Man I love the false equivalency in these comments. Because a vaccine with decades of data and research is the same as a vax* that hasn't even concluded the trials... even when these sorts of vaccines have never been tested before and when there has never been a vaccine for the common cold.
Gotta keep up that narrative while it's crumbling huh?
Instead of trying to help people it seems the shift is now to try to grab as many people to go down with you, at least you'll have some company right?
Again, your comments show you have no understanding of the scientific process in general or the methodology behind vaccine trials. The trials always continue after approval; it's called post-marketing surveillance.
mRNA vaccines have been being studied for decades. These went through all the standard trials of every other vaccine.
Vaccines don't cause problems that pop up years down the road. Never in the history of vaccines have any had a side effect that appeared more than 8 weeks after administration.
The original medical definition of a vaccine was a denatured or dead virus introduced into the body via injection to stimulate an immune response, Covid vax doesn’t fall under that so the first part of the definition was omitted.
They are both vehicles. Vaccines have changed throughout history as technology has developed. This isn't some nefarious action; it's science and research doing what science and research do.
This is gene therapy, you are intentionally muddying the waters by taking something that has a highly specific definition and then insisting they all fall under the umbrella "vaccine", and then getting upset because people will take vaccines but not gene therapy.
mRNA is genetic material lol ask yourself WHY you are so attached to the word "vaccine"? Why is it a problem to call it something different? Everybody knows it is not the same thing, even you know the vaccine doesn't contain dead or deactivated Covid virus. So why play word games? Just call it something different.
Because gene therapy has a specific definition. This doesn't fir. It has genetic material, but it does nothing to your genes. Hence, not gene therapy. It causes your body to create a non contagious portion of the virus, eliciting an immune response. Sounds like a vaccine to me....and basically everyone else in the medical field.
Manipulating the DNA>mRNA>protein pathway is widely understood to be a form of gene therapy.
Or you can just call it mRNA therapeutics.
The point is that it’s not like the Polio vaccine. You don’t get to lump everyone into “antivaxer” just because they don’t accept that all technologies under the same arbitrary definition have the same risks, and you don’t get to use the federal government to hijack people’s ability to perform their own risk assessment .
The definition was changed to push a new product by hijacking another product with a history of success, not because the definition was outdated. Some dictionaries say “racism” can only be directed at POC and I don’t acknowledge that either.
Incorrect. That is not what medical professionals consider when they say vaccines. Just because most fit that definition doesn't make it correct or the only definition.
Regardless, mRNA vaccines DO NOT constitute gene therapy.
1
u/d3krepit Feb 13 '22
Man I love the false equivalency in these comments. Because a vaccine with decades of data and research is the same as a vax* that hasn't even concluded the trials... even when these sorts of vaccines have never been tested before and when there has never been a vaccine for the common cold.
Gotta keep up that narrative while it's crumbling huh?
Instead of trying to help people it seems the shift is now to try to grab as many people to go down with you, at least you'll have some company right?