Question about how mRNA vaccines work

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I clearly made this thread because I had a legitimate question about how the vaccine functions.

I don't believe you. Simple as that. You're asking extremely leading questions in such a way as to draw people's attention to specific areas that are likely to make people afraid. It's like me asking you about your entry on the sex offenders register, it create the impression that you have one.

If our cells are producing viral components it seems like a logical question to ask how our immune system would respond to those cells.

First of all, your body isn't producing "viral components", it's producing a protein that is present on a particular virus. There's a big difference. Secondly, your natural defenses don't respond to this because they don't know that it's happening. Your body's defenses have no mechanism to detect the origins of the protein.

how does the vaccine get around the specific defenses which would attack our own cells long enough to achieve that response.

It doesn't, because there is no need to do so. This isn't something that happens. What measures does your wife have in place to stop you from beating her?

I'm not sure why you would be so adamant about trying to suppress or stifle conversations on this topic.

Because you're reasons aren't genuine. You're not asking questions, you're trying to create fear and doubt by making people think that there are questions to be asked in these areas.

The most vaccinated nations on Earth don't have herd immunity or lower case numbers, in fact they have higher case numbers on average,

They also have dense urban populations, a dependency on mass transit, and the ability to actually tell if people have Covid or not.

Eventually you will have to come to terms with the fact the only people taking away your freedoms are our control freak leaders.

And you're giving them the tools to do it.

Even if 100% of people were vaccinated it wouldn't stop the spread of SARS-CoV-2, you are clinging on to false promises.

We didn't even need 100% vaxxing rates to eliminate smallpox.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

You're asking extremely leading questions in such a way as to draw people's attention to specific areas that are likely to make people afraid.

Even if I were attempting to scare people, I doubt it would have more than a 0.000000001% affect on the global vaccination rate considering this is one thread on a niche website which is probably highly censored by most search engines. Get a grip.

First of all, your body isn't producing "viral components", it's producing a protein that is present on a particular virus. There's a big difference. Secondly, your natural defenses don't respond to this because they don't know that it's happening. Your body's defenses have no mechanism to detect the origins of the protein.

A protein that is present in particular virus is a component of that virus, therefore a viral component. The more important point is it's a foreign body which our immune system will attack. If you think our immune system has no ability to detect and attack compromised cells, then I want you to show me the research and data, because I've seen doctors saying the opposite thing, and common sense would tell me our immune system must have that ability to help prevent viruses hijacking our cells and using them to replicate.

We didn't even need 100% vaxxing rates to eliminate smallpox.

Probably because that vaccine actually prevented the transmission of smallpox. You can't have over 90% of a population vaccinated and not achieve herd immunity, unless the vaccine completely fails to prevent the transmission.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Calling it viral particles is entirely fair.

There are inactivated virus vaccines are what are called subunit vaccines. Instead of using a whole killed virus, they break the virus into particles leaving behind the antigens that would best stimulate the immune system and removing components that would allow viral replication or might cause adverse reaction.

It could be said that this is a form of inactivated vaccine except it does not start with the virus itself. Still the immune system is reacting to what would otherwise be a viral particle or a copy of it.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

More and more, the language surrounding this is like the language surrounding the flu and flu shots.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

According to this doctor, our immune system could view those cells as bacteria or hijacked viral cells and start to attack them.

I suppose that might be a possibility. However, in the long run, what's a few cells to the body? They can be replicated through mitosis pretty easily. If the attack on the cells themselves happen, it will be because of the spike protein, meaning the protein has still created antibodies. I don't think the detriments would outweigh the benefits if that were the case.

Keep in mind that there is a very small amount of vaccine injected, most of which is solution. That leaves an even smaller number of lipids, each with a single mRNA molecule. A cell can absorb multiple lipids and therefore express multiple spike proteins. This means the number of affected cells is likely less than the number of lipids. Now consider, if the virus enters the bloodstream, it is going to be replicating. Even if it replicates in the lungs instead of the bloodstream, that still means a continuous flow of spike protein carrying viruses into the bloodstream. In such a case, I think the small number of affected cells to get a jump start on antibody production would be a good thing.

