Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a legitimate question, so I don't know why it's being downvoted. Especially given the statement in the abstract of the paper that says, "We show here that S protein alone can damage vascular endothelial cells (ECs) in vitro and in vivo...." That being said, other people on this thread have provided reasonable mechanistic explanations as to why the vaccines would not have this effect, but I will also add we ha…
My partner developed inflammation (resembling gottron papules) on her knuckles a few weeks after receiving the first moderna dose. She now (few days later) has developed a shoulder rash where the vaccine was injected. It’s very curious.
SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
71–80 of 100 posts
Re: SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the vaccine causes the body to produce spike protein. The CDC emphasizes the spike protein is harmless, but this new research finds that the spike protein itself can cause damage. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different...
The vaccine causes a relatively tiny amount of spike to be produced compared with a raging infection. A little bit of spike trains your body to identify it and neutralize it. A whole lot of spike is toxic to your organs and damages them. To downregulate ACE2 you need a whole lot of receptor activation and a lot of ligands floating around in your system binding to it to cause that. The dose of spike protein matters.
Re: SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
My partner developed inflammation (resembling gottron papules) on her knuckles a few weeks after receiving the first moderna dose. She now (few days later) has developed a shoulder rash where the vaccine was injected. It’s very curious.
Someone I work with (female, 25 years old) had inflammation on her knuckles that is similar to what you describe. This was after her second shot - not sure if it was Moderna or Pfizer, but it was MRNA. She's fine and it eventually went away, but it's certainly interesting. She doesn't have any autoimmune disorders that she knows of.
Re: SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. But it's a nontrivial question of numbers. The vaccine has to be orders of magnitude safer than the virus, because (essentially) everyone will get the vaccine, but only some will get the disease. E.g. it might be harmful to vaccinate people in New Zealand and Australia at this point, because for now they cannot get the virus. What these papers (there are 3 independent ones showing very similar results, all co…
The rate of MIS-C in children is on the order of 1 in 20,000. So acute myocarditis (which goes away and does not produce lasting damage) at that level is entirely an acceptable risk. You're under the impression that either the vaccine must be perfectly safe and/or that the disease is perfectly safe for young people. Both of which are false.
It doesn't have to be perfectly safe; but it has to be significantly safer if you get it, than the disease if you get it -- which is, in fact, the case for all regularly administered vaccines (MMR, polio, tetanus, etc.), and comes with a warning and explanation for those that aren't (our pediatrician made sure we understand the rotavirus vaccine before we gave it to our child (we did) especially because it's safety profile, while still good, is not as good as the MMR and polio ones.
MIS-C is a big discussion that I don't have enough time for, but according to https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/04/new-find..., incidence in the US is 1:50,000. Acute myocarditis often goes away with no damage but not always. MIS-C does too.
And it's not even clear yet if any vaccine will stop MIS-C, so -- no, it's not an entirely acceptable risk.
Re: SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
#75So if ACE2 is downregulated, and ACE2 uses zinc as a cofactor, why are they not looking at high doses of zinc as a treatment? https://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/Q9BYF1
https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/i-mask-pl...
Re: SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
We also have 150+ million people around the world who've had the virus walking around without damage. The point is how should we change our recommendations? Are older people or others with certain medical conditions more susceptible to damage? I don't see how shrugging off this new information is reasonable or scientific.
Start by telling people to take more zinc.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240545772...
Vitamin D levels had a significant difference between the case and control groups (p = 0.008). Serum calcium and serum zinc levels also had statistically significant differences between the two groups (p < 0.001).
Re: SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
#77If this is a function of the spike protein, doesn't that mean the mRNA vaccines cause this effect as well?
Disclaimer: I am not qualified to interpret this study and have no experience in this field. So the study indicates that the Spike Protein binds to ACE2 that is found in the membranes of cells located in the lungs, arteries, heart, kidney, and intestines, and down regulates them to the point where it damages your mitochondria in those organs. So according to the research they did, it's not just the virus that can hur…
We know to where it typically tends to go now, "the muscle tissue at the site of injection, the lymphatic tissue downstream in your armpit on that side, your spleen, and (for the first day or two) your liver. " [0]
[0]https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/01/21/mr...
