Disclaimer: Please note that what I am writing is my own and not for any other entity that I may be affiliated with. I am not involved in the design of this COVID vaccine, nor did I manufacture any COVID vaccine.
Dr. Madej:
Cannot properly call this a vaccine because they cannot claim it inhibits infection or transmission.
This is not correct. They do call it a vaccine. When you are getting Emergency Use Authorization from the FDA, it means that you are not getting approval to market it. It means that you can use it but you cannot market it. You cannot claim anything because you don’t have an FDA-approved label yet. It is for emergency use right now. Mark my words, when they have FDA approval, they can claim it and indeed will.
Dr. Madej:
A normal vaccine would take a virus and it would be alive or dead and there would be other toxins
This time, no.
Pharmacoengineering.com:
She is using phrases such as:
”This is surprising.”
“This time, no.”
A “normal vaccine”.
A traditional vaccine in the past has been as such. With the recombinant technology we have today, we do not have to inject an alive or dead entity. This is not surprising. In fact, I could argue why it is better to not have the whole vaccine. Look at this publication of mine:
Engineering DNA vaccines against infectious diseases
That was peer-reviewed.
I know what I am talking about. You can look me up (Corey J. Bishop on Google Scholar). If you put a denatured or damaged entity within you, there is a very small probability (which is well worth it for the vaccines that are as such) that it can revert back to a virulent state – meaning a small portion of what you inject could actually cause an issue. With recombinant technology with RNA and DNA, we don’t need to take that risk. It sounds like what this physician is proposing is to go back to the very beginning right after they figured out how you could make the most primitive vaccines. We are now in new generations of vaccines. They do not need to be “normal” or “traditional”. Thank heavens they don’t. They can be new and they can be better. That is why they are being made.
Dr. Madej:
They have honestly never isolated the organism in its entirety.
Pharmacoengineering.com:
Of course we have. Are we using it for vaccines? No. Why not? Because it is not necessary to do so. Why pose a reversion risk when we don’t have to. Why would we “admit it” if it isn’t true and the way she is saying it makes it sounds like it is a negative thing. It is not a negative thing to do that. This is a newer generation of vaccines.
Does she really think that we couldn’t use the primitive vaccine techniques to make a COVID-19 vaccine? Why couldn’t we? If we wanted to, it would have been done. Everyone knew that would not be the best choice given the technology we have.
Because we couldn’t isolate it we took pieces of the genetic material, the RNA, and filled in the blanks?
Let me re-phrase that for you. Because we know what is important to actually make the vaccine, the important part was taken and we added a shell and make it a functional entity that cannot give you COVID-19 that when your body is re-introduced with the wild-type or natural strain, your body will have already been taught how to attack. Filling in the blanks? No, we took the important part, threw away what wasn’t needed, and then made it functional by adding back in what we wanted. No blanks were filled in. You can think of it as an artificial or synthetic virus in a sense that is made to not be infectious itself.
Two minutes in…
Yes, it is a code. Lol. And is it a trick? Heck yes it is. It is a beautiful “trick”. This is what all organisms do. They read code. That is how all of the information in our bodies tell our bodies what to do and for you to teach your children from the moment of conception.
Viruses have RNA in some cases and they hijack the machinery of a host organism, such as yourself, and then re-create itself and propagate. That is a natural virus! What I just described is a natural virus. They hijack your cells and then re-create themselves. They have to use your body to be able to survive. This is why some people ask the question: “Are viruses alive or dead?”. DNA is the code by which we live. DNA is far more stable! RNA is far less stable. If you inject RNA into someone it will be degraded within seconds. If you get it in the cells it will translate into protein. It will not and cannot be inserted into your DNA-based genome. If you inject DNA within you, it will last on the order of minutes. If you tell the body to make something and use the code that WATSON AND CRICK decoded then you will be speaking the language of life. If this DNA makes it into the nuclei, it could potentially undergo insertional mutagenesis which is bad. That is why one of the reasons they chose RNA – because it is not stable in terms of its half-life. It is cleared from your body more quickly. DNA within our cells are highly protected within the nuclei. It is a beautiful way to preserve information. If you deliver RNA, the RNA needs to get into the cytoplasm to make protein. The protein can be therapeutic. The protein can be a toxin to kill cancer. That is a good thing.
When she said that instead of blocking you from making the virus, we are encouraging you to make the virus, it said to me she has absolutely no idea how a vaccine works. Let me tell you why.
If you give the human the virus directly according to her primitive proposition, there will be viruses in you. How is that different from having your body make a new virus? Wouldn’t it be better to tell your body to make a synthetic virus that cannot revert to something virulent? Absolutely.
One huge advantage to using an RNA-based vaccine system is the ability to tailor the code to various strains of COVID-19. You’re welcome.
I am now 2 min and 56 seconds into this.
Dr. Madej:
You don’t have to have a science degree?
Pharmacoengineering.com:
She is biased towards these highly negative feelings and causing others to be biased. People who are uneducated in this realm should not be suggesting to the public what they should do. It is harmful for society. She is causing harm.
You can still be contagious even after you get the vaccine? Teaching your body something takes time. You cannot get the vaccine and walk out of the clinic and say you are completely protected.
When she says that they are assuming that it will last for a couple of months after you get the shot… well, that actually has very little to do, given you have constructed a great vaccine, with the vaccine itself, and a great deal to do with what you are treating to vaccinate against. For example, why have we not made vaccines against HIV? Well, it is simply because it mutates so fast it is pointless to give you a vaccine against it. You could make a vaccine against what the HIV looked like at one point in time but that is not helpful. When we make a vaccine against the flu, why do we get it every year? It is because of how quickly the flu vaccine mutates. So if they guess, it will last 2 months, it is because it is based on how quickly COVID is mutating. Look at all the strains out there. It is unknown! Of course it is unknown.
Well, I am now at about 3 and a half minutes.
RNA does not undergo insertional mutagenesis and no it is not a possibility. RNA does not get inserted into our DNA.
Sneak… tricks… lol…
She is at an extreme side of this argument. Also, the company can just be playing it safe and say that their can birth defects because they do not know. This is not FDA-approved yet. This is for emergency use.
Done.
No more.