In a recent article, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (an American environmental lawyer and activist, author, and anti-vaccinationist) states–what sounds likes scientific evidence and reasons why we should not take the new mRNA vaccines. For those with limited scientific knowledge, they sound plausible. All vaccines have caveats around them and careful steps that must be taken to assure benefits out weigh risks. Eliminating risk is not absolute, as assuring total safety can never be achieved regardless of the amount of favorable data collected. The argument of absolutes has always been used to deny the benefits of new technology, rather than to manage the risks and weigh the costs vs benefits through scientific evidence.
“The great “democratization” of information (don’t confuse this with “Knowledge” or “Wisdom”) has led to nefarious consequences which resemble an infectious disease with pathological consequences, even affecting the susceptibility and spread of actual biological infectious disease in the world or generating disease without an agent through suggestion and brain “plasticity”. It is the ultimate “divorce” of the definition of a “pathogen” from the biological into the concept, idea, the Pattern, being the “pathogen”. Although pseudoscience may be literally defined as “false” science, it is much more. It grows out of the need to promote and popularize a myth which is accepted based on some authoritarian view or bias, religious, political, or philosophical, and the need to justify that view with “facts” which are carefully selected to support the view and presented in a way to mimic the scientific method.”
“One of the more notorious of these was Peter Duesberg’s campaign against HIV causing AIDS. This example shows that scientists can also be lured into supporting pseudoscience if they do not manage their biases and remain true to the scientific method even when it contradicts their most favorite hypotheses (I did not say “theories”, which are often confused with the term “theoretical”). Scientific hypotheses are just that, they remain to be tested with well-designed experimentation, while scientific theories, like evolution, or the theory of relativity, are supported by many generations of observations and experimentation and predictive science before being generally accepted as a scientific consensus. Another major problem, which is pervasive even in “real” science, is the bias against the publication of negative data in scientific journals. This bias results in amplification of a relatively few positive reports against large numbers of negative ones, or ones in which results, of the positive one, are unable to be repeated. The popular press addresses the positive one as absolute, whereas the negative ones are ignored, or at worst, even disparaged. Some scientists are trying to remove this systemic problem by publishing negative data in journals of their own. These defenders of negative data state that scientists have the responsibility to study Nature, and based on what Einstein has stated, “The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true,” to not hide the truth. They assert this includes documenting negative studies in peer-reviewed, acceptable scientific publications. This action is even more imperative because the research projects have most likely been funded by national, public-supported (funded) agencies. These funding agencies have the obligation to publish all results, especially negative results, not just positive ones to maintain the greatest transparency and disclosure of publicly funded research.”— The Black Dragon Trilogy by JOHNATHAN KIEL
https://a.co/dIFEnFy.
Therefore, it is essential that these COVID vaccine trials have full disclosure of results to assure safety, efficacy and an acceptable cost/benefit ratio.
Kennedy’s destructive comments go beyond merely another internet opinion to a display of medical scientific authority and, more so, knowledge he does not possess. “….next Covid-19 vaccination. For the first time in the history of vaccination, the so-called last generation mRNA vaccines intervene directly in the genetic material of the patient and therefore alter the individual genetic material, which represents the genetic manipulation, something that was already forbidden and until then considered criminal.”….”Dear patients, after an unprecedented mRNA vaccine, you will no longer be able to treat the vaccine symptoms in a complementary way. They will have to live with the consequences, because they can no longer be cured simply by removing toxins (SARS-CoV-2 does not make toxins that need clearing from the body—pseudoscience) from the human body, just as a person with a genetic defect (mRNA is not a genetic defect nor a change in the genome which would be necessary for a permanent change) like Down syndrome, Klinefelter syndrome, Turner syndrome, genetic cardiac arrest, hemophilia, cystic fibrosis, Rett syndrome, etc.), because the genetic defect is forever!” https://principia-scientific.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr-covid19-vaccine-should-be-avoided-at-all-cost/?fbclid=IwAR13qqTYiHOTzhRDlaVngMtJHdWl0j-VUVEcQmJlcUvMqWMgSzxGeIFqdCI. This is completely wrong and endangers effective vaccination necessary to bring the pandemic under control. It encourages vaccine hesitancy in the midst of the uncontrollable rise in COVID in the US. We are now facing the onslaught of pseudoscience from people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. https://apple.news/Act3bYCTrQ0GRWfRYshPprg.
SARS-CoV-2 will not reach herd immunity without vaccination for reasons discussed in an earlier post. A smoldering endemic form will persist with periodic epidemic and even pandemic outbreaks. With this persistence, the potential for escape mutations from any vaccine effort will become more likely statistically as the number of persistently replicating viruses within a population increases. Again, mRNA administration is NOT genetic engineering; mRNA does not change the genome and does not persist forever. The opposite is true. His comparison of genetic errors and chromosomal issues in the human genome to mRNA vaccine demonstrates his ignorance or intentional spreading of malicious misinformation. As I discussed in a previous post, it is difficult to sustain RNA in a cell due to natural frequent turnover. This introduction of mRNA is transient transfection; defined as the introduction of nucleic acid in the cell only for a limited period of time and not integrating the nucleic acid into the genome. Therefore, transiently transfected genetic material is not passed from generation to generation during cell division, and it can be lost by environmental factors or diluted out during cell division. However, the high copy number of the initial transfected genetic material leads to high levels of expressed protein within the period that it exists in the cell. Needed for effective vaccination. The mRNA (with added appropriate sequences) would need reverse transcriptase from a retrovirus to turn it into DNA and insert it into the genome. mRNA vaccination, at a minimum, is no different from SARS-CoV-2 infection, but without the pathogenic parts. If what he said were true, then every person who recovered from COVID would be genetically engineered. This man is a dangerous not-medically- qualified quack, who uses equivocation and nonsequiturs to make GMO=mRNA vaccines=genetic engineering of the genome, Technobabble. The official Pfizer protocol shows that mRNA vaccine is transient: it uses 2 shots (A PHASE 1/2/3, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, RANDOMIZED, OBSERVER-BLIND, DOSE-FINDING STUDY TO EVALUATE THE SAFETY, TOLERABILITY, IMMUNOGENICITY, AND EFFICACY OF SARS-COV-2 RNA VACCINE CANDIDATES AGAINST COVID-19 IN HEALTHY INDIVIDUALS, PF-07302048 (BNT162 RNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccines) Protocol C4591001).
Even true examples of gene transfer to the genome, like our original DALM Nanobes, described in my earlier posts, are genome modifying technology which has limited capability to transfer that genetic material horizontally to naive cells. The ability is more limited in human cells than bacterial cells, even though the Nanobes that transfected them contained DNA. The subsequent transfected human cells only produce empty DALM nanoparticles or those which contain RNA, which, in turn, can be transferred to progeny cells. New Nanobes made in human cells , which could only make RNA that could be transferred to naive cells, could only mediate transient transfection at most.
US Patent.: US8,628,955B2, Jan.14,2014.
transferability was only for three iterations after which it ended.
Global Biosurveillance 