5 ms·

inheritable... like... over successive generations?

by realce 4y ago

jaywalk 4y ago
Yes, it's right in the summary: > Interestingly, mice pre-exposed to the mRNA-LNP platform can pass down the acquired immune traits to their offspring, providing better protection against influenza. Who knows what other interesting discoveries will be stumbled upon in the future!
the_third_wave 4y ago
Yes, is was already confirmed in a Swedish study that mRNA from these preparations can be reverse transcribed into DNA [1]. Now this study shows that the reverse transcribed DNA is active as well. The first thing that should be clear is that this was not an intended effect, the mRNA was supposed to be acted upon and discarded. As far as I'm concerned this is not a positive development either since it implies that new cell lines will have been created which can produce SARS2 spike proteins. Long after SARS2 is gone or mutated so that these spike proteins are no longer analogous to the ones on the virus these cell lines will still produce inflammation-causing spike proteins. If those cells happen to be in the wall of a blood vessel, in an ovary or testes they're likely to cause problems. As the study says there is a need for more research to determine this platform's true impact on human health. These preparations were offered to and in many cases forced upon a large part of the population without knowing what long-term effects they had. This was the largest medical experiment ever conducted and the jury is out on both the efficacy as well as the safety of the preparations. [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35723296/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35723296/
- mikeyouse 4y ago
  Just abject nonsense.
  - the_third_wave 4y ago
    Explain, please, why? Preferably with some evidence like that study I linked to and the one which started this thread. Explain why: - it is abject nonsense to state that cell lines will be created which carry DNA originating from mRNA reverse transcription as is shown in the Swedish study - it is abject nonsense to state that this DNA is expressed as is implied in the study to which this thread is linked - it is abject nonsense that cells which express DNA to produce spike proteins will be around even when SARS2 has disappeared or mutated so that its version of the spike protein no longer is analogous to the one produced by cells which carry DNA from reverse transcribed mRNA - it is abject nonsense for such cells to be found outside of the shoulder muscle mass into which the vaccines were meant to be delivered but from where it has been proven they escape into the bloodstream - it is abject nonsense for such cells to cause inflammatory reactions when it is known the spike protein does just that If you sit on knowledge we do not have I suggest you share it.
    - mikeyouse 4y ago
      > If you sit on knowledge we do not have I suggest you share it. There's a reason that Swedish study is unknown outside of antivaxxer circles and it's largely to do with it being scientifically incompetent and published in a journal with zero standards. Best of luck to you in whatever it is you think you're doing though!
      - the_third_wave 4y ago
        That term 'antivaxxer' does not mean what you imply it to mean. Those who are cautious about using largely untested preparations while being open to using well-known vaccines - against Polio, Measles, Diphtheria, Whooping Cough, Tetanus and others - are not 'antivaxxers', they are 'rational individuals'. There is a wide gap between this group and 'traditional antivaxxers' who worry about 5G-transponders in vaccines (etc) so using a term which most people assume to identify the latter to accuse the former is not just erroneous but also disingenuous, just the type of word game which has become so prevalent in the last decade.
        mikeyouse 4y ago
        Yes, yes, all just a word game. You're just asking intelligent rational questions, unlike those antivaxxers of lore with their bad faith. Meanwhile the top thread on Reddit discussing that specific article is in the subreddit "NurembergTwo" and titled: "Shocking study finds covid vaccines REWRITE your DNA… criminal CDC proven to have repeatedly LIED about this very issue to deceive and harm the public" If you're basing your theory of harm from vaccines on bad articles from non-experts in fringe journals, there might be less distance between you and the 5G nutters than you wish to acknowledge
        the_third_wave 4y ago
        Two words: Ad Hominem [1] Do you have anything else to say apart from trying to paint others with your broad brush? I did ask for some constructive arguments after all, not baseless character attacks. As it stands now I can only assume you don't have rational arguments (other than 'my experts are better/more virtuous than your experts' but that is not much of an argument). [1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ad-hominem https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ad-homin...
- lima 4y ago
  > Now this study shows that the reverse transcribed DNA is active as well. > [...] implies that new cell lines will have been created which can produce SARS2 spike proteins This is nonsense (in the most polite sense) - the study does not show any such thing. In fact, it makes no mention of DNA or transcription whatsover.

inheritable... like... over successive generations?

by realce 4y ago

inheritable... like... over successive generations?

