Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Could the Oxford-Astrazenica have unforseen genetic consequences? (Page 2)
Anonymous
(30-35) 
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
24Opinion
Your view in the DNA vaccine may not be a conspiracy theory, but your view on the origin of the virus is.
So you don't think there's bio weapons lab in Wuhan with a past history of containment failures? Spoiler, it's a matter of public record.
www.washingtonpost.com/.../
If it was a bioweapon, it wouldn't take as long as it did to create a vaccine.
What kind of bullshit statement is that? Do you have any way to qualify or support that it whatsoever?
It's pretty obvious. To create a vaccine you need to know the genetic makeup of the virus first. If it was a bioweapon that would mean that those who created it knew its genetic makeup already.
You don't just accidentally create a new strain of a virus by accident.
It's pretty likely they had a containment failure mid development or really had no idea what they'd created, which still doesn't excuse such unethical research.
Weapon, or blunder, the outcome is the same, as is the source of blame.
That's if we assume it was actually created and didn't mutate and jump from animals to humans, which is far more likely. Smallpox was a more severe strain of cowpox.
Yea except for the obvious smoking gun which is that leaky lab at the epicenter
Could China have created it? Yes.
If China did create it would we have known as little about it as we did? No.
I don't care how isolationist China is regarding their foreign policy. It was in China's best interest to stop the spread of it to the world at large. If nothing else, we can always expect China to act in their best interest. If any of it was created by humans we'd have a better understanding of it than we actually did. Obviously we have a pretty good understanding of it now, but this is 2021, and it appeared in 2019. The way the virus spread and its indiscriminate infecting is that of some bioweapons, but the thing is, bioweapons always have an antidote for those that proliferate them. So any work to make a weaponized bioagent similar to COVID-19 would be hand in hand with an effective way to eliminate its effects. To have no work done on the latter makes it clear that no work was done on the former.
No.
Do some light reading about genetic therapy and you'll see why.
An incomplete and therefore useless comment. If you have an actual point make it
Is that picture how the vaccine works?
That's just how viruses work in general, but these vaccines enter the cell the same way.
No it doesn't noy effect your dna or your rna.
mRNA doesn't use DNA, it uses RNA.
The oaz vaccine doesn't use mRNA... Thanks for the hot take though.
But you changed the question.
And yeah, an mDNA vaccine is another story, in this case the medium is a virus.
And viruses can change our DNA, so much that people used it to treat lactose intolerance.
But, your body tends to clean that mutation up, it's virtually impossible to infect even a good portion big cells, eventually the mutated cells die and pluripotent cells take it's place...
But that ain't true for every tissue, the brain is one example.
You actually can't change questions on this forum, you just misread it.
While you're normally right that changed cells won't massively spread, they would in children and fetuses due to increased stem cell concentration.
The other exception being cancer. I'm going to be watching for an uptick in bone cancer a few years from now.
I don't think the changed cells always die, many continue to divide and produce the spike protein, otherwise the immunological effect would be temporary. Not just for vaccines, but for other naturally occurring viral immunity.
The spike ain't made for any cell, it's made for specific cells, usually it doesn't target pluripotent cells, all cells eventually stop dividing, which is why we have telomeres, the conjunctive tissue cells those vaccines target tends to circle through very fast so even a cell that just specialized has a pretty short lifespan.
Would you elaborate as to why each element of your last comment matters in the context of the conversation. For example why would pluripotent cells be ignored? Pretty big omission there.
Your reference to telomeres seems tangential and unrelated to the matter at hand. Just as though you're throwing in an unrelated cell fact to sound like you know more than you do. 'All cells stop dividing', well no shit Sherlock, it usually takes about a hundred years or so.
How quickly the cells cycle doesn't matter if they still retain the modified DNA.
Because they have different proteins in their membranes because they are different cells with different purposes.
Telomeres aren't tangential, it's how our body regulates cell growth to prevent natural mutations and cancer.
And why cell lines die after a certain number of divisions.
Which is why the mutations eventually die off.
Notice I didn't counter your children argument, not because it would be different in them (pluripotent cells are pluripotent cells in kid's or otherwise, but certainly percentaully more prevalent) but because if the mutation is introduced in gametes, it's there to stay.
And also because of development, the mutation doesn't have to stay to create long term effect on a developing kid.