- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Oh no Pfizer bros. RFK just nuked MRNA vaccine development
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:10 am to Tomatocantender
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:10 am to Tomatocantender
quote:
Why don't you write a long post about how you agreed with me that the initial vaccines should have been developed with a wider protein profile which is indicative of the traditional egg based shots
No idea what 'egg-based' is supposed to mean here, as the morphology of COVID and any coronavirus would have likely required a new transmission medium regardless. But yes, I did say that the narrow antigenic profile of the initial mRNA vaccine would prolong the pandemic if it was released in piecemeal fashion. I was correct on that.
quote:
yet here you are 3 years later still simping for mRNA being completely safe to use as a 1-shot fits all approach to herd immunity for an airborne virus
It is both safe to use, but I've repeatedly said that those shots should have been cumulative as the virus transformed in order to limit its genomic potential. If you remember, one of the arguments for mRNA vaccines was that you could change the sequence as needed. That is the entire benefit of the technology, and why it has promise as a cancer therapy.
Glad that you remembered the scope of my opinions.
4
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:11 am to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
I don’t post in threads that I don’t know anything about, you should try it
You don't know anything about this topic, yet you keep posting.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:12 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
crazy4lsu
You are a horrible writer
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:14 am to Mingo Was His NameO
Cool? Let's try to stay on topic little dude.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:15 am to Kentucker
quote:
mRNA cancer treatment has gone
What if I told you that I posted back in 2021 that mRNA could be a game changer in cancer clinical trials etc. I beat you to the punch by 4 years so I would appreciate it if you get off your high horse as you somehow think you're the first person to talk about mRNA for cancer, compassion care etc.
However, the topic is mRNA that was mandated against young and healthy people for a ubiquitous airborne virus as a one-shot-fits-all approach.
Hopefully you're smart enough to stop conflating SARS-CoV-2 with fvcking Cancer.
Dumbass
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:16 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
Let's try to stay on topic little dude.
It’s hard when your writings read as incoherent ramblings in broken English
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:16 am to Mingo Was His NameO
Yeah I imagine lots of things that are easy for others are very difficult for you. Poor thing.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:17 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
Yeah I imagine lots of things that are easy for others are very difficult for you.
Not much other than reaching the top shelf
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:18 am to Mingo Was His NameO
As well as noting irony.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:21 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
It is both safe to use,
Okay, you're saying mRNA is safe to use. Please answer me this: Before its rollout in the early part of 2021 (Pfizer 2 rounds, Moderna 2 rounds), please tell me when in the world's history was mRNA based vaccines used to inoculate entire countries of people?
Recombinant dna was used for H1N1, traditional protein based vaccines were used, but I don't ever recall mRNA having a track record of such. Maybe you can help me out with that conundrum.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:24 am to Cosmo
quote:
It may well be useful technology for the future
I believe it may be a useful technology in the future. But not for vaccines for common illnesses. If I have cancer or a horrible illness and it will work- I’ll take it. No way I’m taking it for anything else.
Either way the taxpayer doesn’t need to pay for it.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:32 am to Tomatocantender
quote:
Let's put this Damar Hamlin bullshite of commotio cordis to rest. Listen to his answer at the 4:25 mark and tell me if it was something just as simple as commotio cordis or if he was given strict instructions by his doctors and the NFL not to disclose anything about the mandated mRNA and boosters the league put those young men through.
quote:
Tomatocantender
You're retarded
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:34 am to Lexis Dad
quote:
You're retarded
quote:
Lexis Dad
Says the poster with 5 usernames
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:38 am to Kentucker
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:40 am to Tomatocantender
quote:
Okay, you're saying mRNA is safe to use.
It is safe to use.
quote:
please tell me when in the world's history was mRNA based vaccines used to inoculate entire countries of people?
It wasn't.
quote:
Recombinant dna was used for H1N1, traditional protein based vaccines were used, but I don't ever recall mRNA having a track record of such. Maybe you can help me out with that conundrum.
It was no track record. Until the HBV vaccine, there wasn't a subunit vaccine. There was an inactivated whole-cell pertussis vaccine first developed in 1914, but was very reactive, and it took 60 or 70 more years before an acelluar vaccine was developed in Japan. At some point, there might be a T-cell receptor vaccine using a peptide subunit. The issue with vaccinology is that new pathogens require new methods. Occasionally we can adapt older methods, but generally each pathogen requires its own approach.
