Help me understand the mRNA technology

originally posted by: SleeperHasAwakened
a reply to: daskakik

If IM shots aren't properly aspirated upon administration, as many folks have described when receiving their doses, then the syringe might've hit a blood vessel. Then instead of the dose sitting in depot in the muscle belly, it could get into the blood stream and all bets are off on where it can end up. Does this happen often? Probably not, but out of the "billions" of doses of this that were given, and the more than a few anecdotes of improper IM injection, without question the odds are this happened more than a few times, and this accounted for some of the insane stories of reactions.

How often did this happen with the flu shot? Hard to say, but then again, no flu vaccine on Earth was ever pimped this heard. When you go hog wild, mandating vaccines for a significant % of the planet's population that, for healthy individuals under the age of 65, the virus is 97%+ survivable, you've just shifted mortality shell game from COVID to other factors, improper administration like failing to aspirate, exposing people with allergic reactions to the non-mRNA ingredients of vaccines (who never had the flu vaccine shoved down their throats before), QC failures in the manufacturing process (graphene anyone?).

Even if, IF the vaccine is "100% safe and effective", and this narrative of completely safe and effective was written in permanent ink waaaay before sufficient data has been collected, the unnecessary over-medication of a manufactured vaccine, for the reasons above, killed people that might've have otherwise survived COVID.

I am thinking someday, enterprising data scientists and lawyers will do some studies to quantify how over-medicated this program was, model figures for how many folks were killed for purely administration/QC failures on the mfg of the vaccine, having nothing to even do with the mRNA, and they will (like good lawyers do) find chinks in Pfizer's iron clad "lawsuit protection" on this vaccine, and siphon off vast sums of money from the outrageous figures Pfizer slurped out of governments by colluding with "health professionals" to ram-rod this down the population's throats, whether needed or not.

Not that it will make anyone from Pfizer or the CDC go to jail, just put a small dent in their blood money profiteering.

You've got a lot more hope than I do that people are able or willing to follow a number of different ideas in a single post.

Thank you for it though, for the likely futile effort. I wish I thought that we could change things with enough posts like this.

This times about 20 is the number of complicated factors that are just lost entirely in the dumb arguments. Each tiny argument is irrelevant. The picture, in totality, tells a story and it's not favorable to the going accepted narrative. It's far from it. Sniping details in posts is great fodder, but those tiny details in the grand scheme don't change the picture were looking at, just makes it fuzzy in a few places.

It was an ineffective vaccine, with higher than previously accepted adverse events, that was arguably not needed or even beneficial when all factors are included. Big picture it doesn't even matter if it's magnetic 5G reptilian DNA, it's marginally effective towards it intended use and all the drama was completely senseless. Even without any additional data there's enough to know some serious mistakes -if we give benefit of doubt- happened at every stage.

Sadly, the highest probably is that somebody finds one detail in your whole post and then prosecutes that like it negates the rest of the information. People that didn't see red flags long ago are going to just continue blindly rejecting anything that makes them feel uncomfortably close to being wrong. I've yet to see a single one to admit the officials were lying about vaccine efficacy and COVID mortality. Being unable to admit the officials were lying doesn't give one much hope toward them being honest about their own errors.

a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened
I think the idea of figuring out how the mRNA technology works is to weed out what is fear-mongering.

For example, the reason the shoulder is where medication is often administered is because there are no major blood vessels there. There is no way you are going to inject .5ml of anything there and have it flow straight to the heart. They probably do tear capillaries with the needle but still that doesn't mean the contents of the jab are streaming to the heart.

I honestly don't see how anyone who would have survived covid would be killed by the vaccine. Just the unchecked multiplication of a virus would mean a much harder task for the immune system, compared to a set number of cells that the mRNA would enter. Everything else would be the same but at a smaller scale compared to a viral infection.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened
I think the idea of figuring out how the mRNA technology works is to weed out what is fear-mongering.

For example, the reason the shoulder is where medication is often administered is because there are no major blood vessels there. There is no way you are going to inject .5ml of anything there and have it flow straight to the heart. They probably do tear capillaries with the needle but still that doesn't mean the contents of the jab are streaming to the heart.

I honestly don't see how anyone who would have survived covid would be killed by the vaccine. Just the unchecked multiplication of a virus would mean a much harder task for the immune system, compared to a set number of cells that the mRNA would enter. Everything else would be the same but at a smaller scale compared to a viral infection.

Need for vaccine aspiration confirmed, why is this not being done - LINK

a reply to: TarantulaBite
From what I have seen an injection properly done in the deltoid is nowhere near any large or medium blood vessels. The video below shows how the area is calculated.

Also, after almost 150M doses administered in the UK, the video talks about 74 "suspected" deaths because of this. And while, yes, it is a precaution that takes so little effort, I'm not convinced it would have made a difference.


