The spike protein is the killer--beware mRNA vaccines

originally posted by: chr0naut

Versions that don't infect well, or don't replicate well, simply disappear over time. But the variants that do thrive and survive, spread.

Why is this so hard to believe?

No, I can believe it, but I think the lab got a hold of it was was using it for their gain of function research and the only reason why bats were even brought into the conversation was because of the wet market near by and they used bats as a convenient excuse.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

Versions that don't infect well, or don't replicate well, simply disappear over time. But the variants that do thrive and survive, spread.

Why is this so hard to believe?

No, I can believe it, but I think the lab got a hold of it was was using it for their gain of function research and the only reason why bats were even brought into the conversation was because of the wet market near by and they used bats as a convenient excuse.

In the wet market, bats were allegedly consumed cooked. That kills the virus. Yet all the media was full of videos of people consuming bat soup.

Additionally, for zoonosis, both species must be able to be infected by the same virus. They have been unable to infect bats with the human SARS-CoV-2 virus. Even if an RaTG13 infected bat bit a human at the market, the human isn't going to get SARS-CoV-2. So, I think we can eliminate 99.9% of the wet market allegations as ignorant racist blaming.

Similarly, if the Wuhan lab was doing the research it was actually supposed to be doing, i.e: checking to see if a zoonotic virus was already sequestered away somewhere in nature, then the research wasn't the source of the virus, nature was.

As already noted, bats can't really catch SARS-CoV-2 so the lab work on bats is unlikely to leak a human pathogen (it isn't entirely impossible that one might exist, or have leaked, but it is very unlikely).

If they were doing GoF research, that is a different type of work procedurally, and they wouldn't need to keep collecting and testing live bats to do that. GoF would be done with gene splicing and mostly in vitro. They also wouldn't have been testing GoF research with a goal of creating a human pathogen, on bats.

Doing such GOF research in a lab under the eye of public and academic institutions is also a bit obvious. Nearly every country these days has secret military labs capable of doing such research. In fact, such secret labs would be set-up and provisioned specifically for GoF from the outset, and no one outside of them would be the wiser.

And then we have some of the earliest cases of suspected COVID-19, located in attempts to identify patient zero, such as cases in France, Italy and other parts of China, having no proximal or causual link to the wet market or the lab. It just takes one instance to prove the lab wasn't the source, and there are several likely, though not definitive, possibilities that rule out anything in, or near, Wuhan as the source.

Most lab-leak theories seem to me as as non-credible as the wet market ones, and probably similarly motivated. I could be wrong, but...

originally posted by: chr0naut

Most lab-leak theories seem to me as as non-credible as the wet market ones, and probably similarly motivated. I could be wrong, but...

My key takeaways unless they are false are the three people hospitalized from the lab about a month before the first case in Wuhan was discovered that could have started the whole thing and this below.

(1) the mutations that would normally be seen in the course of animal to human transmission have not occurred in SARS-CoV-2, indicating that it was fully “pre-adapted” for human infection and (2) SARS-CoV-2 has insertions in its protein sequence that have never been detected in nature and contribute to its infectivity and pathogenicity.

That is, SARS-CoV-2 has a receptor binding domain specifically designed for the human angiotensin converting enzyme-2 receptor (ACE2) found in lungs, kidneys, intestines and blood vessels.

In addition, SARS-CoV-2 has a furin polybasic cleavage site not found in any closely-related bat coronaviruses as well as other artificially inserted charged amino acids that enhance the virus’ ability to bind to and enter human cells by forming “salt bridges” between the virus and the cell surface.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

Most lab-leak theories seem to me as as non-credible as the wet market ones, and probably similarly motivated. I could be wrong, but...

My key takeaways unless they are false are the three people hospitalized from the lab about a month before the first case in Wuhan was discovered that could have started the whole thing and this below.

Perhaps they caught COVID-19 outside the lab in the early days before it was identified as epidemic in the area? They were in Wuhan at the time.

Also, they were working at a BSL-4 lab. Perhaps they were supposed to report to hospital, for immediate quarantine and monitoring, at the first sign of any sort of illness? That would seem rational to me.

The Chinese doctors, and the recent WHO team there at the lab, have tested the three workers and they don't carry COVID-19 antibodies. So it probably wasn't COVID-19 that they were sick with.

