mRNA vaccines may make unintended proteins, but there’s no evidence of harm

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

That's not in general true. If there is selection pressure to become less fatal, they'll become less fatal. There's no reason to think SARS-CoV-2 is under that kind of pressure. The Omicron variants are less virulent than Delta was, but Delta was more virulent that the original virus.

True, not all, however we are specifically discussing coronaviruses, specifically Covid 19. The reproductive rate of a pathogen has a maximum as virulence increases. If initial virulence is higher than this optimal virulence, then, virulence evolves to be lower. But virulence can also increase if the initial one is lower than the optimum. The Omicron variant replaced Delta as the dominant variant. Interestingly, while it has higher transmissibility , it has a lower associated risk of death. Omicron and the currently circulating variants broke the trend of increased transmissibility coupled with increased or similar lethality.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The problem is that vaccinated can and do get and transmit the virus both to vaccinated and non-vaccinated people.

"can and do" != "can and do to the same degree"

While I'd agree that for a healthy 22 year old, the benefits of boosting amid the current strains are negligible.

There was earlier data amid the alpha and delta strains showing that among people who were vaccinated, the contagious period was shorter, and the viral load carried was lower.

So while it's true that vaccinated people can and do catch and spread it, that shouldn't be taken to infer that "the vaccine offers no benefit" or "they're just as much risk as an unvaccinated person"

If a person with it is carrying a much lower viral load when they have it, and that viral load is only being carried for 6 days instead of 12, those were important factors to consider amid the earlier strains.

To use an analogy, it'd be like comparing the externality risk between a person who's had 2 beers and a person who's had 7, yes, both can have impairment that ends up hurting someone else, however the latter presents an increased likelihood and a greater risk as they'll be more intoxicated, and for longer.

If you look you will see much less vaccination now (16%) vs 2 years ago (79%) and also much less mortality now.

Stands to reason that after 2/3 of the world has been vaccinated and most have had a case or two of covid by this point over the past two years, population immunity is much higher than it was in the early phases.

 

[johansen]

viruses don't mutate to become weaker.

viruses kill off the weak. people who survive didn't mutate to become immune, they already were (in a sense)

a virus mutates and gets an immune person sick again. but doesn't usually kill them the second time.

a person alive today who was never exposed to the corona virus, was not vaccinated.. will not be any better off against these later strains as the former.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

viruses don't mutate to become weaker.

viruses kill off the weak. people who survive didn't mutate to become immune, they already were (in a sense)

a virus mutates and gets an immune person sick again. but doesn't usually kill them the second time.

a person alive today who was never exposed to the corona virus, was not vaccinated.. will not be any better off against these later strains as the former.

Viruses can and do become more transmissible and less fatal over time. This is a proven scientific fact. Yes actually a person who was never vaccinated has a much higher probability of survival getting the current strain than say when Delta was circulating. The current strains are much more transmissible but much less fatal now.

 

[sfs]

True, not all, however we are specifically discussing coronaviruses, specifically Covid 19. The reproductive rate of a pathogen has a maximum as virulence increases. If initial virulence is higher than this optimal virulence, then, virulence evolves to be lower.

Yes, that certainly can happen. But with SARS-CoV-2, the mortality rate was already pretty low and most of the mortality occurred in the very old, who aren't great carriers anyway -- they aren't exposed to that many people. Early on, selection was for mutations that increased transmissibility, whether that decreased or increased virulence. Now it's all about immune escape.

 

[sfs]

Except there is NO scientific evidence of that. The mRNA covid vaccines last between 3-6 months and do NOT protect against getting or transmitting the virus.

Yes, there is quite a lot of scientific evidence that the mRNA vaccines provide long-lasting protection against severe disease and a reduced risk of infection and transmission for several months.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Yes, that certainly can happen. But with SARS-CoV-2, the mortality rate was already pretty low and most of the mortality occurred in the very old, who aren't great carriers anyway -- they aren't exposed to that many people. Early on, selection was for mutations that increased transmissibility, whether that decreased or increased virulence. Now it's all about immune escape.

