Does the shot mess with your DNA?

[Floor_Nurse]

The way that this Covid vaccine works is quite different from the flu shot. The Covid vax. is not a (dead) bacteria or virus being injected into your body. (With Pfizer & Moderna) RNA (called messenger RNA) that's been coded in a lab goes into your arm. The RNA has instructions, or a code, that gets deposited on the cell. The ribosomes of the cell make a spike protein. It looks similar to the spike protein on the surface of the actual Corona virus. Then your body is supposed to make antibodies (antigens) that goes after the spike protein and neutralize it. 

The problem is that this has not been tested in any long-term studies, so, this is more of an experiment. We don't know whether or not the DNA gets permanently changed (possibly bad). We're talking about something that's not supposed to be in your body (made in a lab) that can bind to the surface of your cells and possibly may not be able to be reversed. 

Also, since the drug is still being evaluated for long term adverse effects, pregnancy, etc., the FDA would not license the drug, but instead, put out as EUA... Emergency Use Authorization.

[Hannahbanana, BSN, MSN]

Hlopez90 said:

And with all the same talking points: brand-new, not tested, not tested on animals, my choice, DNA changing, injecting chemicals. No mention of fetal cells, yet.

Ooooh, you forgot the microchips Billy Gates has put in the vaccines to, well, um, er, do whatever they were supposed to do. Was it tracking, like the microchip in your cat or dog? Or something to effect a birth control program? I forget. Maybe that's it! It's supposed to make me .... forget! Too late for that, I fear. Nature beat ol' Billy to that.

One of the docs around here posted something about how those microchips were tickling him as they coursed through his veins. He was, of course, joking, but we can be sure that some people really believe it.

[Robmoo, ADN, BSN, RN]

17 hours ago, NRSKarenRN said:

FYI article IS accurate per other news and medical reports. Brazil hit over 300,000 deaths yesterday second only to the U.S --an increase  of 50,000 deaths in just 28 days this past month.

Medical Xpress 3/20/21

In Brazil, COVID increasingly hitting the young

WSJ: Covid-19 Variant in Brazil Overwhelms Local Hospitals, Hits Younger Patients

Global News: Brazil’s COVID-19 death toll hits 300,000 amid patchy vaccine rollout

Gulf News 3/20/21:  Brazil: COVID-19 increasingly hitting young people

Brazil's President has been in denial like Trump over seriousness of COVID pandemic, minimal COVID-19 vaccines administered. Public health institute Fiocruz warned this week that the country of 212 million people is facing "the worst health care and hospital collapse" in its history.  Average Brazil ICU stay, prior 15 days. has now doubled to 28 days.

Brazil began vaccinations January 17, starting with medical workers, the indigenous population and the elderly..  Brazil aims to buy 30 Million COVID-19 Vaccine doses From Russia, India in addition to increased amounts of current AstraZeneca/Oxford shot and China's CoronaVac.

I was just joking.  The little wink imoji really isn't as good as hearing ones voice.  Sorry for any confusion.

[HRoark64, BSN]

Really interesting thread and pretty salient given the vaccine rollout at the hospitals I tech at while in school and vax/no vax conversations in class.  I'm interested in everyone/anyone's thoughts on the risk/reward of the treatment.

The latest article I can find says we've had about 30 million confirmed cases, so roughly 9% of the population caught it.  550k or so deaths comes out to a 1.8% mortality rate of the positive cases and  0.17% for the entire population.  These numbers may change at some point given that the WHO recently said the excessively high PCR cycles used at first caused positive tests that may not have met a viral threshold.  Does the entire population need a treatment when we only had about a 10% infection rate which may have been overstated by inaccurate testing in the first place?  How about if/when the mortality rate is adjusted to reflect comorbidities that played a greater role in death than covid?  Of course, the mortality rate could always end up being higher if the false positives due to inaccurate PCR testing are taken out of the total infection number.  If anyone has updated info, please share. 

I'm not trying to understate the importance of public health or the utility of the first run with mRNA therapy that may be the foundation of very useful treatments in the future.  It just doesn't seem like a lot of bang for the buck considering the lack of long term testing that's been done, the $ that's gone into it, and the risk in the first place.  

Lastly let's consider other massive efforts from the federal government:

War on terror, war on drugs, war on poverty, bailout of banks instead of homeowners in 2008, 500% higher healthcare insurance premiums since the ACA passed, trans fat push in the 70's, criminal justice reform in the 90's, AMTRAK...

And the incentives involved: 

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=H04&cycle=2020&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U

WHO stuff - https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

Where I got my numbers - https://247wallst.com/healthcare-economy/2021/03/18/new-mexico-leads-america-in-covid-19-vaccinations/

 

[Shelby91]

HRoark64 said:

Really interesting thread and pretty salient given the vaccine rollout at the hospitals I tech at while in school and vax/no vax conversations in class.  I'm interested in everyone/anyone's thoughts on the risk/reward of the treatment.