(1) the mutations that would normally be seen in the course of animal to human transmission have not occurred in SARS-CoV-2, indicating that it was fully “pre-adapted” for human infection and (2) SARS-CoV-2 has insertions in its protein sequence that have never been detected in nature and contribute to its infectivity and pathogenicity.

That is, SARS-CoV-2 has a receptor binding domain specifically designed for the human angiotensin converting enzyme-2 receptor (ACE2) found in lungs, kidneys, intestines and blood vessels.

In addition, SARS-CoV-2 has a furin polybasic cleavage site not found in any closely-related bat coronaviruses as well as other artificially inserted charged amino acids that enhance the virus’ ability to bind to and enter human cells by forming “salt bridges” between the virus and the cell surface.

All the details in that quote are indicators that it mutated and evolved in humans, and was not from another species any time recently.

The whole zoonosis bit, and that it hasn't just evolved in place, is not seeing the obvious. Ditto for the lab origin idea.

a reply to: chr0naut
There are researchers in caves catching bats with nets and analyzing the viruses in them. So far nothing has been close enough to SARS-CoV-2 for there to be a link.

Then there are researchers in a lab who added the GoF to the natural virus, put it in an environment to encourage growth and reproduction at a faster than natural rate to try and create the next virus that could cause a pandemic in order to prepare for it. Much of their research record was altered or destroyed.

I somehow missed the media playing videos of people eating bats. All I saw were videos of a market and media saying they ate bats there. The racist stereotypes hook some people though. The earliest cases were the Wuhan researchers getting sick. The Chinese knew about the virus, that's why they were practicing draconian lockdowns within their country very early.

originally posted by: SouthernForkway26
a reply to: chr0naut
There are researchers in caves catching bats with nets and analyzing the viruses in them. So far nothing has been close enough to SARS-CoV-2 for there to be a link.

Exactly.

Then there are researchers in a lab who added the GoF to the natural virus, put it in an environment to encourage growth and reproduction at a faster than natural rate to try and create the next virus that could cause a pandemic in order to prepare for it. Much of their research record was altered or destroyed.

While that is always a possibility, that is extremely unlikely. This was also said by the WHO researchers who have just finished examining the Wuhan lab and its workers to see if there was any GoF work, or coverup happening there.

But it comes down to who you believe. Some armchair speculator, or the qualified team on the ground at the site examining the lab, testing the people, the equipment, and examining the evidence?

I somehow missed the media playing videos of people eating bats. All I saw were videos of a market and media saying they ate bats there. The racist stereotypes hook some people though. The earliest cases were the Wuhan researchers getting sick. The Chinese knew about the virus, that's why they were practicing draconian lockdowns within their country very early.

Search on 'woman eating bat in wuhan' videos.

Veterans Today thinks US troops spread it at the military games in Wuhan. They might be right.

www.veteranstoday.com...

a reply to: 1947boomer

Why the vaccine contains the spike protein and the way to deliberately get the protein Into cells? A lot of people think that it’s to deliberately infect massive amounts of people, and oddly enough if it was that dangerous it should have been like the “Outbreak” scenario ... where the cdc people were wearing those crazy suits and the labs that use the special hand things to work in extremely dangerous environments. And they want us to think that we should wear the little flimsy masks to keep out a dangerous pathogen !!!!

originally posted by: Salander
Veterans Today thinks US troops spread it at the military games in Wuhan. They might be right.

www.veteranstoday.com...

Well in my experience, VT is more left leaning and notice they are blaming the US for the spread of the virus and even blaming it on them staying near the Wet Market. They just glommed on to the fake Wet Market theory. It originated in Wuhan! Even they later admitted it probably came from the lab !

originally posted by: chr0naut

The spike protein alone, made in this manner, cannot exit the cell where it is produced, because it would bind to the ACE2 on the cell wall on the way out, and get stuck there, and so it floats around inside the cell's cytoplasm until it breaks down chemically, or because it is identified by the immune system and destroyed by the 'killer' immune system 'T' cells. Which nature has provided to help us destroy 'foreign' pathogens.

Sorry, but I signed up to ask for clarification.

In the first bolded statement, you are stating that the artificially produced spike protein cannot exit the host cell, correct? If so, would you explain this:



That's from the CDC's own site: Understanding mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines

Here is another mention of it (spike protein) migrating to the outer surface of the host cell: The Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine

From my understanding, once it migrates to the outside surface of the host cell it is supposed to anchor itself there, wave in the wind and wait to be destroyed by the immune system. At least that's what Big Pharma wants everyone to believe.