Unless they are in nursing homes or other large care facilities, which is what happened initially. Higher transmissibility, immune escape and decreased virulence helps the virus stay viable in populations.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Yes, there is quite a lot of scientific evidence that the mRNA vaccines provide long-lasting protection against severe disease and a reduced risk of infection and transmission for several months.

Yes but only for a few months, otherwise, other than constantly having new variants in such quick succession, there would not be a need for constant boosters. You also need to understand humoral vs cellular immunity regarding the mRNA vaccines. Data from 40 studies (JAMA 2023) found that the estimated vaccine effectiveness against Omicron infection and symptomatic disease was lower than 20% at 6 months from the administration of the primary vaccination cycle and less than 30% at 9 months from the administration of a booster dose. Compared with the Delta variant, a more prominent and quicker waning of protection was found (likely due in part to immune escape). Current evidence suggests that natural and hybrid immunity (vaccination followed by recovery from infection or recovery from infection followed by vaccination) might be more durable than just vaccine-induced immunity.

 

[KCfromNC]

Yes but only for a few months

Actual research says otherwise, e.g. : Long-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against infections, hospitalisations, and mortality in adults: findings from a rapid living systematic evidence synthesis and meta-analysis up to December, 2022

 

[Ana the Ist]

New study published in the journal Nature have shown that in some cases mRNA vaccines can lead to the formation of unwanted proteins. The scientists, however, reassure that no connection with side or negative effects has yet appeared, but during the development of future vaccines, it would be appropriate to correct this error.

https://www.science.org/content/article/mrna-vaccines-may-make-unintended-proteins-there-s-no-evidence-harm

N1-methylpseudouridylation of mRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting - Nature

A study demonstrates that nucleotide modifications in mRNA-based therapeutics can lead to +1 ribosomal frameshifting during translation, yielding products that can trigger immune responses.

www.nature.com

Yup. No side or adverse effects have yet occurred....but they might, because we didn't properly test the vaccines.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's early days yet with this technology. But it helped end the covid pandemic which was killing millions so the impact is more positive than negative. The real message here is that we need to give time to study vaccine impacts when that time is available. The production of an extra unwanted protein or two is less likely to be fatal

Why? Do these proteins leave the bloodstream?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Actual research says otherwise, e.g. : Long-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against infections, hospitalisations, and mortality in adults: findings from a rapid living systematic evidence synthesis and meta-analysis up to December, 2022

It is basically saying the same thing I did. It is a meta-analysis, no actual data from their own study but a summary of other research.

"vaccine effectiveness for the primary series reduced from 83% (95% CI 80–86) at baseline (14–42 days) to 62% (53–69) by 112–139 days. Vaccine effectiveness at baseline was 92% (88–94) for hospitalisations and 91% (85–95) for mortality, and reduced to 79% (65–87) at 224–251 days for hospitalisations and 86% (73–93) at 168–195 days for mortality. Estimated vaccine effectiveness was lower for the omicron variant for infections, hospitalisations, and mortality at baseline compared with that of other variants, but subsequent reductions occurred at a similar rate across variants. For booster doses, which covered mostly omicron studies, vaccine effectiveness at baseline was 70% (56–80) against infections and 89% (82–93) against hospitalisations, and reduced to 43% (14–62) against infections and 71% (51–83) against hospitalisations at 112 days or later. Not enough studies were available to report on booster vaccine effectiveness against mortality."

"Our analyses indicate that vaccine effectiveness generally decreases over time against SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalisations, and mortality. The baseline vaccine effectiveness levels for the omicron variant were notably lower than for other variants."

 

[mindlight]

Why? Do these proteins leave the bloodstream?

The body uses proteasome to degrade unwanted proteins.

 

[mindlight]

It is basically saying the same thing I did. It is a meta-analysis, no actual data from their own study but a summary of other research.

"vaccine effectiveness for the primary series reduced from 83% (95% CI 80–86) at baseline (14–42 days) to 62% (53–69) by 112–139 days. Vaccine effectiveness at baseline was 92% (88–94) for hospitalisations and 91% (85–95) for mortality, and reduced to 79% (65–87) at 224–251 days for hospitalisations and 86% (73–93) at 168–195 days for mortality. Estimated vaccine effectiveness was lower for the omicron variant for infections, hospitalisations, and mortality at baseline compared with that of other variants, but subsequent reductions occurred at a similar rate across variants. For booster doses, which covered mostly omicron studies, vaccine effectiveness at baseline was 70% (56–80) against infections and 89% (82–93) against hospitalisations, and reduced to 43% (14–62) against infections and 71% (51–83) against hospitalisations at 112 days or later. Not enough studies were available to report on booster vaccine effectiveness against mortality."