This is to say that there is no track record until there is a track record. Now if you are asking if I would have chosen to use this particular technology in this particular way for this particular virus, I would not. I said as much several times. While in theory, a constantly updated mRNA vaccine which adds new antigenic portions as the virus evolves is a good idea, but that isn't what happened in practice.
In terms of its safety, it is generally safe. If someone suggests that they aren't safe, then what is the exact symptomatology of a vaccine-specific injury? Generally, it is hard to make the case that a vaccine that doesn't seem very effective is also dangerous. Those ideas are contradictory. For example, one of the formulations of the smallpox vaccine had an incredibly high injury rate. But was it effective? Yes it did produce an incredibly robust antibody response at the cost of being reactogenic.
Ultimately, there was never any clarification on why the the Novavax subunit vaccine didn't seem to get the same treatment as the mRNA vaccines. That vaccine was finally approved quite late, and even this year, the FDA limited the scope of its use in stark comparison to the mRNA vaccines.
This post was edited on 8/6/25 at 1:36 pm
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:41 am to Tomatocantender
quote:
What if I told you that I posted back in 2021 that mRNA could be a game changer in cancer clinical trials etc. I beat you to the punch by 4 years so I would appreciate it if you get off your high horse as you somehow think you're the first person to talk about mRNA for cancer, compassion care etc.
Sorry, I wasn’t aware that the discussion of a topic once, no matter how long ago, made it ineligible for future conversations. I do appreciate your knowledge of mRNA, however, and I hope you’re a proponent of its continued use in research. RFK, jr. today canceled 500 million dollars of research money for mRNA. quote:
According to Kennedy, the decision stems from a review of mRNA investments and a determination that "mRNA technology poses more risk than benefits for these respiratory viruses," citing concerns about their effectiveness against viruses like COVID-19 and the flu that mutate frequently. He claimed in a social media video that a single mutation can render mRNA vaccines ineffective and has stated his intent to shift funding toward "safer, broader vaccine platforms," including whole-virus vaccines and other approaches that he believes are less susceptible to viral mutations. It's important to note that these claims have been disputed by leading infectious disease experts.
He is leading us into dangerous territory by not listening to infectious disease professionals. He seems to have a one-track mind towards vaccines, and it isn’t good.
quote:
However, the topic is mRNA that was mandated against young and healthy people for a ubiquitous airborne virus as a one-shot-fits-all approach.
Topics drift in threads. It’s part of what keeps them interesting for many pages.
quote:
Hopefully you're smart enough to stop conflating SARS-CoV-2 with fvcking Cancer.
mRNA is just a vehicle that carries a message to a cell. It’s proving to be a reliable method for researchers to communicate with cells in an attempt to maximize the body’s response to a disease, whether it’s an invading virus or a cell that has gone rogue and has become cancer.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:47 am to Kentucker
quote:
whether it’s an invading virus or a cell that has gone rogue and has become cancer.
Agree that the use of mRNA for cancer and dread diseases could prove in the future to be a first line resource in those specific controlled settings, but that mRNA used as a herd immunity approach (young and healthy, not just the elderly and co-morbidities) to Covid viruses and variants was not safe based off it never having a proven track-record of results. Then Biden mandating it after millions of breakthrough cases in the summer and fall of '21 was pure evil.
This post was edited on 8/6/25 at 10:53 am
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:52 am to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
Says the poster with 5 usernames
I wasn't even responding to you you mouth-breathing troglodyte. Learn to fricking read.
And this is my 2nd handle. The only reason I created it was b/c I lost my login info for my old usename(SBD) when my previous phone literally went to black and I had to get a new one.
Now saying that, go frick yourself with a splintered broom handle up your arse.
This post was edited on 8/6/25 at 11:00 am
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:53 am to TigerV
quote:
My issue with this is his directive only stifles development. Do I think the Covid MRNA vaccines were damaging, yes. I think we may never understand how much so either. That’s doesn’t mean the technology doesn’t have promise and we need to abandon it. It needs more research and development to become what it was sold to be.
RFK seems to be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 11:08 am to Kentucker
quote:
Indeed. mRNA is being used to develop a super-efficient cancer treatment that doesn’t require chemo or radiation.
Might work in that direction. However, it had a crappy MOA as a vaccine.
NVAX used the mRNA on moth cells and then harvested the covid spikes from that so it didn't require the mRNA to display an immune trigger in the person getting the vax.
Page 10 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News