Welll... if the claim is that LNPs from vaccines can be "shed", that's pretty trite. Let's break that particular piece of fear-mongering down further, shall we....?
1. We need some clear evidence that LNPs from vaccines get into bodily secretions that pose a risk of contact and transfer to others (ie saliva, sweat, sexual bodily fluids). …
Welll... if the claim is that LNPs from vaccines can be "shed", that's pretty trite. Let's break that particular piece of fear-mongering down further, shall we....?
1. We need some clear evidence that LNPs from vaccines get into bodily secretions that pose a risk of contact and transfer to others (ie saliva, sweat, sexual bodily fluids). The only thing I have seen is a study [Pfizer, Japan] using LNPs (not from vaccines, but a similar preparation) injected intramuscularly in rats in a dose of 50ug. Ths study showed levels of LNPs in various organs and blood.
---Nothing was detected beyond 48 hours.
---The effective dose considering 50ug in a rat compared to 30ug in a human is that the rats received nearly 200x the dose a human would receive [rat =240g, human =70,000g].
---The only "secretory" organs which showed LNPs were the salivary glands, and the highest amount detected was 0.009% of the injecting dose, and in the prostate gland of male rats at maximum of 0.003% of injected dose.
---These are truly trivial amounts, made even less relevant by the further impact of the dose in rats being so huge compared to the dose given to humans per gm of body weight.
Does the finding of these truly minuscule quantities of LNPs in these organs mean that LNPs are passed from one animal to another during say kissing, or sex? Who knows, ...there are no studies looking at levels of LNPs in the gland's SECRETIONS [ie the saliva or ejaculate].
2. What happens when someone is exposed to some LNPs? Again, nobody knows because no-one has looked, but if swallowed they are likely to be destroyed by stomach acid and pancreatic enzymes, if inhaled they are probably trapped within the bronchociliary escalator and exhaled or destroyed by alveolar macrophages; if a female is exposed during sex then the acidic microenvironment of the female genital tract is likely unfavourable to them and again macrophages and dendritic cells will probably destroy anything.
So, biologically this is looking more and more implausible...not only are minute quantities found within exocrine glandular tissues and for only 48 hours, but we don't know if the LNPs get into the secreted fluids, and if they get into another individual they are likely to not survive passage according to biology and chemistry as we know it.
Let's assume that some get through, shall we? This would be in a concentration several magnitudes lower than would be found in someone vaccinated. We know in vaccinated people that things like myocarditis are rare, and not as frequent as we find in Covid infection, so are we really worried about this "shedding" phenomenon?
....I think absolutely not. This is speculative, imaginative, implausible nonsense, just concocted by antivaccine activists to spread FUD about vaccines. That's all.
Edited to add....you provided a citation showing that LNPs could be detected in breastmilk, but neglected to mention this was only occasionally, and the mRNA was found to be fragmented and non-functional (unable to induce cells to produce spike protein).
Look, I don't have time for this vaccine shilling from you, Offit or Albus. Even your first comment is absurd, they didn't test beyond 48 hours and you claim this is evidence that nothing is detected after 48 hours... Many of the concentrations are even rising at the 48h mark. I'm done with this.
The truth of the matter as I've stated before, is that we don't know, and every time someone looks, another covid conspiracy turns out to be true, even most of the "absurd" ones. Did you even read the Lancet paper I linked. That at least claims there is nothing detected after 48 hours. It was there for 48 hours though, glad we told lactating mothers about that... and in concentrations similar to serum to boot. The fact it's even there should already be hugely concerning and yet thanks to your propaganda many people still thinks it stays in the arm...
And then you go on to tell me none of the things have been looked into so we don't know... Damn bloody right we don't know. What about possibility of spike proteins in BM, DNA contamination in BM, IgG4 and autoimmunity antibodies in BM, frameshifted spike in BM, anyone looked at those? No, I didn't think so...
