Now months and even years from the grand claims of our leaders and mainstream media experts about the COVID-19 vaccines being “safe and effective”, we increasingly see ‘conspiracy theories’ becoming true or at least acceptable. One such ‘conspiracy theory’ was that the spike proteins made in the body due to vaccination could last longer than intended, travel to more places in the body than intended, and cause more damage than intended, all denied by the accepted experts, though increasingly confirmed by the actual science (see
Given the admission that the modRNA produced spike protein lasts longer than originally thought, what are the chances that individuals would shed it given that the mechanism used to produce it is basically the same mechanism that viruses use to reproduce, and we know that virus's are shed by infected individuals..
A very scary prospect. Haven't seen anything conclusive here, but certainly plausible. Extra upsetting for those of us who managed to avoid getting jabbed directly...
I doubt each person has the same reponse to making a keeping spike protein in their body. So to me its like giving a person a random amount of a drug. Could be fine, but more likely its way too much and causes some damage either permanent or temporary.
Given the admission that the modRNA produced spike protein lasts longer than originally thought, what are the chances that individuals would shed it given that the mechanism used to produce it is basically the same mechanism that viruses use to reproduce, and we know that virus's are shed by infected individuals..
A very scary prospect. Haven't seen anything conclusive here, but certainly plausible. Extra upsetting for those of us who managed to avoid getting jabbed directly...
I doubt each person has the same reponse to making a keeping spike protein in their body. So to me its like giving a person a random amount of a drug. Could be fine, but more likely its way too much and causes some damage either permanent or temporary.
Indeed, why would we suddenly assume that a 'one size fits all' approach is appropriate?