Ironically that's one of the cases that came to mind when I read your comments and the guarded language you were using. I knew immediately what you were thinking. I don't think most people are aware of the legal minefield it is.
No.
Most likely if the mRNA degrades it just won't be read by the ribosomes. The reason this was an interesting breakthrough is because they had to use a number of techniques to prevent the ribosomes from kicking it out even though it was otherwise well-formed.
Ribosomes are clever. If something doesn't quite match or the cycle has degraded and the mRNA strands are incomplete, they'll stop reading it.
What they know is probably what they don't know: They likely haven't stolen the ability to manufacture engineered adenoviruses or mRNA.
I've read in the rumor mill that the live attenuated vaccinations for COVID are causing some autoimmune disorders as well (not surprising) so they're also not without risk and are typically less effective.
But they're cheaper and require much less advanced technology. And the Chinese don't really care if it doesn't work, kills a bunch of people, or gives them horrible outcomes that lead to reduced long term survival.
So, basically the same risks we're seeing with our untested solutions with the exception that mRNA may turn out in the long run to be safer. It's just that the transport mechanism seems to be the major show stopper since people are reacting to the polyethylene glycol used to stabilize it.
I suspect we'll find that the PEG-ylated lipid transport mechanism is going to cause issues rather than the mRNA, but basically the same idea. Yes.
Have mRNA therapeutics ever been called a vaccine against cancer?
Colloquially yes.
mRNA therapy is clearly much closer to gene therapy than vaccines.)
I think it's a wash. The idea with mRNA treatments like this is to have the cells produce proteins the body can recognize and attack via the immune system, and it also conveys a degree of cellular immunity as well, which is similar in nature to being infected with the antigen.
So, I would argue that it's probably closer to the vaccine spectrum than therapy.
You are probably very intelligent, however, you seem to be assuming people are unbiased and acting in good faith.
"X but Y" as a veiled dismissal sort of annoys me.
And no, I think you're reading too much between the lines. I'm basing my opinions off of reading a wide array of papers. I have no delusions that people have their own motives, and many of which are completely antithetical to what we'd hope for medical professionals.
Are you getting a vaccine? If so, which one?
No, because I don't know how I'd react to the PEG-ylated lipids. Based on the research I've done, this seems to be the primary point at which most of the negative outcomes have arisen, and I've looked recently at the VAERS data which strongly suggests that it has very little to do with the mRNA.
Remember: If the lipid capsid binds to your cellular tissues, it's not unlike a virus in that the outer sheath combines with the lipid walls of the cells. I suspect it's the same with the transport mechanism in this case. Which might explain the appearance of autoimmune disorders, because the body starts attacking the PEG-ylated bilayer that is now part of your own tissue. (I don't know; I'm speculating here.)
If there were a transport mechanism without PEG, I would almost certainly consider getting the vaccination. I think PEG adds too many variables in this case.
Now, before the expected "ah, you're a hypocrite!" arises, my intent in this is to try to educate people how the vaccination works. What they do with that information is up to them, but simply repeating absolute nonsense like "it changes your DNA" etc., which I've seen in numerous threads, is damaging our case because it undermines our argument with falsehoods.
If we're going to argue from the standpoint that this hasn't been tested sufficiently and presents possible risks, we need to argue from a position of authority with a fact-based approach.
That's where I'm coming from.
(Apologies that this is a month late. I've been busy, and I don't bother with my notifications here all that much.)
Imagine that.
Agreed. I don't know why people do it. It's asking for trouble.
Form 4473 says otherwise. Which is supposed to be retained by the gunshop for 20 years.
Whenever I've bought guns, they fill out the model/serial information while waiting on the background check.
Form 4473 is filled out at the gun shop with the model/serial number and they can be forced to surrender this information.
Then there's form 3310.4 which has to be sent to the ATF if you buy multiple guns within a specific period.
No, I don't trust the .gov to not find a way to collect this information.
Sorry. Don't check my notifications that often on P.W.
The problem with this is that it's tomato/tomato. It's feasible they could have proxied their connections through a foreign country, with cooperation from that country (or not), which then complicates matters. Most likely without cooperation.
Remember: The Snowden leaks included attribution tools the CIA used to attribute attacks to certain foreign actors. This could be a similar case.
My personal opinion is that if a foreign entity were involved, it was almost certainly China. While they might have interfered directly, it's more likely they would've interfered indirectly via the old, traditional route of bribery.