The latest article I can find says we've had about 30 million confirmed cases, so roughly 9% of the population caught it.  550k or so deaths comes out to a 1.8% mortality rate of the positive cases and  0.17% for the entire population.  These numbers may change at some point given that the WHO recently said the excessively high PCR cycles used at first caused positive tests that may not have met a viral threshold.  Does the entire population need a treatment when we only had about a 10% infection rate which may have been overstated by inaccurate testing in the first place?  How about if/when the mortality rate is adjusted to reflect comorbidities that played a greater role in death than covid?  Of course, the mortality rate could always end up being higher if the false positives due to inaccurate PCR testing are taken out of the total infection number.  If anyone has updated info, please share. 

I'm not trying to understate the importance of public health or the utility of the first run with mRNA therapy that may be the foundation of very useful treatments in the future.  It just doesn't seem like a lot of bang for the buck considering the lack of long term testing that's been done, the $ that's gone into it, and the risk in the first place.  

Lastly let's consider other massive efforts from the federal government:

War on terror, war on drugs, war on poverty, bailout of banks instead of homeowners in 2008, 500% higher healthcare insurance premiums since the ACA passed, trans fat push in the 70's, criminal justice reform in the 90's, AMTRAK...

And the incentives involved: 

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=H04&cycle=2020&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U

WHO stuff - https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

Where I got my numbers - https://247wallst.com/healthcare-economy/2021/03/18/new-mexico-leads-america-in-covid-19-vaccinations/

INTELLECT at it's best☝️

[Shelby91]

The numbers have been inflated, straight up..And for an undeserved gain- be it corporate, personal, or political...Noone wants to say that 8 times out of 10 a pt was morbidly obese, chronically hypertensive, diabetic with a1c of 13, and asthmatic when they died at 89 from covid...The inconsistencies of testing is a beast in itself. Such a shame it's this hard to recognize.Shame, shame..?

 

[nursej22, MSN, RN]

Shelby91 said:

Noone wants to say that 8 times out of 10 a pt was morbidly obese, chronically hypertensive, diabetic with a1c of 13, and asthmatic when they died at 89 from covid...

So 8 out of 10 people that die from COVID deserved it? They should have led better lives, had better genes, lived closer to healthy food and further from pollution , and paid for their insulin?

Now do the seemingly healthy people who are suffering from long-term covid, you know, brain fog, headaches, scarred lungs and hearts. Do they deserve that as well?

How about the health care personnel suffering from PTSD? Are they just inflating the numbers of deaths they've witnessed, the times they had serve as proxy family so patients didn't die alone?  There is a thread on this forum about COVID nurses feeling exhausted? Perhaps you should post there and tell them what they've lived through is just not that bad. 

[guest1163268]

Shelby91 said:

The numbers have been inflated, straight up..And for an undeserved gain- be it corporate, personal, or political...Noone wants to say that 8 times out of 10 a pt was morbidly obese, chronically hypertensive, diabetic with a1c of 13, and asthmatic when they died at 89 from covid...The inconsistencies of testing is a beast in itself. Such a shame it's this hard to recognize.Shame, shame..

Bloody hell, don't hold anything back! 

How do you treat patients falling into those categories when you have them? 

I'm a young person and even I understand that older people deteriorate, get slower and acquire age related illnesses just like everything else, but they should still be respected and treated with dignity because knowledge and experience doesn't deteriorate but actually gets refined into better context as you acquire more wisdom. 

You need to start looking at the elderly as a fount of knowledge and someone to learn from. You will be older someday, let's hope that you don't get judged the same way? 

[macawake, MSN]

HRoark64 said:

Does the entire population need a treatment when we only had about a 10% infection rate which may have been overstated by inaccurate testing in the first place?  How about if/when the mortality rate is adjusted to reflect comorbidities that played a greater role in death than covid?

Vaccines aren't treatment, they're prevention and protection against disease. Don't you understand the benefits of herd immunity to both individuals and society as a whole?

https://www.vaccines.gov/basics/work/protection

https://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/herd-immunity

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/herd-immunity-lockdowns-and-covid-19

If more than half a million deaths isn't enough to implement public health countermeasures, how many more would it take before reaching herd immunity with the help of vaccines becomes a worthwhile endeavor? 

Do you have any evidence to support your statement that comorbidities played a greater role in deaths than Covid-19? Are you claiming that the people who died would have died anyway on their death date even if they hadn't been infected with SARS-CoV-2? If you make a claim like this you really need to support it.

HRoark64 said:

The latest article I can find says we've had about 30 million confirmed cases, so roughly 9% of the population caught it.  550k or so deaths comes out to a 1.8% mortality rate of the positive cases and  0.17% for the entire population.  These numbers may change at some point given that the WHO recently said the excessively high PCR cycles used at first caused positive tests that may not have met a viral threshold.

