RSS

mRNA and the WuFlu vaccine

15 Dec

The Pfizer coronavirus vaccine is a novel kind of vaccine, which works somewhat differently in its mechanism from others.

Most vaccines work by implanting a denatured or somehow otherwise inactive bit of the targeted virus into the body; the body then produces antibodies to destroy it, and thus learns how to fight it, and will produce antibodies for the real virus if it encounters it in the future.

This one is different.

The main ingredient in the Pfizer vaccine is mRNA, or messenger ribonucleic acid.

RNA molecules are coded for various kinds of proteins the body produces; RNA is related to DNA, deoxyribonucleic acid, the building block of life, of gene expression, etc.

So, this messenger RNA codes the building of a portion of the coronavirus; that is, it tells the human body how to make a bit of the coronavirus: it instructs the body to do so, then the body does so.

Then the usual sort of vaccine functionality takes over: the body sees this as a foreign matter, and produces antibodies to deal with it, and hopefully then knows how to produce those antibodies to fight off the real virus if it ever encounters it.

I have chemistry background, not biology or biochemistry background per se, so I’m no expert in these matters. But I do know a bit about the drug approval process, which normally takes years.

But the little I know about biology, is enough for me to find this disturbing.

Isn’t it eerie and strange that we’re getting the human body itself to produce the simulacrum of the coronavirus, rather than producing that simulacrum of it outside and using it as a traditional vaccine?

Isn’t using RNA potentially dangerous; do we really know what we’re doing? Have we ever created a vaccine of this nature before?

I’m wary of using something so close to DNA, worried about side effects.

If people who have contracted the coronavirus and successfully recovered from it have developed antibodies to fight it off, why not, if we must use RNA to build anything, get RNA to build such antibodies? Or why can’t we take antibodies from such people, if they still have them in their system, and transplant them into people as vaccines?

I think there’s nothing wrong with being wary of this new technology, and I’m not an anti-vaxxer, per se; I get the flu shot annually, and haven’t suffered any ill effects from so doing, but I am disturbed by this new vaccine technology. We were told that it had been impossible to create a vaccine for SARS; now suddenly we have one for this coronavirus? Why should we believe it’s ready, that the clinical trials weren’t rushed, that they had enough time, despite how long the drug approval process normally take for this kind of thing, i.e. years?

And yet my provincial government’s premier has said that while voluntary, anyone who refuses to take the vaccine could find themselves shut out from entry to various public places, e.g. government offices, shopping malls, doctor’s offices, etc.

Why must we all be hurried into taking this, an unproven, new experimental vaccine technique, for a disease with a 99% recovery rate?

And be treated like lepers, unpersoned if we question it and refuse to comply?

 

19 responses to “mRNA and the WuFlu vaccine

  1. Will S.

    December 15, 2020 at 11:34 pm

    I should clarify that I have a bit of biology and biochemistry background in terms of some courses, but that my major was chemistry.

    So I understand a little, just not a lot, about some of these matters.

    Perhaps a bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing, as they say.

    But surely not having any knowledge whatsoever of a particular thing is likely more dangerous, because then you don’t know when to be wary, and are more likely to blindly trust authorities, and not wonder if the wool is being pulled over your eyes.

     
    • feeriker

      December 15, 2020 at 11:43 pm

      Nofa king way will I be injected with this. If the Globalists want to make this mandatory, they’re going to have one hell of a fight one their hands.

       
      • Will S.

        December 15, 2020 at 11:52 pm

        Good for you! I too intend to resist this, as much as possible.

         
  2. electricangel

    December 15, 2020 at 11:37 pm

    I’m not taking it. Better to just get COVID.

     
    • Will S.

      December 15, 2020 at 11:38 pm

      I am inclined to agree.

       
  3. fuzziewuzziebear

    December 15, 2020 at 11:59 pm

    I too am wary. If they try to force us, I will be doubly wary. It just doesn’t make sense to go to this extent for a virus with such a high recovery rate. We’re being sold a bill of goods. Then, there is the matter of it being approved by the same people who opened the door for opioids. Ray Charles could have seen that one coming.

     
    • Will S.

      December 16, 2020 at 12:01 am

      lol, exactly. 🙂

       
      • fuzziewuzziebear

        December 16, 2020 at 12:09 am

        With the outsized deaths among people in nursing homes, 82% in Canada and 50% in the US, I have to wonder if this vaccine is intended to compound these casualties. Government has a staggering amount of unfunded liabilities associated with the elderly.

         
      • Will S.

        December 16, 2020 at 12:13 am

        Bump off old farts, prevent more Brexit / Trump / populism in future.

        Kill off more rightist populist voters, make fraud in future less necessary, as youngers will tend more Woke and pro-big-business and pro-big-government.

        Fits with mangerial technocracy, innit?

         
  4. Will S.

    December 16, 2020 at 12:54 am

     
  5. Will S.

    December 16, 2020 at 12:55 am

     
  6. Will S.

    December 16, 2020 at 12:57 am

     
  7. Will S.

    December 16, 2020 at 1:11 am

     
    • Will S.

      December 16, 2020 at 10:20 am

      Interesting!

      Well, I’ve never felt vaccinating should be mandatory before, and I still don’t now.

       
  8. SW Richmond

    December 16, 2020 at 9:56 am

    “Why must we all be hurried into taking this, an unproven, new experimental vaccine technique, for a disease with a 99% recovery rate?”

    Asked and answered. You already know why.

     
    • Will S.

      December 16, 2020 at 10:21 am

      Actually, I’m not entirely sure, but I figure it can’t be good, whatever the reason.

       
    • Will S.

      December 16, 2020 at 10:21 am

      At the very least, to increase government spending and control.

       

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s