mRNA Spike protein is very dangerous, it's cytotoxic - says INVENTOR of mRNA Technology

[DA-LION-619]

Sounds like me, I'm the typical "the world is out to get me" nutjob (I assume, couldn't be arsed to read whatever that is about).

What is this thread even about?

Pfizer's mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has the potential to lead to neurodegenerative diseases, there's no evidence yet because the subjects won't confirm if they've taken it.

 

[SlinkyMike]

There's plenty of examples the world over, but let's make it practical.

Why do we not let drunk people drive on the roads? Because it's dangerous for themselves and other road users. It's censorship by sobriety if you will.

Why do we only allow people with licenses to practice medicine? Law? Drive on the road? It's to protect people from themselves and others with regards to them making mistakes and /or uninformed decisions with potentially hazardous outcomes. Censorship by competency if you will.

Information in this day and age is extremely powerful. The power of the pen is mightier than the sword and all that. One can argue that the person with a wide audience or following can be much more influential or damaging than a single person with a gun, and yet people are allowed to use social media and the internet without any restriction, but to own a gun you must show competency and have a license. Just as what information can be used for good, so too can it be used in extremely harmful ways. The incitement of looting this week by a handful of people is a very good example.

And before anyone calls me any names, I am not advocating for censorship in general that prevents people from expressing their opinion. But I am most certainly against people spreading false information knowingly or unknowingly, that can have severe consequences. Even more so against people purposefully spreading harmful information.

Many in this and other threads have cried about Youtube removing content from known conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers, calling it censorship. It's not censorship, your not preventing that person from having his opinion, your just preventing him from using said platform to cause harm. Should we allow the Taliban to put videos on Youtube that teaches kids how to make bombs? Isn't that censorship too?

People are very quick on the "censorship is bad" bandwagon, but we do it all the time in many different forms, all the time. And people are fine with it, because they understand the relevance and need for it. Nobody is crying out "my body, my rules" when you tell a 14 year old that they can't buy alcohol. They understand why it's necessary.

It's not about the vaccine or Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine - it's political that's why it's impossible to make sense. You are dealing with a cult.

 

[buka001]

And? We've always done it that way.

Google
Mice have many advantages over other model organisms: Their genome is similar to the human genome (99%), a good genetic/molecular toolbox is available and the animal's small size facilitates large scale/high throughput studies making it a cost-efficient model.

Mice as Models to Study Human Disease: Hereditary Deafness
The identification of genes responsible for hereditary deafness provides an excellent example of the utility of mice for studying human disorders.

Data from a few mice, vs data from 3 Billion vaccinations administered to humans.

Yeah ok.

 

[zolly]

That's the point... We don't know if vaccines will prevent more virulent variants or if it will give rise to more virulent variants. What we do know is that the virus has remained rather stable in terms of virulence without the presence of vaccines.

Rather stable? We had at least two or three variants appear before vaccination programs started. If I'm correct there are currently five mutations running around, and that's in just over a year and a half? In total, these five variants alone have been attributed to the death of over 4 million people. According to your idea we should just let this virus carry on and cross our fingers and hope it doesn't mutate into something even worse on its own. That doesn't seem like a good plan.

I am not arguing that people shouldn't be vaccinated. I am arguing that these vaccines be used in the elderly and the vulnerable while the rest get on with acquired infection for various reasons.

What do you classify as elderly? Because in pure numbers, a lot of "young" people have gotten sick, some even requiring hospitalisation, even if they haven't died.

Hospitalizations and deaths of younger people soar due to COVID-19, PAHO Director reports - PAHO/WHO | Pan American Health Organization

Countries will need to maintain or increase ICU bed capacity even further if infections continue to rise at current rates. In the past week, nearly 40% of all global COVID-19 deaths took place in the Americas. Washington, D.C. May 5, 2021 (PAHO) – Hospitalizations and deaths of younger people...

www3.paho.org

Others have reported how some who are elderly have barely had a sniffle while others who are younger who were healthy died within days.

I guess my point is it's easy to say "carry on, you'll be fine because you're young/fit/healthy" until you're one of the "not at risk" people who ends up in the ICU, dead, or suffering from the many non-lethal side effects of Covid.