I'll also mention that because the symptoms of the virus and the vaccine are so similar, it stands to reason that the spike protein is not causing the body to target entire cells. The virus is not in the cellular membrane; it is free-floating in the bloodstream. It only enters the cells to reproduce, and since it is a respiratory virus, it would likely be more or less specific, in that respect, to respiratory cells.

I could be wrong about that last part... TheAMEDDDoc, care to educate me?

Well that has been my concern for a few weeks, because it seems like the vaccines can cause issues similar to the real virus. But everything I read about the mRNA vaccines say they used a perfectly safe spike protein, and I think it would be very risky for them to make those claims unless they were certain.

Not really risky at all. Recall that the pharmaceuticals were given immunity from prosecution over this vaccine. They are really risking nothing worse than a failure to sell enough to make a profit at this point. They cannot be sued or prosecuted if they made a mistake.

Personally, I think that was a major mistake. It places the pharmaceuticals above the law, and no one should be above the law.

As long as the media is covering for them, even the risk to the pharmaceuticals from a failure to sell their vaccine is minimal. As we see here on this very site day after day, hour after hour, there are a great many people out there who do not think for themselves, but simply believe what the fool on TV in a three-piece suit is saying. Many, I believe, think of him as a "friend," never really realizing he doesn't even know who they are, and wouldn't care two shakes of a rat's tail about them if he did.

TheRedneck

a reply to: chr0naut

I state facts, chr0naut. Even if those facts dispute my personal positions, they are still facts and I will still acknowledge them.

Truth be known, that may be the cause of many of our disagreements.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I think the miscalculation is that whatever the effects are, they are effects from our own immune systems, and these are the things the companies did not factor in and are not able to take into account as every person is an individual.

The spike protein itself may be harmless. The immune response in most people may be appropriate ... but because the virus targets what it does in the ways it does, perhaps there is an interaction of our immune response involved that creates the adverse affects in some people.

And it seems to me they can't predict who and how much of a reaction people will have. They seem to only know that the risks of some of those side affects only begin to be outweighed by the risks from the disease itself as you get into your 40s unless you have other health issues putting their thumbs on the scale.

The trouble is that as time goes on, they ought to know and they need to be honest about it, especially as they push to vaccinate children who are the least vulnerable of all.

Hmmm I wonder how these two pieces of information fit into the picture...

www.bitchute.com...
www.bitchute.com...

a reply to: AaarghZombies

I've read countless posts by people like you using passive aggressive comments that sound like questions but which are really statements designed to cause fear and doubt. It's an old tactic. Like answering a question with another question. You want to know who I am, well, I'm an old hand at this game, that's who I am.

So you just assume that everyone else is doing what you would do if your positions were reversed, then. That's a pretty poor bit of reasoning. I, for instance, will not sacrifice my intellectual honesty for some temporary perceived benefit. I'm not like you.

People are refusing to take the vaccine because people like you are needling them every 5 minutes to put doubt into their mind.

Bullcrap. I state facts as they are known. You are the one stating opinions here, and you are much more demanding that people take this vaccine unquestionably than I ever have been at instilling any doubt.

Got news for you, hotshot. I just found out in the last few days that a sister-in-law who has been as adamant about vaccines and face masks and avoiding contact as you ever thought of being, now has the virus. A pretty bad case. Luckily, she was able to get the antibody shots before we ran out and is on the mend. In contrast, I have yet to wear a face mask, my wife wears one as little as she can possibly get away with, neither of us are vaccinated, both of us have "co-morbidities," and neither of us have changed our daily lives one damn bit. Neither of us have had the thing, or if we did (possible), it was so mild it didn't even slow us down.

Seems to me that there's a lot of similar anecdotal tales going around. Maybe you should look into the actual facts. There are always more things to consider than "but someone said you should."

The vax doesn't lower your immune system because that would just be stupid.

Speaking of facts... that ain't a fact. It's an opinion, and a silly one at that.

It's all well and good asking questions, but you're doing it deliberately to cause fear.

I'm actually not asking many questions. I'm answering them as I know, and listening to others when I don't, so maybe I can find out. The OP asked a question... the OP has a concern. That concern may or may not be legitimate, but the OP will never know until they get answers.

