Mrna cure for cancer
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (78)
sorted by:
Vaccines literally never cure anything. That's not how they work.
Vaccines would have to prevent cancer, which is damn near impossible.
Moreover, cancer isn't a fucking virus. You can't inoculate someone against cancer because it's a defect in the cell's genetic code.
I'm willing to bet this man literally doesn't know anything about what that mRNA injection is or does.
My guess is that the mRNA injection is a GENE THEREAPY which tries to combat the malformed genes of the cancer cells.
Again, giving them the benefit of the doubt, it's still not a vaccine.
All MRNA is gene therapy. it modifies you to combat thing in your body.
This is why I was able to successfully point out to my employer that I will not have them modify ME to combat the coof, and instead opt for a 'traditional' vaccine.
The fact that one conveniently never has become available is just a nice icing on my decision.
Yes it was, it's called "NovaVax" and it's a protien-based vaccine.
It was developed by a much smaller & independent pharmaceutical company. They didn't get emergency use authorization until 2023, and didn't get emergency funding from operation warp speed.
ah, I was not aware! I appreciate the info.
I will be conveniently forgetting to inform my employer as they have seemingly forgotten to enforce shit since the hysteria mostly ended.
I simply don't trust human engineering to be better than millions of years of real world testing that is evolution. Hell, I don't trust human engineering in this realm to even be non-harmful.
Fun fact this is why actual vaccines work. They take dead shit (minced up portions of real viruses) and give it to your body in a controlled way, so it does what it normally does as if you were going to get infected.
It's basically target practice for your immune system.
The coof was engineered to be a weapon. It escaped before it was ready, but the original version still was dangerous, which is why the elites were shitting themselves over it.
Correct, this treatment isn't a vaccine. It's a gene therapy immune stimulation to make your defense mechanism brutally turn against hopefully a narrow set of rogue (cancer) cells that about about to kill you within weeks / few months.
It's not a prevention. It's not supposed to have long term effects ( but it likely does, which matters less considering you were going to die shortly without it ).
The potential benefit over the risk is unambiguous there.
Contrast this with mass-injecting mRNA coctails into healthy people for no benefit against a cold virus they will catch anyway ( with increased risks of infection 20 weeks post injection over the ''purebloods'', and wiping natural immunity if the injection came after an infection ). Lasting consequences, for no net benefit.
The government-aprouved ''experts'' will tell you there is no difference and you must accept both. Depending on state and country, they might also tell you that you do not have the option to refuse the injections when they declare it so.
And, the alternative to the 'vaccine' was Remdisivir & Respirators which had a fatality rate of 85%
It's like we were exposed to the greatest peace-time crime against humanity since Mao's Great Famine.
I wonder if it would be possible to create a MRNA vaccine against my own genetic code and inject it into others, causing itching, hives, and lupus-like symptoms in others whenever I walk into the room. The ultimate restraining order.
Not a requirement for being a vaccine. All the toxoid vaccines are to build immune response against a toxin secreted by bacteria. Tetanus and diphtheria come to mind.
Fair enough. But cancer isn't a bacteria either.
The issue is that the concept of a vaccine doesn't really apply to cancers (with the exception of what someone else laid out with Grok in this thread), and we know that's not what the Leftist was saying. He was asserting that vaccines cure diseases, rather than inoculate people from them.
I'm no expert, but the key issue with cancers is that the body can't recognize them as a threat because the cells are its own. In theory, if there were some material that could train the immune system to recognize the existing cancer cells, it would fit the definition of a therapeutic vaccine.
I agree with you that an mRNA treatment isn't a vaccine, it's gene therapy. But on paper, a cancer "cure" using a traditional vaccine mechanism could exist. You'd need to come with some antigen that got it to go after the cancer.
Which is why they had to change the definition of what a vaccine was: to hide that the mRNA bullshit was a genetic therapy NOT a vaccine
And in so doing, now the definition of a vaccine makes no sense.
i ran out of gas, so I vaccinated my car.
I bought a glass of orange vaccination to go with breakfast today.
Precisely.
If we wanted a chat bot's "thoughts", we'd have asked it ourselves.
If you were interested in proving the poster wrong, you could have just mentioned that HPV is linked to certain cancers. It's true and commonly known. If they doubted it, they can check for themselves.
Instead you posted AI spam that we're going to completely ignore.
The funny part is you and it are still completely wrong. Gizortnik said that cancers aren't viruses. You said "cancers are related to virii." You changed the claim to give an answer, that wasn't even your own, that didn't refute anything he said.
ALSO "virii" is not not the plural of virus. Even in Latin, it wouldn't be virii.
Here, in case this helps you:
Copilot:
If you actually wanted to contradict him, you'd want to focus on prophalactic vs. therapeutic vaccines, because vaccines aren't specifically preventative and aren't specifically for viruses.
Take your hallucinations and fuck right off.
Mudblood projection on your part I'm sure.
Yes, I've heard that argument, but let's be clear that that's not what this person is saying because he's an idiot.