The mRNA vaccine technology has been safety tested in human clinical trial since 2013 on the following viruses: rabies, influenza, and Zika. For SARS-CoV-2, animal and human clinical trials were done currently during a public health emergency. Manufacturing capacity was expanded before phase III clinical trials ended during accelerated d…
The mRNA vaccine technology has been safety tested in human clinical trial since 2013 on the following viruses: rabies, influenza, and Zika. For SARS-CoV-2, animal and human clinical trials were done currently during a public health emergency. Manufacturing capacity was expanded before phase III clinical trials ended during accelerated development.
RT-qPCR is actually the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 testing because of optimized primer-probe sets. Internal controls, including reference genes, allow normalization of SARS-CoV-2 genes. False positive rate depends on RT-qPCR assay, but it is generally 0.01 to 0.12%.
Didn't Pfizer state antibodies wasn't enough . But that's all governments harped on. What about lipid nanoparticles. Moderna stated the more you dose the worse the adverse effects can be. The lipid nanoparticle can cause many adverse events just like were seeing now in VAERS and live accounts. Didn't you need animal ethics permission to test on animals but oh look governments stole ethics and ethics scholars were hypocrites on vaccine mandates. But based on what Moderna stated ethics for humans very important. So where are the trials you list and outcomes. How big were the groups. Care to share as we know cancer gene therapy with MRNA was very sick people and small groups. That's odd as we researched that vaccines only became recent after Moderna failed on gene therapy. So they moved to vaccines . Pfizer had 4 vaccine candidate variants to use based on 3 distinct MRNA formats .. They chose BNT 162 they stated in SEC FILINGS they weren't sure if they used the right or favorable one. They started the first human trials April 2020. It was experimental. They can't say it's the optimal one. They did this with shanghai fosum pharmaceuticsls from China a communist country .
Your misleading as Pfizer never got anything approved. So just because you do small human tests that doesn't mean they were approved. Biontek Pfizer in SEC filings admit this and they admit it's an experiment and they are not sure if they picked the right variant candidate. Considering the fraud in the vaccine medical trials and the pregnant female it's a bad experiment and cover up
Would you like to confirm why genotoxicity or carcinogenicity studies weren't done for these MRNA vaccines and why they stated they didn't have to. It's gene therapy.
Wrong, Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 received FDA approval for BLAs.
RT-qPCR used for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics tests is nearly a gold standard. Cycle thresholds at 35 to 45 are validated because cut-off values are based on the limit of detection (LOD), so background fluorescence is distinguished from positive amplification.
Emergency use authorization you mean. With no refunds.
And PCR should be ran at 27 CT to detect active infection. 45 gives massive amounts of false positives (which is probably a feature rather than a bug).
Shouldn't the stage 3 trials have ended by now? In which case the manufacturers won't have their legal immunity. I guess that will happen when Biden declares the "emergency" over next month and everything will be memory holed.
False positive rates are near zero because of optimized primer-probe sets specific for SARS-CoV-2. Analytical validation determines cut-off cycle thresholds for specific genes: N1, S.
The mRNA vaccine technology has been safety tested in human clinical trial since 2013 on the following viruses: rabies, influenza, and Zika. For SARS-CoV-2, animal and human clinical trials were done currently during a public health emergency. Manufacturing capacity was expanded before phase III clinical trials ended during accelerated development.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8940982/
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768155
RT-qPCR is actually the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 testing because of optimized primer-probe sets. Internal controls, including reference genes, allow normalization of SARS-CoV-2 genes. False positive rate depends on RT-qPCR assay, but it is generally 0.01 to 0.12%.
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/JCM.01080-21
Where is your evidence of autoimmune responses from mRNA vaccines?
Didn't Pfizer state antibodies wasn't enough . But that's all governments harped on. What about lipid nanoparticles. Moderna stated the more you dose the worse the adverse effects can be. The lipid nanoparticle can cause many adverse events just like were seeing now in VAERS and live accounts. Didn't you need animal ethics permission to test on animals but oh look governments stole ethics and ethics scholars were hypocrites on vaccine mandates. But based on what Moderna stated ethics for humans very important. So where are the trials you list and outcomes. How big were the groups. Care to share as we know cancer gene therapy with MRNA was very sick people and small groups. That's odd as we researched that vaccines only became recent after Moderna failed on gene therapy. So they moved to vaccines . Pfizer had 4 vaccine candidate variants to use based on 3 distinct MRNA formats .. They chose BNT 162 they stated in SEC FILINGS they weren't sure if they used the right or favorable one. They started the first human trials April 2020. It was experimental. They can't say it's the optimal one. They did this with shanghai fosum pharmaceuticsls from China a communist country .
Your misleading as Pfizer never got anything approved. So just because you do small human tests that doesn't mean they were approved. Biontek Pfizer in SEC filings admit this and they admit it's an experiment and they are not sure if they picked the right variant candidate. Considering the fraud in the vaccine medical trials and the pregnant female it's a bad experiment and cover up
Would you like to confirm why genotoxicity or carcinogenicity studies weren't done for these MRNA vaccines and why they stated they didn't have to. It's gene therapy.
Would you like to dispute a paper that stated MRNA not ready in 2019 as not studied on enough non human primates?
And yet no product was ever licensed for human use. Why was that if they were so well tested?
As for PCR, labeling something gold standard doesn't make it so. I know the sequencing center here was running them at a 35 cycle threshold.
Wrong, Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 received FDA approval for BLAs.
RT-qPCR used for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics tests is nearly a gold standard. Cycle thresholds at 35 to 45 are validated because cut-off values are based on the limit of detection (LOD), so background fluorescence is distinguished from positive amplification.
Emergency use authorization you mean. With no refunds.
And PCR should be ran at 27 CT to detect active infection. 45 gives massive amounts of false positives (which is probably a feature rather than a bug).
Shouldn't the stage 3 trials have ended by now? In which case the manufacturers won't have their legal immunity. I guess that will happen when Biden declares the "emergency" over next month and everything will be memory holed.
False positive rates are near zero because of optimized primer-probe sets specific for SARS-CoV-2. Analytical validation determines cut-off cycle thresholds for specific genes: N1, S.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7850182/#:~:text=Public%20Health%20England%20reports%20that,of%20cases%20are%20false%20positives.&text=The%20impact%20of%20false%20positive%20results%20includes%20risk%20of%20overestimating,the%20extent%20of%20asymptomatic%20infection.
Just ramp up the cycle threshold and you can get a positive out of anything. Absolute bullshit.
How much do they pay you for these posts?
Actually FDa said it's not a gold standard
Academic journals cite RT-qPCR as the gold standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in diagnostic tests.