Vaccine is not a real vaccine

[CheeseWall]

Is what my colleague says. Dh and I have had both vaccines and will have our dc vaccinated as soon as this is possible.

My colleague says that the vaccine is not a vaccine per se but that it's 'gene therapy'. He claims to have researched the matter extensively and that people who have had Covid, even asymptomatically, have antibodies, which will protect them from getting very ill.

What spooked me was his claim that the vaccine kills off people's natural antibodies, which they have from having been exposed to the disease and that therefore people who have been vaccinated are only protected against that particular variant whereas those who have antibodies but aren't vaccinated have protection against a range of variants.

Please tell me this is nonsense.

@UndercoverToad Sorry I’m just seeing this. The excipients aren’t new, using liposomes in delivery is also not new. You also aren’t getting “dosed” with spike protein- it’s being produced by your own cells at the same rate as it would be during infection. The clinical trials assessing safety all exist. The AV crowd is basically a giant Internet circle jerk make up of arrogant individuals who, whilst very competent at copy and pasting chunks of scientific literature to try and confuse the general public- wouldn’t pass a first year undergraduate immunology exam. It’s often difficult to reason with them because what they are saying is completely nonsensical in the context they deliver it. It’s like trying to explain how to do long divisions to someone who has just downed a bottle of whisky and keeps slurring “Maths! Numbers! Calculations! Number 4! Repeatedly in your face with a smug smile thinking they are the next Newton.

"It's very singularly focused on the spike protein, so if the virus evolves such that the spike protein becomes less important, all the vaccines so far will then become useless to that variant."

COVID-19 is entirely covered with its spike proteins - hence the term Coronavirus. What else would you suggest that we prime the immune system to recognize?

"Vaccinating during an active pandemic puts evolutionary pressure on coronavirus which makes this more likely to happen. Vaccinating some of the world population while huge amounts of coronavirus is still circulating is therefore risky."

It's quite the opposite. The more hosts the virus has to infect, the quicker it will mutate and render previously acquired immunity less effective. If we could vaccinate everyone against the current strains at once, herd immunity would be reached despite imperfect vaccines and the pandemic would be over. Since that is not possible, we should vaccinate the maximum number of people possible, in as quick a time frame as we can.

"there could be an argument to be made that, a bit like chicken pox, it's better for children to be exposed to covid when they're young and won't be seriously affected, but should then have antibodies for future protection."

Childhood illnesses like chicken pox and measles confer lifelong immunity because their viruses do not mutate rapidly. COVID-19 , on the other hand, does mutate albeit not as rapidly as influenza viruses. Given its track record in the last two years, it is highly unlikely that natural immunity to COVID-19 acquired following infection will protect you for life. Therefore, your idea that children should be infected now so that they are protected as adults does not hold water.

Having said that, we are offered Pfizer vaccines for +12s here but our DC are not yet vaccinated. DH and I are fully vaccinated but do not feel that the risk/benefit ratio for teens is as low as we would like just yet, given the unknowns and lack of data. Such is the shortcoming of voluntary vaccination programs, with which it has been shown that no disease can be eradicated.

Ah extensive research on YouTube. One of those! 'do your own research', don't watch MSM, the great reset, population control.

A nut job that probably hasn't done any actual science since school and probably flunked that.

@Zippy1510

I have a PhD in microbiology, teach microbiology at university level and manage my own research group- this is not what gene therapy is and the rest of it is complete nonsensical rubbish.

If you have time ZIPPY could you start a thread posting how the vaccine works, the different type of vaccines. Maybe the ones posting rubbish could be directed to it? It would also be useful for the ones that have read or heard rubbish and are worried about the vaccine be directed to.

This is nonsense. Vaccination + infection will give you even better protection, not less.

It's also not gene therapy.

These kinds of comments are useful as a filter though

If anyone says
It's not really a vaccine it's genetic engineering
What about Ivermectin?
The trials haven't finished yet
PCR tests have a lot of false positives

Then I know I can classify them under Covidiot and not pay them any more attention
Handy

TallOak I already posted some links earlier in the thread explaining how the different types of vaccine work. You are welcome to save them and share with whoever you like. They were easy to find by googling.

If the pandemic had taught me anything it is that we have woefully under invested in science in our education system.

This meme sums it up:

@CovoidOfAllHumanity

What about Ivermectin?

That’s a valid question - one which should be answered before too long by its inclusion in a randomised controlled clinical trial - the same sort which discovered … is highly effective and hydroxychloroquine isn’t.

