I've had a lot of folks given me a hard time for questioning the long term safety of the Oxford AstraZeneca DNA vaccine for COVID-19. But I think it's worth a closer look.
Unlike the mRNA vaccines, which seem safe, this vaccine uses an actual DNA fragment to induce the cell to generate the immunity boosting spike protein.
My concern is regarding unintended consequences, and potentially intentional negative consequences that are being obscured from the public view. The human body, as part of the immune response to viruses, viral DNA fragments called endogenous DNA are incorporated into the human genome, usually this imparts the a lasting immunity, via protein expression, but occasionally it can have unintended consequences such as genetic diseases like cancer and more subtle issues.
My reading has led me to believe that the DNA fragments left behind by this particular treatment may impart an unwanted mechanism by which a protein is excreted that prevents placental implantation, which would have devastating effects on people's reproductive abilities. Such an effect has been observed in mice, due to protein from a covid strain.
in a broader context I worry about generalized unanticipated consequences such as the aforementioned cancer or other anomalies.
It is widely accepted that there is a population/resource crisis in progress, so the thought of a clandestine attempt at population reduction is not the insane conspiracy theory that some would suggest it is.
We also need to remember that the source of the virus was likely a bioweapons lab in Wuhan, and that the CCP has a track record of invasive and orwellian population control measures.
I'm not deeply entrenched in my position, and would love a legitimate discussion as to why my fears are valid, or mistaken.
As it stands now I won't be taking this particular treatment.
I'd really like a scientific response. Any qualified experts around?
Updates
+1 y
Well we didn't really get anywhere with this exploration of the subject. Probably asking too much of GaG 😂 Three camps seem to have formed, the I accept whatever people in authority tell me camp, the tell me what I already know without adding anything camp, and the knows enough to be confused camp. There are also the nut bars, but they're less a camp and more a swarm of arsonists handing out jelly beans.
Could the Oxford-Astrazenica have unforseen genetic consequences?
So I'm doing a master's degree in medical biology. I'm not an expert on vaccines persé, but I know quite a bit about the human body.
So what it is is a chimpanzee adenovirus shell with a fragment of the spike protein DNA. The adenovirus shell is modified in the way that it cannot replicate anymore. The adenovirus latches onto a human cell through a receptor and goes into the cell. There it inserts its DNA fragment into the nucleus where it hijacks the RNA transcriptase and transcribes into mRNA and then into spike proteins by the ribosomes outside the nucleus. Then the spike proteins are presented at the outside of the cell and antigen presenting white blood cells will alarm that there's something wrong with the cell and will induce apoptosis. Then T-helper cells recognize that spike protein on the macrophages and will present it to B-memory cells to remember the antigen for future infections. So you're right about the DNA entering the nucleus, but why isn't that so bad and won't cause infertility? That's because the vaccine is being injected in a muscle and the adenovirus cannot replicate. So imagine the viri infecting a few muscle cells in the upper arm, immune system being activated and cleaning everything up. It cannot reach your testes or ovaries, because the virus can't replicate or transfer or something. The few infected muscle cells are being cleaned up as well as the debris by immune cells.
You could read this if you'd like a more visual representation. Ask any question.
by the way I'm a future researcher and I'm not planning on reducing the world population. Just want to help people.
4
12 Reply
Asker
+1 y
The ny times article is linked in my original post, meaning I've already read it.
The argument that only cells local to the injection site get modified is an interesting one, but I don't think it's likely to be accurate at first blush, as we have a circulatory system.
I'm not saying the virus replicates, I'm saying the modified host cell divides as normal, with the added viral DNA, continually releasing the spike protein.
I've said that the protein prevents placental implantation, which is a separate issue than reaching the testes or ovaries.
You don't have to get rude with me. I read it, but I don't understand your argumentation, because biologically it makes no sense. A normal human cell takes about 19 hours to replicate. The immune system is way faster than that so it doesn't make sense. Also it's not injected into an artery. It's injected where there's microcirculation. It's not being taken up fast enough to go with the big circulation. If it was, it's being attacked by the immune system there.
How long do the cells continue to express the spike protein?
In the DNA vaccine, much much longer than is required for training immunity, at least as long as the injection site cells live, probably longer if the cells remain viable and replicate after incorporating the viral DNA.
So now you have what potentially is a protein that can potentially block placental implantation, being produced for an unknown length of time. One of my further reading links explains how Covid spike protein disrupts placental implantation, perhaps you should read it
You can see how giving this to a young woman might be a problem.
