I’ve seen this information. Not from horizon magazine, but other publications that have the same information. This sentence here is the hack:
“They are designed to only trigger an immune response to the virus's spike protein, which is just one component of the viral membrane and enables the virus to invade our cells.“
After it ”invades“ here's the potential known problem:
“...researchers are carefully monitoring that the vaccine does not trigger an unwanted immune response.“
So they've had issues with “unwanted immune responses“ in trials at some point. Also, this strikes me:
“ Once the injected mRNA enters a human cell, it degrades quickly and only stays in the body for a couple of days. This is why people need two injections to develop the best immune response, he says.
So they are defeating the body’s natural immune system by injecting a synthetic, messenger ribonucleic acid that your body would otherwise keep out of the cell wall, by cleverly wrapping it in a coated nano-bubble designed to sneak through the cell wall without breaking and then wrap it in a thick coating so my body can’t reject it fast enough to prevent it from sending it’s message.
Even if the nucleus isn’t breeched, the natural antigens produced would have access to cell walls of other organs in the body and the ability to get into the nucleus that way. Maybe that won’t happen, but the possible side effects of breaking-in to the biological functions of the body take longer to test than the time spent. The “we’ve been testing since 2011 for cancer” doesn’t move the needle for me here. The Coronavirus isn’t new and they’ve been trying to create a vaccine specifically for it and for longer.
They may have found something that hacks the system, but we are the test subjects for the unknown. That’s why I don’t like the push for this particular therapy being injected in every man, woman and child. The disease doesn’t warrant an emergency of such a magnitude to forego the protections of becoming approved as opposed to authorized. Even if the chances are extremely low that there could be a problem, going all-in doesn't make sense because the survival rate of the disease is very high.
Yup, fair enough. Like I said, I never advocated for those things. I think people not at risk for COVID shouldn’t get the shot.
My problem is people preemptively claiming they know things they don’t know, and incorrectly categorizing data to falsely prove their point to people foolish enough to believe them.
The entire premise of this post was exactly this.
I never claimed to be a scientist, or even wanted to understand how it works. My rudimentary understanding was enough, and I know way more than I need to now.
I’ve heard the point of view that this is all a conspiracy of the 177-year-old company and the NWO to create a mass-die-off event. It’s great fear porn, but until there’s evidence of that, I’m going to keep my stance which makes sense in all case scenarios.
Not yet anyway. Trials issue with animals and 15 years of failure to get approval are good enough reason to shy away from it.
Lol.
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-12-mrna-vaccine-safety.html
I’ve seen this information. Not from horizon magazine, but other publications that have the same information. This sentence here is the hack:
“They are designed to only trigger an immune response to the virus's spike protein, which is just one component of the viral membrane and enables the virus to invade our cells.“
After it ”invades“ here's the potential known problem:
“...researchers are carefully monitoring that the vaccine does not trigger an unwanted immune response.“
So they've had issues with “unwanted immune responses“ in trials at some point. Also, this strikes me:
“ Once the injected mRNA enters a human cell, it degrades quickly and only stays in the body for a couple of days. This is why people need two injections to develop the best immune response, he says.
So they are defeating the body’s natural immune system by injecting a synthetic, messenger ribonucleic acid that your body would otherwise keep out of the cell wall, by cleverly wrapping it in a coated nano-bubble designed to sneak through the cell wall without breaking and then wrap it in a thick coating so my body can’t reject it fast enough to prevent it from sending it’s message.
Even if the nucleus isn’t breeched, the natural antigens produced would have access to cell walls of other organs in the body and the ability to get into the nucleus that way. Maybe that won’t happen, but the possible side effects of breaking-in to the biological functions of the body take longer to test than the time spent. The “we’ve been testing since 2011 for cancer” doesn’t move the needle for me here. The Coronavirus isn’t new and they’ve been trying to create a vaccine specifically for it and for longer.
They may have found something that hacks the system, but we are the test subjects for the unknown. That’s why I don’t like the push for this particular therapy being injected in every man, woman and child. The disease doesn’t warrant an emergency of such a magnitude to forego the protections of becoming approved as opposed to authorized. Even if the chances are extremely low that there could be a problem, going all-in doesn't make sense because the survival rate of the disease is very high.
Yup, fair enough. Like I said, I never advocated for those things. I think people not at risk for COVID shouldn’t get the shot.
My problem is people preemptively claiming they know things they don’t know, and incorrectly categorizing data to falsely prove their point to people foolish enough to believe them.
The entire premise of this post was exactly this.
I never claimed to be a scientist, or even wanted to understand how it works. My rudimentary understanding was enough, and I know way more than I need to now.
I’ve heard the point of view that this is all a conspiracy of the 177-year-old company and the NWO to create a mass-die-off event. It’s great fear porn, but until there’s evidence of that, I’m going to keep my stance which makes sense in all case scenarios.