My kids are both vaccinated... many family members are vaccinated... most of my friends are vaccinated. Do I worry about them? Yes. Did I ever tell them to not get the vaccine? NO! I'm not like you.

You want to know what's in it for me? Seriously, Not getting locked down is in it for me. Getting to go to a baseball game is in it for me. Not having to wear a mask when I visit my elderly relatives is in it for me. If one kid in my children's class gets covid they all get told to quarantine. Which means that I get told to quarantine.

When unvaxxed people get sick my freedoms get restricted.

That's not going to change no matter how many people get vaccinated. You already lost your freedoms because you listened to a bunch of tyrannical wanna-be dictators using your own fear against you. The only way you're going to get them back is to take them back. Asking nicely and complying with demands from those who took them isn't going to work. It has never worked, not one single time, in all of recorded human history.

If you are vaccinated, why would you even be locked down? Ever think of that? After all, immunity to a disease means one cannot catch the disease. I am immune to chickenpox; had it when I was little. If someone has chickenpox, I don't worry about being around them. I'm immune. I am immune to poison oak. I don't even notice it any more. If someone points it out, I just shrug. I don't care. I'm immune.

So either the vaccine does not work, does not produce immunity, or the lockdowns have nothing to do with the virus.

Either get vaxxed or start campaigning for Covid passports

I choose neither. I'm not gonna give up any of my freedoms simply because you're too chicket-s**t to keep yours.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Keep in mind that there is a very small amount of vaccine injected, most of which is solution. That leaves an even smaller number of lipids, each with a single mRNA molecule. A cell can absorb multiple lipids and therefore express multiple spike proteins. This means the number of affected cells is likely less than the number of lipids.

This is a pretty good explanation for why our immune system may not detect or attack our own cells, if each cell only produces one or two spike proteins. But at the same time I'm seeing more and more data which is giving me a strong sense that there's something important about how the immune system functions in relation to the vaccine.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

First of all, your body isn't producing "viral components"

Dude, just stop right there.

Is the spike protein a part of the virus? If it is, it is by definition a "viral component." if it is not, why are we getting a vaccine using a protein that isn't part of the virus? You are making no sense either way you want to look at that.

Just more unscientific, semantic, unreasoned fear-mongering on your part, making you look stupid and the vaccine look bad.

TheRedneck

a reply to: ketsuko

The spike protein itself may be harmless.

Quite true. It may indeed be harmless. The problem is we don't know. We do have reports of some clotting issues, very minor in the vast majority of people, but that's still a side effect. It would be prudent IMO to investigate that and find out why these clotting issues are happening. We would do that with any other drug.

And it seems to me they can't predict who and how much of a reaction people will have.

That's the most worrisome thing to me. Is it blood type? Immunity to a specific other disease? Lack of immunity to a specific other disease? Something in their lifestyle? Diet? A co-morbidity?

And these same people who are dismissing the side effects out of hand are the exact same people who earlier made such a fuss over hydroxychoroquine, which has a known set of contra-indicators! And, if memory serves, that specifically includes the poster I admonished for trying to shame others into giving up their own freedoms to preserve his.

In the end, the vaccine, whether it works or not, whether it is safe or not, is not being treated like any other medication. That's obviously because at least part of its purpose is not as a medication... it is as a control mechanism and a money tree for the pharmaceuticals and for China. That doesn't mean I think no one should take it; it means that there is an alternate reason it is being pressed so hard.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
Hmmm I wonder how these two pieces of information fit into the picture...

www.bitchute.com...
www.bitchute.com...

They don't this is pretty standard stuff, you just don't hear about it with other vaccines because it's boring.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

This is a pretty good explanation for why our immune system may not detect or attack our own cells, if each cell only produces one or two spike proteins. But at the same time I'm seeing more and more data which is giving me a strong sense that there's something important about how the immune system functions in relation to the vaccine.

Well, the immune system is pretty complex. We simply don't know everything about how it operates. We know that if a foreign particle enters the body, the body produces antibodies against it, and that is the basis for all vaccines. The only difference between this vaccine and earlier ones is the mRNA system, which as I said, seems to be pretty safe and effective. All present a "safe" version of the virus to trick the body into producing antibodies.

That leaves a problem with the target protein.