 

[Geoff.D]

Data from a few mice, vs data from 3 Billion vaccinations administered to humans.

Yeah ok.

3 Billion doses --- a huge number that is supposed to impress? How about telling us how many of those have been thoroughly checked, short of a full autopsy for adverse effects/ strange blood test results etc?

Can't? Don't know? Well then, what does that number other than they have not keeled over and died? Come to think of it how many have died and had full autopsies done to determine any adverse effects?

Don't know either? Well then, what exactly does that number then represent in relation to this debate?

 

[Geoff.D]

currently five mutations running around

5 that are spoken about but many more that have been identified. In fact, it is becoming pretty tricky to keep track.

 

[DA-LION-619]

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-afs:Content:9792931264 :

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Pfizer and Moderna did not skip animal trials when testing their COVID-19 vaccines.

And? We've always done it that way.

You wanted a debate, then debate honestly.
Don't do it maliciously by misquoting or swapping vaccines.

Debate with data from https://clinicaltrials.gov/ even our vaccine is there, you don't need any 'leaked' reports.

 

[Dave]

Are you @Hamster? That report is based on rats...

I was just about to rebut the first link he posted but he’s gone full retard with multiple crazy links in the hope he gets one that’s relevant, it really isn’t worth trying to have a human level discussion with a pigeon.

 

[cobussc]

He was a pioneer in the research, the fact that you can't grasp this is astounding. Anyway you cling to your nitpicking.

I am saying that he has more than earned his right to have a critical view of the vaccine, and that the spike protein might be cytotoxic. People saying otherwise are no better than Brown Shirts attempting to silence debate and force censorship on everyone who isn't falling in line with the dogma you lot just so love.

Dr Malone is a contributor in a long line of scientists, not the discoverer of mRNA, nor the inventor or even a co-inventor of the vaccine. He is today a malcontent seeking recognition not due to him. Not even Kariko claims to be the inventor:

Messenger RNA vaccine pioneer Katalin Karikó shares her long journey to Covid-19 vaccines​

• 

By Claudia López Lloreda July 19, 2021. https://statnews.com


When asked her thoughts on possibly being considered for the Nobel prize, Karikó instead focused on the collaborative nature of science and how so many contributions to the mRNA vaccine by others may be overlooked. “Many scientists, just like me, work for years and years and nobody knew about them. And so, I have to represent all of them,” she said.

​

And this article shows the long line back to the late 1940's. Plus the crucial and blinding insights of one Sydney Brenner, South African-born scientist at Oxford University in 1961.

Volume 25, Issue 13, 29 June 2015, Pages R526-R532
Journal home page for Current Biology
Essay
Who discovered messenger RNA?
Author MatthewCobb


Conclusion:
Textbook authors, students and Wikipedia editors generally like simple stories. A simple view of the history of mRNA would claim that Jacob and Monod named it, while Brenner, Jacob and Meselson subsequently isolated it. The complexity of what actually took place is much more in keeping with what we know about science — a series of different groups attack a problem, using slightly different techniques, seeing the problem from different angles, before eventually a breakthrough makes clear what was previously problematic. From this point of view, priority of publication is not the sole criterion for contributing to discovery.
So the answer to the question ‘who discovered mRNA?’ depends on what you mean by ‘discovered’. Many different groups have a claim, depending on which part of the mRNA story is being focussed upon:

• •
  The first person to argue that DNA produces RNA which in turn leads to protein synthesis was André Boivin, in 1947.
• •
  The first suggestion that small RNA molecules move from the nucleus to the cytoplasm and associate with ribosomes where they drive protein synthesis was made by Raymond Jeener, in 1950.
• •
  The first reports of what we would now identify as mRNA were made by Al Hershey’s group in 1953 and by Volkin and Astrachan in 1956.
• •
  The realisation that mRNA might exist, with the functions we now ascribe to it, first came about through the insight of Brenner and Crick, while Jacob and Monod named mRNA and put it in a theoretical framework.
• •
  The first unambiguous description of mRNA was jointly the work of Brenner, Crick and Meselson on the one hand, and of Watson’s team on the other (although the Brenner–Crick–Meselon group got their results first).
• •
  Finally, the first people to prove the function of mRNA were Nirenberg and Matthaei, although they did not frame their results in these terms.