Re: SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. But it's a nontrivial question of numbers. The vaccine has to be orders of magnitude safer than the virus, because (essentially) everyone will get the vaccine, but only some will get the disease. E.g. it might be harmful to vaccinate people in New Zealand and Australia at this point, because for now they cannot get the virus. What these papers (there are 3 independent ones showing very similar results, all co…
Not disagreeing with your general message regarding individual risk assessment based on age, sex, health etc. What I will say though is that you seem to be comparing to the baseline scenario "Covid stops spreading". After one year of Covid (and its mutations) that baseline simply doesn't exist (any more). Instead we are in a no-win situation: (a) We keep lockdowns/non-pharmacological measures and border closures, (b)…
> Each scenario has associated cost.
There are other scenarios, e.g. https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-02-09-common-asthma-treatment... shows a cheap widely available steroid inhaler has comparable efficiency to vaccines in the KPIs studied by the Pfizer trial. I'm not saying it should be used instead of a vaccine; but it's also not true that your list is close to exhaustive. We keep finding out new stuff. In the first 2-3 months, the intubation+ventilation regime was counterproductive; it took a while to realize, but now we know that. We also know (e.g. from Florida and Texas) that the NPI are much less effective than they were assumed to be.
> Each and every vaccine up to now is orders of magnitude safer than Covid for the vast majority of people (YMMV!).
That's ... not been shown. The Israeli study I linked to above (a report of it) says this assertion might be wrong for Pfizer for the sizable group of 16-30 ; The British think that's not true for AZ under age 30 ; many countries in the EU think that's not true for AZ under the age of 50 ; Norway thinks that's not true for frail elderly.
And basically, we only have short term safety data (pfizer: less than a year for 20K people, less than 6 months for the rest), so even if it is true that "every one will eventually get it", it does NOT follow that it makes sense to vaccinate everyone right now -- if it takes 20 years until "everyone eventually gets it", and severe side effects appear 2 years later, then, no, it doesn't make sense.
I linked a BMJ+Science article that showed for a similarly EUAd vaccine, "Pandemrix" in 2009 that it took over a year to figure out that it was causing narcolepsy and worse than the flu it was supposed to stop. It's not just a theoretic possibility - it happened in a very similar setting just 11 years ago, and the causes are NOT perfectly understood to the point that you can guarantee it won't happen again.
> many are conjectured to be due to the 'SARS-Cov-2 ingredients' (e.g. myocarditis). Heuristically speaking you can choose between Covid or a very very very mild version of Covid.
You could be right, but that's not at all clear. This paper from Nature Immunology https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-00808-x.pdf shows that 80% of unexposed people have a T-cell response to SARS-Cov-2 - that is, they have cross-immunity.
It could be that for those 80%, that response would be enough to stop the virus before it can get systemic traction, whereas the vaccine is essentially guaranteed to generate systemic effect. I asked an immunologist, who said he doesn't know the answer and does not believe anyone does without measuring.
Re: SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
#79So if ACE2 is downregulated, and ACE2 uses zinc as a cofactor, why are they not looking at high doses of zinc as a treatment? https://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/Q9BYF1
Zinc supplements are part of the recommended prevention and treatment protocol. There is some research to indicate that Quercetin facilities zinc uptake. https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/i-mask-pl...
Plus, they’re giving zinc to people already sick. Why not check people for zinc deficiency and supply them with the zinc they need? I know why, it’s because we don’t believe in preventative care in this country.
Re: SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. Is there a significant difference in total number of viral particles versus vaccine particles your cells are exposed to, over the course of the infection/vaccination?
in general terms yes, there is no real hard number on minimal number of viral particles required to result in infection, its most likely a small number compared to the number of vaccine particles in a dosage. assuming 30 micrograms dosage in a volume of 300 microliters that is a very large number of particles in one place. this is not a lot of vaccine, but this [30micrograms] would be quite a lot of viral particles.…