mRNA degrades quickly, so it’s possible we haven't detected vaccine mRNA in the placenta because we didn’t look quickly enough.
To address this, the authors look at placentas for two babies born two and ten days after their mothers received a dose of COVID vaccine. 2/
The authors used a much more sensitive form of PCR than has been used in previous studies, called ddPCR. This technique also tells us whether the mRNA is intact. 3/
In the baby born 2 days after vaccination, they found vaccine mRNA in the placenta (77% degraded) and umbilical cord blood (87% degraded). In the baby born 10 days after vaccination, they found vaccine mRNA in the placenta (58% degraded) and did not look in cord blood. 4/
Using a technique that allows us to actually look at the mRNA, called FISH, the authors see occasional spots of mRNA in the placenta (marked with arrows). 5/
But is any of this mRNA active? The authors say they detect protein in the placenta of one of the babies but the technique they use looks at mixed maternal tissues and placenta, so I’m not convinced they do.
Staining on sections would clear this up. 6/
This paper doesn't look for COVID vaccine protein crossing the placenta, so can't tell us anything about that. But 4 papers have looked for evidence of vaccine protein in 192 babies and don’t find it. 7/
So what’s the take home here? We still don’t have any evidence that mRNA COVID vaccines given in pregnancy are active in the baby, but the possibility that they could be active in the placenta definitely merits further research. 9/
In the meantime, the most important question for people making a decision for themselves is: how do babies born after COVID vaccination in pregnancy do?
PS! Completely forgot about this paper, which uses the better technique of staining sections - 48 of them - and finds no spike protein in placentas collected following COVID vaccination in pregnancy.
This came out while I was away last month, so I didn't post about it at the time. But I talk about it on @SkepticJonGuy's video released last night, which prompted me to share a few (belated!) thoughts... 2/
RSV is the leading cause of death in babies <6 mo, and is implicated in 50% of hospitalisations for respiratory illness, so development of a vaccine is a priority.
I should declare an interest here... my baby son was very sick with RSV 😢 and I would have loved to avoid that. 3/
@davidicke Hi David. Independently-generated data looking at safety of COVID vaccines in more than 360,000 people vaccinated in pregnancy find no increased risk of any pregnancy problems.
How do we reconcile that with the spontaneous reporting in your video?... 🧵
@davidicke First, for context... it would probably help you to realise that those 458 spontaneous reports were out of approximately 48,000 people who had been vaccinated in pregnancy at that time. 2/
@davidicke And these are reports of events that occurred after vaccination. There is no requirement that the events are thought to have occurred because of vaccination.
@MarkWar16520311 To understand adverse effects of vaccines, it helps to think about the phases of the immune response. First, we have the innate response, which we might think of (roughly) as being inflammation. This lasts from minutes after vaccination to 48 hours-ish. 1/
@MarkWar16520311 Most adverse events happen in this timeframe and whenever we see inflammation-type symptoms (sore arm, fever, myocarditis), we should straight away be thinking: that might be the vaccine. 2/
@MarkWar16520311 Of course, some of those are so well-established (and mild) that we don't even investigate them anymore (sore arm, fever). But this logic is one of the reasons that myocarditis was taken quite seriously as a potential side effect (and indeed turned out to be one - rarely). 3/