5 ms·
Yes, but the route in which a vaccination takes place (IM injection into deltoid) should mean that much much less of the spike protein ends up in the heart and
by lame-robot-hoax 5y ago
Yes, but the route in which a vaccination takes place (IM injection into deltoid) should mean that much much less of the spike protein ends up in the heart and lungs vs a natural infection. As well, the overall amount of spike protein in the body will be less.
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/05/04/spike-protein-behavior https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/05/04/sp...
“Consider what happens when you’re infected by the actual coronavirus. We know now that the huge majority of such infections are spread by inhalation of virus-laden droplets from other infected people, so the route of administration is via the nose and/or lungs, and the cells lining your airway are thus the first ones to get infected. The viral infection process leads at the end to lysis of the the host cell and subsequent dumping of a load of new viral particles – and these get dumped into the cellular neighborhood and into the bloodstream. They then have a clear shot at the endothelial cells lining the airway vasculature, which are the very focus of these two new papers.
Compare this, though, to what happens in vaccination. The injection is intramuscular, not into the bloodstream. That’s why a muscle like the deltoid is preferred, because it’s a good target of thicker muscle tissue without any easily hit veins or arteries at the site of injection. The big surface vein in that region is the cephalic vein, and it’s down along where the deltoid and pectoral muscles meet, not high up in the shoulder. In earlier animal model studies of mRNA vaccines, such administration was clearly preferred over a straight i.v. injection; the effects were much stronger. So the muscle cells around the injection are hit by the vaccine (whether mRNA-containing lipid nanoparticles or adenovirus vectors) while a good portion of the remaining dose is in the intercellular fluid and thus drains through the lymphatic system, not the bloodstream. That’s what you want, since the lymph nodes are a major site of immune response. The draining lymph nodes for the deltoid are going to be the deltoid/pectoral ones where those two muscles meet, and the larger axillary lymph nodes down in the armpit on that side.”
- osipov 5y ago>The injection is intramuscular, not into the bloodstream. Recent research (per No Agenda shownotes) showed that unlike traditional vaccines, Moderna mRNA spread through the bloodstream producing and distributing spike protein in the entire body.
- lame-robot-hoax 5y agoWhat do you mean by “spread through the bloodstream”? Of course even in an IM injection, some will end up in the blood stream. The better question is the overall amount that stays within the deltoid vs that that travels elsewhere, and how the compares to natural infection. How does the virus deposit itself around the body vs. how does the spike protein via vaccination deposit itself around the body. As well, with the way the vaccine works, once it hits a cell, that cell will express the spike protein to the surface and that’s it, instead of contributing to further viral spread in the same region.
- osipov 5y agoMy point is different: the mRNA molecule travels through the bloodstream and escapes the deltoid in quantities magnitude larger than an attenuated virus in a traditional vaccine. Then, onces mRNA is spread throughout the body, the cells use the mRNA to manufacture spike protein and spread the virus even further.
- newsclues 5y ago“Should” Has it been tested?
- VoiceOfWisdom 5y agoIts in testing right now.
- newsclues 5y agoI’m listening to the livestream on Bret Weinstein’s channel and they are discussing data that states the opposite including data that shows a concentration in the ovaries.
- lame-robot-hoax 5y agoI’d be interested to see a source. I know of rat models that show a very small accumulation in ovaries, but these rats were afaik given doses in the range of 300x-1000x that of a human. And the accumulation in the ovaries or other regions was still incredibly small, despite the dosage given.
- lootsauce 5y agois this it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn_b4NRTB6k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn_b4NRTB6k
- 0-_-0 5y agoI'm listening to the same podcast. The source was Pfizer data obtained via FOIA request, it was a Japanese study I think. edit: this one: https://files.catbox.moe/0vwcmj.pdf https://files.catbox.moe/0vwcmj.pdf Here's the data in a plot: https://trialsitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Ovaries-get-the-mRNA-from-Pfizer-Shot-Graph-2048x1424.png.webp https://trialsitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Ovaries...
- SamBam 5y ago> As well, the overall amount of spike protein in the body will be less. Less that an acute infection, probably. Less than a mild asymptomatic infection? Do we know that? My understanding was that they packed quite a lot of mRNA into the shot in order to ensure a response.
- officialjunk 5y agoinfection is a spectrum, sure, but the public usage of the word "asymptomatic" does not include cardiovascular side effects, that can show up some weeks/months later. we are observing "asymptomatic" infections followed by cardiovascular problems for some. is it really asymptomatic in those cases?
- motohagiography 5y agoDoes that imply that the difference in hitting a vein with the injection vs. staying intramuscular would be where in the body the protein travels to and causes an immune response? Nothing is ever that simple, but of cases with effects consistent with the protein being in the blood stream with consequences to the heart and brain, if that were a factor, it would be both testable and avoidable, and provide the explanation people would need to choose to get the shot. If the odds of accidentally hitting a vein and the bloodstream consequences as described lined up, it could move the issue forward. I have zero expertise in this area, my interest in asking is what would make a more compelling case for getting more people immune, and having a straightforward explanation for the causes of the prior reports of harm would go a long way toward that goal. Put another way: would injecting directly into an artery or vein have risks that the intramuscular jab would not - and do those risks resemble the anecdotal reports of myo, clots, and deaths?
- rolph 5y agoexpect immediate and catastrophic thromboembolism upon IV administration of any current covid vaccine none of them are formulated for IV administration https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/Coronavirus/Community_Resources/Vaccinations/Print-Materials/Fact-Sheets/Ingredients_English.pdf https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/Coronavirus/Community_Resource...
- T-A 5y agoIt's been hypothesized that AstraZeneca's vaccine is more likely to cause clots when accidentally injected intravenously: https://www.sortiraparis.com/news/coronavirus/articles/246623-astrazeneca-janssen-thromboses-explained-by-german-searchers/lang/en https://www.sortiraparis.com/news/coronavirus/articles/24662...
- nikolay 5y agoThe adenoviruses already attach to red blood cells and have the blood clotting issue with or without the extra genetic load they carry in the COVID-19 vaccine case. It's been known of over a decade and I wonder why no precautions are prescribed before and after the shots.