At least one version of Gab Social was available openly on their GitLab instance. So it's not like u/--1-- needed access to their code.
The problem is that the CFAA is pretty broad, and just hitting APIs without permission to look for potentially problematic holes could net you jail time. And it has in the past. This is an area you have to be really careful about, even if you're just poking at public endpoints. Heck, even writing a crawler could (and has) violate(d) the CFAA.
If there were issues, then u/--1-- could ask for further details on the code they're actually running on their servers since I doubt public Gab Social is reflective of it in its entirety.
The reason this is a worry is because they forked from Mastodon quite some time ago, and may not have kept up with upstream security fixes.
That's because it probably wasn't $1 billion. I don't remember the email containing specific details, because his post strongly seemed to suggest it was the Mercers.
So probably $250 mil or so. Not unreasonable.
I have had warm conversations with complete strangers
Well, at least you had something to keep you warm while the green energy failed you.
I'll supply the rope.
The environmentalists should be happy: It's reusable.
So they're afraid they're going to get caught and go to jail?
Good.
Fuck these people. If you take bribes to upend the electoral process, you deserve what you get. I'd start with hangings.
Rest in peace my friend.
The argument they'll probably use is that D3 deficiency seems to predict worse outcomes with COVID, and since people with darker skin are more likely to exhibit D3 deficiency in norther latitudes, they need to be prioritized for the vaccine.
No, I don't know why a supplement program wasn't considered instead, but being as these people aren't rational, I don't really expect the decision to make sense.
I think he just hates everyone.
But you may be right, this might be a spectrum.
Exactly.
The problems with the vaccine so far seem to be twofold:
-
The polyethylene glycol used to stabilize the lipid nanoparticles used to transport mRNA into muscle tissue.
-
It seems plausible that receiving the vaccine while concurrently infected with COVID or having received the vaccine after recovering from COVID could exacerbate an immune response.
Looking through the VAERS data myself it appears that most of the deaths are probably from anaphylaxis which would be consistent with a reaction to PEG.
Jesus overturned tables and flayed the people desecrating the temple.
Oddly makes me think of the ruby-opal ticket incident. That tranny eventually got hired by GitHub only to be fired a year later for being too toxic.
Imagine being a tranny activist so toxic you get fired from one of the most leftwing organizations in SV.
What we needed was legislative relief to prohibit banks, payment processors, hosting providers, etc., from deplatforming entire business just because they committed the cardinal sin of wrongthink.
It's a bit difficult to foster competition when the entire infrastructure can be ripped out from under you just because a dozen libtards started screaming madly on Twatter.
Realistically, what we need to see are massive fines directed especially to banks and payment processors for canceling merchant accounts for no other reason than "you might hurt our feelings for saying mean things." They claim it's because of their risk assessment; that such accounts are more likely to see chargebacks. Which, I suppose, has happened before with libtards signing up and then issuing a chargeback specifically to harm the company. But, I think that could be dealt with as well; if chargebacks are used as a weapon, and it can be demonstrated, then the people issuing them should be fined the amount of the service they were purchasing plus an additional fee.
The reality is that the entire system is deliberately designed from one end to the other to prevent the growth of small tech startups. We should have seen legislation sometime in the last 4 years to limit the effects of cancel culture, but because the GOP is in bed with the same corrupt tech-authoritarians the left is, we'll likely never see a solution.
In the meantime, you're absolutely right. We MUST support alt tech where possible, but it's an uphill battle and a lot of people aren't willing to forgo the inconveniences of having to, e.g., mail checks to Gab. We do need to take a stand, here, and now. But it's not going to be easy.
Don't use Dissenter. It's horribly out of date. It's based off a version of Brave from June/July last year and there are a couple dozen CVEs that impact the Chromium it's based off of that could lead to code execution on your machine.
Use Brave if you must, but don't use Dissenter.
I'm pretty sure it came from a bat, but that bat had some all-expenses-paid vacation time in a biolab.
It was a blade out failure which was contained by the engine. The vibration and damage from the imbalance probably dislodged the cowling which contributed to the failure.
The reality is that engines are designed to contain a catastrophic failure. If they didn't, this would have brought down the entire aircraft.
It's not that concerning since this is a success of the engineering that goes into these engines, so I'm not sure what u/TwistedSister is trying to get at here.
The concerning thing is that the PW4077 engines have suffered a couple of other blade-out events like this which I think probably warrants grounding the fleet long enough to figure out why there has been more than one failure of this type.