3 ms·

> This one says five days > And this one says ten Doesn't really inspire confidence in these results, right? I mean, first you cited a claim that said "few hou

> This one says five days > And this one says ten Doesn't really inspire confidence in these results, right? I mean, first you cited a claim that said "few hours", and then the expirimental evidence shows at least 5 days, and another one says 10, and may be the next study that looks closer will find that it ll last at least 30 days... But hey that is ok, because that is how "science" "progresses" duh, right? EDIT: Oh, and it seems that CDC removed the claim that "The mRNA and the spike protein do not last long in the body" from its pages.. https://web.archive.org/web/20220721092000/https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/mrna.html https://web.archive.org/web/20220721092000/https://www.cdc.g...

Calavar 4y ago
The first source I quoted said a "a few hours or days," but I guess that wasn't convenient for you, so you clipped it. The numbers 5 and 10 are means. "A few hours or days" represents a range. If you look at the first study, there were several participants who never had detectable spike protein, even when they first checked on day 1 after vaccination. So the spike protein cleared in less than a day for a large chunk of people (i.e. "hours"). As for which study I would trust more, the first study (that reported the shorter period had four times the number of patients). But I guess that is also not convenient for your narrative.
- tresqotheq 4y ago
  >so you clipped it. So what? You did say "few hours", right? I am only pointing out the ambiguity in your claims. >there were several participants who never had detectable spike protein, even when they first checked on day 1 after vaccination. Look that is fine. But saying "hours or days" is as good as saying we don't have a clue how long the thing lasts in the body. Because, we know that the spike protien itself has toxic effects. Also I see that you ignored the bit about CDC modifying the statement about this. Not convenient for your narrative?

Calavar 4y ago

The first source I quoted said a "a few hours or days," but I guess that wasn't convenient for you, so you clipped it. The numbers 5 and 10 are means. "A few hours or days" represents a range. If you look at the first study, there were several participants who never had detectable spike protein, even when they first checked on day 1 after vaccination. So the spike protein cleared in less than a day for a large chunk of people (i.e. "hours"). As for which study I would trust more, the first study (that reported the shorter period had four times the number of patients). But I guess that is also not convenient for your narrative.

tresqotheq 4y ago
>so you clipped it. So what? You did say "few hours", right? I am only pointing out the ambiguity in your claims. >there were several participants who never had detectable spike protein, even when they first checked on day 1 after vaccination. Look that is fine. But saying "hours or days" is as good as saying we don't have a clue how long the thing lasts in the body. Because, we know that the spike protien itself has toxic effects. Also I see that you ignored the bit about CDC modifying the statement about this. Not convenient for your narrative?