With other options available, I'd still avoid the oaz vaccine unless you can address the issues I've brought up.
Listen I don't owe you anything. You're being very rude and I'm about to block. I'm only responding to help confusion.
1. I'm not sure on top of my head, but I know that an influenza virus is recognized by T-cells 1,5 hours post infection. Since the influenza virus has more DNA to code, my educated guess is shorter than that. Especially bc influenza uses reverse transcriptasis to go from RNA to cDNA so very short. 2. The infection site doesn't live long. 3. Not only does the infection site live very shortly, it's not like a muscle cell in the arm can form into a placenta cell or something. Cells only replicate locally. Also only a few proteins within the cell travel to the outside of the cell. 99.9% is disintegrated because proteins are not stable. Tbh I can't give a rat's ass about you taking the vaccine. Don't worry about that.
I never gave an impression that I didn't know that. Maybe you should read my response back?
Look, I'm sorry if you're offended, but you positioned yourself as an expert when you're a student.
Block me if you want, but you should consider working on managing your emotional responses. Get used to being challenged if you're entering a research field.
You make an interesting point about the protein being unstable. How long, and where are you getting that info? Why do you think that the injection site cell changes are temporary?
Regarding the changes to the injection site cells, they're likely permanent. This is effectively gene therapy.
Again, it *prevents* placental implantation, it doesn't become placental cells which I never said.
This is best description... And even if it infects your produced sperms.. It won't mutate your somatic cells in your genital... And your next batch will be fertile..
I remember a comment from a guy here but I guess it got removed? I feel like as someone who has been studying the human body for years, I'm more knowledgeable than most people. What are your degrees?
I'm always okay with a respectful discussion, but you've been rude and question my degree.
I don't understand why you post that link because it's about something completely different? It has nothing to do with the vaccine. Maybe you should read your own links or accept that you don't know everything and leave it to experts.
I can't say how long. I would say a few seconds without implantation in the cell surface. It also says in the NYtimes article. I know this info because I've worked in a lab myself in clinical genetics for my internship.
Because the cell is destroyed by immune cells. I said that before. If the cell is not there, the cell surface is gone. The antigen-presenting cells stop signalling the antigens after activation of t-helper cells.
What do you say then? I don't understand your thought progress when it comes to placenta implantation. The article you posted is not prove of anything?
I suppose the technique has been around longer than I thought, good to know.
Still have some misgivings though, if you look at the data closely though both the DNA and mRNA vaccine look more like gene therapy than a traditional attenuated viruses vaccines.
I already know that... My reference was to the fact that you addressed me as having low intellect and dumb.. A few weeks ago... I thought you were.. Rude.. But now I realize.. You studied too much stuff that's all... Never mind.. Continue!.. 👍
No. There is no "genetic consequences" of any of the vaccines. The side effects are mostly with various ingredients in the manufacture and/or the individuals immune systems themselves. Such as a person infected with another variant of Covid may get a very different response to the vaccine than someone in their family that didn't have Covid.
I am not a medical professional but know plenty, and have plenty in my family. The ChAdOx1 viral vector is NOT DNA, nor able to replicate or be part of our DNA. It's just a small altered sample of the spike protein put in a cold virus to act as an envelope and trigger the required response. But there is new data coming out all the time. What is known todays, may become out of date tomorrow, there are just too many different variables. But it's people and not the vaccine, that are the main issue as no two peoples immune response to Covid are exactly the same.
Contrary to the newer technology of the mRNA vaccines, the technique of the AstraZeneca vaccine is quite traditional and the basis is not much different than e. g. the yellow fever vaccine, which is widely used and recognized to be very safe and reliable.
I can understand that the recent news regarding the AstraZeneca vaccine makes people cautious, but the specific technique used for this vaccine shouldn't be a reason to reject it. If someone would reject a vaccine because of the used technique, I would rather expect that the mRNA vaccines would be criticized, as they use relatively new technology which hasn't been used on such a large scale before.
2
7 Reply
Asker
+1 y
Ah, finally something I didn't know. I hadn't heard of any other DNA based vaccines being deployed. I though they were theoretical only until now.
It has genetic material of the actual virus to create an immune response.
Many vaccines for other diseases have either dead or weakened actual virus material to trigger the immune response (just as a living virus would do). This is the basis of most of the currently used vaccines.
Just as an infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus will not change your DNA, the AstraZeneca vaccine can not change your own DNA either.
