Otherwise, as long as the Covid vaccine acts like a vaccine, I will continue to call it a vaccine.
ACTUAL vaccines go through periods of proper testing.
All theater, not addressing any of the important issues—accountability for mass hospital murder, repeal of the PREP Act and other legislation forfeiting our rights, the danger of All mRNA jabs and treatments, etc.
Shots are effective at reducing everyone’s immune system. They don’t really stop the virus at all. You have bought their BS hook, line and sinker. Unreal to watch people that still haven’t caught on to their game.
Why do you suppose that Congress exempted Congressmen and Senators plus their staff from getting the shots? Why did Pfizer and Moderna exempt their employees if the shots were so effective? These are facts that show the intent.
The Covid vaccines are FDA approved. That means that they went through all three phases of clinical trials, as well as the "fourth" phase, which is post-approval monitoring.
In this single clinical trial About Our Landmark Trial, 46,331 participants volunteered and were enrolled. That's just one clinical trial out of many. By federal law, each formulation of a drug must be tested in the population for which it is intended. That translates to several clinical trials being run for each vaccine formulation--and with tens of thousands of participants for each trial, I do not know how anyone can say with a straight face that the vaccines are untested.
FYI, the narrative that the vaccines are experimental was devised long before Covid was even a blip on the horizon. Professional antivaxxers have used that language for DECADES.
If you want to find out about actual vaccine testing from a real source, try https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. This is a searchable database used by scientists all over the world to register clinical trials. All you have to do is put "covid" in the "Condition/disease" field and "vaccine" in the "Intervention/treatment" field, and you can find all of the registered Covid vaccine trials.
Another scientific source is www.pubmed.gov. This is also a searchable database, which contains references to medical/scientific articles, along with abstracts (summaries), usually a link to the article, and sometimes the full text of the article.
If you learn how to use the databases that scientists use, then you can actually fact-check those professional antivaxxer claims and see just how much they are lying to you.
BTW, do you think that all of those tens of thousands of vaccines I mentioned before, the ones designed only to produce antibodies for research use, are FDA approved? The only testing those vaccines get is 1) does it kill the animal? And 2), does the animal receiving it produce the antibodies we want? The answer to the first should be "No," and the answer to the second should be "Yes." If either answer is different, then it's back to the drawing board to design another vaccine.
The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2) uses modified nucleotides. Specifically, it incorporates N1-methylpseudouridine instead of uridine. This modification helps to enhance the stability of the mRNA and reduce the innate immune response against the mRNA, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the vaccine. Thus modRNA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.