According to some, Covid-19 was just a excuse to create hysteria so that all the hysterical folks would clamor for these mRNA 'gene therapies'. It sure seems as if Covid was a scare tactic and the never used on Humans before mRNA technology was the 'destination'. Sadly, those who are double and triple mRNA 'vaxxed' are not doing so well …
According to some, Covid-19 was just a excuse to create hysteria so that all the hysterical folks would clamor for these mRNA 'gene therapies'. It sure seems as if Covid was a scare tactic and the never used on Humans before mRNA technology was the 'destination'. Sadly, those who are double and triple mRNA 'vaxxed' are not doing so well health wise. And some claim that recent studies show that the mRNA 'vaxxes' DO alter our DNA. If true... a Brave New World is upon us.
mRNA vaccines have been used in humans, at least in clinical trials, for over a decade, but as delivery devices for cancer immunotherapy, where the risk/benefit analysis is pretty well-defined.
To be clear... mRNA 'gene therapies' are not 'Vaccines'. They are patented as 'gene therapies' because that's what they are. No mRNA injectable is a 'vaccine'. Until the CDC changed the definition recently... a vaccine had to contain a weakened or dead piece of the antigen. So if mRNA tech was used for cancer... it was not as a 'vaccine'. I guess it was used as 'gene therapy' ? And how did it work out ? I suspect not very well ? See link #3 @ < https://www.C-19truth.com > . Stay Healthy...
Absolutely. Until September, 2021, they were not vaccines. Medical devices, I suppose, though they were referred to as vaccines prior to that by some investigators. It's not a dead topic in oncology, as there are quite a few ongoing and upcoming trials. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8047518/. But, as I implied, the risk of an experimental therapy when your condition is already terminal is much more tolerable compared to when your condition is currently good health, and the condition you are treating is unlikely to affect you long term in any way. And don't take this the wrong way coming from me, I don't think big pharma has a much better record when it comes to cancer therapy. Most of the time these are not curative therapies, rather than something that buys an elderly patient six months of progression free survival, or something like that at an exorbitant cost and loss of quality of life.
We don't hear much about the adenovirus vector "vaccine" anymore. I don't know why. Live adenovirus vaccines have also been around for decades, and used by the US military. They have never been FDA approved, because adenoviruses are known to be oncogenic. The virus used for the J&J vaccine, of course, is nonreplicating. One of the genes responsible for replication has been removed. I understand this vaccine uses a simian adenovirus. I don't know much it has in common with human adenoviruses, which surround us every day, just like coronaviruses, causing respiratory and gastrointestinal infections. In vitro, non--replicating adenoviruses, such as the one used in the vaccine, can recombine with a wild-type adenovirus and regain the ability to replicate. I wish I had a link, but I was reading this way back when I was deciding whether I was going to receive either of these shots, and that was what sunk in. What happens to someone who has a replicating adenoviral capsid in their own cell nuclei with the job of manufacturing spike protein? I don't know the answer to that, or the probability, but it sounds pretty damn bad.
In one of the first 20 or so (IIRC) sessions of the German "Corona Committie", they had one, geneticist I believe or other qualified _seeming_ person, who claimed that the cheap mass production method for the mRNA jabs is sloppy compared to the lab products used in the study, and that one consequence was incomplete conversion of the DNA that they apparently have as source, into RNA, and such remainders could then possibly get into your DNA, or produce replicable "garbage" cells out of half baked stuff... from my very rough memory. Does that make any sense? IIRC also, the person claimed that was a known thing that Pfizer reported to the EMA, they knew about it but not much fuss was made.
According to some, Covid-19 was just a excuse to create hysteria so that all the hysterical folks would clamor for these mRNA 'gene therapies'. It sure seems as if Covid was a scare tactic and the never used on Humans before mRNA technology was the 'destination'. Sadly, those who are double and triple mRNA 'vaxxed' are not doing so well health wise. And some claim that recent studies show that the mRNA 'vaxxes' DO alter our DNA. If true... a Brave New World is upon us.
mRNA vaccines have been used in humans, at least in clinical trials, for over a decade, but as delivery devices for cancer immunotherapy, where the risk/benefit analysis is pretty well-defined.
To be clear... mRNA 'gene therapies' are not 'Vaccines'. They are patented as 'gene therapies' because that's what they are. No mRNA injectable is a 'vaccine'. Until the CDC changed the definition recently... a vaccine had to contain a weakened or dead piece of the antigen. So if mRNA tech was used for cancer... it was not as a 'vaccine'. I guess it was used as 'gene therapy' ? And how did it work out ? I suspect not very well ? See link #3 @ < https://www.C-19truth.com > . Stay Healthy...
Absolutely. Until September, 2021, they were not vaccines. Medical devices, I suppose, though they were referred to as vaccines prior to that by some investigators. It's not a dead topic in oncology, as there are quite a few ongoing and upcoming trials. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8047518/. But, as I implied, the risk of an experimental therapy when your condition is already terminal is much more tolerable compared to when your condition is currently good health, and the condition you are treating is unlikely to affect you long term in any way. And don't take this the wrong way coming from me, I don't think big pharma has a much better record when it comes to cancer therapy. Most of the time these are not curative therapies, rather than something that buys an elderly patient six months of progression free survival, or something like that at an exorbitant cost and loss of quality of life.
We don't hear much about the adenovirus vector "vaccine" anymore. I don't know why. Live adenovirus vaccines have also been around for decades, and used by the US military. They have never been FDA approved, because adenoviruses are known to be oncogenic. The virus used for the J&J vaccine, of course, is nonreplicating. One of the genes responsible for replication has been removed. I understand this vaccine uses a simian adenovirus. I don't know much it has in common with human adenoviruses, which surround us every day, just like coronaviruses, causing respiratory and gastrointestinal infections. In vitro, non--replicating adenoviruses, such as the one used in the vaccine, can recombine with a wild-type adenovirus and regain the ability to replicate. I wish I had a link, but I was reading this way back when I was deciding whether I was going to receive either of these shots, and that was what sunk in. What happens to someone who has a replicating adenoviral capsid in their own cell nuclei with the job of manufacturing spike protein? I don't know the answer to that, or the probability, but it sounds pretty damn bad.
'Pretty damn bad'. Yes. Agreed...
This was originally supposed to be a SIX SHOT SERIES!
The jab doesn't change your DNA, badly designed paper to push... Something. And some people took it and drove their preferred narrative.
The mRNA is absolutely poison don't get me wrong. I have been against them since June 2020
In one of the first 20 or so (IIRC) sessions of the German "Corona Committie", they had one, geneticist I believe or other qualified _seeming_ person, who claimed that the cheap mass production method for the mRNA jabs is sloppy compared to the lab products used in the study, and that one consequence was incomplete conversion of the DNA that they apparently have as source, into RNA, and such remainders could then possibly get into your DNA, or produce replicable "garbage" cells out of half baked stuff... from my very rough memory. Does that make any sense? IIRC also, the person claimed that was a known thing that Pfizer reported to the EMA, they knew about it but not much fuss was made.
Yeah, I think it is too soon to say it doesn't change dna