Hmm, I thought the viral intermediary step is new though, and not a completely dead or attenuated virus in the oaz vaccine. It's an engineered protein isn't it?
You're right, I checked further and indeed the AstraZeneca vaccine uses genetic material from a different virus (an adenovirus, that is quite harmless), that is modified with a little bith of the genetic material of the coronavirus, so it contains the spike protein.
However, that modification of the viral material can not change a person's DNA. It will only trigger the immune response. It is a bit more engineering than the most traditional vaccines, but still not far away from it. It works and it's safe to use it.
Okay, but why can't it change the host cell dna when the immune system naturally collects viral fragments and incorporates them into primary DNA, how does this process occur naturally, and what amount the vaccine prevents the incorporation of the artificial DNA fragment from the vaccine? This is where my understanding breaks down.
I'd like to add to this that mRNA technology/type of vaccine has been studied for over a decade so it isn't as new as people think it is. I believe people think they literally just made it up for the covid vaccine which in reality they just figured out a way for it to work for the covid vaccine.
I'm not particularly interested in the AstraZeneca vac, but I know sometime sooner or later I'll get to get a vaccine to attend college/work. I'm also wary to since it's almost like playing a game of chance. I knew someone whose parents both ended up in the hospital when they got the Pfizer/Moderna. They were on the brink of death but luckily receives help in time. Even perfectly healthy people suddenly drop dead. I don't want to die of a vaccine, but I also don't want to end up in the hospital and make my family become homeless and living in the streets, as I don't have insurance, and neither do they.
1
1 Reply
Asker
+1 y
The other covid-19 vaccines use a safer mechanism that shouldn't have permanent genetic effects , it's just the oaz one I'm worried about.
I must admit I found this video fascinating when I saw it.
What do you think of this?
EXTREMELY GOOD explanation of RNA, DNA and mRNA and how the functions of those elements of cellular biology will be impacted by the synthetic mRNA vaccines being rolled out. Dr. Tom Cowan, a “visionary” medical thinker, takes on the subject of the new mRNA “vaccines.” He spells it ‘vacations’ in order to avoid YouTube censorship. He also refers to a vaccine as a ‘vacation’ in the video for the same reason.
As for me, goes without saying, I won't be taking any of them. Even if it costs me my life or my job. If you investigate most things, you realise it's not science at all. It's not even science versus superstition, since the science is usually shoddy in the first case.
I wish I could discuss this as it's astronomically intelligent considering the usual questions posted here but this is way above my head. I can say that I'm extremely reluctant regarding vaccines for the very reason of genetic manipulation and the possible mutations caused. Thanks for the question though. I'm glad to see someone is thinking.
1
4 Reply
Asker
+1 y
As far as I know the oaz vaccine is the first of its kind. The other ones are way safer.
Good to hear. I just got the Johnson shot the other day. What's your take on that one over the Pfizer. Safer? Just as good? Not? I've heard all sorts of thing and all are inconclusive.
I haven't read up on the J&J as it wasn't around when I was doing my study of the issue, but I'm generally confident in the safety of the mRBA vaccines, because they self destruct as they generate the spike protein, which only goes on long enough to have the desired immunity effect.
The mRNA method thats used in the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine provides the "Blueprint" for the antibodies.
While the Vector vaccine by Astrazeneca uses the Virus or parts of the Virus and the body figures out the best defense by "studying" the enemy.
Just because you let DNA or RNA enter your body doesn't mean your own DNA is altered.
Everytime you breath, trillions of (skin) cells and with them their DNA enters your body, and with them also several different bacteria, fungus spores, viruses, ...
Things that actualy would alter your DNA are the things causing cancer, like smoking.
1
1 Reply
Asker
+1 y
What a bloody stupid argument, debris in the air, like skin and fungus and the like are not packaged in a viral sheath for ready injection into cells.
The immune system naturally adda viral DNA fragments to your genome with random effects. The issue at hand is that these are engineered DNA fragments, which being man made, are rather more likely to cause a problem.
Clearly you don't have the faintest idea what your talking about, though I commend you on your ability to parot the sales pamphlet.
It's perfectly safe we have been having vaccines for the past 70 years and hardly anyone i mean 0.1% of people do have negative side effects of vacation and well the disease are usually a lot worst.
Just bc it's carona doesn't all of a sudden make this vaccine anymore dangerous the measles vaccine or anything other vaccine.
