https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5475249/
This was in mice. I am seeking studies to decipher if the mRNA vaccine itself gets into ejaculatory fluids and if stuides show that psedouraicl present in this virus (instead of uracil isomer) is not able to be reverse transcribed.
*psuedouracil present in the VACCINE
I read somewhere they used pseudouracil instead of uracil
Why COVID-19 mRNA vaccines would not be reverse transcribed into DNA.
Some astute observers note that retroviruses use viral RNA and reverse-transcribe it into double stranded DNA and insert this DNA into the host genome. This is how retroviruses reproduce. The viral RNA in retroviruses is very similar to mRNA, since it has a cap and a poly-A tail and is made by cellular DNA-dependent RNA-polymerase. So, if a cell is infected with a retrovirus and a mRNA vaccine gets into that cell, maybe the mRNA from the vaccine could be reverse-transcribed into double stranded DNA and inserted into the cell’s genome, thereby changing the host DNA. There are also some endogenous retroviruses that are already in the genomes of all of our cells.
There are a number of reasons why this mRNA vaccine to DNA process would not happen. The first is that reverse transcription of viral RNA starts from a cellular transfer RNA (tRNA) primer that has to bind to the viral RNA. The mRNA vaccines do not have binding sites for a tRNA, so there would be nowhere for the reverse-transcriptase (the enzyme that copies the RNA into DNA) to start. The second is that all retroviruses have 2 copies of the viral RNAs that bind to each other through a special sequence called a kissing loop. Having two copies attached to each other through this kissing loop is essential for virus replication. The mRNA vaccines do not have this “kissing loop” sequence.
The third, and probably most important, reason is that reverse transcriptase stops when it tries to copy a RNA that contains a pseudo-uridine (a special modified base that is present in the tRNA primer that the reverse transcriptase used to start reverse transcription) instead of the normal uridine. This stopping is essential for the reverse transcriptase to make a double-stranded DNA that can be inserted into the genome (check out my Retrovirus lecture on YouTube for an explanation). The mRNA vaccines contain pseudouridine (actually 1-methyl pseudouridine) instead of the normal uridine to protect the vaccine from stimulating the immune system before it can do it’s job. So any reverse transcriptase that is trying to copy an mRNA vaccine into DNA, would stop before it had a chance to make double stranded DNA.
So, because the mRNA vaccines a) do not have a primer binding site, b) do not have a kissing loop structure, and c) contain pseudouridines instead of uridines they will not be copied into DNA by reverse transcription.
Spike protein shedding has a high possibility.
mRNA vaccine (mrna) iself much lower chance of being shed.
mRNA vaccine integrating into our genome via RT doesn't sound probably.
mRNA vaccine creating DNA errors/defects are still possible.
Spike shedding will give (person shed upon) the possiblity of creating Ab's to spike and +ELISA.
Virus itself can have different sequences of its genome integrated into our DNA via endogenous RT which is what is theorized to create +PCR for extended periods of time.
Yes.
Given that these fuckers are out to cause damage and are very deceitful makes this very likely.
Also remembering Flemming speak about why people having AB's against nucleocapsid after vaccine raises the possibility of unkonwn elements in the vaccine itself / or the possibilty that you were infected with virus at some point/
Viral integration of sequences into host and reassembly is possible.
Viral mutations, leaving the virus with the ability to enter and infect the cell either via ACE2 or cholesterol, will create a need for upgrading the vaccine eventually.
Current mRNA vaccines need multiple boosters, raising the point that these mRNA vaccines are inefficient.
Drift and shift will eventually require a modified vaccine in time.
Animal reservoirs, multiple simultaneous strains, will increase the likelihood of more mutant strains.
Treatment is the better option.
Treatment aimed at killing the virus without ramping up or immune system is the best way.
Using a treatment that modifies our immune system to kill the virus will lead to more problems.
Using medications to attack the virus at multiple points of its cycle is a much better technique.
Using a drug that does this (for instance ivermectin works at multiple aspects of the viral life cycle) or better yet a combination of drugs early on will help avoid resistance to certain meds in the long run.
mRNA vaccines might lead to the ability of virus to mutate or escape.
Using the mAB route is much riskier since you are relying on the hosts' immune system after neutralization to be effective.
The activation of the immune cascades is one of the main reasons for further destruction and havoc.
Yes.
There are multiple available.
They use 'multiple' mAB's in one formulation to help hinder escape mutations.
They are trying to decrease cost production and ADE via multiple processes/tests,
Neutralizing and sub-neutralizing antibodies can lead to ADE.
They can move towards mAB injections instead of infusions.
The infusion components included have risks and their own side effects to take into account.
They are using this more expensive technique for people early on and I am still trying to figure out what the requirements for qualifying for this treatment are… you would this it would be for people who are much more vulnerable to the virus (immunosuppressed/cancer/etc) but that could be a danger given the condition itself.
There is a need for monitoring of patients for a brief period of time after administration is needed.
Let us say the mRNA in the vaccine can't be reverse transcribed, fine.
If it gets into fluids, that's another route to shed in addition to spike shedding.
That would theoretically increase the incidence with tests they are using given they are testing for the spike.
This is in addition to all the other reasons why you should avoid these vaccines in the first place.
If the mRNA vaccine itself sheds via sex fluids, how likely is it to enter cells it is excreted near?
If that happens and it is able to do so, then those cells would create spike you could possibly test positive for spike/COVD…
if the mRNA vaccine sequence is for the spike, then wouldn't the PCR testing for this sequence be positive?
Testing is the problem. Everyone can be positive.
Symptoms matter. Even if you are symptomatic… using these tests would make you positive… that doesn't mean the symptoms you are experiencing are from COVID…
For example, if you have a pneumonia…. we decide to GS/culture.etc secretions (deep) from your respirator tract…. a variety of organisms show up. Which one is the culprit? Maybe multiple are, many none are.. maybe something else is leading to the pna. Hence they guess and flood you with multiple multiple abx/antifungals and hope for the best.
Let us argue that other antigens are not present via testing and we conclude it is vaccine over virus…
Or the other way around…. you test for AB's to multiple antigens in virus and are positive… except you had the virus a while ago, abs are still positive, something else is causing your symptoms but if testing for cov-2 is + then we are inclined to think thats the reason for your current infxn/symptoms
This is why PCR used correctly (cycles) in addition to other antigen/ab testing/ in addition to CT/MRI/CXR/culture/GS needs to all be taken into account.
Antigen testing
Ab testing
PCR with cycles mentioned
GM, culture, blood tests
Imaging
Etc etc etc are all important if used correctly