You've either misunderstood or are misrepresenting the implications of that WHO link. I think you need to read the following fact-check of your claim.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-who-instructions-pcr-guidan-idUSKBN2A429W

Regarding your numbers, roughly 9% of the population have become infected that you know of. You can't use the number of positive cases alone to draw any definite conclusions. But it's in all likelihood the case that the majority of the population have not, so far, had a Covid-19 infection. So the majority of the population is still susceptible/naive.

What exactly are you talking about when you mention PCR tests with false positive results? It may well be false in the sense that the individual is no longer infectious, but it's less frequently false in the sense that they never had a Covid infection in the first place. The number of confirmed Covid cases are likely lower than the real number. 

There are other factors that correlate with an increased percentage of positive tests out of total tests performed, namely hospitalizations and deaths. You can look at the stats from pretty much any country that's been hard hit by Covid and see it. Covid hospitalizations and deaths are independent of test results. When they increase that suggests an increasing disease burden. 

[macawake, MSN]

Shelby91 said:

Noone wants to say that 8 times out of 10 a pt was morbidly obese, chronically hypertensive, diabetic with a1c of 13, and asthmatic when they died at 89 from covid...

This is a nursing board and we've discussed risk factors associated with a serious outcome several times. I have no idea why you think no one is talking about it. But you know what, it is possible to discuss risk factors without sounding like the deaths of elderly people and the deaths of people with various comorbitities are completely irrelevant.

Your number that 80% of Covid-19 deaths are persons who were 89 years old and had all four comorbidities; diabetes, hypertension, astma, and obesity is absolutely false.

LESS THAN A THIRD of U.S. Covid deaths have been in the age group 85 years and older. I don't know if you're any good with math, but that alone makes it impossible that 8 out of 10 were 89 years old. 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/

Shelby91 said:

The numbers have been inflated, straight up..And for an undeserved gain- be it corporate, personal, or political...

You are about the umpteenth person who has made this claim without an iota of proof. You haven't provided proof that the numbers have been inflated and you haven't specified what kind of gains you think have been made. 

In over a decade of nursing I've never seen a year like the previous one. Those were and are real people in our ICUs and Covid floors, in numbers we've never seen before. And I know that I'm not alone. 

I'm saddened by all the deaths. That old (or not so old) person with astma and cardiovascular disease was someone's beloved grandfather or sister or friend. They mattered. Their age and comorbidities don't make them matter any less. 

[subee, MSN, CRNA]

Shelby91 said:

The numbers have been inflated, straight up..And for an undeserved gain- be it corporate, personal, or political...Noone wants to say that 8 times out of 10 a pt was morbidly obese, chronically hypertensive, diabetic with a1c of 13, and asthmatic when they died at 89 from covid...The inconsistencies of testing is a beast in itself. Such a shame it's this hard to recognize.Shame, shame..

Once again, your logic is ridiculous and ideologically driven.  There are so many citations about the billions of dollars hospitals are in the hole for that I'm not going to list them.  You can look up multiple sources on your own, if you even care or know how to do research.  Determining whether someone "died of Covid" or not is way above your pay grade because it vexes even experienced pathologists how to code a death.  What about all the people who got Covid and just died at home like the ICU nurse in Detroit who went home from her shift and just.....died?  You think that scenario wasn't repeated over and over?  You will have to prove that there were hospital wide conspiracies to inflate their Covid statistics - one in which multiple staff members colluded to change the COD on a death certificate.  Ridiculous.

[macawake, MSN]

1 hour ago, subee said:

You will have to prove that there were hospital wide conspiracies to inflate their Covid statistics - one in which multiple staff members colluded to change the COD on a death certificate.  Ridiculous.

I agree, it is absolutely ridiculous. Not only would there have to be a large number of hospital wide conspiracies, but worldwide conspiracies. 
I wonder what the people who believe this think the incentive is for European hospitals when most European countries have universal healthcare. The Covid pandemic has had an extremely negative impact on a global level.

[GrumpyRN, NP]

Can Shelby91 or Jack Peace or one of the other one who think this is not real (I forget all the names and can't be bothered reading through 14 pages to find out but you know who you are) please tell me, WHY? 

Why do you think that the world governments are treating this the way they are and why should what you advocate be put in place?

Serious question. I understand that some Americans are a bit wary of their government, but the rest of the world? Why do you think almost the entire world has put restrictions in place. Why have countries like New Zealand and Australia had better results and are now much more open than others?

Why are countries accepting lock-downs and all the problems that go along with that? This is costing a fortune and the bill will have to be paid sometime but people are willing to accept this if it means that people can be safe and won't die early.

Don't say "sheep" because that is lazy and stupid.

So please, tell me why you think everyone is wrong?

ETA macawake, I had just written this when you beat me to it by seconds.?