And before people go on about the timeline everything that the vaccine would have to pass normally it has passed, it's just we've had a lot more people working on it and a lot of the paper/funding problems have been shorten bc we need it.
I've know 4 people who have gotten back to the oxford and there all perfectly fine.
We have no long-term research on RNA manipulation. At all. Let alone with a vaccine. That's why I am very critical of these specific vaccines (and not the procedure of vaccination in general, so take your pitchforks back), because we are essentially turned into beta-testers.
The real question is, why in the hell do you consider mRNA safe? It's also something we never had the technology for (and I'd say we still don't), they're also first of their kind, and all these covid vaccines, even the ones using traditional approach, were developed in an insultingly ridiculous timeframe.
Not one single phase of development can be squeezed into it, let alone the entire procedure.
1
2 Reply
Asker
+1 y
mRNA can't replicate, and is destroyed when the cell processes it. Or so I've read.
Yeah now that I've read more about reverse transcriptase I suppose that gene therapy is becoming the norm regards of the risks. There was a time when medical ethics would have at least made this a subject of debate before imposing it on a population that barely understands what they are being given.
Anytime you put a needle in your body that the government was behind you should question it. Whether covid is overhyped or whatever the hell is going on it is not an intelligent thing to get a shot that has unknown consequences can we all agree on that at least? That is just basic common sense but people only want to listen to their TVs instead of think for themselves.
@update so what camp do i fall into as the only one here that actually had the oxford jab? thing is, when asked if i wanted to jump the queue because of my job it took all of three seconds to weigh up the pros and cons... unknown risks vs lying on a hospital bed with a ventilator rammed down my throat... i wonder what most would do if offered the same choice.
By the time any cancer or genetic abnormality would have become an issue you'd likely have died anyhow, and you're not likely to try to become pregnant, so you really haven't got much to worry about.
Really I'm more concerned about giving it to adults of child rearing age, or children.
But apparently everyone's okay with tinkering with our DNA like we're GMO tomatoes, so I might as well just groove on it lol.
well thanks for the agism there but i have at least 40 years in me yet seeing as im very healthy but ignoring that inane comment i might also point out that the lower age limit for getting the vaccine here will be set at 18 so children won't be getting it... well done on ignoring all my other points though
Oh don't get all bent out of shape, it could take decades for abnormalities to appear. If you're over fifty you're probably not going to have to deal with them. But if you're feeling left out there are lots of other diseases you can have.
Regarding your point about being in hospital, yeah it sounds pretty shit.
Gotta admit though, that if they 'accidentally' make a bunch of women barren, but can sell them an enzyme to fix it, well that's a lot of money to be had isn't it?
ok so the sterilization of women story came from version one of the sputnik vaccine where three women in total showed abnormalities... it was altered and they are now on sputnik 5. no evidence of any other vaccines having this effect on anyone. as for getting bent out of shape as you put it, i just dont like people resorting to insult when there is no need for it in a civil debate. especially when i have given you my personal reasons for having had the jab while all you can do at this point is offer second hand opinions. i wonder if you would take up the offer of any vaccination if you worked on the front line like i do. as i said its about pros and possible cons and yes all vaccines have been rolled out far sooner than normal medical research would dictate but these are not normal times so in the fight against a world pandemic this sort of fearmongering is not so helpful
No man, if you read the first additional reading link there's a good study on preventing placental implantation via covid proteins, which is much older than this crisis, which is why I didn't mention anecdotes about the Russian vaccine.
Obviously you're free to do as you like. I personally tend to question decisions driven by fear, but if you think bypassing the regular safety testing is a good idea then by all means.
i didn't think it was a good idea at all but when time isn't on our side it becomes a question for the individual when offered a possible safety net... you haven't been offered it so while you are questioning stuff now, all im saying is i wonder if you would make a quicker descission when offered the jab and moreso if in a high risk enviroment... whats really interesting though is the whole manner to which you asked the question in the first place and then your update... im sorry i wasn't providing the echo chamber you seemed to be looking for
Do you have any qualified education to come to such conclusions? Maybe ask at another forum which could have more qualified users, also not anonymous. Like facebook.
I would not be concerned. There are hundreds of scientists in the world who has dealt with research on this. Researchers are normal people who would not be holding back important information like that, at least not in most western countries. Please, don't doubt those people so much :)
3
11 Reply
Asker
+1 y
Let's deconstruct what you've said:
You open with a personal attack with elitist undertones, as if a layperson can't form a valid scientific question.
You suggest I out myself while you your self have chosen double anonymity.