As to the second bolded statement. You're stating that the antibodies will enter the host cell to go after the spike protein?

originally posted by: chr0naut

The only way the mRNA in the vaccine gets into the cell is by the damage to the cells caused by the needle penetration. So, its effect is extremely local.

Actually, no.

The delivery system of the mRNA is the coating of lipid nanoparticles. That coating is what allows the cell(s) to take up the mRNA payload. The needle is only necessary to get the injection into the arm, nothing more.

Why Are Lipid Nanoparticles So Important to the COVID-19 Vaccine??

In fact, there are companies working on alternatives to the 19th century technology of needles.

Future COVID-19 vaccines could come in a capsule or spray

originally posted by: chr0naut

That is why with the Pfizer vaccine is stored, frozen, at -80 degrees and after thawing, must be used within 45 minutes, or it is throw out material.

Time-to-use greatly depends on how you thaw the vials. As well, since you didn't specify units, here are the temperature requirements:



The time for use is longer than 45 minutes:



As you can see, thawed in the refrigerator allows for a maximum of 30 days before needing to be discarded.

Alternatively:



The information above comes from the FDA's site:

Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine EUA Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers

There are currently research efforts into second-generation mRNA vaccines that are having great success in overcoming the cold chain problem.

Houston Methodist Medical Center is one such research center. Their RNA Therapeutics Program has managed to create preparation methods that make mRNA considerably more stable. Up to six months in a refrigerator in fact. They have even had success in shipping room-temperature mRNA overseas.

originally posted by: 74686557617463686572

originally posted by: chr0naut

The only way the mRNA in the vaccine gets into the cell is by the damage to the cells caused by the needle penetration. So, its effect is extremely local.

Actually, no.

The delivery system of the mRNA is the coating of lipid nanoparticles. That coating is what allows the cell(s) to take up the mRNA payload. The needle is only necessary to get the injection into the arm, nothing more.

Why Are Lipid Nanoparticles So Important to the COVID-19 Vaccine??

In fact, there are companies working on alternatives to the 19th century technology of needles.

Future COVID-19 vaccines could come in a capsule or spray

I had only thought of the the lipid shell as a protective capsule to prevent enzymatic breakdown of the mRNA, but the use of the lipid shell as way to penetrate the cell wall had not occurred to me. Thank you for pointing this out. I've got a bit of re-reading and study to get up to speed on this bit that I missed.

Cheers!

originally posted by: chr0naut

The only way the mRNA in the vaccine gets into the cell is by the damage to the cells caused by the needle penetration. So, its effect is extremely local.

Boy, that's some super stupid comment, you just disqualified yourself from being taken serious on all matters about the vaccine.

And you ridicule others on the internet for being cautious about the vaccine?

originally posted by: 74686557617463686572

originally posted by: chr0naut

The spike protein alone, made in this manner, cannot exit the cell where it is produced, because it would bind to the ACE2 on the cell wall on the way out, and get stuck there, and so it floats around inside the cell's cytoplasm until it breaks down chemically, or because it is identified by the immune system and destroyed by the 'killer' immune system 'T' cells. Which nature has provided to help us destroy 'foreign' pathogens.

Sorry, but I signed up to ask for clarification.

In the first bolded statement, you are stating that the artificially produced spike protein cannot exit the host cell, correct? If so, would you explain this:

That's from the CDC's own site: Understanding mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines

Here is another mention of it (spike protein) migrating to the outer surface of the host cell: The Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine

From my understanding, once it migrates to the outside surface of the host cell it is supposed to anchor itself there, wave in the wind and wait to be destroyed by the immune system. At least that's what Big Pharma wants everyone to believe.

As to the second bolded statement. You're stating that the antibodies will enter the host cell to go after the spike protein?

I was replying to several posters who seemed to believe that the vaccine generated spike protein migrated to other cells within the body, where it might do damage.

It does present on the exterior of cells, but as I explained, it binds there to the ACE2 receptors on the cell wall.

Also, in regard to antibody penetration of cells, it is complicated. While the usual description of antibody action is extracellular, there is some indication that there is a natural mechanism of antibodies inside cells. If you think about it, the majority of disease causing foreign protein targets for antibodies are inside the cell, so it makes sense that there would be some way of identifying and destroying those proteins. Generally, these intracellularly functional antibodies are described as intrabodies.