According to this:SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Binds to Heart’s Vascular Cells Potentially Contributing to Severe Microvascular Damage

Intrigued by this finding, in a second test-tube experiment, the researchers challenged the cardiac pericytes with the spike protein alone, without the virus. The spike protein made pericytes unable to interact with their companion endothelial cells and induced them to secrete inflammatory cytokines, suggesting the spike protein is harmful to human cardiac cells.

So, it seems to me, virus or vax, the protein spike is the most damaging to the cardiovascular system and they both create them.

a reply to: Zenchuck

Pretty much my understanding of the process as well, this should be fun.

The current feedback I'm getting is that the injected materials will not move out of the muscle of the arm, will not cross any membranes, and that RNA will break down in a few hours.

Are these assumptions, or based on evidence?

*** edit***In May of 2021 Pfizer provided a biodistribution study to Japan. It clearly shows LNP travel throughout the body. This study was performed on rats. That settles the question in my mind. If you disagree I am open to looking at other studies. How was this research not conducted in a limited human study before mass injecting? This is nuts. Not sure how much further I want to travel down this rabbit hole.

a reply to: Zenchuck
I don't think anyone said they wouldn't move out of the muscle of the arm. I said it would have to travel quite a distance while surrounded by cells they could enter. It isn't like they are on a bus passing up stops because the liver or heart is their their stop.

As for the BBB. Here is a study where they tried to use ultrasound to open the pores in it to allow larger molecules to pass.
The size of blood–brain barrier opening induced by focused ultrasound is dictated by the acoustic pressure
Obviously, size matters and I already posted the info about the LNP in the vax being 100 nm, in this study they had to use something external to get them to 54.4 nm.

RNA can have a half-life of minutes to hours but you asked about the stories of 120 days. There is a huge difference there.

Not sure about the rat study you mentioned, I heard that there was one where the injection was into the blood stream and that this is what everyone is basing the need for aspiration. Maybe it was that one.

a reply to: daskakik

That was another poster who had corrected me on that point. I mean, my understanding of vaccines is that is true. The injection does stay in the injected muscle. Why would LNP be any different? Maybe it has something to do with how lipids travel? The size again? You mentioned earlier the average size was 100 nm. To me, that would mean you could have a range around that. The bit I read was saying they ranged in size from 10 nm to 1000 nm.

The study I found was called “A Tissue Distribution Study of a [3H]-Labelled Lipid Nanoparticle-mRNA Formulation Containing ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 Following Intramuscular Administration in Wistar Han Rats.”

It was a study done by Pfizer and provided to the Japanese health authority. In the study rats are given an injection of LNP and the biodistribution is measured using radioactive isotopes. The study lasts for 48 hours and a number of rats are killed at different time intervals to collect data points.

It looks like 20-30% of the LNP stayed at the site of injection.

This study does not show what biodistribution would look like in humans, and was performed using a product that was not the product in question.

This paper is supposed to have some good information. "Immune imprinting, breadth of variant recognition, and germinal center response in human SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination"

originally posted by: Zenchuck
To me, that would mean you could have a range around that. The bit I read was saying they ranged in size from 10 nm to 1000 nm.

Is this for the LNPs in the covid vaccines or for different medications?

It was a study done by Pfizer and provided to the Japanese health authority. In the study rats are given an injection of LNP and the biodistribution is measured using radioactive isotopes. The study lasts for 48 hours and a number of rats are killed at different time intervals to collect data points.

I think I found a table from that report.

I would think that the lipids are stripped from the mRNA when it enters the cell, so that the instructions can be read, and what happens to them afterwards might be what is being shown there.

Honestly, I think we are just coming up with more questions and not any real answers.

a reply to: daskakik

Honestly, I think we are just coming up with more questions and not any real answers.

you are right about that. I guess that's why they say, "just trust the experts."

Here are the two most prescient questions in my mind.

1.) How does the replacement of uridine with pseudouridine affect the function of mRNA, with emphasis on pharmacokinetics?

2.) What is the extent of biodistribution of both LNP and synthetic mRNA in the body?

This discussion has helped to formulate better questions - so not a total loss. Thank you all for the contribution to my education.
If you have an answer to either of these two questions - please let me know!

Hey, some of y'all are real downers. Pessimists even. Shame on you.

Just think how much the elite learned in working out some of the bugs in such a large test group. They have great plans for what mRNA tech might do for them some day...just not before working the bugs out on pesky useless-eaters, eh?

originally posted by: Zenchuck
1.) How does the replacement of uridine with pseudouridine affect the function of mRNA, with emphasis on pharmacokinetics?

According to this (opens a pdf), one of the things it does is it keeps the mrna from causing an immune response.

2.) What is the extent of biodistribution of both LNP and synthetic mRNA in the body?

I don't think we are going to find an answer to this but I personally don't think it is that big of a deal.

The Pfizer shot is 0.3ml. Even if it spread out evenly all over the body, which it doesn't because most of it does stay in the injection site, there isn't enough material to cause any significant damage to any organ.