Snopes did not even begin to check the science facts.
The science facts are that RNA vaccins can potentially change your DNA. To understand how, we have to go a bit into genomics. Our genome contains about 50-60 thousand genes (~20 thousand protein-coding genes, the rest RNA genes). Together they make up about 25% of the genome.
In addition to that, our genome contains about 50% socalled transposable and transposed elements (TEs), including ERVs and LINEs. The latter function, among other things, as (epi)genetic switches to control when genetic programs are switched on and off.
Interestingly, ERVs and LINEs both posses genes for the enzymes "reverse transcriptase (RT)" and "integrase" (INT). The RT enzyme converts RNA into cDNA, whereas the INT enzyme can put cDNA back into the genome. They prefer doing this with viral-like RNA molecules.
Further, RNA vaccins use viruses as their genetic backbones. RNA vaccins contain viral RNAs. With thousands of copies of RT and INT genes in our genomes there is ample opportunity to put any viral RNA back into our DNA. So, RNA vaccins are potentially "genotoxic".
"Genotoxic" means that the "RNA-->cDNA-->genome integration" mechanism can lead to disturbed genetic control. In the long run, that may lead to genetic abberations and disease. It should be noted that RNA vaccins were not tested to exclude above described genotoxicy.
Taken together, SNOPES IS WRONG. It has not even been tested!
And I, a genome researcher, am not going to take a shot (or two) of the novel RNA Vaccins.
Isn't it tale telling that "Swissmedic" the drugs approval organ in Switzerland did not approve these vaccins?
1/n "Decades of sophisticated and detailed legislation created to safeguard Humanity from exposure to Genetically Modified Organisms, was ignored or legislated away in an instant when SARS-CoV-2 arrived."
2/n "This was done with intention, and not for the good of Humanity. The LNP-modRNA ‘vaccines’ always fulfilled the legal definitions for being categorised as Genetically Modified Organisms. Pfizer, Moderna, and regulators all knew this."
3/n "The claims by Pfizer and Moderna repeated by regulators and complicit politicians that modRNAs do not enter the cell nucleus, and reverse transcribe into the Human Genome, were lies, made knowingly."
Ze hadden heel veel junk DNA nodig, want anders is hun evolutie niet mogelijk. Het was namelijk al sinds de 1950er jaren bekend dat de mutatie-input veel te hoog is voor een volledig functioneel genoom. Het junk DNA was de plek waar hun schadelijke mutaties mochten ophopen.
Dan is er de enorm negatieve grondhouding mbt ENCODE researchers, die 80% van het genoom functie toeschreven. Die wetenschappers moesten worden gedemoniseerd en afgemaakt, want 80% is vernietigend voor de Darwinisten-atheisten filosofie. Het functie-begrip moest geherdefinieerd.
@KlinkBart gelooft:
"De grootteverschillen van de genomen zijn bij dieren 7.000-voudig en tussen gewervelden 350-voudig. Deze genoomgrootte correleert niet met de complexiteit van het dier of het aantal coderende genen, zoals wellicht intuïtief verwacht wordt."
Let wel, er is geen enkele relatie tussen vorm en genetica. Evolutie is compleet weerlegd:
Ze hoeven niet met complexiteit te correleren, want het zijn variatie-inducerende genetische elementen (VIGEs), die het bouwplan van organismen bepalen door directe & indirecte effecten op de gen expressie. Soorten hebben impliciete genetische netwerken (bouwplannen), ...
In Pfizer´s press release last friday to debunk they work on gain of function (GOF) shows they recombine and engeneer viruses in cooperation with virologists!
The next new and aggressive virus will not come from nature, it will come from a laboratory.
FRom their own press release:
"Working with collaborators, we have conducted research where the original SARS-CoV-2 virus has been used to express the spike protein from new variants of concern."
This is recombining viruses.
From their own press release:
"We then make this data available through peer reviewed scientific journals and use it as one of the steps to determine whether a vaccine update is required."
No, they didn´t. Pharmaffia never publishes such data. They only publish to promote drugs.
Two years ago, we published a list of critiques on the PCR- Test published in @Eurosurveillanc by an international team of virologists, including @c_drosten and @MarionKoopmans.
We did so, because we observed it generated heaps of false results.
So, November 2020 we submitted a request to @Eurosurveillanc to retract the Cormann-Drosten paper (below), which was published without appropriate peer review. And we hoped for publication of our critique. After 2 months @Eurosurveillanc declined.
Despite its shortcomings and despite not being peer-reviewed, the Cormann-Drosten PCR test became the standard of SARS-CoV-2 detection, almost world-wide.