Go back to previous topic
Forum nameGeneral Discussion
Topic subjectHere's my unprofessional understanding what why it's different
Topic URLhttp://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13441722&mesg_id=13441767
13441767, Here's my unprofessional understanding what why it's different
Posted by Boogie Stimuli, Sat Sep-11-21 12:48 AM
The definition of what qualifies as a vaccination was changed to allow approval of this one.
Traditionally, a vaccine is giving someone a protein, antigen, partial or whole pathogen. Injecting RNA into a human being doesn't historically fall under the definition of a vaccine. Verbiage was shifted in the federal register to approve it. This is experimental biological gene therapy immune modulatory injection. Injecting ppl with a synthetic sequence of nucleic acid has never been done on a large scale in human history. RNA trials in mammals have led to odd cancers and autoimmune diseases from 6 to 12 months after the injection.

Also, if there is a treatment for a disease, the federal gov't cannot approve a vaccination. The NIH (who is involved in approving medications) cohold the patent to the vaccine with Moderna. There you have the gov't in bed with a private company, vending a product that they want to give to everyone. Conflict of interest. They don't want a therapy to work, because then they can't sell the vaccine.

But this just notes from a curious nigga trying to do a lil research.