Once the trial reports, then we’ll know whether people asking that question are covidiots or not.

The EU have already concluded that Invermectin is in fact toxic at the dose required to treat covid in the lungs.

Whilst it has been used in some undeveloped countries and shown to reduce the severity of symptoms, scientists believe that this is due to the high degree of parasitic infection in those countries. Once the parasitic infection is removed, the body has more resources to fight covid.

I don't believe that the study will give confirmation of effectiveness so much as enable it to be dismissed.

May be wrong, just scientists best guess at present. CT will have you believe that it is known to be effective and being withheld. It isnt.

Gosh! I hope your colleague hasn’t reproduced?! We can’t be doing with an extended faulty gene pool.

Dexamethasone. That’s what I meant. Randomised trials showed that dexamethasone is highly effective.

I don't believe that the study will give confirmation of effectiveness so much as enable it to be dismissed.

That is a valuable conclusion to reach.

It’s interesting as like most conspiracy stuff, there is a grain of truth and it goes from there

These are new style vaccines and I don’t think it’s incorrect to say there is a form of gene therapy. I don’t think we know yet whether they negate previous covid infection; it’s a shame that previous infection isn’t being explored more.

But they are not traditional vaccines and I am concerned about several aspects of them. I am not a scientist though. My biggest concern is the destination of the nanoparticles

Re ivermectin. I thought it was meant to be used as a treatment before it got to the lungs? I assumed it was like anything. Early treatment, when the infection is at a mild stage, is best. Treatment to prevent it progressing to a more serious stage.

I don't know whether ivermectin helps or not, but I hope the trials are including early stage lower (safe) dose treatments?

Separately, there is another treatment trialled and approved in America that we're not using in the UK. The one that was given to Trump. It's expensive but I think we should consider it. Regeneron.

Obviously vaccines as well. Better to not need treatment if at all possible in the first place. Hence vaccines, even if they're not 100% effective.

@PuzzledObserver

Dexamethasone. That’s what I meant. Randomised trials showed that dexamethasone is highly effective.

Definitely and busemide looks promising

Whilst it has been used in some undeveloped countries and shown to reduce the severity of symptoms, scientists believe that this is due to the high degree of parasitic infection in those countries. Once the parasitic infection is removed, the body has more resources to fight covid.

Perhaps it also has an anti fungal effect?

www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/01/covid-perfect-storm-as-more-patients-hit-by-fungal-infections

Now scientists are warning that other dangerous or even deadly fungal infections have spawned in critically ill coronavirus patients globally, including in the UK.

A patient with aspergillosis is just sick on a ventilator, and they’ve already got a bad lung disease with Covid. And if they then die, then it’s all attributed to Covid.”

The issue with steroid treatment (i.e. dexamethasone and budesonide) is the increased risk of the deadly fungal infections.

That's why alternatives would be helpful.

Regeneron, for example.

www.recoverytrial.net/news/recovery-trial-finds-regeneron2019s-monoclonal-antibody-combination-reduces-deaths-for-hospitalised-covid-19-patients-who-have-not-mounted-their-own-immune-response-1

Regeneron is outrageously expensive.

Inhaled budesonide is very expensive.

Dexamethasone is NOT suitable for the mildly ill, it is not more beneficial the earlier it's administered -- it's explicitly shown to benefit people who are already getting oxygen support (and not the less ill).

Some good proof I can think of that ivermectin isn't useful for covid is the fact that groups like MSF aren't agitating about it. They'd love a cheap drug that prevents severe covid. MSF are not afraid to agitate for cheap & better drugs for all sorts of conditions -- but there's no solid evidence to make them waste their efforts on ivermectin for covid.

Inhaled budesonide is very expensive.

Is it? Privately, an inhaler is available for around £40-50. I'm sure the NHS buys in bulk cheaper.

NHS is already prescribing it for Covid (on a case by case basis).

Regeneron is expensive, yes. More so than the long term costs of mental health issues related to trauma and bereavement, impact on the NHS, and Long Covid? Perhaps not.

America has been using it for a while now.

If not mass use, regeneron could be used for people who are less protected by vaccines. Those with blood cancer, for example.

www.independent.co.uk/news/health/recovery-regeneron-coronavirus-antibody-drug-b1866896.html

It was included in UK funded trials. A waste of money if no intention of using it.

It can help patients who don't mount their own immune response.