I never claimed to know what would happen after the vaccine is transferred, but that isn't even the only possible way things can go wrong, so better do those tests rather than ridiculing those that are asking the questions. What you're advocating for is we don't look, and keep on injecting, even pregnant and lactating women. It's INSANE and you know it.
Oh hi Albus, glad you could join. Saves me having to reply to both shills separately. Let's hear it from the horses mouth shall we. Took me a while to find it, but here's Pfizer's own review document from 2021 on pregnant and lactating mothers (forced release via FOIA). To quote from page 6 "The remaining 215 cases reported exposure [to the vaccine] via lactation" followed by a rather long list of AEs including 10 SAEs. It also shows a horrible outcome for pregnancies in the first trimester, indicating likely placental crossing. So... Pfizer said they were exposed via lactation, including a long list of AEs, and when it comes to pregnancies, a disturbingly high miscarriage rate, so I think we can safely conclude that the vaccine is transferred and that there is some effect on the babies, AS REPORTED DIRECTLY BY PFIZER. Now, rather than shilling some more, how about advocating for the right thing, which is to stop these absurd recommendations and baseless accusations, and actually do the tests, as it's pretty obvious by this point that, at best, nobody knows, and at worst, you are actively advocating that nobody even tries to look, because you know what they will find. https://prd-tsn-main-api.s3.amazonaws.com/article/dc9ea854-0d51-42d6-a6bd-89a0b88bbf3f.pdf
1. You just didn't have the basic reading skills to see that YOUR Lancet reference is literally the opposite of what you claim.
2. You didn't have the integrity to correct your error.
3. Instead, you changed the topic...OK...the Pfizer document.
4. Once again your basic reading skills have grossly failed you.
Pfizer did NOT report exposure to via lactation. The document does NOT say, suggest, or imply that.
You just missed Pfizer's use of quotation marks and you just didn't understand what adverse events are.....you have completely misunderstood the entire report.
But hey, what you lack in basic reading skills, you make up for with name-calling.
Welll... if the claim is that LNPs from vaccines can be "shed", that's pretty trite. Let's break that particular piece of fear-mongering down further, shall we....?
1. We need some clear evidence that LNPs from vaccines get into bodily secretions that pose a risk of contact and transfer to others (ie saliva, sweat, sexual bodily fluids). The only thing I have seen is a study [Pfizer, Japan] using LNPs (not from vaccines, but a similar preparation) injected intramuscularly in rats in a dose of 50ug. Ths study showed levels of LNPs in various organs and blood.
---Nothing was detected beyond 48 hours.
---The effective dose considering 50ug in a rat compared to 30ug in a human is that the rats received nearly 200x the dose a human would receive [rat =240g, human =70,000g].
---The only "secretory" organs which showed LNPs were the salivary glands, and the highest amount detected was 0.009% of the injecting dose, and in the prostate gland of male rats at maximum of 0.003% of injected dose.
---These are truly trivial amounts, made even less relevant by the further impact of the dose in rats being so huge compared to the dose given to humans per gm of body weight.
Does the finding of these truly minuscule quantities of LNPs in these organs mean that LNPs are passed from one animal to another during say kissing, or sex? Who knows, ...there are no studies looking at levels of LNPs in the gland's SECRETIONS [ie the saliva or ejaculate].
2. What happens when someone is exposed to some LNPs? Again, nobody knows because no-one has looked, but if swallowed they are likely to be destroyed by stomach acid and pancreatic enzymes, if inhaled they are probably trapped within the bronchociliary escalator and exhaled or destroyed by alveolar macrophages; if a female is exposed during sex then the acidic microenvironment of the female genital tract is likely unfavourable to them and again macrophages and dendritic cells will probably destroy anything.
So, biologically this is looking more and more implausible...not only are minute quantities found within exocrine glandular tissues and for only 48 hours, but we don't know if the LNPs get into the secreted fluids, and if they get into another individual they are likely to not survive passage according to biology and chemistry as we know it.