"Our analyses indicate that vaccine effectiveness generally decreases over time against SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalisations, and mortality. The baseline vaccine effectiveness levels for the omicron variant were notably lower than for other variants."

COVID is closer to the common cold than it is to small pox. By that I mean we can expect a one stop vaccine against small pox to be effective but we are a long way away from such a solution for the cold. As the strains grow weaker the vaccine for COVID becomes less necessary. Continual research can enable boostershots for the weakest members of society though. It is still very clear that is mainly unvaccinated people who are dying

 

[KCfromNC]

It is basically saying the same thing I did.

No, it's saying the opposite. Notice how it shows vaccines were still effective after several months, despite your post claiming otherwise.

 

[Larniavc]

I'm confused. I was reliably informed on this very site that by now I would be dead due to the multiple vaccines I've had. Can anyone tell me when I'm going to die so I can take out a massive loan to spend on women and helicopters?

 

[KCfromNC]

I'm confused. I was reliably informed on this very site that by now I would be dead due to the multiple vaccines I've had. Can anyone tell me when I'm going to die so I can take out a massive loan to spend on women and helicopters?

Looking at the VARES database which proves how dangerous the vaccines are, people have died multiple times and were still able to post their results there. Perhaps you need to die a few more times before it actually takes? Keep up the good work!

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

No, it's saying the opposite. Notice how it shows vaccines were still effective after several months, despite your post claiming otherwise.

Either you can't read or can't comprehend what the data show, as I said, it IS basically saying the same thing I said.

 

[KCfromNC]

Either you can't read or can't comprehend what the data show, as I said, it IS basically saying the same thing I said.

Luckily I quoted what you actually said because for some reason that post seems to have disappeared.

But there is a big difference between vaccines being effective "only for a few months" and the data showing effectiveness of "79% (65–87) at 224–251 days for hospitalisations and 86% (73–93) at 168–195 days for mortality".

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Luckily I quoted what you actually said because for some reason that post seems to have disappeared.

But there is a big difference between vaccines being effective "only for a few months" and the data showing effectiveness of "79% (65–87) at 224–251 days for hospitalisations and 86% (73–93) at 168–195 days for mortality"..

What you posted was not actual data but from a meta-analysis

what I posted is here in black and white...

Data from 40 studies (JAMA 2023) found that the estimated vaccine effectiveness against Omicron infection and symptomatic disease was lower than 20% at 6 months from the administration of the primary vaccination cycle and less than 30% at 9 months from the administration of a booster dose. Compared with the Delta variant, a more prominent and quicker waning of protection was found (likely due in part to immune escape). Current evidence suggests that natural and hybrid immunity (vaccination followed by recovery from infection or recovery from infection followed by vaccination) might be more durable than just vaccine-induced immunity.

"vaccine effectiveness for the primary series reduced from 83% (95% CI 80–86) at baseline (14–42 days) to 62% (53–69) by 112–139 days. Vaccine effectiveness at baseline was 92% (88–94) for hospitalisations and 91% (85–95) for mortality, and reduced to 79% (65–87) at 224–251 days for hospitalisations and 86% (73–93) at 168–195 days for mortality. Estimated vaccine effectiveness was lower for the omicron variant for infections, hospitalisations, and mortality at baseline compared with that of other variants, but subsequent reductions occurred at a similar rate across variants. For booster doses, which covered mostly omicron studies, vaccine effectiveness at baseline was 70% (56–80) against infections and 89% (82–93) against hospitalisations, and reduced to 43% (14–62) against infections and 71% (51–83) against hospitalisations at 112 days or later. Not enough studies were available to report on booster vaccine effectiveness against mortality."

"Our analyses indicate that vaccine effectiveness generally decreases over time against SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalisations, and mortality. The baseline vaccine effectiveness levels for the omicron variant were notably lower than for other variants."