I find it interesting from an academic perspective that the human body seems to take a long time to produce antibodies against this particular virus, be it via infection or injection. Likely that has something to do with the issues you raise.

Now, maybe someone will discover more details about the mechanisms behind immunity and cause me to change that sentiment. That's completely possible. But for now, everything seems to working exactly as designed.... antibodies produced to fight the spike protein... except for verification that the correct target protein is being used.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

The part that bothers me, and now I cannot find the bit of testimony I read, is where the FDA panel asked the Pfizer rep about the cardiac side effects and what they were doing to lower the incidence of those effects.

I remember reading it because where my husband has a congenital heart defect and it may or may not have been passed on to our son ... so far his checkups have been clean, but there was a brief question of a heart murmur a couple of years ago. It was passed off because a followup showed no signs and he had just had the flu just prior which can cause such things in young kids, but we are watching him. Anyways, the rep told the panel that the cardiac side effects are pretty much static, and that the risks of severe COVID only really start to outweigh them as you get into your 40s.

So I'm very leery of the idea of vaccinating children and our son. To get him the shot is to knowingly expose him to that risk where he may or may not get COVID and if he does, the odds of him getting it severely are less than his odds that he might suffer serious side effects from the vaccine that could be life-changing.

I realize none of those odds are very high all the way around, but as a parent ... what do you do?

a reply to: ketsuko

As a parent, you do what you think is best for your children. Government and talking heads be damned.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: AaarghZombies

edit on 10-10-2021 by AaarghZombies because: (no reason given)

a reply to: TheRedneck

Exactly. That wondered off the point a bit.

But if that was the answer the rep gave to the panel, then it tells me they know certain effects are baked in and it's not so much a matter of tweaking potencies to raise/lower immune response or anything else.

Something about what their vaccine does will always tend to run that risk as it stands.

a reply to: TheRedneck

So you just assume that everyone else is doing what you would do if your positions were reversed, then. That's a pretty poor bit of reasoning. I, for instance, will not sacrifice my intellectual honesty for some temporary perceived benefit. I'm not like you.

This wasn't in my comment. you just want people to think that it's something that I said.

You are the one stating opinions here

I don't think that stating that anti-vaxxers want to discourage vaxxine us is a particularly controversial think to say. It's not my opinion when it's their stated aim.

Speaking of facts... that ain't a fact. It's an opinion, and a silly one at that.

Source, please.

the OP has a concern. That concern may or may not be legitimate, but the OP will never know until they get answers.

As stated, I don't think that their intent is to get an answer, it's to spread doubt. Like going into an open house and loudly asking what the local rape rate is like.

You already lost your freedoms because you listened to a bunch of tyrannical wanna-be dictators using your own fear against you.

Don't confuse annoyance with fear. I'm annoyed that this could have been over by now, but anti-vaxxers and mask refuses are spreading Delta around like it was going out of fasion.

Asking nicely and complying with demands from those who took them isn't going to work. It has never worked, not one single time, in all of recorded human history.

My country's government doesn't want to take our freedom away. We've got a libertarian government that wants as few rules as possible. Their hand is being forced. They'd much rather have a booming economy than control over people. It's why we voted them in and the socialists out.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: AaarghZombies

First of all, your body isn't producing "viral components"

Dude, just stop right there.

Is the spike protein a part of the virus? If it is, it is by definition a "viral component." if it is not, why are we getting a vaccine using a protein that isn't part of the virus? You are making no sense either way you want to look at that.

Just more unscientific, semantic, unreasoned fear-mongering on your part, making you look stupid and the vaccine look bad.

TheRedneck

This is why I don't believe that you're genuinely interested in answers. You're using the most provocative language possible and are playing into people's fears. The spike protein is one component of this virus, but what is being produced is not a viral component.

Aluminium is a component of some weapons, but selling copper isn't the same thing as selling weapons components.

The spike protein being produced isn't a virus component because it's not being produced as a part of a virus or for use in the production of a virus. It's being produced as a stand-alone protein.

If you weren't interested in spreading fear and doubt you wouldn't have even have mentioned this. But you're reacting to my debunking by doubling down. If you wanted answers you'd double down on the questions, not the fear.