It is a vaccine. I'm sorry if you don't understand why.
Let me try to sum up the 4 main types of vaccines in use today, and reiterate how they all achieve the same end result, getting your body to recognize a foreign protein that is part of the invading virus in order to build an immunity to it so that when a real living example tries to invade your body, it recognizes it and reacts before it can gain a foothold and make you sick.
Here's a tl;dr summary... :P
The point of all of these is to trigger the immune response. They just differ in how they cause that reaction.
Throw in the whole original virus with some tweaks so you don't get sick, but enough to trigger the immune system.
Throw in just a tiny harmless piece of the virus, just enough to train your immune system.
Throw in a tiny piece of code to make the tiny piece of the virus to trigger the immune system (mRNA) - or - Throw in a tiny piece of code to make the tiny piece of code that makes the tiny piece of the virus to trigger the immune system (DNA Plasmid). (Neither change your DNA.)
Throw in a different basically harmless virus that has its DNA altered to make the mRNA in point 3 above. Doesn't change your DNA, doesn't reproduce, but also boosts your immune response.
All of these use a part of the original virus to train your immune system. How that protein is exposed to your immune system is the only difference.
The guy in the video saying it's not a vaccine is frankly an idiot.
Let's break down WHY he's a retard, shall we?
He says that it's not a vaccine because it is "a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator."
He also claims that there is a legal definition of "vaccine." The definition I'm seeing most referenced legally is as follows;
"Vaccine means a specially prepared antigen administered to a person for the purpose of providing immunity."
Which he claims the mRNA vaccine doesn't match.
Now, let's break down his 2 major errors here.
First, his claim that the mRNA vaccine stimulates the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator.
It does not. Why? Let's look at the definition of a pathogen.
"a bacterium, virus, or other microorganism that can cause disease."
The mRNA vaccine contains none of these things, nor creates any of these things.
In cellular function, we have genes in our DNA which encode proteins used to build other things in our body, and they do this by creating little pieces of messenger RNA that move from the nucleus of the cell, where our DNA is, into the cytoplasm of the cell outside the nucleus, where ribosomes read those little mRNA snippets and build little chains of amino acids out of the instructions, which then fold into the final protein.
In the case of these mRNA vaccines, that little snip of temporary mRNA that is used to build the protein and then degrades and is reabsorbed by the cell, is coded to specifically build a single piece of one of the spike proteins on the outside of the coronavirus. The protein by itself being totally useless and nonfunctional, but being enough to teach your immune system what to look for so that when the real whole virus shows up, it will recognize it by the protein in the spike and attack it before it starts spreading in our body and making us sick.
That leads us back to the legal definition of a vaccine.
"Vaccine means a specially prepared antigen administered to a person for the purpose of providing immunity."
What is an antigen?
"a toxin or other foreign substance which induces an immune response in the body, especially the production of antibodies."
In this case the single protein out of the spike from the surface of the coronavirus. That protein is the antigen. The foreign substance that is enough to induce the immune response in the body and create the learned immunity to the real virus should it show up in the future. Exactly as the definition says.
Not a pathogen, an antigen.
As noted in point 1, most vaccines would just find a way to kill the whole virus and just jam the whole virus in you. A much more difficult and potentially risky venture than just precisely creating a tiny little snippet of a temporary messenger code that tells your ribosome to make copies of a single targeted protein in order to precisely train your immune system what to look for without all the added risk of other toxins, improperly attenuated viruses, etc.
If there is any part of this you don't understand, please ask.
This guy is a quack who is making patently false claims about what vaccines are and how mRNA vaccines actually work.
I very clearly just explained how it is one, by definition, and how that doctor, in his own words, which I quoted, are very clearly and unequivocally WRONG.
If you can't understand any of that, that's not my problem and doesn't change the facts.
It is a vaccine. I'm sorry if you don't understand why.
Let me try to sum up the 4 main types of vaccines in use today, and reiterate how they all achieve the same end result, getting your body to recognize a foreign protein that is part of the invading virus in order to build an immunity to it so that when a real living example tries to invade your body, it recognizes it and reacts before it can gain a foothold and make you sick.
Here's a tl;dr summary... :P
The point of all of these is to trigger the immune response. They just differ in how they cause that reaction.
Throw in the whole original virus with some tweaks so you don't get sick, but enough to trigger the immune system.
Throw in just a tiny harmless piece of the virus, just enough to train your immune system.
Throw in a tiny piece of code to make the tiny piece of the virus to trigger the immune system (mRNA) - or - Throw in a tiny piece of code to make the tiny piece of code that makes the tiny piece of the virus to trigger the immune system (DNA Plasmid). (Neither change your DNA.)
Throw in a different basically harmless virus that has its DNA altered to make the mRNA in point 3 above. Doesn't change your DNA, doesn't reproduce, but also boosts your immune response.
All of these use a part of the original virus to train your immune system. How that protein is exposed to your immune system is the only difference.
The guy in the video saying it's not a vaccine is frankly an idiot.
Let's break down WHY he's a retard, shall we?
He says that it's not a vaccine because it is "a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator."
He also claims that there is a legal definition of "vaccine." The definition I'm seeing most referenced legally is as follows;
Which he claims the mRNA vaccine doesn't match.
Now, let's break down his 2 major errors here.
First, his claim that the mRNA vaccine stimulates the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator.
It does not. Why? Let's look at the definition of a pathogen.
The mRNA vaccine contains none of these things, nor creates any of these things.
In cellular function, we have genes in our DNA which encode proteins used to build other things in our body, and they do this by creating little pieces of messenger RNA that move from the nucleus of the cell, where our DNA is, into the cytoplasm of the cell outside the nucleus, where ribosomes read those little mRNA snippets and build little chains of amino acids out of the instructions, which then fold into the final protein.
In the case of these mRNA vaccines, that little snip of temporary mRNA that is used to build the protein and then degrades and is reabsorbed by the cell, is coded to specifically build a single piece of one of the spike proteins on the outside of the coronavirus. The protein by itself being totally useless and nonfunctional, but being enough to teach your immune system what to look for so that when the real whole virus shows up, it will recognize it by the protein in the spike and attack it before it starts spreading in our body and making us sick.
That leads us back to the legal definition of a vaccine.
What is an antigen?
In this case the single protein out of the spike from the surface of the coronavirus. That protein is the antigen. The foreign substance that is enough to induce the immune response in the body and create the learned immunity to the real virus should it show up in the future. Exactly as the definition says.
Not a pathogen, an antigen.
As noted in point 1, most vaccines would just find a way to kill the whole virus and just jam the whole virus in you. A much more difficult and potentially risky venture than just precisely creating a tiny little snippet of a temporary messenger code that tells your ribosome to make copies of a single targeted protein in order to precisely train your immune system what to look for without all the added risk of other toxins, improperly attenuated viruses, etc.
If there is any part of this you don't understand, please ask.
This guy is a quack who is making patently false claims about what vaccines are and how mRNA vaccines actually work.
It's not A vaccine that's all I didn't make the video.
I very clearly just explained how it is one, by definition, and how that doctor, in his own words, which I quoted, are very clearly and unequivocally WRONG.
If you can't understand any of that, that's not my problem and doesn't change the facts.
I understand a 100% you got your facts I got my facts. Choice, you could be wrong I could be wrong. Or we both are right.