Who discovered mRNA? It is complicated. No wonder the Nobel Prize committee did not try and reward the discovery. Naming just three (or even six) people would be invidious — mRNA was the product of years of work by a community of researchers, gathering different kinds of evidence to solve a problem that now looks obvious, but at the time was extremely difficult. But that is the nature of history — it straightens out what at the time was tangled and unclear. We have the advantage of looking backwards, knowing the answer; the participants were peering into a foggy future, trying to reconcile contradictory evidence and imagine new experiments that could resolve the problem. Their collective insights and imaginations laid the basis for today’s understanding and tomorrow’s discoveries.

 

[SoldierMan]

You wanted a debate, then debate honestly.
Don't do it maliciously by misquoting or swapping vaccines.

Debate with data from https://clinicaltrials.gov/ even our vaccine is there, you don't need any 'leaked' reports.

What are you talking about what am I misquoting?

 

[SoldierMan]

Data from a few mice, vs data from 3 Billion vaccinations administered to humans.

Yeah ok.

Give it time. You can't rush symptoms that will take time to manifest. We now know that the vaccine spreads throughout the body and doesn't just stay at the injection site, now we wait for the consequences thereof.

 

[SoldierMan]

I was just about to rebut the first link he posted but he’s gone full retard with multiple crazy links in the hope he gets one that’s relevant, it really isn’t worth trying to have a human level discussion with a pigeon.

No response from you. Speaks volumes, all you have are insults. Speaks volumes.

 

[SoldierMan]

Some anecdotal evidence, my aunt in the UK's friend had the Pfizer vaccine and she had a huge reaction to it, she nearly died. She is still suffering. There are reports like this all over the world but the mainstream media doesn't report on them, you have to go to alternative media to get the info.

Safe indeed.

 

[buka001]

3 Billion doses --- a huge number that is supposed to impress? How about telling us how many of those have been thoroughly checked, short of a full autopsy for adverse effects/ strange blood test results etc?

Can't? Don't know? Well then, what does that number other than they have not keeled over and died? Come to think of it how many have died and had full autopsies done to determine any adverse effects?

Don't know either? Well then, what exactly does that number then represent in relation to this debate?

Statistically speaking, if you have a sample of 3 Billion, even if you had 0.1% of a error rate, you would be seeing 3 million people suffering severe side effects.

But we haven't.

This is why it is significant.

 

[buka001]

Some anecdotal evidence, my aunt in the UK's friend had the Pfizer vaccine and she had a huge reaction to it, she nearly died. She is still suffering. There are reports like this all over the world but the mainstream media doesn't report on them, you have to go to alternative media to get the info.

Safe indeed.

Some anecdotal evidence, from the UK.

My section of works has circa 50 staff. We have all been vaccinated. Most with 2 vaccines.

No adverse reactions.

Oh and I know 4 people who died from COVID. One of them 2 weeks ago. He was 37. All 4 of them unvaccinated.

 

[Geoff.D]

No adverse reactions.

No obvious reactions are visible or detectable. No evidence to support the conclusion that there are no adverse reactions.

 

[buka001]

No obvious reactions are visible or detectable. No evidence to support the conclusion that there are no adverse reactions.

Do you have evidence of hundreds of thousands or millions of people suffering serious adverse reactions from the vaccines?

 

[zolly]

No obvious reactions are visible or detectable. No evidence to support the conclusion that there are no adverse reactions.

There's no evidence a meteor will hit us tomorrow Geoff, but maybe we should start building underground bunkers since there's no evidence a meteor WON'T hit us either.

 

[Geoff.D]

Do you have evidence of hundreds of thousands or millions of people suffering serious adverse reactions from the vaccines?

Wrong answer and the wrong follow up question. Just avoid making absolute statements and accept that no one knows, and might not know for years and years.

 

[Geoff.D]

There's no evidence a meteor will hit us tomorrow Geoff, but maybe we should start building underground bunkers since there's no evidence a meteor WON'T hit us either.

Wrong response and a fallacious analogy. See my answer to Buka