You go on to make a fallacious argument of appealing to authority, and then faith.
If you think that researchers are Beyond reproach perhaps you should read about the Tuskegee study.
Deconstructing.. more like interpret like it was an attack on you. I ask because I am a scientist in another field. And it is not for fun that people study for years to do research, it is because you need a lot of background to understand and follow it.. and definitely to go as far as to make your own conclusions. So with no education in a related field I'd say it is more likely you got something wrong. Thereby you should go directly to someone in the field instead of being scared and spreading ideas.
You are the one questioning HUNDREDS of people working on those vaccines and the science behind. Think of that before you feel like people are wrong for questioning ONE anonymous person on the internet. Bringing up a case from a previous century about immoral scientific approach is not relevant at all. Science happens every day with peer review. Some serious crime cases happens sometimes like in any other sector.
Hundreds of engineers review designs for new cars before they go to market. Yet there are still oversights that cost lives.
Only a handful are even likely to notice, and even if they do, there's a conflicting profit motive to ignore the issue unless it crosses an unprofitable threshold of occurence.
This situation is at best similar, and at worse very much more serious.
As for spreading ideas, a bit of healthy skepticism isn't exactly a new one.
You don't get my point. I say researcher and developers of these vaccines are normal people. They just got the education for it. That's it. They are not some elite who wants to make the rest of the population infertile or get cancer. They would not let a vaccine known to have severe flaws on the market. Of course there can be some unwanted side effects but not on a large/significant scale like you propose.
I'm calling you an elitist, in that you imagine yourself smarter than the working class by virtue of you academic and economic opportunities.
As for vaccine researchers, it would only take a handful to run a hidden agenda. The majority involved are basically just lab techs collecting data and repeating established protocols. Just like those car engineers, they're only responsible for their own nominal contribution.
I wrote: 'So with no education in a related field I'd say it is more likely you got something wrong'.. no strong conclusions. But definitely no concern either. My point is that I trust the many people who worked on the vaccine more than what a single person could find online. I would even question it if had been a single person who had a relevant education.
And I just noticed your other comment: 'Ah, finally something I didn't know. I hadn't heard of any other DNA based vaccines being deployed. I though they were theoretical only until now.' I cannot get why you did not know that if you studied intensely about the vaccine intensely :S
You know people in glasshouses? Seems like you put your own knowledge on a pedestal and cannot accept that other people who have gained knowledge on this for years (and not just since the vaccines came), are more knowledgeable than you. It has nothing to do with an elite, and thinking one is smarter. Gaining knowledge is a skill like anything else. You throw around classic elitist bullshit about someone you only know has done research. You assume way too much from so little. You are the one putting people in some standard box and others outside it. People in glasshouses..
Yeah and I'm a lizard person that will use the Zionists to take over humanity to harvest their souls... what other "qualifications" do you have other than being a "scientist" (probably not even a woman)?
Eh i'm not worried about sterility at this point. Lol and wirh my love of fried food i'm pretty sure my heart will kill me long before cancer. I'll take the vaccine.
0
2 Reply
Asker
+1 y
I'm thinking it'd only effect women if it's a thing at all. It's the cancer or mutations that worry me.
1., They're not safe at all, amount of chemtrials in altering your DNA.2. No difference between one and another, plus nano particles gratis. Also each so called vaccine killing spiritual piece.3. It's been weaponized for strict purposes only. To control the masses, all freedoms has been taken from us.
It could but I don't care and have taken it, the rest of my body is trying to kill me given my list of medical issues I can afford a cremation so I'm not worried about dying
Okay so studied science only till high school and what I get from this is short is they are taking part of COVID RNA strand and adding it to other DNA And injecting..
When our immune system breaks down that DNA it will also break down that RNA and learn to break some part of COVID RNA...
So when we face real virus.. Our immune system will inhibit its replication
Now you are worried about.. Its making you sterile.. Here the deal.. This process is not causing any genetic mutation... Because that RNA or DNA is not being added to our DNA.. Our DNA is safe in our nucleus.. And that's what replicates.. To give us new cells..
Now about infertility... I don't see how it can cause infertility... Even if this vaccine causes infertility it should be temporary... For 6 months max.. Once everything is flushed out of your system and your immune system has learned what it needs to learn.. Your safe sex cells will produce new fertile gametes for you..
Also I am not okay with this even if it makes me infertile.. I am not hell bent on having. My genetic offsprings..
Most Helpful Opinions