Yes, it's right in the summary: > Interestingly, mice pre-exposed to the mRNA-LNP platform can pass down the acquired immune traits to their offspring, providing better protection against influenza. Who knows what other interesting discoveries will be stumbled upon in the future!

the_third_wave 4y ago

Yes, is was already confirmed in a Swedish study that mRNA from these preparations can be reverse transcribed into DNA [1]. Now this study shows that the reverse transcribed DNA is active as well. The first thing that should be clear is that this was not an intended effect, the mRNA was supposed to be acted upon and discarded. As far as I'm concerned this is not a positive development either since it implies that new cell lines will have been created which can produce SARS2 spike proteins. Long after SARS2 is gone or mutated so that these spike proteins are no longer analogous to the ones on the virus these cell lines will still produce inflammation-causing spike proteins. If those cells happen to be in the wall of a blood vessel, in an ovary or testes they're likely to cause problems. As the study says there is a need for more research to determine this platform's true impact on human health. These preparations were offered to and in many cases forced upon a large part of the population without knowing what long-term effects they had. This was the largest medical experiment ever conducted and the jury is out on both the efficacy as well as the safety of the preparations. [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35723296/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35723296/

mikeyouse 4y ago
Just abject nonsense.
- the_third_wave 4y ago
  Explain, please, why? Preferably with some evidence like that study I linked to and the one which started this thread. Explain why: - it is abject nonsense to state that cell lines will be created which carry DNA originating from mRNA reverse transcription as is shown in the Swedish study - it is abject nonsense to state that this DNA is expressed as is implied in the study to which this thread is linked - it is abject nonsense that cells which express DNA to produce spike proteins will be around even when SARS2 has disappeared or mutated so that its version of the spike protein no longer is analogous to the one produced by cells which carry DNA from reverse transcribed mRNA - it is abject nonsense for such cells to be found outside of the shoulder muscle mass into which the vaccines were meant to be delivered but from where it has been proven they escape into the bloodstream - it is abject nonsense for such cells to cause inflammatory reactions when it is known the spike protein does just that If you sit on knowledge we do not have I suggest you share it.
  - mikeyouse 4y ago
    > If you sit on knowledge we do not have I suggest you share it. There's a reason that Swedish study is unknown outside of antivaxxer circles and it's largely to do with it being scientifically incompetent and published in a journal with zero standards. Best of luck to you in whatever it is you think you're doing though!
    - the_third_wave 4y ago
      That term 'antivaxxer' does not mean what you imply it to mean. Those who are cautious about using largely untested preparations while being open to using well-known vaccines - against Polio, Measles, Diphtheria, Whooping Cough, Tetanus and others - are not 'antivaxxers', they are 'rational individuals'. There is a wide gap between this group and 'traditional antivaxxers' who worry about 5G-transponders in vaccines (etc) so using a term which most people assume to identify the latter to accuse the former is not just erroneous but also disingenuous, just the type of word game which has become so prevalent in the last decade.
      - mikeyouse 4y ago
        Yes, yes, all just a word game. You're just asking intelligent rational questions, unlike those antivaxxers of lore with their bad faith. Meanwhile the top thread on Reddit discussing that specific article is in the subreddit "NurembergTwo" and titled: "Shocking study finds covid vaccines REWRITE your DNA… criminal CDC proven to have repeatedly LIED about this very issue to deceive and harm the public" If you're basing your theory of harm from vaccines on bad articles from non-experts in fringe journals, there might be less distance between you and the 5G nutters than you wish to acknowledge
        the_third_wave 4y ago
        Two words: Ad Hominem [1] Do you have anything else to say apart from trying to paint others with your broad brush? I did ask for some constructive arguments after all, not baseless character attacks. As it stands now I can only assume you don't have rational arguments (other than 'my experts are better/more virtuous than your experts' but that is not much of an argument). [1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ad-hominem https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ad-homin...
lima 4y ago
> Now this study shows that the reverse transcribed DNA is active as well. > [...] implies that new cell lines will have been created which can produce SARS2 spike proteins This is nonsense (in the most polite sense) - the study does not show any such thing. In fact, it makes no mention of DNA or transcription whatsover.