The more worrying thing here is the "circulate" part. Meaning that the lipid packages containing the mRNA sequences are traveling throughout the body, instead of staying at the injection site.
"When mRNA-LNPs were injected intramuscularly and intratracheally, similar to intravenous and intraperitoneal deliveries, a large portion of the luciferase activity was detectable in the liver, demonstrating systemic spread of the nanoparticles."
Yes, and people like Bret Weinstein say this is a massive problem and why there’s heart inflammation, if the mrna enters heart muscle your immune system might well attack it, the problem is - heart muscle does not get remade.
The problem with this is that there's simpler explanations. Myocarditis is more frequent with C19 infection than vaccination, so it seems spike protein circulating is "enough".
Also this study didn't find significant uptake of mRNA in the heart (though it did find notable uptake in the lungs).
The Mycocarditis line is not true - it highly depends on gender and age. Repeating that its more frequent for infection outright is wrong, it is only in certain sub-populations (female, older).
Moderna does seem to have an effect in the direction you name; the Pfizer vaccine seems to have a lower risk than infection in all categories. Overall, the myocarditis risk is lower with vaccination than infection with both Moderna and Pfizer, but it may not be in some subpopulations with Moderna.
It’s such a dumb topic too - because when you focus solely on the myocarditis risk stratification between Covid and the vaccine, you lose sight of all of the other morbidities that come with Covid. It’s like that video making the rounds right now where Bill Maher is trumpeting that the infection provides as strong protection against severe disease compared to the vaccine. Cool! Not actually surprising but kind of misses the obvious point that it involves you getting Covid, a serious, highly
transmissible disease, when you could get the same protection without the illness.. I guess you could use the evidence to adjust guidance on vaccine schedule but protection still wanes over time so..
I think the data still supports what I said, even in that article, but also if you want to be really accurate you'd need a meta review of a variety of articles I've read now in detail, and my general intuition is its clear that < ~30yr old men are higher risk.
The mRNA-based covid shots (and the adenovirus-vector covid shots) are a wee bit different in how they operate than pre-covid vaccines.
Modified covid spike proteins are produced by host (i.e. a vaccinee's) cells. The spike proteins are anchored within the cells but "poke out" through the cellular membranes so they're able to elicit an immune system response.
The cells expressing the mod-spike are ultimately destroyed. If you review pop-sci / marketing materials produced by Pfizer and Moderna and government agencies and non-profits who promoted the shots, the fate of these cells will be glossed over, but that's what happens.
This is why it was important that the contents of the jabs stayed in the muscle tissue near the injection site and the process of translating all of the vax mRNA into mod-spike be rapid. If vax mRNA travelled around via the circulatory system and was taken up by cells in, say, the walls of blood vessels throughout the body or cells in the heart or pericardium or in other tissues, then some cells in those locales would be destroyed and, if enough cells in the wrong place at the wrong time were destroyed this way, bad things could happen. Observing vax mRNA persisting or existing weeks and weeks post-administration is not good for this (and additional) reasons.
Everything he's saying is common knowledge to anyone who has researched this topic. Having a background in bioscience would not help and most likely hurt, because people within those fields are highly incentivized to suppress bad news about their prior actions.
> If vax mRNA travelled around via the circulatory system and was taken up by cells in, say, the walls of blood vessels throughout the body or cells in the heart or pericardium or in other tissues, then some cells in those locales would be destroyed…
This is something that you would consider to be common knowledge?
To anyone who has researched this topic, yes, and many other things. How do you think the mRNA vaccines work? If you got interested in vaccines around the middle of 2021 and started finding and subscribing to the right blogs and people, you know a whole lot of things about this topic that other people don't. These sorts of threads are a bit frustrating because it involves watching people catch up to where we were 12 months ago.
Is that true? I remember my daughter had a severe bacterial infection and they couldn't get an IV in her so they did an intramuscular injection of antibiotics.
We've known that forever. There's been studies done with luciferase to see where the mRNA triggers protein production in small animals.
We know that a big portion of the activity is in the liver, distant from the IM injection site (a lot of the activity is at the site, too).
e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4624045/
"When mRNA-LNPs were injected intramuscularly and intratracheally, similar to intravenous and intraperitoneal deliveries, a large portion of the luciferase activity was detectable in the liver, demonstrating systemic spread of the nanoparticles."