Let's assume that some get through, shall we? This would be in a concentration several magnitudes lower than would be found in someone vaccinated. We know in vaccinated people that things like myocarditis are rare, and not as frequent as we find in Covid infection, so are we really worried about this "shedding" phenomenon?
....I think absolutely not. This is speculative, imaginative, implausible nonsense, just concocted by antivaccine activists to spread FUD about vaccines. That's all.
Edited to add....you provided a citation showing that LNPs could be detected in breastmilk, but neglected to mention this was only occasionally, and the mRNA was found to be fragmented and non-functional (unable to induce cells to produce spike protein).
So...more FUD about nothing.
Look, I don't have time for this vaccine shilling from you, Offit or Albus. Even your first comment is absurd, they didn't test beyond 48 hours and you claim this is evidence that nothing is detected after 48 hours... Many of the concentrations are even rising at the 48h mark. I'm done with this.
The truth of the matter as I've stated before, is that we don't know, and every time someone looks, another covid conspiracy turns out to be true, even most of the "absurd" ones. Did you even read the Lancet paper I linked. That at least claims there is nothing detected after 48 hours. It was there for 48 hours though, glad we told lactating mothers about that... and in concentrations similar to serum to boot. The fact it's even there should already be hugely concerning and yet thanks to your propaganda many people still thinks it stays in the arm...
And then you go on to tell me none of the things have been looked into so we don't know... Damn bloody right we don't know. What about possibility of spike proteins in BM, DNA contamination in BM, IgG4 and autoimmunity antibodies in BM, frameshifted spike in BM, anyone looked at those? No, I didn't think so...
I never claimed to know what would happen after the vaccine is transferred, but that isn't even the only possible way things can go wrong, so better do those tests rather than ridiculing those that are asking the questions. What you're advocating for is we don't look, and keep on injecting, even pregnant and lactating women. It's INSANE and you know it.
So...by shilling...you mean reading your references....
In the Lancet link....they didn't even try and measure any LNP shedding and they clear explain the barriers that stop it from happening.
Oh hi Albus, glad you could join. Saves me having to reply to both shills separately. Let's hear it from the horses mouth shall we. Took me a while to find it, but here's Pfizer's own review document from 2021 on pregnant and lactating mothers (forced release via FOIA). To quote from page 6 "The remaining 215 cases reported exposure [to the vaccine] via lactation" followed by a rather long list of AEs including 10 SAEs. It also shows a horrible outcome for pregnancies in the first trimester, indicating likely placental crossing. So... Pfizer said they were exposed via lactation, including a long list of AEs, and when it comes to pregnancies, a disturbingly high miscarriage rate, so I think we can safely conclude that the vaccine is transferred and that there is some effect on the babies, AS REPORTED DIRECTLY BY PFIZER. Now, rather than shilling some more, how about advocating for the right thing, which is to stop these absurd recommendations and baseless accusations, and actually do the tests, as it's pretty obvious by this point that, at best, nobody knows, and at worst, you are actively advocating that nobody even tries to look, because you know what they will find. https://prd-tsn-main-api.s3.amazonaws.com/article/dc9ea854-0d51-42d6-a6bd-89a0b88bbf3f.pdf
Yes, it is obvious how the anti-vaccs operate.
1. You just didn't have the basic reading skills to see that YOUR Lancet reference is literally the opposite of what you claim.
2. You didn't have the integrity to correct your error.
3. Instead, you changed the topic...OK...the Pfizer document.
4. Once again your basic reading skills have grossly failed you.
Pfizer did NOT report exposure to via lactation. The document does NOT say, suggest, or imply that.
You just missed Pfizer's use of quotation marks and you just didn't understand what adverse events are.....you have completely misunderstood the entire report.
But hey, what you lack in basic reading skills, you make up for with name-calling.
😂🤣 Talk about desperate
Hey....you are the person that has been unable to read the words in your references correctly.
And clearly, you just don't care.