Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultramaroon
So, what's a good way to whack this particular weed? All my queries have returned documents saying "take our word for it." mRNA doesn't enter the nucleus but perhaps some by-product does. I'm looking for a way to refute that.
If my approach is misguided, can you point me in the right direction?
|
which particular "weed" are you referring to? I was referring to the overall anti-vaccination because of _(changing DNA, microchipping, toxic poison/poisonous ingredients, etc.)_ statements.
It sounds like your "weed" is regarding 'mRNA potentially entering the nucleus'?
Yes, some mRNA can and will enter the nucleus, but it doesn't do anything there are it would get digested by the RNAse into nucleobases. If mRNA is used and served its translation purpose (mRNA → proteins), RNAse comes to cleave/cut up the mRNA into the nucleobases again. These nucleobases are recycled for DNA/RNA, energy, or other cellular functions. Yes the "Lego" pieces of mRNA used in the vaccine will be broken up and recycled by your cells (as does every endogenous/exogenous mRNA). The pieces can be moved throughout the cell (nucleus included) be it via entropy/protein-guided, and will be used for something else.
The mRNA entering the nucleus doesn't do anything to our DNA because humans lack reverse transcriptase enzyme (which would provide the function of transcribing RNA sequence into DNA).
Even if humans DID have this function, human DNA has proteins that double checks the DNA sequence matches the other strand. If it doesn't, the strand gets chopped up and DNA polymerase comes back in to properly copy the father strand. (Not even going into nitty-gritty details that DNA sequence is not exact mirror to mRNA sequence ~)
And lets say it gets past this check point, then the immune system will detect foreign proteins synthesized by the foreign DNA sequence. This will cause the immune response to attack the source of the foreign protein and eventually find the root cause cell and trigger cellular death be it apoptosis or phagocytosis or what have you.
(That being said, there is ongoing research into reverse transcriptase for humans as it is one of the potential reasons for aging - fun topic, why do we age?).
The only "alteration" one can argue is epigenetics. Which can be both important or so insignificant that it's not even worth discussing. With regards to vaccinations, it's an insignificant impact. It's like on par with comparing "running your car with or without DRL on your car during the day" insignificance in terms of vaccinations-epigenetics.
-----------------------
The easiest way to find academic information for people not in the scientific community would be to go to your library (online is fine) and search for a public access biology textbook. Textbooks are reviewed by several PhD's within the field and are regularly updated (often for $, to the bane of college students' wallets, sometimes for typos/error correction) to learn the general mechanics. If you want to dive further, pick up a biology focused biochem textbook (trust me, chemistry focused biochem isn't something you want to touch).
If you try to go on NEJM/PNAS/NATURE/etc. journals, you'll find information way over your head. Heck, majority will be over my head as I am not specializing in research of that specific niche topic. I can read up on it and catch up on the topic, but you need to realize most of those articles are published with aims of contesting the current standard of knowledge and push the boundaries of what humans as a society know. So you'll be able to find outlandish hypotheses and the arguments for them. Part of being a researcher is analyzing the logic behind the published article to determine whether or not that is a sound logic and whether or not the data supports the logic. Scholarly journals are literal public forums where scientists throw their months/years of research into the scholarly public eyes and ears, hoping their work gets picked up and catches the attention of others. Most are ignored, but those work gets picked up by others to feed into the next step of researching a question that probes deeper. And this continues until a groundbreaking discovery happens which may have a chance of revealing a new method of treating diseases. To which will trigger further research, in biological, medical, and pharmaceutical forks in the research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by p1l0t
Yeah that's the claim is that is tells ribsomes to make the spike protein and then it just breaks down without ever entering the nucleus of a cell... sounds great but we'll see. I still see humans hijacking the genetic process. Yeah maybe the virus does too, and maybe this is way safer. But maybe we accidentally do something we didn't think of. The at-risk people can go ahead and get the vaccine, and if it works then they should have nothing to worry about right? Like I said I'm not trying to be in the first wave.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
|
You've got a better chance of winning the lotto multiple times for the next several years than the spike protein doing anything significant to your DNA. Yes it may bind to the nuclear membrane, but doesn't do anything else. Protein function is defined by its structure. Once the protein is synthesized, some of it gets pushed outside of the cell to allow the immune cells to bind to it and recognize it as foreign.
Once the antigen (protein) is recognized as foreign, it triggers immune response to that specific antigen. Once immune response is complete and the body has cleared itself of this foreign antigen, the immune system creates memory immune cells. These cells floats around and doesn't reactivate unless it binds to that same antigen (again, protein structure specific), meaning you have been exposed to covid. The memory cell then activates a faster and more robust immune response than a person that did not have the vaccine. This is how vaccines work. So if your immune system is on the weaker end then it is still technically possible to get covid even with the vaccine. Albeit extremely unlikely.